I was accused of making up the fat that bush rescinded the laws that
require coal burning energy plants from improving immesssions,
particularly of the toxin mercury.

Here's some urls.
http://www.literalpolitics.com/Envir...rodisaster.htm
http://www.bushgreenwatch.org/back_issues.php
http://www.commongroundcommonsense.o...hp/t22922.html

(Washington Post)
> The Bush administration is seeking a replacement for former Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Chief Christine Todd Whitman, who told the president recently that she planned to resign as of June 27.
>
> The former New Jersey governor frequently clashed with White House staff over clean air issues during her tenure as chief of the environmental agency.
>
> One key disagreement was over the administration's decision to withdraw from international global warming treaty negotiations.
>
> Particularly heated clashes came over Whitman's support of litigation to ban coal-burning utilities from modifying their plants to increase capacity, which the Justice Department now is in the process of winding down. Also, under Whitman, the EPA argued against changes to the New Source Review Performance Standards, which changed the way emissions from coal plants are measured. The standards, released shortly after Bush's victory in the midterm elections last year in accord with the White House position, came under fire from environmental activists for allowing increased emissions, but drew praise from the coal industry for affording a more flexible way to comply with the Clean Air Act.

http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache...onmental&hl=en

These are just some of many. The fact is he rescinded the legislature.

Perhaps Usual Suspect will thank me for correcting his mistake.

There are many many more sources, both mainstream and alternative.

Note the resignation over that decision.

Beach Runner wrote:
> I was accused of making up the fat that bush rescinded the laws that
> require coal burning energy plants from improving immesssions,
> particularly of the toxin mercury.

You remain accused of deceit.

> Here's some urls.

All from left-wing groups, and each link is polemic not fact-based.

<...>
> These are just some of many. The fact is he rescinded the legislature.

He cannot rescind legislature, you imbecile. That would set up a
constitutional crisis the likes of which our nation has never known.

> There are many many more sources, both mainstream and alternative.

No, only alternative -- by polemicists rather than reporters.

> Note the resignation over that decision.

Whitman did NOT resign over that decision:

As rewarding as the past two-and-a-half years have been for me
professionally, it is time to return to my home and husband in
New Jersey, which I love just as you do your home state of
Texas. I leave knowing that we have made a positive difference
and that we have set the Agency on a course that will result in
continued environmental improvement. Please accept my deepest
thanks for the opportunity to serve our country in your
Administration and my every good wish for continued success in
leading the Nation in these challenging times.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/...ter/index.html

Go read the whole letter. Note the first sentence of each paragraph:
America's air will be cleaner. America's water will be purer. America's
land will be better protected. I am proud of the work this Agency has
done and of the contributions it has made to the success of your
Administration.

She nowhere objects to ANY policies of the administration.

Note also the difference between our sources. You go to kook-fringe
leftwing websites. I go to CNN and get the text of her actual
resignation letter. You stupid little fruitloop.

usual suspect wrote:

> Beach Runner wrote:
>
>> I was accused of making up the fat that bush rescinded the laws that
>> require coal burning energy plants from improving immesssions,
>> particularly of the toxin mercury.
>
>
> You remain accused of deceit.
>
>> Here's some urls.
>
>
> All from left-wing groups, and each link is polemic not fact-based.

All, even the Washington Post?

Plenty of other sites. Of coos you only consider Republican Right Wing
Sources.

The the Congressional Record.
http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache...ush+coal&hl=en


>
> <...>
>
>> These are just some of many. The fact is he rescinded the legislature.
>
>
> He cannot rescind legislature, you imbecile. That would set up a
> constitutional crisis the likes of which our nation has never known.
>
>> There are many many more sources, both mainstream and alternative.
>
>
> No, only alternative -- by polemicists rather than reporters.
>
>> Note the resignation over that decision.
>
>
> Whitman did NOT resign over that decision:
>
> As rewarding as the past two-and-a-half years have been for me
> professionally, it is time to return to my home and husband in
> New Jersey, which I love just as you do your home state of
> Texas. I leave knowing that we have made a positive difference
> and that we have set the Agency on a course that will result in
> continued environmental improvement. Please accept my deepest
> thanks for the opportunity to serve our country in your
> Administration and my every good wish for continued success in
> leading the Nation in these challenging times.
> http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/...ter/index.html
>
> Go read the whole letter. Note the first sentence of each paragraph:
> America's air will be cleaner. America's water will be purer. America's
> land will be better protected. I am proud of the work this Agency has
> done and of the contributions it has made to the success of your
> Administration.
>
> She nowhere objects to ANY policies of the administration.
>
> Note also the difference between our sources. You go to kook-fringe
> leftwing websites. I go to CNN and get the text of her actual
> resignation letter. You stupid little fruitloop.

Obviously you have an issue. It is well documented that Bushed quit
Kyoto, questions Global Warming, under the clear air bill allowed coal
plants to modernize without conforming to clear air standards. He
rescinded the legislature to improve the MPGs of automobiles.

These are facts. Your immediate defense is to call them left wing
publications, even when one I chose to use was the Washington post.

It doesn't matter what I write, you'll turn it around.



Beach Runner wrote:

>
>
> usual suspect wrote:
>
>> Beach Runner wrote:
>>
>>> I was accused of making up the fat that bush rescinded the laws that
>>> require coal burning energy plants from improving immesssions,
>>> particularly of the toxin mercury.
>>
>>
>>
>> You remain accused of deceit.
>>
>>> Here's some urls.
>>
>>
>>
>> All from left-wing groups, and each link is polemic not fact-based.
>
>
> All, even the Washington Post?
>
> Plenty of other sites. Of coos you only consider Republican Right Wing
> Sources.
>
> The the Congressional Record.
> http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache...ush+coal&hl=en
>
>
>
>>
>> <...>
>>
>>> These are just some of many. The fact is he rescinded the legislature.
>>
>>
>>
>> He cannot rescind legislature, you imbecile. That would set up a
>> constitutional crisis the likes of which our nation has never known.
>>
>>> There are many many more sources, both mainstream and alternative.
>>
>>
>>
>> No, only alternative -- by polemicists rather than reporters.
>>
>>> Note the resignation over that decision.
>>
>>
>>
>> Whitman did NOT resign over that decision:
>>
>> As rewarding as the past two-and-a-half years have been for me
>> professionally, it is time to return to my home and husband in
>> New Jersey, which I love just as you do your home state of
>> Texas. I leave knowing that we have made a positive difference
>> and that we have set the Agency on a course that will result in
>> continued environmental improvement. Please accept my deepest
>> thanks for the opportunity to serve our country in your
>> Administration and my every good wish for continued success in
>> leading the Nation in these challenging times.
>> http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/...ter/index.html
>>
>> Go read the whole letter. Note the first sentence of each paragraph:
>> America's air will be cleaner. America's water will be purer.
>> America's land will be better protected. I am proud of the work this
>> Agency has done and of the contributions it has made to the success of
>> your Administration.
>>
>> She nowhere objects to ANY policies of the administration.
>>
>> Note also the difference between our sources. You go to kook-fringe
>> leftwing websites. I go to CNN and get the text of her actual
>> resignation letter. You stupid little fruitloop.

Beach Runner wrote:
>>> I was accused of making up the fat that bush rescinded the laws that
>>> require coal burning energy plants from improving immesssions,
>>> particularly of the toxin mercury.
>>
>> You remain accused of deceit.
>>
>>> Here's some urls.
>>
>> All from left-wing groups, and each link is polemic not fact-based.
>
> All, even the Washington Post?

ESPECIALLY the WP.

> Plenty of other sites. Of coos you only consider Republican Right Wing
> Sources.

Christine Todd Whitman is indeed a Republican, but she is not on the
party's right wing.

<...>
>>> Note the resignation over that decision.

Since you need more information...

Environmentalists have long suggested Whitman was unhappy with
the White House over several key environmental policies, but she
has steadfastly said she was happy in her work....

But, in an interview with CNN, Whitman insisted that was not the
case.

"I'm not leaving because of clashes with the administration; in
fact, I haven't had any," she said. "There's always give and
take ... The president has always wanted my unadulterated
opinion and that doesn't mean that you're having a battle about
it."

Whitman said Bush was "very gracious" when she approached him
about her decision and "indicated he wished I would stay but
understood my reasons for leaving."

In her resignation letter, Whitman gives no hint of displeasure
and highlights what she describes as the administration's
successful efforts to clean the country's air, water and land.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/...itman.resigns/

CNN is not a "Republican Right Wing" news outlet.

>> Whitman did NOT resign over that decision:
>>
>> As rewarding as the past two-and-a-half years have been for me
>> professionally, it is time to return to my home and husband in
>> New Jersey, which I love just as you do your home state of
>> Texas. I leave knowing that we have made a positive difference
>> and that we have set the Agency on a course that will result in
>> continued environmental improvement. Please accept my deepest
>> thanks for the opportunity to serve our country in your
>> Administration and my every good wish for continued success in
>> leading the Nation in these challenging times.
>> http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/...ter/index.html
>>
>> Go read the whole letter. Note the first sentence of each paragraph:
>> America's air will be cleaner. America's water will be purer.
>> America's land will be better protected. I am proud of the work this
>> Agency has done and of the contributions it has made to the success of
>> your Administration.
>>
>> She nowhere objects to ANY policies of the administration.
>>
>> Note also the difference between our sources. You go to kook-fringe
>> leftwing websites. I go to CNN and get the text of her actual
>> resignation letter. You stupid little fruitloop.

Established.

Beach Runner wrote:
> Obviously you have an issue. It is well documented that Bushed quit
> Kyoto,

Whoa, mother****er. The US Senate never ratified the Kyoto agreement
because the CLINTON ADMINISTRATION NEVER SENT IT TO CAPITOL HILL:

On June 25, 1997, before the Kyoto Protocol was to be
negotiated, the U.S. Senate passed by a 95-0 vote the Byrd-Hagel
Resolution (S. Res. 98), which stated the sense of the Senate
was that the United States should not be a signatory to any
protocol that did not include binding targets and timetables for
developing as well as industrialized nations or "would result in
serious harm to the economy of the United States". On November
12, 1998, Vice President Al Gore symbolically signed the
protocol. Aware of the Senate's view of the protocol, the
Clinton Administration never submitted the protocol for
ratification.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocol

BTW, GWB was still Governor of Texas in June of 1997. Your problem is
with Bill Clinton. Dope.

> questions Global Warming, under the clear air bill

Clean Air Act?

> allowed coal
> plants to modernize without conforming to clear air standards.

Ipse dixit and false.

> He rescinded the legislature to improve the MPGs of automobiles.

He cannot rescind legislaTION, you ****. He has no such power under the
Constitution.

> These are facts.

No, they're blatant lies.

> Your immediate defense is to call them left wing
> publications,

Because those are the nature of your sources. Kyoto preceded the Bush
administration. The non-ratification of Kyoto preceded the Bush
administration. You lied AGAIN.

> even when one I chose to use was the Washington post.

Which is a left-leaning paper.

> It doesn't matter what I write,

I know, because you can't get anything straight.

"usual suspect" wrote (to "Beach Runner"):

> BTW, GWB was still Governor of Texas in June of 1997. Your problem is
> with Bill Clinton. Dope.
---------------
OOPS! You forgot to mention that his "problem" actually is also with
Bush....

Bush won't implement Kyoto agreement
Last Updated Wed Mar 28 14:56:27 2001

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The White House announced Wednesday that U.S. President
George Bush will not sign the Kyoto climate treaty. (etc.)

ref:
http://cbc.ca/cgi-bin/templates/view...oto_bush010328

-TW

The What wrote:
> "usual suspect" wrote (to "Beach Runner"):
>
>
>>BTW, GWB was still Governor of Texas in June of 1997. Your problem is
>>with Bill Clinton. Dope.
>
> ---------------
> OOPS! You forgot to mention that his "problem" actually is also with
> Bush....
>
> Bush won't implement Kyoto agreement

Rightly so on grounds that it would stifle our economy while other
nations with greater emissions of pollutants would not have to play by
the same rules. And fwiw, the President cannot bind our nation to a
treaty. The Senate must first ratify it. The Senate has been on record
opposing ratification for over eight years.

Finally, Bill Clinton never implemented Kyoto, either, and it was
something that came up under his presidency. Clinton had neither the
political courage, the political right, nor popular support -- either
through public support or the support of their elected leaders -- to do so.