>From "
Boortz.com" today FYI and further to some of the "econazi" discussions
we've had here.
Enjoy!
Dick 75 PB in Atlanta
PS: If you're leaning libertarian, check out this site each week-day. Neal
is 100% NON-PC.
ABOUT THOSE NOW-DEAD EPA ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS =85.
=85=85. there=92s something you need to remember here.
Essentially, the court ruled that the EPA didn't justify the new restrictive
levels on particulate matter that could be released into the air. In other
words, they just picked some numbers out of thin air and made those numbers
the new law. The ruling said that the EPA "construed (sections of) the Clean
Air Act so loosely as to render them unconstitutional delegations of
legislative power."
The left-wing enviro-radicals are going to be screaming about this one. The
very idea that their environmental rules and regulations ought to be based
on sound scientific evidence is not popular among this crowd.
OK ... here's a little reminder for you ....
When Carol Browner's EPA set those new --- and very expensive --- clean air
standards, they said the new rules were based on the latest scientific
research. Problem is, the EPA has steadfastly refused to release that
research to the media or to the public. It's been one of those "trust us"
scenarios from
government.=20
Trust,
hell.=20
Now that the Court has struck down the new standards, let the EPA come forth
with new rules --- this time backed by some reliable data.
