Obama Double Crosses The Environmentalists

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Obama-Double-Crosses-The-E-by-Sherwood-Ross-111002-21.html

President Obama's betrayal of the environmental protection movement could cause him to lose his activist base and ruin his bid for re-election next year. That's the editorial opinion of "The Nation" magazine in its October 3rd issue and there's a lot to it.

"Obama has 13 months to persuade voters that they should blame not him but the GOP for his presidency's shortcomings. He has much less time to convince the thousands of activists nationwide---who do the grunt work of getting out the vote---that he's worth their sweat and sacrifices one more time," the editorial said.

While noting that Obama "has done some good things on the environment," including the fuel efficiency standards he pushed through this year, "he has done bad things as well, including opening vast tracts of the West to coal mining and providing much more funding to nuclear and fossil fuel than to green alternatives," "The Nation" said.

One of those "bad things," the liberal magazine charged, was his decision September 2nd "ordering the EPA to delay new regulations on ozone emissions because the rules pose undue 'burdens' on corporate polluters." Environmental activists want Obama to live up to the pledge he made when running for office that during his watch the global warming trend would slow.


More at the link --

The little shit can't decide to be cold ot hot. Pick a side, loser!

Decided on his appointments.

And that was certainly the side of Corporate America, and not our side.

On a brighter note, Time Magazine recently declared that we don't know all that much about risks to human beings from radiation. So even if Obama does go ahead and offer up another fifty billions of dollars of "loans" to the nuke industries - we can rest assured that we won't get annoying announcements from the EPA about dangers to our health should one of the nuke plants go up in radioactive smoke!

Hit from every side and pore.

"Idiopathic" is the medical term of this era.

Of serious concern to independent researchers have been tested using adequate methods of testing for safety.

Usually what passes for testing amounts to whatever tests that the Manufacturing entity decides are appropriate.

For instance, when Monsanto wanted to do "tests" on RoundUp, before applying for the license to sell this crap over the counter to causal users, they carefully designed the test.

It involved feeding dogs the product - which is a big joke on Congress. They knew in advance that the dogs' stomachs and intestinal processes wold keep the dogs from dying.

But RoundUp is not sold to be fed to anyone or anything. it is sold to be sprayed - so those tests mean not a single thing in terms of the product's safety.

But just to make sure that the product was passed off and agreed to by the EPA, they lied about the formula. In order for RoundUp's glyphosate to be spray able, they added formaldehyde tot he product. This ingredient alone would have allowed for the State of California to pull it from the shelf - formaldehyde cannot be in a pesticide sold over the counter.

But the lie stayed safe until the end of the nineties. Then a forensic witness who had seen secret court papers about the real ingredients finally spilled the secret.

(I believe that they now use another "aldehyde" rather than formaldehyde, but without an aldehyde, the Product RoundUp is not sprayable.)

My fault for not crafting a better sentence. :D

I have to say, I wouldn't call President Obama a "little shit" .

So topic is not deleted or locked by mods.

Clarity is always good, in any case. Though easy to avoid to those of us who type too fast!