 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / December 2006Bush wants to put lead back in gasoline -!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/blogs/politicalticker/2006/12/epa-leaded-gas-may-ret urn-along-with.html Thursday, December 07, 2006 EPA: Leaded gas may return, along with lower standards WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Bush administration is considering doing away with health standards that cut lead from gasoline, widely regarded as one of the nation's biggest clean-air accomplishments. The Environmental Protection Agency said this week that revoking those standards might be justified "given the significantly changed circumstances since lead was listed in 1976" as an air pollutant, claiming that concentrations of lead in the air have dropped more than 90 percent in the past 2 1/2 decades. Battery makers, lead smelters, refiners all have lobbied the administration to do away with the Clean Air Act limits. But Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., the incoming chairman of the House Committee on Government Reform, called on the agency to "renounce this dangerous proposal immediately," because lead, a highly toxic element, can cause severe nerve damage, especially in children. --------------------- I bet 99% of the country opposes this. But if the lead industry pays Bush and the EPA enough, it will be done. AMERICA = TOTAL CORRUPTION >...The Bush administration is considering doing away > with ...standards that cut lead from gasoline... You are such a sorry bald faced liar. Your mother must be embarrassed that you are alive and spewing this crap. Dan Rather? Is this another of your fake memos?? LOL!!! > >...The Bush administration is considering doing away > > with ...standards that cut lead from gasoline... > > You are such a sorry bald faced liar. Your mother must be embarrassed > that you are alive and spewing this crap. Your avoidance of the issue and use of childish namecalling is noted. It must really suck to be you. > > >...The Bush administration is considering doing away > > > with ...standards that cut lead from gasoline... [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Your avoidance of the issue.... The issue is that this is a lie. Its a Dan Rather styled fake memo lie. It is false. It is fake. It is the mainstream media shilling for the liberals in the democrat party while claiming to be professional objective journalists. Its disgusting. > and use of childish namecalling is noted. If you lie then you are a liar. Its not "namecalling". Its a simple fact of basic physics. If you say something that is false you have told a lie. If you tell a lie then you are a liar. Do you get it now? > It must really suck to be you. It must really suck to be a 75 IQ idiot who constantly falls for your liberal lies. By the way, are you going to go out and find a job today or are you going to just sit there on your mother's couch and eat breakfast cereal in stale milk all day like you did last week? >> > >...The Bush administration is considering doing away >> > > with ...standards that cut lead from gasoline... [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > The issue is that this is a lie. Its a Dan Rather styled fake memo I am confused about your references to ". . . a Dan Rather styled fake memo. . . " When and where did Dan Rather fake a memo? Please provide PROOF -- not a link to some clown who fancies himself a typography expert. > lie. It is false. It is fake. It is the mainstream media shilling for > the liberals in the democrat party while claiming to be professional [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > going to just sit there on your mother's couch and eat breakfast cereal > in stale milk all day like you did last week? > I am confused about your references to ". . . a Dan Rather styled fake memo. > . . " > > When and where did Dan Rather fake a memo? Please provide PROOF -- not a > link to some clown who fancies himself a typography expert. Dan Rather himself may not have faked the memos... but Dan Rather's (former) boss has acknowledged that they could not be authenticated, and even Colonel Killian's son has stated that they are, and I quote: "a mixture of truth and fiction". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rathergate The real clown here is Mr. Rather himself. Had he not been so desparate to misuse his position as an old-guard media figure to present distorted or even ficticious "news" to try and defeat the fellow Texan he apparently dislikes, he would still still be reading the news from the chair now occupied by Katie Couric. All of the old media is slanted to the left - that's old news. Rather ended up under the bus because he went so far that he tossed aside even the most cursory journalistic ethical standards and practices, and embarrased the suits at Black Rock. Let that be a lesson to anyone who wishes to perpetuate a lie in the media: You can fool the sheep anytime. But try to fool a few shepherds, and you're gonna end up getting sheared. > > I am confused about your references to ". . . a Dan Rather styled fake memo. > > . . " [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > media: You can fool the sheep anytime. But try to fool a few shepherds, > and you're gonna end up getting sheared. That is a good summation, Barry. The Drive-By Media, and the pinko-liberal Left, will continue to spew their verbal diarrhea. >> > I am confused about your references to ". . . a Dan Rather styled fake >> > memo. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rathergate Not one word of what you have posted constitutes proof. How does Killian's son know the provenance of the memos? "Can't be authenticated" and "faked" are not the same thing. As for Wikipedia -- >>>> I am confused about your references to ". . . a Dan Rather styled fake >>>> memo. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > As for Wikipedia -- The old "memos" were in proportional-faced fonts when, at the time they were supposedly created, office typewriters (or any general office equipment) didn't produce those types of typefaces. Only an expensive print-setter could do that back them. There is no other conclusion...the memo's were fakes. Care to guess why Rather was basically told to take a hike after that episode? > >>> Dan Rather himself may not have faked the memos... but Dan Rather's > >>> (former) boss has acknowledged that they could not be authenticated, [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > Care to guess why Rather was basically told to take a hike after that > episode? Dan Blather is a congenital liar. >...the memo's [sic] ... No one has effectively disputed the fact that the contents depicted were accurate. Bush was a deserter during Vietnam. Now he's a war criminal. >>...the memo's [sic] ... > >No one has effectively disputed the fact that >the contents depicted were accurate. No one has any reason to consider the content of obvious forgeries.  SignatureThere's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can result in a fully-depreciated one. >>>...the memo's [sic] ... >> >>No one has effectively disputed the fact that >>the contents depicted were accurate. > >No one has any reason to consider the content of obvious forgeries. You don't seem to understand that a copy of a fact is still a fact. * wrote: > >>>...the memo's [sic] ... > >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > You don't seem to understand that a copy of a fact is still a fact. You don't seem to understand that a forged memo purporting to document a fact is a work of fiction... and is also actionable, whether part of a political campaign or not. > * wrote: > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > a fact is a work of fiction... and is also actionable, whether part of > a political campaign or not. Rather's memos were forgeries, and they did not contain any "facts", they contained lies. They were a fraud. Ted Kennedy - President of DDDAMM (Drunk Driving Divers Against Mad Mothers) - 11 Dec 2006 12:41 GMT Someone wrote: >> >...The Bush administration is considering doing away >> > with ...standards that cut lead from gasoline... [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Your avoidance of the issue and use of childish namecalling is noted. >It must really suck to be you. Wow, you're saying the same thing to him that everyone else says to you. Where'd you learn that tricker, loser? =)) > > >...The Bush administration is considering doing away > > > with ...standards that cut lead from gasoline... [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Your avoidance of the issue and use of childish namecalling is noted. > It must really suck to be you. Childish namecalling is noted? By a netloon whose nym is childish namecalling? You are more proof that liberalism is a very, very serious mental disorder. > >...The Bush administration is considering doing away > > with ...standards that cut lead from gasoline... [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Dan Rather? Is this another of your fake memos?? Dan Blather is a discredited (and fired) member of the Drive-By Media. > The Environmental Protection Agency said this week that revoking those > standards might be justified "given the significantly changed > circumstances since lead was listed in 1976" as an air pollutant, > claiming that concentrations of lead in the air have dropped more than > 90 percent in the past 2 1/2 decades. Battery makers, lead smelters, What kind of abject idiocy IS this? Could the reduction in levels possibly be the RESULT of these policies? Naaah! Let's just write it off as a fortunate coincidence that couldn't possibly be turned around by eliminating environmental laws - and count on the public being so completely stupid or complacent as to not put 2+2 together. I feel sick. yak > > The Environmental Protection Agency said this week that revoking those > > standards might be justified "given the significantly changed [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > What kind of abject idiocy IS this? Its not "idiocy". Its a carefully crafted lie. Dan Rather must be publishing fake memos again. > I feel sick. > > yak Lying liberals often make people sick. >> > The Environmental Protection Agency said this week that revoking those >> > standards might be justified "given the significantly changed [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Its not "idiocy". Its a carefully crafted lie. And you proof that this is a lie???? > Dan Rather must be publishing fake memos again. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Lying liberals often make people sick. >>> > The Environmental Protection Agency said this week that revoking those >>> > standards might be justified "given the significantly changed [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > And you proof that this is a lie???? Lead smelters are lobbying for more slack in emmissions. Others make the magical leap that this would somehow result in TEL being added to gasoline. The only vehicles that could use leaded gasoline would be race cars and cars built before ~1974. No modern vehicle could use it or would be made to use it. Lead didn't vanish from gasoline because it was banned, it vanished because catalytic converters couldn't handle it, so new cars made for roughly model year 1975 and newer couldn't use it. The demand fell as the cars that could use it grew ever smaller in number. Yes, the EPA reduced what amount of lead could be in the fuel, but that's not what stopped it's use, lack of demand did. GWB could make it so companies could put as much TEL in gasoline as they wanted, remove all the lead emmissions requirements. There still wouldn't be any leaded gasoline. > >> > The Environmental Protection Agency said this week that revoking those > >> > standards might be justified "given the significantly changed [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > And you proof that this is a lie???? Why don't YOU prove that it is the truth. Start here: http://www.epa.gov/lead/ Find the alleged memo. I'll wait... but I won't be holding my breath. > > Dan Rather must be publishing fake memos again. > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > > > Lying liberals often make people sick. There is a kernel of truth in the story. Two different kernels, actually. It would appear that the EPA is considering changing the standards for atmospheric lead emission, and also has changed the procedure with which it reviews and updates certain air-pollution regulations. Both aspects have become highly controversial. See for instance http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-epa8dec08,0,1689344.story It's all part of in some interesting infighting (well, interesting to some of us; others find their eyes glazing over) where science and politics have their always uneasy interface. This trial balloon (I am trying hard not to describe it as a lead balloon) seems to mostly concern certain point sources of lead in the atmosphere, such as smelters and battery manufacturers. As far as I know it does not have anything to do with gasoline, which has been free of tetraethyl lead for ten years now in the US (leaded gas had been getting hard to find for several years before that), and which would probably kill your expensive catalytic converter just as it always did. --Joe Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Laura Bush murdered her boy friend said in rec.autos.driving: > I bet 99% of the country opposes this. But if the lead industry pays > Bush and the EPA enough, it will be done. AMERICA = TOTAL CORRUPTION Give me a f.cking break, you moron. Even chimpzilla isn't that stupid. If he allows lead back in to gasoline and it becomes the only product on the market it would put about 99.99% of the cars in the nation in their garages permanently. OTOH, though, I kinda miss the smell of leaded exhaust..... Signature"Years ago i had a vehicle in which i rigged up a switch so the horn would stay on continuously. I used it when backing up or when driving thru a congested area. Worked real well though it prolly wouldn't if everybody had one." --Speeders & Drunk Drivers Are MURDERERS, a.k.a SADDAM, LBMHB, lb- VH.. 12/6/2006, 0141hrs Ref: http://tinyurl.com/y72pnu Message ID: 92pcn2dt4mhr8ojsapifkq07fuium5hish@4ax.com |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.