Supreme Court deals Biden climate agenda serious blow with EPA decision

So you're a big government advocate. What makes you think that big government can make better decisions about the environment
than the Chemical Industry?

 

Well, catering to the interests of a minority is what it did by blatantly siding with West Virginia/big-bussiness. I guess the petty desires of West Virginia/big-business are more important than the needs of the entire nation.

And again, this was not a surprise considering that the court is controlled by the right. There was absolutely no "opinion" to review here. It was essentially a demand by West Virginia disguised as a "Constitutional opinion", and the SC six spewed a bunch of Constitutional nonsense to justify it.

There is no separation of power. It's a myth. All 3 branches are run by the wealthy who work in concert to enrich themselves & seek re-election.

Which means what? That they will do what's BEST for the nation & all its people? LOL

No we're not. We're slaves to a monetary/capitalist-consumerist death culture run by the uber-wealthy, led to believe we're a "free democracy".

What was once an uber-wealthy King is now a group of uber-wealthy elites. Things have not changed, and perhaps have actually become worse.

At least the people can overthrow a single King/tyrant when things get bad enough because the King is where the buck stops --- that's where all the power is concentrated. Chop off the head and the body dies.

But how does one overthrow an uber-wealthy international group of non-elected elites that one does not see, know, or hear; who hide in the shadows behind their managers (ie, elected officials & the courts) laws, bureaucracy and corporations; and who have their tentacles in every state institution, agency and banking & financial sector? This uber-elite group is so pervasive & paranoid that virtually every major organization established to counter corruption has been infiltrated & contaminated by them.

Aaron Russo, in an interview, claimed he & Nick Rockefeller became good friends and that Nick even tried to recruit him into their group (Russo refused). Russo said that Nick once asked him what he believed the women's liberation movement was all about. Russo replied it was about asserting equal rights to work & pay for women. Nick replied that Russo was an "idiot", and that his group (the elites) was behind this movement and that the movement served two main purposes: (1) By getting more women into the work-force children could be placed into the school system at an earlier age & thus be easier to indoctrinate by the state, and who would begin looking at the state/schools/officials as the family. And (2) the state could now tax the other half of the population. Nick also told Russo about an "event" that would occur 11 months prior to 9/11 which would propel the US into war with the Middle East on the pretext of fighting a "war on terror". (There's a saying that if you want to destroy the opposition, you must become the opposition.)

Here's the interview if you care to watch it.

Because those with the hard powers are smart. They would never subject themselves to the whim of popular elections. They leave that to their managers --- the elected officials whom they control. As long as you keep voting your focus will remain fixated on the elected, and the un-elected will remain safe.

Tell Mufasa to tell Simba he doesn't need to remember who he is, but only to know where he is and where he's going.

Ultimately, we are what we do.

You do know that this story is from 2014, right? And you do know that this occurred at only one office in Region 8 in Denver, CO and that it was unknown if a single individual or more were responsible?

EPA Deputy Regional Administrator Howard Cantor noted "several incidents" in the building, including clogging the toilets with paper towels and "an individual placing feces in the hallway" outside the restroom. "Management is taking this situation very seriously and will take whatever actions are necessary to identify and prosecute these individuals," [SOURCE]

It's not like this kind of behavior was being condoned or allowed by the EPA management. If I were to guess, it was probably an single employee with a mental condition. It says nothing about the EPA, its management, or its role.

Employees go berserk from time to time no matter where they work due to stress, personal issues, home life, drug addiction, mental disorders, etc.

You mean like the Jan 6 rioters?

Rioters left feces, urine in hallways and offices during mobbing of US Capitol [LINK]

 

That's certainly an optimistic take. Thank you for sharing it.

​

As Frederick Douglass came to realize, our Freedom and Liberty are stacked on 3 boxes that are absolutely essential to maintaining them:

1. The Ballot Box
2. The Jury Box
3. The Cartilage Box

We all take care care of those three boxes for each other, and we'll be fine.

If Congress wishes to grant the power to the EPA that they were attempting to exercise, Congress is free to do so.

 

That was directed at someone else. Sadly you really aren't um... subtle? Yeah, let's go with that. You really aren't subtle enough to deflect.

 

I’m so glad that the court correctly ruled as it correctly did in this case. Victory for we the people.

 

There's a big difference between your hyperbole and reality.

The purpose of the environmental movement is not clean air, clean water, and to protect the environment - the purpose of the environmental movement is to shackle capitalism, shackle liberty, and put the global elite in control of us all.

You're either very naive or very dishonest - at least a healthy dose of both.

 

I was thinking the same thing. I would trust the chemical industry to safeguard my health & keep my environment pristine any day. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if their motto was: "Health before profits!"

 

Capitalism = shackle liberty = control by global elite

Without a monetary/capitalist system there's no power for the elite, and hence no opportunity to shackle the people's liberties.

 

There's always an elite - you think the politburo weren't wealthy murderers of the peasant class??

The CCP hierarchy - leaders of the people, for the people, blah, blah, blah... they're all filthy rich - having done nothing but exploit and oppress the masses.

Get a clue.

 

Yes we know every time the left feels pushback on any other insane agenda we're either throwing grandma off the cliff or some such other emotion laden drivel. Sorry it doesn't work any more. So basically what you are saying is that 800 kids died of asthma last year. And you are yelling it's because of coal power plant almost all of which are easy if the musdip while the deaths are scatter pretty much evenly about the country. I bet a lot more kids died of heat stress in socal last summer where there isn't enough power to keep the AC on because 2 decades of green energy foolishness has left California's energy grid a shambles.

 

Of course they exploited & fed off of the working class. How is that different than what our elite capitalists are doing?

You have to understand, all monetary systems are intrinsically parasitic capitalist systems. The only difference between different nations that use a monetary system is how they balance socialism (social programs) with capitalism (robbing the working class). In every nation, no matter how autocratic or tyrannical the government, there has to be some degree of socialism for the sake of stability just to keep society from immediate collapse (ie, the people need to have food, shelter, and other basic essentials if the nation is to have a viable work-force, an army, and to avoid persistent conflict/rebellion).

In the US you will notice that social programs are dwindling as more wealth is becoming concentrated into the hands of fewer people. In this way we are transforming more and more into a 3rd World autocratic regime (which would be perfect for tin-pot dictator wannabes like Trump). And this, after only a few short centuries of existence. In the US, billionaires are not only not kept on a short leash as they should be, but are also allowed to hold high positions of power/influence. Hence, the fruits of labor, resources & wealth are hoarded & controlled by fewer & fewer people.

In European nations, particularly the Nordic ones, social programs take greater precedence over the capitalist interests of billionaires & leaders. Hence tax rates are typically high, but the returns on those taxes provide all that the people need to be content. Here, billionaires are kept on a very short leash. But that doesn't mean they've given up in trying to rob the working class & control resources. There have been conspiracies underway by the uber-wealthy/elites to undermine & destroy the socialist-leaning European nations.

In so-called "communist" nations, the term "socialism" is used as a pretext & justification for concentrating power, wealth, and control of resources into the hands of the Party leaders. Such nations are neither communist, nor socialist. Social programs are meager and austerity measures the norm, as the fruits of labor are not returned to the working class to an adequate level. This type of capitalism would be similar to a single corporation (the Party) monopolizing the entire nation's means of production & labor, but paying the workers very little in return, and not investing the wealth adequately into infrastructure and other social programs.

In money-less indigenous cultures, devoid of capitalism, socialism is practiced unhindered in a fully cooperative, sharing economy & democratic system. Behavioral & social management/control is typically based on ancient cultural traditions, religious beliefs, and peer expectations, with further guidance from the elders & Chief. Along with this mutually beneficial social arrangement exists an intimate connection & respect for one's natural resources. Such a sustainable arrangement has allowed indigenous cultures to exist virtually unchanged for 80,000+ years.

In summary, the more socialist a society, the more its people will thrive.

 

There is nothing that drives more people into poverty than socialism does. Capitalism on the other hand has lifted more people around the world out of poverty since it was invented by Adam Smith than anyone or anything else. Capitalism is the poverty eradicator, socialism is a poverty creator

 

Then we have totalitarian governments to "shackle the people's liberties".

 

In summary that is a lie.

 

No deflection needed. The facts are that, historically, the CO2 concentrations are low. I get it that you don't have an answer to that.

 

Thrive as in live in cramped little row houses with little to no opportunity to be anything other than a corporate drone. In the end it matters little whether the corporation is run by the government or a billionaire save that the billionaire is less likely to shoot you for leaving his version of the workers paradise.

 

Socialism is not dependent on profit.
Socialism is not dependent on money.
Poverty cannot exist without money.
Socialism cannot create poverty.

Capitalism depends on profit.
Capitalism depends on money.
Poverty cannot exist without money.
Capitalism creates poverty.

Capitalism definition: an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.

 

Name one totalitarian government that does not depend on money/currency.

 

Indeed.

A for-profit organization is a for-profit organization, even if run or called by different names.

 

All organizations are run for profit of one sort or the other or they cease to be organizations.

 

Like BLM??

 

Yet according to you the government that iis controlled by corporate interest is the best hope to protect us from those same corporate interests.

 

There is one basic problem with a single agency making such decisions. They only look at one aspect. It is like the old saying. To a hammer, everything else is a nail.

They only consider the impact of such decisions on direct health considerations. They do not consider that their decision could end up killing more people because of the effect on the rest of the body. Such decisions also affect the stomach and people can end up starving or not getting proper medical attention because of lack of income.

I don't particularly trust congress to ever make the right decision, but the total affect has to be considered, not just breathing. Such decisions rightfully belong to congress, not a single one issue agency.

 

Especially when that agency is largely staffed by green fanatics

 

GOOD: Why the Supreme Court’s EPA Ruling Has Cultists, Authoritarians, Politicians and Gun Control Advocates Worried.

​

SCOTUS limiting the authority for the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) ability to make up "their own rules without clear congressional authorization that Congress intended to delegate to the EPA could also upend rules published or pending from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)."

An unelected "administrative agency, doesn’t have the legal authority to make their own rules. That’s the responsibility of elected Congress – the duly elected representatives of the people."

Confusion about how Constitutional Liberal Democracy Works.​

When the EPA wrote the rules for the Clean Power Plan rule under the Clean Air Act, “claimed to discover an previously unheralded power representing a transformative expansion of its regulatory authority in the vague language of a long-extant, but rarely used, statute designed as a gap filler. That discovery allowed it to create a regulatory program that Congress had conspicuously declined to enact itself.”

They attempted to illegitimately arrogate the authority they claimed. The only legitimate power in our system is that that We The People grant, not power that unelected Administration Staff pukes swipe.

“Agencies have only those powers given to them by Congress, and ‘enabling legislation’ is not an ‘open book to which the agency may add pages and change the plot line,’” Chief Justice Roberts wrote. “The agency instead must point to ‘clear congressional authorization’ for the power it claims.”

That's not a short-barrelled rifle, not matter what ATF staff pukes claim.​

"The DOJ and ATF claimed authority to rewrite the rules defining what is a frame and receiver and define AR-pistols as rifles under the 1968 Gun Control Act and the 1934 National Firearms Act. In both laws, however, the authority for ATF to do so doesn’t exist. In fact, defining firearms is explicitly the authority of Congress."

"Congress set the definition of what constitutes a firearm in the 1968 Gun Control Act. In the case of reclassifying AR-pistols as rifles, these definitions were created by Congress. Congress alone has the authority to rewrite them. Neither of the laws include provisions allowing agencies, including the ATF or the Attorney General, to rewrite definitions of what constitutes a firearm on their own."

That's not a "machine-gun".​