This time on the environment.
Obama’s getting tired of throwing people under the bus, so this time, he’s throwing the planet under the bus.
Obama: Change we can believe in. Air we can’t breathe in.
I don’t know much about Obama and the environment. Has he done anything good on the environment at all? Can someone clue me in? All I can think of are bad things he has done on the environment. I guess that figures if he’s been a rightwing Democrat all along.
Obama caves in on new environmental regulations for polluting industries.
The Obama administration is retreating on long-delayed environmental regulations — new rules governing smog and toxic emissions from industrial boilers.
The move to delay the rules, announced this week by the Environmental Protection Agency, will leave in place policies set by President George W. Bush. President Obama ran for office promising tougher standards, and the new rules were set to take effect over the next several weeks.
In other words, Obama = George Bush, right? I always hated it when people said that, but increasingly, it seems to be true.
Obama. You traitorous bastard. You piece of shit.
From the tone of the article, the New York Times seems very happy with these changes.
The EPA says it “needs more time to make its decision.” But they said that 3 months ago.
But in a striking turnabout, the National Association of Manufacturers and the American Petroleum Institute — which have been anything but friendly to Mr. Obama — are praising his administration.
Isn’t that wonderful? Obama’s new best friends are Fox News, the NAM, the Republican Party and the Wall Street Journal. Hey, you never have too many friends, right, Obama?
“We also hope EPA will now reconsider other costly and unworkable proposals,” such as a planned rule to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, said Howard Feldman, API’s director of regulatory and scientific affairs.
The American Petroleum Institute wants to “friend” you too, Obama. Just click yes on your Facebook page to be friends with the API!
What’s he doing? Trying to get votes? There are no votes in opposing the environment. It’s a solid vote-getter. I don’t get it, unless Obama’s been anti-environment from the very start, like Clinton. That’s the only thing that makes sense.