The Spectacle Blog
In testimony EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson tried to convince Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee why her agency needs to be funded to carry out its planned greenhouse gas regulations. Today my colleagues at the American Tradition Institute rebutted ten points that she cited to justify GHG regs — every claim was either wrong, wrong-headed or simply silly.
View all comments (3) | Leave a comment
Related Blog Posts
More Blog Posts by Paul Chesser
http://spectator.org/blog/2011/02/16/rebuttal-on-greenhouse-gas-reg
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Bob K.| 2.16.11 @ 6:32PM
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson aka Green House Gasbag!
David W| 2.16.11 @ 6:51PM
She is correct on point 10. It will reduce dependency on foreign oil. It will do this by reducing use of domestic and foreign oil. It will do this by making any product derived from or produced by oil so expensive that only the rich (or the poor who will be getting energy rebate checks) will be able to afford these products.
So it will do what she says, but not in a way that anyone would want (and would basically put the US at the same economic development level as Haiti (though we might actually be lower, since Haiti won't have an EPA department to screw them over, just corrupt government, drug lords, and Bill Clinton who just wants to help)).
Jeff Perren | 2.16.11 @ 9:53PM
The link goes to a list of Latest News. Can you fix?