Friday, September 2, 2011

Obama Convenes Real Death Panel - Sentences Tens of Thousands with Asthma to Early Deaths

From Death Panel Central - The White House:
[A]fter careful consideration, I have requested that Administrator Jackson withdraw the draft Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards at this time. Work is already underway to update a 2006 review of the science that will result in the reconsideration of the ozone standard in 2013. Ultimately, I did not support asking state and local governments to begin implementing a new standard that will soon be reconsidered.
Even the folks over at Obamabot Central - Daily Kos - are freaked :
So even though we're talking about a two-decade window to achieve compliance, why is Obama doing this? Because it would cost big business money:
Obama earlier this week wrote House Speaker John Boehner identifying the costliest draft regulations, and the ozone rule was the costliest, with a negative impact estimated between $19 billion and $90 billion.
I'm sure this will appease John Boehner, right? Via Jamie Dupree on Twitter:
Spokesman for Speaker Boehner calls today's White House withdrawal of ozone rules "a good first step"
Can't wait to see what other regulations protecting the health of American citizens are on the table. Man this is dispiriting.
 Susie Madrak at Suburban Guerrilla echoes my sentiments on this cowardly act:
Of course, that might be hard for asthmatics, but hey, survival of the fittest!
President Obama abruptly pulled back proposed new national smog standards Friday morning, overruling the Environmental Protection Agency’s efforts to compel states and communities nationwide to reduce local air pollution in the coming years or face federal penalties.
The move represented a win for the business community, which had lobbied to postpone new restrictions on ground-level ozone—known as smog—until 2013 in light of the current economic downturn.
In a statement, Obama praised EPA administrator Lisa P. Jackson’s effort to improve the nation’s air quality, but said he had asked her to withdraw the draft standards since they were scheduled to be reconsidered two years from now anyway.
I guess I should note here that it’s utter bullshit, and driven by the apparent decision of Obama’s campaign advisors not to allow anything to happen that might even theoretically be used against them by the Republicans. As if, you know, we won’t notice how many people don’t have jobs.
 A commenter at the Politico article on this notes:
Why doesn't President Obama annouce [sic] that he is not running for reelection so that another Democrat can run and win the election. President Obama appears to be doing everything in his power to lose the election. He is allienating [sic] every group that made up his base in 2008. I really fail to understand what he is doing. He continues to show incredible weakness in standing up to Republinuts. His advisors are standing behind him laughing or just giigling [sic] under their breath.
And at my favorite blog, firedoglake, fellow firebagger Jon Walker writes:

The big winners are corporations that pollute. The big losers are individuals with respiratory problems, such as kids with asthma and those who live in urban environments. Research has found that people who live in areas with high levels of ozone, mainly big cities, are significantly more likely to die of lung cancer.

The other minor winner from Obama’s decision is the Republican economic framing.   By using the GOP talking point of “regulatory uncertainty” to justify this decision, Obama is helping to re-enforce the Republican narrative that it is Obama’s flood of new regulation that is holding back the economy instead of a lack of demand.
Can't wait to see how Alaskans are asked to frame this at the upcoming Democracy for America Training Academy on September 17th and 18th.

I'm hoping to find the time to attend.


nswfm said...

The tag from AKWTF is appropriate here: Spineless fucking jellyfish.

A friend of mine works for the EPA under this and the previous admin, as well as in the mid-late 1980s. She said the next election will be the lesser of the evils.

Hope and change, not so much.

Anonymous said...

You might consider unlinking your blog from IM. It really doesn't fit. Wrong audience and wrong politics.

Is the "Progressive" title a little tongue-in-cheek entendre?

nswfm said...

I got here from IM. He also links to AKWTF where I got the spineless fucking jellyfish. There are a lot of intelligent people who voted for President Obama, but are disgusted with what has happened in a few short years--the self-inflicted wounds, the re-hiring of the same mofo financial losers who got us into this mess, the capitulating and capitulating and capitulating and capitulating and to the GOP and not going after the real crooks in the financial system. I've been involved in a number of environmental causes and even I'm disgusted by this from our idiotic "justice" department: (that's for the musicians)

and this:

Don't want to be a Kool-aid drinker for either side.

Philip Munger said...

"You might consider unlinking your blog from IM. It really doesn't fit. Wrong audience and wrong politics.

"Is the "Progressive" title a little tongue-in-cheek entendre?

--- I fail to see your point. What is un-progressive about observing that the lack of spine on this issue WILL endanger the health and shorten the lives of many asthmatics and people with cardiovascular problems? Do you disagree?

Are you implying that Jesse would walk over the edge of a cliff for Obama, and that if I won't too, I must be failing some sort of a progressive litmus test?

Please note that finally today the Mudflats is also taking up the issue covered extensively here since it began - the protests outside the White House of the Keystone XL tar sands oil pipeline. And she writes about her encounter with the Begich office on this pipeline, which Sen. Begich seems to support fully, based on her interview.

AKM has also joined me in protesting this egregious backstabbing by Obama of the health standards for hundreds and hundreds of thousands of Americans. Should AKM also de-link to and from the Obama-worshipping blog, Immoral Minority?

Hat off to Jeanne Devon!

Waiting for Gryph to stop awarding Obama gold stars. Not holding my breath.

Anonymous said...

"--- I fail to see your point." No, not really, Phil. My point? A four-sentence post suggesting you unlink. From an "Obama-worshipping blog."
No, you got it.

"Are you implying that Jesse would walk over the edge of a cliff for Obama, and that if I won't too, I must be failing some sort of a progressive litmus test?" Um. Sure. I guess? What? No. You're not progressive. What does Jesse have to do with it?

I wonder we couldn't just do it the old-school way? Why people can't just speak using real language, offer opinion, rationale, reasons for what they think?

Hate, love, worship, idolize, detest...very strong but meaningless. Inaccurate. Excessive.
I'm over it with the sexy emotional trigger language and sentiment-based positions. That's a marketing gimmick, not a position statement.
I'd like it if people would offer dry explanations of WHY they think what they do. _Nobody_ ever says WHY they think something, these days. Including you, Phil.
I'm interested in the BASIS, the INFORMATION, the RATIONALE on which an opinion has been formed.

The other thing I'm fatigued with - the credential of the clique. So-and-so said it and thinks so too, so therefore, it's meaningful.

You know, President Obama is not the worst leader I can think of. It's not an easy thing to run a small company (or a university or a prison system), much less an entire country of the size and sophistication of the U.S.
He's doing a fair job. He deserves a fair critique. He (and me, too, Phil) deserves a real analysis, not just a spanking. Is that hard?

I like to hear real stuff. Partly because I don't understand every issue and the nuances of every piece of policy-setting. No one does. But very few people acknowledge that. I like explanation and instruction. I like to really know the 'how' and 'why'. It's an awful lot of homework to spend the time looking for the pieces for a thorough understanding. If you have it, you could share it.

So. Get my point?
Probably not. Never mind.

clark said...

seems to remove any justification for the rule changes.

Philip Munger said...

"He (and me, too, Phil) deserves a real analysis, not just a spanking. Is that hard?"

--- I don't even know who the fuck you are, so a lot of your comment seems bizarre, especially this part.

Celia Harrison said...

For some Obama is like being in an abusive relationship. People keep telling them the truth, but they are in denial. They won't understand until they get the crap beaten out of them several times. Obama is not the friend of the people that so many believe he is. When someone shows you who they are believe them the first time.

HarpboyAK said...

Phil, DailyKOS is hardly an "Obama worship" site. Lately there have been a lot of pie fights, because any time Real Democrats dare to criticize Obama's pro-corporate actions or policies, or complain about his many broken campaign promises, they get piled on by a very small minority of Obama worshippers.

As a frequent commenter there, I can tell you that the majority of Kossacks are NOT Obamabots.

But those that are, as Celia says, act much like someone who is stuck as the victim in an abusive relationship.

You are right, he is barrelling rapidly towards not only losing the election but killing our Party! It's time for Real Democrats to take it back, starting with our caucuses next March(?).

Linda Kellen Biegel said...

Ummmm...Phil...the Democracy for America Training Academy is to help folks run their local/statewide races. It's not training for Pres. Obama's campaign.

Philip Munger said...


Judy told me the same over dinner tonight.

Anonymous said...

I think the bit about Jesse walking off a cliff for Obama as a litmus test for you, is bizarre. Also bizarre, the form of a question: 'did I imply that'.
Clearly - I did not imply that.
There is no choice but to concede that perspective is hugely different here.

You present whatever you want - it's your blog. For you to express yourself and your thoughts.
I get to comment on what I think about what you presented, although maybe I shouldn't. But you're prominently visibly linked. So I click and read.
You write well. You obviously think hard about it. But I never get the 'why' of it. I walk away wondering what I may have missed in _my_ understanding of any given issue. But you do compel me to read more, trying to figure it out. So I guess that's well-served.
Perhaps I simply give you too much credit.

So there's the U.S. leader with a rather sinister look on his face, raising a toast to his unilateral decision to sentence tens of thousands of asthmatics to death.
Oh. Now why would he do that? What jackass doesn't know that EPA regulatory standards are a good idea? That industrial pollution is a problem? That is causes illness. That poor air quality makes it hard for human beings to breathe and life-threatening to those with respiratory conditions. That it's a health risk to shit in our own nest.
Is it possible that President Obama doesn't know this or is deliberately choosing to disregard this?! [gasp] Wow, he just doesn't seem like that kind of a guy (or that painfully stupid, either). How would such a thing happen?
Wait, I can take a guess right off the top of my head.
Like a unified front of Republican Party nincompoops who willfully hold hostage the American citizenry and interfere with normal government operations in order to get what they want, and still sleep just fine at night?
A group of individual politicians hell-bent on making this particular president look bad at any cost?
A coven of elected policy-makers (oh yes, including Alaska's) who intentionally and deliberately misuse reasonable rules of order and process intended to provide checks and balances, to manipulate congressional activity. And should maybe be held a little accountable.

Is it possible that this might be part of the deal that got the debt ceiling issue closed? Is this where we see the paying of the piper? I genuinely don't know, because I didn't personally read the hundreds of pages myself. I wonder what the language says, and what concessions have been made, and where we might see deals made come into play. In stuff that we care about. On issues that make a difference.
How can we tell where it's a president making bad decisions and where it's a president gamely playing the hand that he was dealt, when the house cheated and rigged the deck?
And that would be my primary purpose in reading this blog and others like it. Because I'm hoping to learn something; get a better understanding.

Oh well. Maybe not. Maybe he's just a really bad, terminally stupid president.
McCain, anyone? Now there's the guy that would have gotten it done, right?