Last Minute Damage to America

[Superman]

Predictably, Dubya is trying to sneak some rules quickly past the folks who are supposed to review them. As we have discussed here, his "administration" has placed cronies on so-called "scientific" boards and as heads of cabinet-level agencies. John Howard, the widely respected (by both business and labor) head of NIOSH was canned recently in preparation for these new rules which would roll back efforts to protect workers and citizens from chemicals and substances we know, for a fact, to be hazardous. For example, the "administration" was hoping the labor department could publish rules, before anyone notices, which claim that asbestos is really not that bad.

First, I think it is unconscionable that any American would try to pull a stunt like this. But also, I think it is the epitome of ignorance for Dubya to imagine he might have even the slightest success at this. Technically, these are rules and those agencies can adopt them whether Congress likes it or not. But in practice, Dubya is the lamest of lame ducks. In a best case scenario, the rules get passed, Republicans in Congress effectively block new laws that undo the rules.......and in January those agencies rules are washed clean and the libs are emboldened to "fix" the perceptual damage done over these past few years. In other words, even if Dubya gets this done, the backlash once a reasonable Chief is in place will (hopefully) make conservatives wish he had just left those agencies alone.

Tragic. Pathetic. Treacherous. Hard to find words that do justice to the carnage that the next guy will need to deal with. It has been fun and games for Dubya, and we will pay dearly for that. So will our children and their children.

And the sneaky way he is trying to get these rules pushed through is not working. It is in fact ruining McCain's thin chance of getting something near a majority in November.

[Hugh R]

I couldn't believe they didn't renew Dr. Howard's six year term. I've known John professionally for 20 plus years. I had lunch with him in Las Vegas about six weeks ago while I was at the American Society of Safety Engineers conference. "Widely respected" is an understatement to say the least.

[Superman]

Originally Posted by Hugh R

I couldn't believe they didn't renew Dr. Howard's six year term. I've known John professionally for 20 plus years. I had lunch with him in Las Vegas about six weeks ago while I was at the American Society of Safety Engineers conference. "Widely respected" is an understatement to say the least.

Dr. Howard, and hundreds or thousands of workplace casualties, injuries, deaths, exposures, cancers, etc., are a price Dubya hopes America will pay for increased corporate profits. In my view, many of Dubya's antics deserve prison time. Seriously. And in this case, he's not even smart enough to understand that none of his antics will be successful at this point. They can only backfire. Mercifully.

[onewhippedpuppy]

.......yawn. Supe, you and Shawn are slipping into the same sort of rhetoric you typically mock. Don't make vague unsupported claims and proceed to bash Bush, lets see some fact.

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by Superman

First, I think it is unconscionable that any American would try to pull a stunt like this.

First you must understand the mind of the neo-con Corporate Internationalist which is loyal only to profit, and bound to no country.

[Superman]

Here is the text of a recent news story. You said you wanted facts. This story outlines some of the agencies, committees, legislators, etc., that are or have been involved. Legislators are pissed that the "administration" tried to sneak some agency rulemaking past them. The usual rulemaking method at least communicates their decisions and actions to Congress, and Dubya tried to sidestep that procedure. Technically......these agencies can go forward with their rulemaking regardless of Congressional support or lack thereof. But in practice (somebody should tell Dubya about this part), there are some serious dangers to this strategy. From his first term, Dubya has imagined he can just shove stuff down Congress' throat. And it worked a few times. He imagines his relationship with Congress is the same as his relationship with the entire rest of the world. It is a Master/Slave relationship with him as Master. Well, that might work for a while. But then you wake up one day and find yourself alone. With no allies. That is the situation he is in now. Congress is fully equipped to undo whatever damage Dubya does through this agency rulemaking strategy. And.....it will be used to help discredit McCain. And......it will just make for a bigger housecleaning process when Obama sets those agencies back on track. In other words, more firings in those agencies in February.

But even besides his Neanderthal diplomatic skills, here Dubya is removing heath and safety protection for workers and citizens, against the virtually unanimous advice of the scientific community. He does this by adopting scientific "studies" financed and managed by the corporations that want the safety and health regulations to go away. Same strategy that has you guys dismissing climate change conclusions. It is not science that dismisses these scientific findings. It is the Dubya cronies that are doing that. Pretending to be scientific. Okay, here is the article:

[Superman]

Agencies asked to ease safety rules
White House tries to push changes on asbestos, toxins
By ANDREW SCHNEIDER
P-I SENIOR CORRESPONDENT

In its final days in power, the Bush White House is rushing to have federal agencies water down the regulation of hazardous substances, lawmakers and public health experts say. A panel of scientific advisers this week denounced an Environmental Protection Agency plan to quickly alter the way it measures the cancer-causing risk of asbestos, but the thumbs-down doesn't prevent the agency from making the change anyway.

The latest 11th-hour toxic sparring match comes while members of Congress are asking why the Labor Department has sent plans for sweeping changes in how workers are protected from chemical hazards directly to the White House Office of Management and Budget.

Many of the government scientists and physicians in the Labor Department and other agencies who are normally required to weigh in on these kinds of changes say they haven't had a peek at the proposal.

Similar concern has been focused on the firing of John Howard, the popular director of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health,

People at EPA headquarters say the rush to have them change the way asbestos hazards are calculated is caused in part to OMB's desire to appease the automotive, mining, construction and chemical industries being sued for harm done by asbestos-containing material they've used or sold.

The 20 experts appointed to the Scientific Advisory Board's asbestos panel were to evaluate the validity of the EPA's plan to change how the toxicity of the six types of asbestos regulated by government differ in danger. The change centered on the EPA's desire to ignore decades worth of what are considered solid studies documenting the actual hazard of the most common type of asbestos -- chrysotile.

Instead, the EPA submitted other studies which, it said, showed chrysotile isn't dangerous and doesn't cause mesothelioma, an almost always fatal cancer, which often garners multimillion-dollar judgments in court cases brought by people sickened or killed by exposure to it.

Lawyers defending corporations against asbestos claims says passage would greatly increase their chances of convincing juries that the asbestos used by their company wasn't dangerous. The Labor Department's current efforts would offer the same benefit to corporations in litigation involving scores of other toxins.

Sen. Patty Murray, who has long fought for a ban on asbestos and better protection for workers, is angered by the EPA action.

"I'd like the political appointees at the EPA to look into the eyes of a mesothelioma patient and say that asbestos isn't dangerous. It appears that this administration is once again putting politics before public health," said the Washington Democrat.

On Monday and Tuesday, more than two dozen witnesses either provided statements or testified before the scientific panel.

"Garbage in, gospel out," said lead-off witness Dr. David Egilman. The occupational medicine specialist explained to the panel that industry-financed studies cited in the EPA report had been proved to have no scientific credibility. "This is another example of how this administration all too often bows to corporate pressure and facilitates regulations that fail to protect the health of both the workers and the public."

The EPA's position was that the new approach was needed to improve assessment of many asbestos-contaminated Superfund sites.

The only non-EPA person to speak in favor of the EPA's plan was Suresh Moolgavkar, an epidemiologist hired by W.R. Grace, which has been charged with contaminating the tiny northwest Montana town of Libby. But while saying that the EPA's efforts were needed, Moolgavkar nevertheless criticized the agency for the weakness of the data it presented.

Dr. Michael Silverstein, a University of Washington clinical professor and occupational health specialist, submitted a 29-page report signed by 87 of the nation's leading public health authorities. The document strongly questioned the EPA attempt to change the risk assessment methods and accuracy of the data the agency used.

"We knew plenty about asbestos. We didn't need more investigations. We didn't need more policy. What we did need was to stop exposures and stop the use of it," said Silverstein, who added that the latest effort by the EPA "just came out of nowhere and is one of a number of questionable things being rushed through at the end of this administration."

The Bush administration has repeatedly taken industry's position on issues involving asbestos and other toxic substances. For almost four years, Bush fought openly for asbestos tort reform to end workers' ability to sue their employers.

"Too much has happened for this not to be a last-ditch effort by the administration to weaken public safety rules, especially for workers," said Silverstein.

Among the recent actions that concern the physician and other public health activists was the firing earlier this month of NIOSH boss Howard, who unlike many of his predecessors, had support of both industry and labor.

He was fired July 3, about the same time that NIOSH released its controversial "Roadmap to asbestos."

Fred Blosser, NIOSH's chief spokesman, said. "The document doesn't make any final pronouncements on the toxicity of specific (asbestos) fibers but rather addresses the uncertainties about asbestos that has existed for years."

The final report from the panel will not be available for about a month, Vivian Turner, the panel's coordinator said Wednesday. According to those who observed the scientific sparring match, all but two members of the panel declared the proposal dead on arrival.

"Yes," said Turner being more diplomatic, "The view of most members was that there were problems with the document, and they made recommendations on how to improve it."

However, that may not prevent the EPA from charging ahead with the changes, said Dale Kemery, an EPA spokesman.

"EPA will review the committee's comments and take them into consideration as we decide how to proceed. But we can move ahead without future approval from OMB or the (Science Advisory Board)."

This is far from the first attempt by the OMB to undercut safety standards in almost every federal agency, says Jennifer Sass, a senior scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Fund who has worked with congressional investigators to control erosion of federal safety policies.

In January 2006, OMB issued a plan to dramatically change how all federal agencies assessed hazardous material.

"Every single federal agency was critical of OMB's plan and made no secret of their concerns," Sass said. "So the White House office tried an end run and asked the National Academies (of Science) to evaluate its plan, but the scientists all shot it down."

In January 2007, John Ahearne, chairman of the committee that did the evaluation, said: "We began our review of the draft bulletin thinking we would only be recommending changes, but the more we dug into it, the more we realized that from a scientific and technical standpoint, it should be withdrawn altogether."

"The White House has used this cloak of secrecy all too often," Sass said.

Hazardous substances are used by manufacturers of consumer products in literally thousands of ways. In recent months, the Seattle P-I has reported on the hazards of diacetyl, a butter-flavoring chemical used in butter popcorn and cooking oils, which causes bronchiolitis obliterans, a fatal lung disease. On Wednesday, the P-I reported a University of Washington study showing that toxic chemicals added as fragrances to laundry products and air fresheners are often not listed on product labels.

"Much-needed regulations to protect workers from lung cancer, silicosis, bronchiolitis obliterans and other serious disorders languish in the Department of Labor for decades," said Celeste Monforton, a former policy analyst with the Labor Department and a special assistant to an assistant secretary of labor.

"However, when it comes to some mystery proposal of the anti-regulatory ilk, there not even a peep in the pipeline and then poof, it's already at OMB for its blessing," added Monforton, who is now with the Project on Scientific Knowledge and Public Policy at George Washington University.

Murray, chairwoman of the Senate Employment and Workplace Safety Subcommittee, agreed.

"For eight years, this administration has failed to make any significant progress in improving the health and safety of our nation's workers. Now, in its waning days, it appears that they are actually trying to increase barriers to workplace safety," the senator said.

[Rearden]

Originally Posted by kach22i

First you must understand the mind of the neo-con Corporate Internationalist which is loyal only to profit, and bound to no country.

I thought this thread was blaming Bush for something. Bush isn't a neo-con.

[Pazuzu]

Originally Posted by Rearden

I thought this thread was blaming Bush for something. Bush isn't a neo-con.

Correct, that would infer that he was conservative, which he's not. He's a neo-rep.

[Superman]

He is a Cretin.

[Tidybuoy]

I was in a Radio Shack about two weeks ago and I saw an electircal cord with a tag on it that said: this product has materials in it known to the State of California to cause cancer if injested.

I realize this is a seperate subject, but sometimes regulations have gone too far and can be rediculous.

Regarding this story that Superman has posted - I refuse to read it becuase of your continued "quotes" around the word administration and the over use of Dubya. Once again...you are totally ineffective at making your point by setting the negative tone.

[Mule]

2010 Was Not A Good Year To Be President


Welcome to Toastmasters, June 13, 2033. That's right: 2033.

Today Rick Campbell, one of our senior members at age 87, is here to reminisce a bit and give us a history lesson. He says he is so old that he learned to drive an internal combustion engine car (remember those) with a manual transmission. He once owned a typewriter. He remembers when bicycles had one speed, phones had two-party lines, and cameras had something called film. As incredible as this may seem, he says that when he was young, it was common for people to smoke in restaurants and public places. He is from a different time; almost a different world.

I'm sure all of us are far too familiar with the tragic events of 2010, so Rick is not going to plow that fertile field again. Instead, he is going to give us a personal look back at the conditions which led up to that fateful year, in a speech titled "2010 Was Not A Good Year To Be President."

"2010 Was Not A Good Year To Be President"

Yes, 2010 was long ago and far away.

As we look back on history, it appears that some Presidents had an easy ride- times of growth and stability. Teddy Roosevelt, Warren G. Harding, Dwight Eisenhower, Bill Clinton come to mind. Those were good years to be President.

Others were elected just when the Republic was facing terrible crises: Abraham Lincoln, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, George W. Bush. They rose to the occasion, even though they were controversial and widely hated while in office. Not such good years to be President.

Just a few years prior, in 2008, the country began foundering. We were in the sixth year of the Iraqi Occupation, and the economy was flat. The mainstream press clearly wanted a Democrat elected.

Although we didn't know it until some years later, oil producing nations had colluded to secretly buy their own oil on the open market, driving oil prices to shocking levels above the true demand price- reaching a high of $162 a barrel in October, 2008, just before the general elections.

Their purpose was simple: to effect regime change in the United States .

And of course, the U.S. economy was already in a real estate slump and also suffering the curse of stagflation; slow growth and high inflation.

There were a million home foreclosures.

Independent truckers went under by the thousands.

Airlines failed. Airlines with names now long-forgotten: United, Delta, Northwestern, American. All now merged, of course, into the one lone U.S. carrier we love so much: Southwest.

Against this backdrop of weariness of the war on terror, and economic distress, the American people were ripe for a demagogue, and they certainly got one in Barack Hussein Obama.

He and his running mate Kathlene Sibelius inspired them with vague notions of hope and change; of a world in which diplomacy settled all international problems, of free universal health care, of abundant alternative energy, of peace and love.

It was a vision too good to resist.

The Republican nominee, a name you probably haven't heard in years anyone?

Yes, it was John McCain, an obscure Senator from Arizona had no clue how to run a national campaign, and a platform nearly as liberal as Obama's.

The selection of Condoleeza Rice as his running mate looked brilliant at first. Unfortunately, black voters viewed her as white, and women voters viewed her as one of the guys.

Even so, the McCain/Rice ticket would have won the election if it weren't for the fact that 16 percent of conservative Republicans voted for anyone remember? That's right, Bob Barr, another name that's a footnote in history.

After Obama's narrow win, thanks to recounts in Broward County , Florida , the country was positively giddy. A Democrat House, Senate, and President. At last an end to gridlock in Washington .

Camelot!

When Congress convened in January, 2009, the 44th President of the United States did something unique in history: he made good on his campaign promises.

Certainly most Americans never really thought he was serious during the campaign. But whether because of inexperience, idealism, or simply incompetence, he followed through.

In Obama's first One Hundred Days, the Congress passed his initiatives, and he signed them into law as he said he would.

He repealed the Bush tax cuts, and increased capital gains taxes.

He enacted a windfall profits tax, and instituted price controls on gasoline and diesel fuel.

He passed universal health care, which added an additional 10 percent tax increase on all working Americans.

He signed the Immigrant Amnesty bill which created 12 million new citizens instantly, each with entitlements.

He closed the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay , and summarily released all the detainees.

He repealed the Patriot Act, and cut funding for espionage, and eliminated all terrorist listening and wiretaps.

Most important, he began the complete and immediate withdrawal of all American troops from Iraq .

He ignored the advice of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who wanted to retain bases in Kuwait and Qatar . Instead, he went with the recommendation of Secretary of Defense Dennis Kucinich, and ordered all troops back to U.S. soil.

Viola! In One Hundred Days, by May of 2009, it was all done, and the vision was complete. He did exactly what he said he would do.

And so it was in the summer of 2009 that things began to unravel for Obama.

Of course, the economy needed a tax cut, not an increase, and unemployment quickly rose to 12 percent. Even attorneys and economists were put in the bread lines. Hard times!

Price controls on gasoline immediately led to shortages and gas lines.

The global cooling trend we have seen for the past 25 years first became obvious in 2009, exposing the CO2 global warming fraud.

People were justifiably angry.

Federal deficits increased massively because thousands of baby boomers, facing job loss and much higher taxes, simply gave up and took social security.

Although the superb U.S. health care system was thrown into disarray, the bright spot was the creation of the Federal Department of Health care, and the immediate hiring of 250,000 administrators, inspectors and auditors, the only job growth in any economic sector in 2009.

By February 2010, the U.S. military withdrawal from Iraq was complete. It was a very expensive undertaking.

And then in March, the gradual Shiite insurgencies from Iran turned into a true Iraqi civil war. In May, Iranian tanks crossed the border and quickly took Baghdad . Although the exact number is not know, at least 230,000 Sunni Iraqis died as we stood by.

Iran also quickly moved into undefended Kuwait .

President Obama did exactly what he said he would. He sent Secretary of State, Maria Cantwell, to Tehran to meet with Iranian President Ahmadinejad.

After two weeks of high level talks, the United States agreed to allow Iran to retain Iraq and Kuwait to create stability in the middle east, with the understanding that Israel would not be disturbed.

Cantwell returned to Washington, and explained the agreement in her famous speech, in which she proudly noted that the Obama administration had finally achieved "peace in our time" in the Middle East .

So there was some surprise at the rocket attacks on Tel Aviv on August 14th.

President Obama said, "This is not the Mahmoud Ahmadinejad I knew."

The Obama administration decided it would be de-stabilizing to take sides in the conflict, and approximately 29,000 Israeli civilians died during the summer and fall.

American Jews were appalled at the inaction. Yes, in 2010 most American Jews were Democrats, but because of 2010, they are solid Republicans today.

As awkward as it was, everything might have turned out all right for the Obama administration going into the fall mid-term elections of 2010, if it hadn't been for the dirty bomb in the Port of Long Beach .

The administration had cut funding for the inspection of containers, because they felt it showed a "lack of trust" in the international trading community.

It wasn't really a very big bomb, and thank goodness, not a real nuclear device, but nonetheless it contaminated some expensive real estate- Newport Beach , Palos Verdes Estates- and ultimately caused the death of 14,000 Americans. People were especially annoyed that Disneyland had to be closed for decontamination.

And so, in the midterm elections, Republicans regained control of both the House and Senate, and the rest is history.

The impeachment proceedings against President Obama for "failure to protect and defend" were swift and nearly unanimous. Vice President Sibelius resigned. Newly-elected Speaker of the House, J.C. Watts, became the 45th President of the United States .

But you know the rest of the story well.

Republicans finished the war on Islamic fundamentalists, largely by aiming ICBM's at Mecca and Medina .

No Democrat has been elected President since.

Republicans have held both Houses of Congress.

History of Western Civilization and Economics are now taught in all public schools, and in English only.

Marriage is defined as one man and one woman.

And there are border fences, north and south.

We old codgers remember the ancient Confucian curse: "May you live in interesting times."

Well, 2010 was an interesting year, but it was not a good year to be president."

[krichard]

Mule needs to put down the weed, its making him paranoid.

[Superman]

Originally Posted by Tidybuoy

I was in a Radio Shack about two weeks ago and I saw an electircal cord with a tag on it that said: this product has materials in it known to the State of California to cause cancer if injested.

I realize this is a seperate subject, but sometimes regulations have gone too far and can be rediculous.

Regarding this story that Superman has posted - I refuse to read it becuase of your continued "quotes" around the word administration and the over use of Dubya. Once again...you are totally ineffective at making your point by setting the negative tone.

I would probably agree that some regulations are ineffective or unnecessary. Yeah, they go too far. In the matter of the regulations being pursued by cabinet-appointment agencies, this is not the case. Here, the regulations being targeted, and the science and research behind those regulations, are well-established. The "science" being used to justify the attacks is.......bogus. And everyone knows it. The attempt was made in secrecy, of course.

As far as boycotting your own education as a protest against my punctuation.......whatever. Poke yourself in the eye if you wish. I have nothing but disrespect for George W. Bush. My opinion of him would be MUCH MUCH higher if he were just a simple idiot. I would cut him some slack. But that is not who he is. He is a guy who is comfortable injuring American, exposing them to known carcinogens, in the name of corporate profits. And what's worse is.......this is predictable. That is his agenda. His actions are deliberate. He earns none of my respect and so....he gets none. And so, you go ahead and retain your ignorance of the current "administration"'s agenda. As a punishment, I guess?

[Mule]

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by Tidybuoy

I was in a Radio Shack about two weeks ago and I saw an electircal cord with a tag on it that said: this product has materials in it known to the State of California to cause cancer if injested.

I see these signs everywhere in CA, in cars, hotels, on pay phones, vending machines. It's ridiculous.

[Superman]

If this were about those signs, I would not have posted it. This is about actual carcinogen exposure. This is about revitalizing the asbestos industry, and protecting it from lawsuits when we know for a fact it is a hazardous material. This business of pretending that asbestos really isn't that dangerous.........that does not pass what I call the "straight face test." It is dishonest. Deliberately dishonest, in a deliberate attempt to harm Americans. For money.

[Superman]

Not a single one of the posts above even attempts to explain or justify Dubya's attempt to change these health and safety rules. Not one. This man is your "president." And the leader of your political party. Most Republicans have had reasonable success at sly rule changing, but not this guy. Have you heard the phrase "You dance with the one who brung you?" This is your leader. The nation is watching. Enjoy the dance. It's nearly over.

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by Superman

Not a single one of the posts above even attempts to explain or justify Dubya's attempt to change these health and safety rules. Not one. This man is your "president." And the leader of your political party. Most Republicans have had reasonable success at sly rule changing, but not this guy. Have you heard the phrase "You dance with the one who brung you?" This is your leader. The nation is watching. Enjoy the dance. It's nearly over.

He's your president too and he's not the leader of my party. I'm registered independent in AZ. VA didn't have party reg. when I lived there. There is no end to the number of legal and very common household products which we put in our bodies and/or use around the house or office every single day. If we outlawed everything that could hurt us, we'd be living in caves still. I guess you can't fathom that someone would want to cut down on federal regulation of the private sector. Lord knows Bush would never get any cooperation out of Congress if he had tried that route, even when the GOP did control the Hill.

[Red Baron]

Originally Posted by Superman

This man is your "president." And the leader of your political party. Most Republicans have had reasonable success at sly rule changing, but not this guy. Have you heard the phrase "You dance with the one who brung you?" This is your leader. The nation is watching. Enjoy the dance. It's nearly over.

I'm guessing that means your's is AlGore?