Little: Obama's move to reduce carbon...

Little: Obama's move to reduce carbon emission not legal

There are 90 comments on the The Paradise Post story from Jan 12, 2010, titled Little: Obama's move to reduce carbon emission not legal. In it, The Paradise Post reports that:

It appears the President Obama has decided he alone can dictate emission standards for America's autos under "cap and trade." He reportedly supports proposals requiring limited carbon emissions without any involvement from Congress.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Paradise Post.

First Prev
of 5
Next Last
Treason

Courtland, CA

#1 Jan 12, 2010
Can we press charges against Obama for attempting to bypass our government by interring into Internation Ageements without the consent of Congress?

Instead of bantering back and forth about it, why not start legal proceedings?
John Howard

AOL

#2 Jan 12, 2010
Treason wrote:
Can we press charges against Obama for attempting to bypass our government by interring into Internation Ageements without the consent of Congress?
Instead of bantering back and forth about it, why not start legal proceedings?
He is the Government. As long as the gop continues to claim that the President has total powers 'in time of war' you just might give up wasting your time and emotion for it ain't gonna change any time soon.

Remember, if you think the President should be telling Congress what to do, and your masters claim you do, get used to 'bending over' for they truly are having 'fun at your expense'.
Confusion

Courtland, CA

#3 Jan 12, 2010
John Howard wrote:
<quoted text>
He is the Government. As long as the gop continues to claim that the President has total powers 'in time of war' you just might give up wasting your time and emotion for it ain't gonna change any time soon.
Remember, if you think the President should be telling Congress what to do, and your masters claim you do, get used to 'bending over' for they truly are having 'fun at your expense'.
Yes, John. We all know who let the dogs out on that one. Americans got caught in fast moving confusion and have been there since. We need to step away from both sides and get a clear picture in order to gain sure footing.

Unfortunately, we just keep getting snatched, enticed, manipulated...back into the confusion. Divide and conquer is no new concept. But it still works.

So, who stands to gain here? Those are the ones keeping the pot stirred.
The Realist

United States

#4 Jan 12, 2010
WHEN WAS WAR DECLARED BY CONGRESS???
As long as citizens buy into the sh** coming from both the republicans and the dems. the power grabbers from both sides will prevail. Right now the Tea Party people are the only ones getting tired of the "status quo".
Totally agree

Courtland, CA

#5 Jan 12, 2010
The Realist wrote:
WHEN WAS WAR DECLARED BY CONGRESS???
As long as citizens buy into the sh** coming from both the republicans and the dems. the power grabbers from both sides will prevail. Right now the Tea Party people are the only ones getting tired of the "status quo".
I totally agree with your post. Totally.
Totally agree

Courtland, CA

#6 Jan 12, 2010
The Realist wrote:
WHEN WAS WAR DECLARED BY CONGRESS???
As long as citizens buy into the sh** coming from both the republicans and the dems. the power grabbers from both sides will prevail. Right now the Tea Party people are the only ones getting tired of the "status quo".
What can we do to end the cycle of finger pointing? How can we unite without being tricked into voting for another Rep/Dem shill?
(like McCain)
The Truth

Chico, CA

#8 Jan 13, 2010
This story is so far to the right its running over mail boxes. It is absolutely legal for the leader of our country to set any guidlines he wants to. Thats how it is bush set so many or should I say changed all the good guidlines Clinton put into place, Maybe when President Obama is done fixing this country in 2016 the GOP might be able to rig another election and change the guidlines back to polluting without concern then you can stop whining.
The Realist

United States

#9 Jan 13, 2010
The Truth wrote:
This story is so far to the right its running over mail boxes. It is absolutely legal for the leader of our country to set any guidlines he wants to. Thats how it is bush set so many or should I say changed all the good guidlines Clinton put into place, Maybe when President Obama is done fixing this country in 2016 the GOP might be able to rig another election and change the guidlines back to polluting without concern then you can stop whining.
WHO IS WHINING? I stated that both the repbs. and the dems. are crooked as the day is long!!! It may be legal, thru executive order buy it is NOT CONSTITUTIONAL.

I think the only way we are going to get our country back is another revolution! I hate to say it. Someone smart once said, "you have a Republic, if you can keep it". As long as the powers that be, can keep us fighting, dems, against republicans,
they are free to change our country into something we don't recognize. Maybe the Tea Party movement is a start.

p.s. Think about the number of immigrants, legal and illegal, who are now voting, who have no natural allegience to this country; they came here to better THEMSELVES; not to help our country live by the constitution. Even Obama has lived most of his life outside the country and in other culture.
The Realist

United States

#10 Jan 13, 2010
The Truth wrote:
This story is so far to the right its running over mail boxes. It is absolutely legal for the leader of our country to set any guidlines he wants to. Thats how it is bush set so many or should I say changed all the good guidlines Clinton put into place, Maybe when President Obama is done fixing this country in 2016 the GOP might be able to rig another election and change the guidlines back to polluting without concern then you can stop whining.
That's called a DICTATORSHIP!!!!!!
Quiet Takeover

Courtland, CA

#11 Jan 13, 2010
The Realist wrote:
<quoted text>
That's called a DICTATORSHIP!!!!!!
We ARE living in a Dictatorship, thanks to both the Dems and Reps. The complete takeover will take place before Obama's term is over. That is why all the confusion keeps being stirred. It deflects to enable a quiet takeover.
Obama is itching for a Revolution. He wants to go down in history as the man who destroyed The United States. Obama wants to be THE ONE.
I don't think it is any secret... The American People are aware we are now being controled by a Marxist Dictator who wants a revolution. We do not want a Revolution. We are being forced into it or accept the lose of ALL our freedoms.
The Realist

United States

#12 Jan 13, 2010
Quiet Takeover wrote:
<quoted text>
We ARE living in a Dictatorship, thanks to both the Dems and Reps. The complete takeover will take place before Obama's term is over. That is why all the confusion keeps being stirred. It deflects to enable a quiet takeover.
Obama is itching for a Revolution. He wants to go down in history as the man who destroyed The United States. Obama wants to be THE ONE.
I don't think it is any secret... The American People are aware we are now being controled by a Marxist Dictator who wants a revolution. We do not want a Revolution. We are being forced into it or accept the lose of ALL our freedoms.
You are right, sad to say !!
Taz

Chico, CA

#13 Jan 13, 2010
The Truth wrote:
...or should I say changed all the good guidlines Clinton put into place....
You mean like the one forcing banks to write mortgages to people who didn't qualify?
The Truth

Chico, CA

#14 Jan 14, 2010
Taz wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean like the one forcing banks to write mortgages to people who didn't qualify?
No I mean like this just one small example.
On March 5, 2003, Senator Carl Levin, the Ranking Minority Member of the Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, released a report prepared by the minority staff that reveals why gasoline prices soared under the Bush administration. It has to do with the nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserves (SPR) and some odd decisions by the Department of Energy (DOE) after consulting with White House officials.

According to the Senate Report, the Bush administration added forty million barrels of oil to the nation’s reserves in 2002. That wouldn’t be a problem in and of it self. But the purchases represented an extreme change in energy policy; they were made in a strong market, with a tight supply of oil, which increased demand, which in turn pushed up the gasoline prices to their highest levels in twelve years.

The Senate report said in a one-month period in mid 2002 the Bush administration purchases caused crude oil prices to soar, raising the cost of heating oil by 13%, jet fuel by 10% and diesel fuel by 8%. The bottom line was the Bush policy change cost citizens between $500 million and $1 billion.

When crude oil jumps from $20 a barrel to $30, the Senate report says, the costs to U.S. taxpayers are an additional $1 million per day.“Over three months, the additional cost of filling the SPR approached $100 million,” which will ultimately be borne by U.S. taxpayers.

Why did Bush do it? For one thing, he was advised to do it. It has to do with the secret National Energy Policy advisory group headed by Vice President Dick Cheney. Cheney has steadfastly refused to release the names of those who advised the administration on energy matters.
Joshua Tree

United States

#15 Jan 14, 2010
Little. Dick, Only a fool would equate an attempt to further clean up the toxic air many Americans are forced to breath with "SOCIALISM" In the past 30 years there have been several laws put in place that have helped reduce toxic emissions from big industry and autos. Long, long before anyone on the National scene ever heard the name Obama, many Republicans and Democrats alike have fought hard against big industry and auto makers to reduce the toxic emissions pumped into the air we breath. Maybe you are too young but do you remember when LEAD was a common additive in gasoline?(Obama didn't do it) How about MTBE?(Obama didn't do it) Maybe you are lucky enough to live in a place where air polution is not a big concern but I once lived in Arvin Ca, the town with the most poluted air in the Country. See no evil (or breath no evil) is no excuse for a lack of concern about everyone elses desire to breath clean air. Obama did not invent clean air standards but thank God we finally have a President that realizes how vital they are.

“Government IS the problem.”

Since: Jan 08

Yolo, CA

#16 Jan 14, 2010
The Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
No I mean like this just one small example.
According to the Senate Report, the Bush administration added forty million barrels of oil to the nation’s reserves in 2002. That wouldn’t be a problem in and of it self. But the purchases represented an extreme change in energy policy; they were made in a strong market, with a tight supply of oil, which increased demand, which in turn pushed up the gasoline prices to their highest levels in twelve years.
The Senate report said in a one-month period in mid 2002 the Bush administration purchases caused crude oil prices to soar, raising the cost of heating oil by 13%, jet fuel by 10% and diesel fuel by 8%. The bottom line was the Bush policy change cost citizens between $500 million and $1 billion.
Do you actually think that a one time addition of 40 million barrels of oil to the SPR in 2002 would cause crude oil prices to rise when worldwide consumption is 85 million barrels of oil per day? U.S. oil consumption is 19.5 million barrels per day.

40 million barrels of oil is 1/1000th of the worlds yearly oil consumption. I may be wrong but I kind of doubt that would cause "crude prices to soar".

“Peto of Verum”

Since: Sep 09

Delay is preferable to error.

#17 Jan 14, 2010
When all else fails.... blame BUSH

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#18 Jan 15, 2010
The Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
No I mean like this just one small example.
On March 5, 2003, Senator Carl Levin, the Ranking Minority Member of the Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, released a report prepared by the minority staff that reveals why gasoline prices soared under the Bush administration. It has to do with the nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserves (SPR) and some odd decisions by the Department of Energy (DOE) after consulting with White House officials.
According to the Senate Report, the Bush administration added forty million barrels of oil to the nation’s reserves in 2002. That wouldn’t be a problem in and of it self. But the purchases represented an extreme change in energy policy; they were made in a strong market, with a tight supply of oil, which increased demand, which in turn pushed up the gasoline prices to their highest levels in twelve years.
The Senate report said in a one-month period in mid 2002 the Bush administration purchases caused crude oil prices to soar, raising the cost of heating oil by 13%, jet fuel by 10% and diesel fuel by 8%. The bottom line was the Bush policy change cost citizens between $500 million and $1 billion.
When crude oil jumps from $20 a barrel to $30, the Senate report says, the costs to U.S. taxpayers are an additional $1 million per day.“Over three months, the additional cost of filling the SPR approached $100 million,” which will ultimately be borne by U.S. taxpayers.
Why did Bush do it? For one thing, he was advised to do it. It has to do with the secret National Energy Policy advisory group headed by Vice President Dick Cheney. Cheney has steadfastly refused to release the names of those who advised the administration on energy matters.
This is revealing. Someone posting under the name “the truth” posted this related to energy policy,“Thats how it is bush set so many or should I say changed all the good guidlines Clinton put into place,”
And then when questioned about the specifics he/she was referring to said this about the nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserves,“the Bush administration added forty million barrels of oil to the nation’s reserves in 2002.”
So it would seem from the first claim “the truth” is claiming Clinton had put in place a “guidline” halting the president from adding to the reserves, Bush reversed that “guidline,” and added 40 million barrels to them at a time oil was $20.00 per barrel.

Perhaps “the truth” should look up the energy policy regarding what previous presidents (Clinton in particular) did related to energy policy. From 1995-1999 President Clinton built up and reinforced the capacity of our national reserves. At the conclusion of 1994 our capacity was 591.7 million barrels, and then with the Clinton build-up, by 1999 we were capable of storing 727 million barrels. Clinton began adding to the reserves as well in 1999 and continued till he left office, but used the Royalty-in-Kind (RIK) program (a domestic source), which was the same source Bush tapped in 2002.

Here read about it from the government source….our energy department.

http://fossil.energy.gov/programs/reserves/sp...

So in light of this perhaps “the truth” could share with me how Bush doing the same thing Clinton not only did, but actually INCREASED our ability to do, became a change in “guidlines” as Mr. Truth claimed,“bush set so many or should I say changed all the good guidlines Clinton put into place?”
The Truth

Chico, CA

#19 Jan 16, 2010
Brad II wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you actually think that a one time addition of 40 million barrels of oil to the SPR in 2002 would cause crude oil prices to rise when worldwide consumption is 85 million barrels of oil per day? U.S. oil consumption is 19.5 million barrels per day.
40 million barrels of oil is 1/1000th of the worlds yearly oil consumption. I may be wrong but I kind of doubt that would cause "crude prices to soar".
Yeah you could be wrong and you are.
The Truth

Chico, CA

#20 Jan 16, 2010
brad jenks wrote:
<quoted text>
This is revealing. Someone posting under the name “the truth” posted this related to energy policy,“Thats how it is bush set so many or should I say changed all the good guidlines Clinton put into place,”
And then when questioned about the specifics he/she was referring to said this about the nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserves,“the Bush administration added forty million barrels of oil to the nation’s reserves in 2002.”
So it would seem from the first claim “the truth” is claiming Clinton had put in place a “guidline” halting the president from adding to the reserves, Bush reversed that “guidline,” and added 40 million barrels to them at a time oil was $20.00 per barrel.
Perhaps “the truth” should look up the energy policy regarding what previous presidents (Clinton in particular) did related to energy policy. From 1995-1999 President Clinton built up and reinforced the capacity of our national reserves. At the conclusion of 1994 our capacity was 591.7 million barrels, and then with the Clinton build-up, by 1999 we were capable of storing 727 million barrels. Clinton began adding to the reserves as well in 1999 and continued till he left office, but used the Royalty-in-Kind (RIK) program (a domestic source), which was the same source Bush tapped in 2002.
Here read about it from the government source….our energy department.
http://fossil.energy.gov/programs/reserves/sp...
So in light of this perhaps “the truth” could share with me how Bush doing the same thing Clinton not only did, but actually INCREASED our ability to do, became a change in “guidlines” as Mr. Truth claimed,“bush set so many or should I say changed all the good guidlines Clinton put into place?”
This is one example of policy change which is not Illegal which this article is trying to say so maybe you want to respond to the topic which is saying that its Illegal for our president to change policy

“Government IS the problem.”

Since: Jan 08

Yuba City, CA

#21 Jan 16, 2010
The Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah you could be wrong and you are.
Explain to me how that would happen.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 5
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Jim Webb Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Only 19 Months Until Election Day, And Over 19 ... (Apr '15) Mar '16 Three Days 79
News Jim Webb: 'I would not vote for' Clinton (Mar '16) Mar '16 Harry 21
News Today in History (Feb '16) Feb '16 Billy Ringo 2
News Obama smears Iran deal critics and liberals las... (Aug '15) Jan '16 Ritual Habitual 3
News Distinguished pols of 2015 (Jan '16) Jan '16 Black Annie 4
News Chafee quits 2016 presidential race (Oct '15) Oct '15 Le Jimbo 5
News Jim Webb Abandons Bid For Democratic Party... (Oct '15) Oct '15 Cat74 8
More from around the web