President Bush Was Enviro Friendly After All
President Bush was actually good to the environment. In the following report of statistical data collected by the Environmental Protection Agency, pollution levels have decreased under 6 Republican Administrations.
According to statistics calculated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the United States is in much better shape today than they were several years ago.
Americans have reduced toxic releases by more than 50 million tons since 1970. If that many tons were deposited in dump trucks, the trucks would stretch from Baltimore to Dallas (all the way around the world) if lined up bumper-to-bumper.
- Currently, it would take 20 of today’s new automobiles to release the same number of emissions as a 1960s model.
- Carbon monoxide emissions (CO) have decreased by 33 percent. Forty-one fewer tons are being produced per year as a result of current efforts. Much of these emissions are from cars, trucks, buses, lawn and construction equipment.
- Large utility and industrial boilers and other mechanical devices are producing 12 percent less nitrogen oxide emissions. This is 3.3 million tons fewer each year. Nitrogen oxide is a contributing factor to ozone formation.
- Sulfur dioxide emissions have reduced by 38 percent or 13 million tons per year. These emissions are typically associated with large boilers. Acid rain has been a product of these emissions in the past.
- Dropping 14 million tons per year, volatile organic compound emissions have decreased by 42 percent. VOC emissions are a factor in the formation of the ozone layer.
- Particulate matter emissions reduced by 9 million tons per year, or a 75 percent reduction.
- Decreased by 98 percent, lead emissions have reduced by 217 thousand tons per year.
- The EPA statistics indicate that the decrease in emissions is about 48 percent across the board, reducing pollution by 109 million tons of toxic fumes.
President Bush’s positive effects on the environment are further detailed here by AEI (the same venue Vice President Cheney spoke after President Obama’s Guantanamo Detention Facility speech).
The American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research analyzed data collected by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and concluded that levels of numerous gases linked with air pollution have fallen off since 2001.
Among the findings: Carbon monoxide decreased by 39 percent, ozone by 6 percent, and sulfur dioxide by 32 percent.
“Pick any category you want and pollution levels are generally lower than they were seven years ago,” said Steven Hayward, the policy analyst who authored the report, titled “Index of Leading Environmental Indicators,” for the conservative think tank.
“(Environmental groups) said air pollution was out of control, but this was always more about politics than it was fact,” Hayward said.
Environmental groups agree that tremendous progress has been made since the 1980s, when cities like Houston and Los Angeles were thick with smog and acid rain devastated lakes and forests across the U.S.
It in fact, it goes to show that policy decisions by a Republican led congress at the time had a positive impact on the environment, while protecting business interests at the same time. When sound judgment and policy are united good things do happen.
President George W. Bush drew the ire of environmental groups throughout his eight years in the White House, perhaps the loudest in 2003 when he announced that he would end a Clean Air Act program that required older power plants, refineries and industrial sites to install pollution control devices when they expanded their operations.
But in looking over the data on air quality from the Bush years, Hayward notes that levels of most air pollutants decreased at a faster rate than they did during the Clinton administration.
“Mostly of it’s technological change. Quite a bit of it’s been forced by regulation, but a lot of it has been the marketplace,” Hayward said. “The EPA has models that project an 80 percent decline in auto emissions. Nothing Bush could have done was going to change that.”
Another case in point is free markets, competition, and the need to change in order to keep up with global demands while protecting the environment made much of this possible. Taking away free market principles and mandating industry by government will set us back both economically but environmentally and safety wise (if Mr Obama gets his way with roller skate size soda cans for cars).
Jeff Holmsted, a high-ranking official at the EPA from 2001-2005 and now an attorney with the law firm Bracewell & Giuliani, acknowledged that the decrease in air pollution over the last eight years owes much to efforts of past administrations. But he called the statistics a vindication of Bush’s environmental policy, which he said did away with cumbersome regulations while still protecting the environment.
“I think among people who actually understand how the regulatory process works, they, in private, would acknowledge that we accomplished a lot,” Holmsted said.
Source:forums.gardenweb.com
President Obama, Refinancing Your Home Is Not a Tax Cut
President Obama’s assertion to homeowners that refinancing their mortgage loans now with interest rates at a near-record low equates to a tax cut isn’t that cut and dry, according to tax analysts.
Obama said at his third press conference last month that the housing plan his administration has launched has “already contributed to a spike in the number of homeowners who are refinancing their mortgages, which is the equivalent of another tax cut.
Well in all reality that is simply wrong. First off, interest paid on your mortgage is not a tax. It is the charge you pay the bank for using their money. Anyone who has financed a car, home, or credit card knows that. This is very basic stuff Pres. Obama. Interest paid is not paid to the government for services. Though, given the chance, I am sure Nancy Piglosi would incorporate that into a tax bill. So yet again, more democratic propaganda, lies, and misinformation for the purpose of political brownie points among people who may not know any better.
“While there could be overall savings by refinancing and lower monthly payments, there also could be reduced tax benefits as less interest is paid,” said Gil Charney, an analyst for The Tax Institute at H&R Block.
In short, for those who itemize and can deduct interest payments, by reducing the amount of interest paid, you reduce the amount of the deduction you could possibly take, thus reducing the amount of any potential tax break.
“Also refinancing could extend the period before the mortgage is fully paid off, so this might not be desirable for someone who wants to be mortgage-free,” he said.
When you refinance you restart the term of your loan at the new rate. Now depending upon the terms and the amount your refinance, you could reset back at the 30 year mark. By doing this one could extend the amount of time actually paid on the mortgage itself. Also, one must consider that if you refinance it may take several years to recoup the finance charges.
Savings, yes; tax break, NO! Please get it straight President Obama
President Bush, Integrity; Barack Obama, Floppy Fish
If there was one thing you could always say about President Bush, it is that he always stood on his principles and values. He had an enormous amount of integrity and did not compromise any of those things for political expediency. He firmly believed every move and decision he made was based on what was best for the American people. He did not rely on polling data or popularity statistics. President Bush’s firmly held beliefs in a post 9/11 world are what guided him.
Now President Obama, on the other hand, stands on his teleprompter. As he has “navigated” his way through the first 100 days in the Oval Office, we have yet to really see the characteristics of integrity or doing what is right by the American People. At least two of his cabinet members should have been tossed; Turbo Tax Tim Geithner and Secretary Napolitano, both of whom have embarrassed the Oval Office and outraged the American people. If he really stood on principle and integrity they would have been gone.
President Obama showed signs of this early in the election cycle when he said he would accept public financing of the campaign, but when the primary season was over and he was the nominee, he opted out of the system and continued to collect just shy of 3/4 of a billion dollars, most of which is untraceable. That in itself goes against the Open Government Act by fully disclosing all donors.
President Bush walked his talk after the campaign. He worked with the Democratic leadership, showing bipartisanship on the budget, FISA, immigration and other issues. The only thing he would not compromise on (thank goodness) was a troop withdrawal time table. Democrats tried in vain to force his hand as the Obama backing MSM flooded the evening news night after night with each road side bomb image they could find. Very little attention was paid to the success we were having, only the carnage. This unwavering stance against a timed withdrawal was significant because he did not want give the emboldened insurgency a window in which to “wait it out”, and to prevent these politicians from micromanaging commanders in the field. True, there was pressures to change strategies in order to combat this issue, and the administration did just that; they initiated the “surge”. And guess what, it worked! Now Mr. Obama on the other hand has shown about as much bipartisanship as Iran has shown cooperation with the UN….Uh that would be none! The GOP has been completely shut out of the administration, being told to basically shut up and sit down because “we” (the Dems) won. So much for a new era of cooperation and open government.
What people fail to realize in Iraq, is that not only did we rid the world of a very evil dictator, who’s atrocities are well documented (so in fact there is you weapon of mass destruction), shut down Dr. Germ Rihab Taha (who was identified by UN weapon inspectors specifically), the mission also brought stability to the region as a whole.
If you look back, Moamar Kadafi quickly and quietly ended their rebellious ways and cracked down on terrorists in Libya. Syria also became much more user friendly, and cooperative. So there were broader positive effects.
Mr. Obama who was not a Senator when the Congress initially authorized action in Iraq, on the campaign trail he waved the “No More War” flag like the checker flag at the end of a car race. The election was soundly anti-Bush, and all the rhetoric that goes with that. ‘When he is elected president, we will be out of Iraq in 16 months at the most. There should be no confusion about that’.
Well as you all know, the mission (and I am not complaining about this) remains on target and is, in fact, in a winding down phase. We have consolidated much of our operations to specific areas in Iraq, handed over control and security operations to the Iraqi Army and Police force in many areas, continue to train and equip those forces so when we do leave, there will be stability and peace inside the borders. Mr. Obama’s rhetoric got him into the White House, but the reality of the situation on the ground in Iraq dictated his actions. And if the people who were so hell bent on completely ditching the quote “Bush Doctrine” (as Charlie Gibson tried to nail Sarah Palin with) they would have realized that this notion of up and run out of Iraq was not plausible in the least.
President Bush was thrust into a situation that day in September, unbeknown to America or our intelligence agencies. We went from a 20 plus year time of relative peace and suddenly thrust into war, against an enemy that does not belong to a nation or state, but operates in the shadows among innocent people whom they will sacrifice without any hesitation. Yes, mistakes were made. But this nation was kept safe, and still is, by those policies President Bush put into place.
Now we have a floppy fish in the White House. Yes he was thrust into an economic situation that has not been pretty. However, Mr. Teleprompter as not shown us anything except he is bent on a socialistic agenda and that he changes his word like we change underwear.
Now Mr. Obama wants to openly (yes there is that word open again) and without preconditions, have talks with these nations that simply hate the United States. Iran, who is pursuing nuclear weapons and calling for the destruction of Israel, North Korea, who has nuclear material but can not build a delivery vehicle, Venezuela, who just yesterday seized American Owned and Operated energy sites and equipment, and Cuba, where money can now flow freely without using a 3rd and 4th party intermediary. Oh yes lets not forget Mexico. Yet, another apology from Mr. Obama and Secretary Clinton for causing the drug war along the boarder.
Mr. Obama and his economic team have showered the coffers with billions and billions of dollars in order to prop up the economy. Thus far, nothing. New jobless filings hover around 600K and overall, 6.5 million people are out of work, and counting. Now that Chrysler and GM are making significant cuts, that is going to go up more this year. Not only does that effect line workers in the auto plants, but spills out to the suppliers and peripheral businesses that support them.
Mr. Obama, first week in office broke the most basic of his campaign pledges, saying that the practice of earmarks and pork spending would immediately come to and end. Say what? The first two things he signs into law are pork laden wasteful bills that did nothing. The Stimulus package, which failed to stimulate the American people, was shoved through the congress by the new Dem Majority in the middle of the night in which no one was even able to read. And what was in there (Mr. Dodd)? Bonuses for the executives at AIG, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac!!! Next he signed an Omnibus bill that contained over 9000 earmarks, again pushed through on a Dem freight train in the middle of the night.
Now the administration continues to politicize national security doctrine as the administration stammers on what our evil interrogators did to terror suspects. This emboldens the enemy, teaches them our techniques so now they can prepare for what little we actually do. The September 10th mentality of the administration puts us in jeopardy. Many of the policies that Mr. Obama so vehemently touted against remain in effect. The naval prison at Guantanamo Bay was ordered closed yet remains open as Obama plans where to send its inmates; the president has yet to establish a coherent policy on Iran — following in the Bush administration’s footsteps and while American troops are being removed from Iraq, most will stay in place until 2010.
It is important to note that all the enhanced interrogation tactics that we used actually yielded crucially important intelligence that helped keep this country safe,” with the eight years of safety on the home front since Sept. 11, 2001. Even though congressional leaders claimed to be left out of the loop on these techniques, it was revealed that the same Dem leaders, who bewitched President Bush, were duly informed of those methods. But as Dems, true to color, they pretended to take the moral high road, and were thus outed as hypocrites using this issue for political expediency.
Obama’s own Director of National Intelligence, Dennis Blair, wrote an internal memo last week citing the “high value” information about Al Qaeda’s operations yielded by tactics such as water boarding, but its morality has been called into question by human rights monitors and many others both in and out of the Obama administration.
So therein lays the conflict with this administration. Integrity, direction, political expediency, governing by polling data, and letting Nancy Pelosi write its budget a mere 3 Trillion and some change.
So we as Americans have to wonder, where the transparency, openness, and new era of cooperation is. Yeah, that is right, so sorry, we lost.
