keepthefaith Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 (edited) Yeah, god forbid we have any environmentally conscientious people providing influence at the Environmental PROTECTION Agency. We need environmentally conscious people in the EPA for sure, but people of reason. Just a couple months ago our lawn at the office was dug up so that drainage for nearby construction could be connected. It was about a 50' x 50' area. Our property. Once done the construction co. sent a landscaper over to grade and seed the area. They also left 40' or more of a barrier on the original grass. This was a couple 20' sections of 12' in diameter round "bag" of ground up tires serving as a barrier. A barrier to what I don't know. After several weeks the new grass badly needed to be mowed. under this barrier the original grass was basically dead. I called the construction company and asked them to come by and pickup their long black bags as we wanted to cut the grass. The person told me the barriers needed to stay in place until the new grass was "established" per EPA regulation. I said it's way overdue to be cut. They said it had to be left in place until an inspector approved it being moved. I said bull ****, we're going to move it into the parking lot now so we can cut it today as our landscaper was on site and by the way leaving it there is killing the grass underneath. I told them to come and get it today or we might put it in the dumpster. Later that day someone picked it up. The grass underneath never did come back this year. This is just a tiny example of environmental idiocy. Dumb rules written and paid for by taxpayer dollars, there are probably 100's of thousands of such stupid regulations. Next week an inspector is coming here to test our sprinkler system backflow valve. It has to be done annually. He'll be here for less than 30 min and will give me a bill for $400+, part of which is a fee back to the municipality. His tools fit in a brief case sized enclosure. This is another EPA rule. So a stupid law is passed to test a part every year that never fails and the inspector is required to kick back some of the fee to the municipality. By the way if the valve failed, the sprinkler system alarm would be triggered due to a change in pressure. Edited December 8, 2016 by keepthefaith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 Yeah, god forbid we have any environmentally conscientious people providing influence at the Environmental PROTECTION Agency. This public service announcement brought to you by the same people who B word about Wall Street executives in charge of the Treasury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 This public service announcement brought to you by the same people who B word about Wall Street executives in charge of the Treasury. Ouch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 Sure. One has nothing to do with the other. He's right you know. Financial institutions were forced to take the bailout. But hey you've been wrong before. When is the coronation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 Sure. One has nothing to do with the other. The initial round of allocations was a week before the 2008 election. You're not seriously arguing that Citi got a bailout under Bush for donating to Obama? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 Are you really arguing that consciousness = activism? Well, I for one say this kind of "activism" isn't welcome - even though it was the EPA that did this. And they still haven't cleaned it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 Well, I for one say this kind of "activism" isn't welcome - even though it was the EPA that did this. And they still haven't cleaned it up. The EPA has no budget to clean things up. They only have a budget to force companies to clean things up. So no company responsible...no way for the EPA to clean it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 Again, the two are not related because banks were trying to get as little TARP as possible. Let alone that you don't even understand the difference between the various operating groups within bank holding companies. But yeah, its all Citibank for the simpletons I never said it was all Citibank. Stick to what I actually say, it's less work than inventing your own spin. You're terrible at this. He's right you know. Financial institutions were forced to take the bailout. But hey you've been wrong before. When is the coronation? He's not even having the same conversation as I am, so he's not right. And I was wrong about the election, clearly. The initial round of allocations was a week before the 2008 election. You're not seriously arguing that Citi got a bailout under Bush for donating to Obama? Citi was one of Bush's biggest donors as well. They, like all the financial institutions, play both sides of the aisle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 I never said it was all Citibank. Stick to what I actually say, it's less work than inventing your own spin. You're terrible at this. He's not even having the same conversation as I am, so he's not right. And I was wrong about the election, clearly. Citi was one of Bush's biggest donors as well. They, like all the financial institutions, play both sides of the aisle. But what you said was: Actually, it was Citigroup -- a full month before the election and several months before they got a $476b bailout from the very cabinet they picked. So Citi was bailed out (for $45B, not $476B) by the "cabinet they picked" a week before the election by a different cabinet, and several months before the "cabinet they picked" even existed? That only makes sense if "cause" follows "effect." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 But what you said was: So Citi was bailed out (for $45B, not $476B) by the "cabinet they picked" a week before the election by a different cabinet, and several months before the "cabinet they picked" even existed? That only makes sense if "cause" follows "effect." Fair. I got the number wrong for that specific sentence. The point was they're buying influence. As they have through administrations. Only a fool would assume they were doing so only so they would be excluded from government decisions that threatened their very existence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 Fair. I got the number wrong for that specific sentence. The point was they're buying influence. As they have through administrations. Only a fool would assume they were doing so only so they would be excluded from government decisions that threatened their very existence. It's called "lobbying." Which is why everyone who comes in to DC wants to reform K Street. Which is why they don't, because of this thing called "lobbying." What it is not, is purchasing cabinet positions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 It's called "lobbying." Which is why everyone who comes in to DC wants to reform K Street. Which is why they don't, because of this thing called "lobbying." What it is not, is purchasing cabinet positions. I never said they purchased cabinet positions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 (edited) back to the cabinet picks...................and in this case, the hysterical reactions Think Progress just can’t stand it when corporations succeed. Trump’s pick for labor secretary is Hardee’s/Carl’s Jr CEO Andrew Puzder whose company is famous for hot chicks eating hamburgers. Hey, if your marketing plan works and it happens to include hot chicks eating big burgers, who cares? Apparently Think Progress isn’t all that progressive when it comes to beef and babes … Trump’s labor secretary pick really likes his company’s sexist burger ads http://thkpr.gs/a1d358043990 David Burge @iowahawkblog .@Think Progress wait till the Teamsters rank and file hear about this sexist outrage, there will be HELL TO PAY Edited December 9, 2016 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 The EPA has no budget to clean things up. They only have a budget to force companies to clean things up. So no company responsible...no way for the EPA to clean it up. Sorta like, "Oh, I'm not a Security Guard. I'm a Security Monitor. There's a robbery. " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grinreaper Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 Sorta like, "Oh, I'm not a Security Guard. I'm a Security Monitor. There's a robbery. " I think that's the worst cavity I've ever seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 back to the cabinet picks...................and in this case, the hysterical reactions Think Progress just can’t stand it when corporations succeed. Trump’s pick for labor secretary is Hardee’s/Carl’s Jr CEO Andrew Puzder whose company is famous for hot chicks eating hamburgers. Hey, if your marketing plan works and it happens to include hot chicks eating big burgers, who cares? Apparently Think Progress isn’t all that progressive when it comes to beef and babes … Trump’s labor secretary pick really likes his company’s sexist burger ads http://thkpr.gs/a1d358043990 I've watched that ad a few times. Can't find anything wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 So many reasons to love the designation of Andrew Puzder as head of the Department of LaborRead more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/12/so_many_reasons_to_love_the_designation_of_andrew_puzder_as_head_of_the_department_of_labor.html#ixzz4SM3zXZWe Remember when Obama had three generals on his team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 I've watched that ad a few times. Can't find anything wrong. Aside from the fact that I found myself asking "what burger?" the first eleven times I saw that commercial, I think it's a pretty decent ad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 (edited) ED MORRISSEY: Trump’s Cabinet: A Conservative About Face Toward Growth and Change. “Trump seems intent on creating the most conservative and business-oriented Cabinet in decades.” Donald Trump’s Cabinet Selections Signal Deregulation Moves Are Coming. Edited December 9, 2016 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 I never said they purchased cabinet positions. You implied it. The same inference can be made about all the former Goldman Sachs people in Trump's inner circle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts