brenthutch

Exactly! And not just Russia, if we take advantage of our ample energy reserves we will drive down the cost of energy, and put pressure on Iran, Venezuela and other nefarious actors as well. As a side benefit it will help our economy, balance of trade and create thousands of good paying jobs.

I don't think anyone has said that. You are really grasping at straws now.

Not the case with natural gas. It's a win win. Now we just have to open federal lands to fracking, ensuring clean cheap energy well into the next century.

And yet somehow you're just fine with coal-fired power plants pumping mercury into the environment. Don Yes that is just what power plants do, pump mercury into the environment, affordable electricity is just a byproduct. If mercury is such a devastating problem, why didn't Obama address it in his first term? Look, I have no problem with coal being phased out and being replaced with cleaner, cheaper natural gas, that is what markets do. I do take issue with government placing undue regulatory burdens on a particular industry, raising energy prices for everyone with no discernible benefit. I know this may bruise your world view, but coal is real, it produces most of the quality of life boosting electricity in the world, and it will for the next quarter of a century+. Deal with it.

A few more MPGs for the price of people's lives is not a right minded trade, in my book.

It might not kill businesses, it does kill people. "According to the Brookings Institution, a 500-lb weight reduction of the average car increased annual highway fatalities by 2,200-3,900 and serious injuries by 11,000 and 19,500 per year. USA Today found that 7,700 deaths occurred for every mile per gallon gained in fuel economy standards. Smaller cars accounted for up to 12,144 deaths in 1997, 37% of all vehicle fatalities for that year. The National Academy of Sciences found that smaller, lighter vehicles "probably resulted in an additional 1,300 to 2,600 traffic fatalities in 1993." The National Highway Transportation and Safety Administration study demonstrated that reducing a vehicle's weight by only one hundred pounds increased the fatality rate by as much as 5.63% for light cars, 4.70% for heavier cars, and 3.06% for light trucks. These rates translated into additional traffic fatalities of 13,608 for light cars, 10,884 for heavier cars, and 14,705 for light trucks between 1996 and 1999."

Yes subsidies are no less pernicious than over regulation.

Wow that changes everything and completely invalidates my larger point. While you are being overly pedantic, why don't you correct my figure of $100 billion in Obama's regulatory cost, when the actual number is $108 billion?

I'm not suggesting that we get rid of environmental protection or all regulation. Let us just remove the hundred billion dollars of Obama's regulations. Just the prospect of less onerous governmental interference has led to booming stock markets. Ford just announced a billion dollar investment here in the US (instead of Mexico) citing the business friendly attitude of the incoming administration.

Near as I can tell rivers weren't burning and smog was not killing people in the US during the Bush administration. "The Obama Administration is responsible for an unparalleled expansion of the regulatory state, with the imposition of 229 major regulations since 2009 at a cost of $108 billion annually (using the regulatory agencies’ own numbers). The actual costs are far greater, both because costs have not been fully quantified for a significant number of rules, and because many of the worst effects—the loss of freedom and opportunity, for example—are incalculable. The need for reform is urgent. The White House, Congress, and federal agencies routinely breach legislative and even constitutional boundaries, and increasingly dictate lifestyle choices rather than focusing on public health and safety." http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2016/05/red-tape-rising-2016-obama-regs-top-100-billion-annually

Clean Power Plan and the expansion of what is defined as wetlands to name a few.

Do you really think that Governor Brown would ever let that happen? I never said no regulations.

I share that I am glad that the new administration has shown a willingness to take a second look at overly burdensome EPA regulations, that somehow translates into burning rivers in the brains of many on this thread, yourself included.

No-one said it would. That kind of strawman rhetoric is just one of the reasons everyone laughs at you "This is why my colleague James Hansen has characterized approval of the pipeline as tantamount to "game over for the climate"" Michael Mann, Climate Scientist. Yeah, as I was saying...

Just how does approving the Keystone XL pipeline cause rivers to ignite? This hyperbolic, "the sky is falling," rhetoric, is just one of the many reasons I laugh at lefties. How in the world do you ever expect to be taken seriously.

Not for the NRA and the gun/ammo industry. But great for the gun owner/citizen.

Don't you ever get tired of being wrong?

The bad effects will may or may not show up, however the positive effects of deregulation will manifest immediately.

Who said anything about drinking water?

Undoing regulations is easy, just stop regulating, cut the budgets of regulatory agencies and bury the opposition in the courts. Regulating is much harder, just ask Obama about his Clean Power Plan.

I do expect that much of the Republican agenda (as opposed to the Trump agenda) will be automatic. Removing billions of dollars of economy stifling regulation can be done quickly with nothing more than a pen and a phone.

is what the Dems will be doing, starting tomorrow. Powerless to stop Trump's Cabinet appointments and the dismantling of Obama's legacy, Democrats will be dependent upon a friendly press to slow down Republicans. This will fail of course, because the press and the left wing outrage machine will be too distracted by Trump's latest tweet to put up any credible opposition. I'm going to need a bigger bag of popcorn.

It pales in comparison to your petty jealousy.

Let us stop sniping at each other (no pun intended) and celebrate the drop in firearm prices and the ubiquitous availability of ammo. I think we can all agree that is a good thing.

Just because the US intelligence community chooses not to divulge its methods and technical capabilities to YOU, terrorists and hostile nations, doesn't mean no evidence exists. They do provide evidence to the relevant committees of both Senate and House, members of which have security clearances. Sometimes we just have to believe that even Republican congresspersons do their jobs. That is what I thought about WMD in Iraq. What they divulged to the public was so weak, I KNEW, they were sitting on a smoking gun and where just protecting sources and methods. At it turned out I was wrong.