Democrats & Liberals Archives

White House: Facts only get in the way

The NY Times reported this week (link) that an official policy email from the EPA containing a report concluding that greenhouse gases are pollutants that must be controlled was maliciously ignored by the White House.

The report put together by the EPA was in response to the Supreme Court’s 2007 ruling requiring the EPA to determine whether greenhouse gases pose a danger to the environment. Once the report was complete, the EPA sent their findings to the White House, where White House said that they would not open the email.

So the EPA did what they were required to do from the Supreme Court, sent it off to the White House and what did the White House do? They ignored it by pretending it didn’t exist.

How arrogant. How sophomoric.

But I guess that’s just par for the course for the past 7 plus years.

I wonder how many other emails this administration put in their SPAM filter? Maybe the one from the CIA when they said ‘Niger isn’t selling plutonium to Iraq and Iraq has no connection with al Qaeda.’ Or maybe one from FEMA saying they needed immediate help for the people of New Orleans. Or maybe the email from someone in the Veterans Affairs describing the deplorable conditions at Walter Reed, pleading with the White House not to cut funding.

But we know one thing for sure, they opened the one that said: ‘Wilson’s wife works for the CIA.’

Posted by john trevisani at June 28, 2008 6:44 PM
Comment #257048

Good article. Thanks for keeping this out there. We can all come up with a lot of reasons why Bush is such a terrible president, but in the long run, I think the refusal to do anything significant about Global Warming will be the most damning single issue with which posterity condemns this miserable failure of an administration with.

Don’t get me wrong. The failures in Iraq and Afghanistan are really bad. Everyone, regardless of whether they are a liberal or conservative, should be giving Bush the finger over what happened.

But what is really, really appalling is that there were so many good reasons to pursue energy and national security policies which would have mitigated Global Warming, even if the administration did not ‘believe’ in it. But. They didn’t. Bush and his administration ignored inconvenient e-mails, and any information which gainsayed their prejudices. And now all of us Americans, conservative and liberal alike, are screwed.

Posted by: phx8 at June 29, 2008 3:26 AM
Comment #257050

phx8, Bush’s failures are also American’s failures. We the people did reelect him to continue what he was doing the first 4 years. The American voters are DIRECTLY responsible for their incumbents. One can understand making a mistake electing a freshman to office. But, reelecting the likes of Bush was quite another matter.

Those who knew his second 4 years would be as bad or worse than the first 4, didn’t exert the necessary effort to inform and convince, their voter friends, families, and neighbors. And those who did vote for his reelection are guilty as charged for voting party instead of the candidate, voting their egos instead of their children’s futures.

Bush does not come along by accident. He doesn’t get reelected to complete his damage of the nation without a willing population. Perhaps Americans are a bit closer to understanding how the German people were capable of supporting Adolph Hitler all those many unforgivable years.

The real shame and irony is however, that America is quite capable of a repeat performance with another Bushlike figure, packaged and sold to them through 10’s of millions of dollars of marketing, advertising, public relations, spin and deceptions.

America’s democratic elections are NOT proving to be very reliable when it comes to selecting competent leadership. One need only look at the polls of Congress’ approval ratings for evidence of this fact. And Americans will prove this true again in November by reelecting more than 4 out of 5 Congresspersons this year.

America has lost its role as democratic leader in the world. That is GW Bush’s and the American voter’s legacy of the Bush years.

Posted by: David R. Remer at June 29, 2008 5:40 AM
Comment #257054

This administration hasn’t changed it’s method. They’ve been doing this type of thing for years. And David is correct, the American citizens are at fault. Although i think that the fault rests mostly on this administration.

The American citizens have undergone years of misinformation, fear-mongering and blatant lies to make their decisions. These citizens have had to make their way through the maze of misinformation and have made the wrong choices. But it takes a significant amount of dedication to track down the truth. So when an administration actually creates FAKE NEWS reports it makes it extremely difficult to the average voter to understand that the news item shown on the news it actually a planted and manufactured story by the administration to promote their agenda.

But in this specific case, what’s sad about the EPA’s report is that since the White House refused to open the report, the EPA decided to CHANGE the report to fit the White House’s opinion.

In science, the data rules. You learn from data. You make informed decisions from data. You adapt and evolve from data. But with this administration, they ignores facts, ignore analysis and creates their own reality from their faith and beliefs rather than objective analysis. They force the will of their power to change and subvert the facts and in doing so have created such an alter-world of surreality that the voter doesn’t know what’s real and what’s fake.

Posted by: john trevisani at June 29, 2008 7:33 AM
Comment #257088

John & David,
Well, yes, the American public as a whole has to take responsibility for the Bush adminisration, which is pretty galling. It’s hard to know what to do, or if I as an individual should even bother. Something like 10% of the American public thinks the sun revolves around the earth. A similar percentage thinks the
Apollo moon landings were faked. Larger percentages believe Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11, and so on. Part of it is due to ignorance. Another part is due to religious faiths, and yet another to misinformation provided by the Bush administration in order to support a corporatist/religiious agenda. And yet another part is the terribly destructive ideas at the heart of conservatism: privatization, deregulation, and the rejection of the idea that Americans can work together through government in a positive way.

But in spite of that, it is worth bothering, which is why I support Obama. I don’t know if it will work out. We’ve discussed leaving the country, and perhaps that day will come. In the meantime, it seems better to be optimistic and try to effect changes and improvements.

Posted by: phx8 at June 29, 2008 3:01 PM
Comment #257093

Doesn’t global warming make rebuilding New Orleans pointless? Why not build in Alexandria, Baton Rouge, and Lafayette instead.

Posted by: ohrealy at June 29, 2008 3:15 PM
Comment #257102

ohrealy -

I agree with you - with the advent of global warming (and I see the proof every time I look south and see the retreating glaciers on Mount Rainier), it seems rather pointless to rebuild New Orleans…unless one wants to build dikes as in the Netherlands.

But then, waterfront property is hard to resist….

Posted by: Glenn Contrarian at June 29, 2008 4:53 PM
Comment #257118

The Bush administration has made it possible for an Obama Administration to promote a corporate controlled solution to the problems to replace the current corporate controlled energy policy.

Indy race cars run on 100% ethanol. If I had a vehicle that ran on 100% ethanol, I could produce my own high proof ethanol for fuel. Does anyone think the government will allow myself and perhaps a few million like minded citizens to produce their own ethanol?

Is ethanol produced for fuel by corporate interests manufactured in such a way that it is poisonous if taken internally or is the poison added as an afterthought?

The answer is that ethanol produced for fuel is poisoned as an afterthought by adding 2 to 5 percent gasoline per gallon.

If ADM can produce ethanol for $4 per gal. why can’t Old Grandad do the same?

Posted by: jlw at June 29, 2008 7:30 PM
Comment #257127

Ethanol is sort of wimpy as far as energy goes IE BTU, British thermal unit.the saving grace with Ethanol is the very high Octane rating or ie Resistance to knock ethanol octane rating is about 116 and higher, unleaded gas is 86-92.. so we can build newer smaller more efficient motors to take advantage of the high octane Rating… here are btu ratings for fuels Volumetric energy density of some fuels compared with gasoline:

Fuel type MJ/litre MJ/kg BTU/Imp gal BTU/US gal Research octane
number (RON)
Regular Gasoline 34.8 44.4[10] 150,100 125,000 Min 91
Premium Gasoline 39.5 Min 95
Autogas (LPG) (60% Propane + 40% Butane) 26.8 46 108
Ethanol 23.5 31.1[11] 101,600 84,600 129
Methanol 17.9 19.9 77,600 64,600 123
Butanol 29.2 91-99
Gasohol (10% ethanol + 90% gasoline) 33.7 145,200 120,900 93/94
Diesel 38.6 45.4 166,600 138,700 25(*)
Aviation gasoline (high octane gasoline, not Jet fuel) 33.5 46.8 144,400 120,200
Jet fuel (kerosene based) 35.1 43.8 151,242 125,935
Liquefied natural gas 25.3 ~55 109,000 90,800
Hydrogen 121 130[

Posted by: Rodney Brown at June 30, 2008 12:08 AM
Post a comment