11–20 of 197 posts
I mean it's entirely obvious from everything that this administration does that it fundamentally opposes the entire purpose of the EPA. They want people to think climate change is a hoax, and environmental regulations are in the way of earning money. Wind power is bad, and "clean coal" is good.
They don't care what happens to our world because half of them are dispensationalsts and the rest just think: après moi, le déluge.
Claims of an EPA “publication freeze” look overstated. Two staffers say they were told to pause, HQ flatly denies it, and no memo has surfaced. Most likely it is a clearance bottleneck tied to the reorg that killed ORD. To staff it feels like censorship, to leadership it is process. Until documents leak I treat this as local slowdown, not agency-wide gag. The bigger story is the reorg itself which centralizes control…
This administration does not seem to work via memos or anything with a paper trail.
Claims of an EPA “publication freeze” look overstated. Two staffers say they were told to pause, HQ flatly denies it, and no memo has surfaced. Most likely it is a clearance bottleneck tied to the reorg that killed ORD. To staff it feels like censorship, to leadership it is process. Until documents leak I treat this as local slowdown, not agency-wide gag. The bigger story is the reorg itself which centralizes control…
And Trump said this would be "the most transparent administration in history" [1]. What a disgrace. [1] https://www.whitehouse.gov/videos/the-most-transparent-admin...
The real question is why are so many people completely willing to sell their country, community, and future to these liars?
Ask any trump voter and you'll find various racial nationalism answer to it.
Claims of an EPA “publication freeze” look overstated. Two staffers say they were told to pause, HQ flatly denies it, and no memo has surfaced. Most likely it is a clearance bottleneck tied to the reorg that killed ORD. To staff it feels like censorship, to leadership it is process. Until documents leak I treat this as local slowdown, not agency-wide gag. The bigger story is the reorg itself which centralizes control…
> Two staffers say they were told to pause, HQ flatly denies it Presenting these two pieces of evidence in juxtaposition, as if they are equally trustworthy, is a bit misleading: I think we're all well aware that pretty much any given career scientist, particularly one who has chosen to dedicate their lives to public service, is more trustworthy than the current administration, which is on record with tens of thousan…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Two staffers say they were told to pause, HQ flatly denies it Presenting these two pieces of evidence in juxtaposition, as if they are equally trustworthy, is a bit misleading: I think we're all well aware that pretty much any given career scientist, particularly one who has chosen to dedicate their lives to public service, is more trustworthy than the current administration, which is on record with tens of thousan…
Probably less a grand gag order and more a clearance choke point from the reorg, but in a hostile political climate even routine slowdowns look like censorship.
For an administration which claims that their primary goal is removing bureaucracy and making the government more efficient and effective, these whistleblower reports describing the exact opposite are pretty damning, and the objective is clear to all.
I mean it's entirely obvious from everything that this administration does that it fundamentally opposes the entire purpose of the EPA. They want people to think climate change is a hoax, and environmental regulations are in the way of earning money. Wind power is bad, and "clean coal" is good.
Can somebody explain the psychology behind these beliefs? I'm pretty sure they know how coal is mined. They must surely have heard about the black lung disease and COPD. Where does this 'clean coal' concept come from? And if that's about the products of coal burning, is it too hard to imagine breathing in hot air containing soot, fly ash, some obnoxious oxides, some unburnt VOCs and some extra CO2? Where have they seen perfect combustion of coal?
Ultimately, what is their motivation to reject their own experiences and endorse such wishful thinking? Why do they choose ideas that harm them? I'm looking for an answer that doesn't assume that they're stupid or insane.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably less a grand gag order and more a clearance choke point from the reorg, but in a hostile political climate even routine slowdowns look like censorship.
More likely, based on the evidence, is more lies by the administration on the pile of tens of thousands, and another example of actual censorship by the administration historically most famous for it. For an administration which claims that their primary goal is removing bureaucracy and making the government more efficient and effective, these whistleblower reports describing the exact opposite are pretty damning, an…
I mean it's entirely obvious from everything that this administration does that it fundamentally opposes the entire purpose of the EPA. They want people to think climate change is a hoax, and environmental regulations are in the way of earning money. Wind power is bad, and "clean coal" is good.
> Wind power is bad, and "clean coal" is good. Can somebody explain the psychology behind these beliefs? I'm pretty sure they know how coal is mined. They must surely have heard about the black lung disease and COPD. Where does this 'clean coal' concept come from? And if that's about the products of coal burning, is it too hard to imagine breathing in hot air containing soot, fly ash, some obnoxious oxides, some unbu…