Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Strictly: Drilling and oil-field services -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Now Shes Blonde who wrote (90467)	4/27/2001 9:39:29 PM
From: Tommaso	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 95453

Thanks for all the interesting information. HELLO!

To: Now Shes Blonde who wrote (90467)	4/28/2001 12:43:24 PM
From: isopatch	Respond to of 95453

Liberals luv price controls and... How bout this dose of the truth from uncle Rush. (great photo if you punch in the url) Ta ta(g) Isopatch rushlimbaugh.com "Folks, the Democrats have made bale after bale of political hay out of Bush's decision to reverse the new arsenic-in-water levels Bill Clinton rushed into place in his last hours as commander-in-chief. They're even running ads with children asking for "another glass of arsenic," as if for eight long years under their president we weren't drinking that exact level of arsenic. Well, here's the truth on those arsenic water levels - and because it exposes a huge lie behind these arsenic lies, you won't hear about it from the Democrats' willing accomplices in the mainstream press. There is no substance whatsoever to any of these claims that the arsenic levels that Bush has allowed to stand are in any way harmful. In fact, in 1996, the GOP Congress set a schedule under which the EPA was to update the arsenic standard for drinking water, and required the Clinton-Gore EPA to issue its final rule by January 1, 2001. But the Clinton administration told Congress that it would not be ready to reduce the arsenic levels until maybe as late as April of 2001 - six months behind schedule! Many small communities were especially worried about this proposal because reducing arsenic is prohibitively expensive. For instance, a Republican committee appointed to study this reports that the Utah Department of Environmental Quality found that the cost of water for residents in one mobile home park would be $230 per month, per customer, under the proposed new arsenic rule. With prices like that, it was very likely that in some areas the rule would just end town water service, because people couldn't afford the cost and would therefore refuse to pay. Instead, they would simply drill their own wells and would be drinking water that would be much less safe. In light of this fact, a bill in Congress proposed to extend the deadline to June 22nd of 2001 so the EPA would have ample time to finish its work, come up with a more reasonable level and get that implemented. After everyone from Clinton's EPA, Congress, and Clinton himself agreed to extend the deadline until June of this year to figure out what to do with the level of arsenic in the water, Bill Clinton nevertheless issued his last-minute arsenic regulation two days before leaving office! Bill Clinton's own council on environmental policy supported the extension on reducing the water arsenic levels, and so did Carol Browner, Clinton's EPA chief. When the extension came up for a vote, 42% of Senate Democrats and 87% of Senate Republicans voted for it - and among the Democrats voting to postpone the arsenic level reduction was Tom Daschle himself. Why hasn't one reporter gone to Daschle and said, "Senator, you're running an ad which says the Republicans want to poison the water with arsenic, and yet you, sir, voted to allow the same amount of arsenic in the water through June of this year." Not one journalist, folks. Not one. The media, instead, is regurgitating the partisan propaganda that's spewed by the likes of Daschle, Gephardt, Terry McAuliffe and all these left-wing special interest groups. At no point in this debate, by the way, was it ever seriously discussed that the arsenic levels were harmful or deadly. It's only been a matter of economics. It has never been a matter of health, but it is now a matter of politics, because this is all the Democrats have. This is what they have decided is their main angle of approach: lying, demagoguery and distortion. And not one journalist has asked them why."