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.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: D. Long who wrote (343432)	1/16/2010 4:04:15 PM
From: Tom Clarke	1 Recommendation Respond to of 793931

Cattlemen fight EPA with 'Climategate' By Tim Hearden Capital Press A national beef group is invoking the so-called "Climategate" controversy as it challenges a recent U.S. government ruling on climate change. The National Cattlemen's Beef Association has filed a petition to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. to overturn the EPA's recent greenhouse gas "endangerment" ruling. The ruling states that gases believed to cause global warming pose a human health risk and is the first step toward their regulation by the EPA under the Clean Air Act. The NCBA and other producer groups fear the ruling could lead to lawsuits and new restrictions on the nation's livestock industries. The NCBA plans to argue the government's finding is based on faulty and incomplete science and that the Clean Air Act is the improper vehicle for regulating greenhouse gases, said Tamara Thies, the organization's chief environmental counsel. "We are taking a position that we do not believe the science with regard to alleged manmade climate change is there," Thies said. "The EPA has a responsibility to conduct a rigorous scientific analysis and look at all the science out there instead of just cherry-picking certain studies that agree with its position about manmade climate change." The cattle group points to Climategate, in which critics allege that e-mails stolen from Great Britain's University of East Anglia show bias and manipulation of data by scientists on the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The fact that the EPA relied on some of the IPCC's data to make its finding makes the ruling questionable, Thies said. "The EPA has only considered some (evidence) and never really seriously considered that climate change could actually be caused by natural causes," she said. In a statement to the Capital Press, an EPA spokeswoman said the agency is confident that it will prevail in court, adding that the Supreme Court had ordered the agency to answer the endangerment question. The spokeswoman would not comment on NCBA's references to Climategate. Under the Clean Air Act, parties have 60 days after a rule has been promulgated to appeal to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. Once the appeal period for this ruling ends Feb. 15, the parties will likely decide on a briefing schedule and a hearing date will be set, Thies said. The time between the filing of petitions to a court decision can vary, but generally it takes about 18 months to 2 years, Thies said. The appeal comes as Republicans in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives have vowed to try to block the EPA's ruling. Thies argues that Congress, not the EPA, should be the body to enact legislation regarding climate change. "When it's put in Congress' hands, the democratic process is at work and Congress can decide, 'Is it appropriate to regulate greenhouse gases or not?'" she said. "When the EPA decides in a dictatorial fashion that they should be regulated ... we're very concerned about that process." capitalpress.com

To: D. Long who wrote (343432)	1/16/2010 4:11:56 PM
From: Jan W	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793931

His two daughters came out with this radio ad right after the ad you posted came out. LINK: YouTube/Scott Brown Ad .

To: D. Long who wrote (343432)	1/16/2010 8:11:23 PM
From: Brumar89	1 Recommendation Respond to of 793931

He's claiming defamation - a Dem ad says Brown wants to turn rape victims away from hospitals .... I think they told some similar lie about Sarah Palin. Hey, how can Democrats run without defamation? Mass. GOP Senate candidate claims defamation The Associated Press Saturday, January 16, 2010; 5:51 PM BOSTON -- Republican Scott Brown charged Saturday that a Democratic mailing against his U.S. Senate campaign violates a Massachusetts law prohibiting false statements against a political candidate. The cover of a four-page mailer sent by the Massachusetts Democratic Party says, "1,736 women were raped in Massachusetts in 2008. Scott Brown wants hospitals to turn them all away." Brown is a state senator, and in 2005 he filed an amendment that would have allowed workers at religious hospitals or with firmly held religious beliefs to avoid giving emergency contraception to rape victims. The amendment failed, and Brown voted in favor of a bill allowing the contraception. He also voted to override a veto issued by his fellow Republican, then-Gov. Mitt Romney. A section of the Massachusetts General Laws prohibits false statements against political candidates that are designed or tend "to aid or to injure or defeat such candidate," with a penalty of to $1,000 fine and up to six months in prison. Brown campaign legal counsel Daniel Winslow said, "People can shade things and spin things, but it has to have some kernel of truth." Brown is locked in a dead heat with Democrat Martha Coakley, the state's attorney general, in the race to succeed the late Sen. Edward Kennedy. Independent Joseph L. Kennedy, who is not related to the famed Kennedy political family, is also on Tuesday's ballot. Winslow called on the Democratic Party and the Coakley campaign to disavow the mailer's claim. The Brown campaign plans to wait until Tuesday, the next business day, before seeking a legal remedy, he said. Coakley campaign spokesman Corey Welford said: "This is a failed attempt by his campaign to divert attention from the fact that Scott Brown filed an amendment that would have prevented women who have been raped from getting the health care that they need." A party spokeswoman did not immediately return an e-mail seeking comment. washingtonpost.com This is from a liberal disgusted by the ad: .... If this is what is being sent out by Democrats in Massachusetts to obviously help Martha Coakley bring affluent and suburban women, regardless of parties, to the polls on Tuesday. She’s finished, whether she wins or not. Let’s just hope the White House had nothing to do with this, not even giving a nod, though I wouldn’t put anything past David Axelrod. .... taylormarsh.com h/t gatewaypundit