Bush Ends the Week With The Customary Crap On The Environment.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

March 8, 2003

Oil and Gas Industry Exempt From New Clean Water Rules
By JENNIFER 8. LEE

WASHINGTON, March 7 ? New clean water regulations requiring small construction sites to develop plans for storm water will not apply to the oil and gas industries, officials of the Environmental Protection Agency said today.

The new rules, which take effect on Monday, will require construction sites bigger than one acre to have plans to handle storm water, which can carry chemical and metal runoff from the disturbed soil. Existing rules already require such plans for sites larger than five acres.

The agency says it is giving the oil and gas industries a two-year exemption from the requirement at the smaller sites while it conducts further study. Critics in national environmental groups and in Congress say the oil and gas industries are taking advantage of close ties to the administration to lay political groundwork for broader exemptions to the Clean Water Act.

More
here.

Janeane Garafalo Turns The Tables On The Conservative Shouting Heads on CNN's Crossfire.

Here's part of the transcript: Go to the above link for the whole thing.

CARVILLE: Let me tell you what a lot of people are thinking right now. That you're just some feminist, liberal, do-gooder, naive, anti-war goofball.

(APPLAUSE)

GAROFALO: Why are you guys clapping for that? Well, first of all, I'm very proud to be...

CARVILLE: Well, that's OK. How many people believe what I just said? Raise your hands.

(APPLAUSE)

CARVILLE: See, all these people think that -- go ahead, answer it.

GAROFALO: But, first of all, I'm very proud to be a feminist. That's irrelevant. I'm very proud to be a liberal. And if I'm a

No Shocker Here

"Appellate Court Rules Media Can Legally Lie.

By Mike Gaddy
Published 02. 28. 03 at 19:31 Sierra Time

On February 14, a Florida Appeals court ruled there is absolutely nothing illegal about lying, concealing or distorting information by a major press organization. The court reversed the $425,000 jury verdict in favor of journalist Jane Akre who charged she was pressured by Fox Television management and lawyers to air what she knew and documented to be false information. The ruling basically declares it is technically not against any law, rule, or regulation to deliberately lie or distort the news on a television broadcast."

More here.

On The Bait & Switch

Watching the president’s news conference Thursday and reading the Globe’s coverage the next day, a pattern emerged that mirrored the administration's pattern of jumping from rationale to rationale to justify a war with Iraq. Any reporter that asked a direct and hardball question was given a response that was nebulous at best and incoherent at worst. Then, to avoid having to explain his answer or falling prey to a follow-up question, the president would quickly move on to a friendly reporter and give a direct and clearer response to their softball question. By the time the easy questions are answered, the hard questions are lost in this haze of obfuscation, burring any attempts to understand the administration's rationale for this war. At the end of the conference, conservative commentators declare that the president handled the press corps "masterfully." He certainly did. Rationales for war have followed a similar pattern: once one is begins to fall under scrutiny, the administration simply abandons it and manufactures a new one so that no effective exploration of any motivation to go to war is possible. Perhaps it is telling that so many rationales have been employed when the administration seems to think that the reasons to go to war are so obvious. If the president has so much faith in his rationales, why are follow-up questions that would illuminate his ideas feared? If the president is unwilling to answer questions , why are we so quick to follow him to war?

From TBOGG.

"When, exactly, did the pro-war people morph into "pro-liberation" people? Did this happen during the ever-changing rationale for going after Saddam? Looks like they have gone from Pro-1441 to Pro-He Tried To Kill My Dad to Pro-He Has WMD's to Pro-He Double Dates With Osama to Pro-Democracy In Iraq Before America to Pro-Aluminum Tubes! Aluminum Tubes! Aiiiieeeee! to Pro-Well, The Soldiers Are Already There to Pro- Bush's Vestigial Manhood Is At Stake to Pro-Reclaim Our Precious Bodily Oils That Are Under Their Sand to Pro-Liberation in mere months.

Anyway, for those keeping score at home, pro-war = pro-liberation...anti-war = Marxists."