Editorial: A bad but realistic decision on EPA

  • Article
  • Updated: September 11, 2011 - 7:34 PM

Obama was forced to stand down by faltering economy, GOP.

  • 15
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
karendavid816Sep. 11, 11 7:51 PM

What a whiny defense of Obama. He did it. His choice. No one put a gun to his head. If it really was the wrong choice, hold him accountable. Whenever he does something the left hates, it is always someone else's fault. Tax cut extension by a lame cut Democrat Congress? Republican's fault. Keep Gitmo open? Republicans wouldn't let him build a prison in Illinois. Double down on Afghanistan? The generals made him do it. Failed stimulus program? Bush gave him worse economy than he thought. yadda yadda yadda

39
20
perronjpSep. 11, 11 8:50 PM

Before we further harm our ability to compete economically in a world market, let's let the rest of the world catch up to our standards. The left would have you believe we are awful, but the facts show we are doing a pretty good job regarding the environment. The real winners when we restrain manufacturing here are the competition overseas. They love it. What this is really is, is another manifestation of the hate the left has towards business, and the possibility that some American business man might be making a dollar that cannot be further targeted for redistribustion.

33
20
venturerSep. 11, 11 8:52 PM

If Obama could have defended the EPA here, he would have. This is only one small step in restricting the EPA's war on the American economy. Perhaps this can lead to a realistic debate on the "out-of-contol" manifesto on anything not green or goofy. The Solyndra debacle should bring more sense to the Narcistic.

26
19
goldengophaSep. 11, 1110:10 PM

The time has long past come for Obama to stop basing his decision-making on the whims of a Republican party intent on maintaining national misery in order to win the White House. But of course, Obama is who he is: there is no capitulation too great, nor belief too inviolate, for our current President. His tenure may do more to damage the progressive cause than any Republican president could have.

16
21
akmscottSep. 11, 1110:24 PM

So get used to it and quit crying!T he air is cleaner now than thirty years ago even with the burgeoning human population.If it's not a problem-don't fix it!

29
19
bernice3Sep. 11, 1111:52 PM

Mr. Obama didn't "have to" restrict the EPA from doing its job, which is to protect the American people from unsafe emissions and pollutants. Industry has complained for decades about consumer protections of any kind, but the EPA (and the FDA) have saved millions of American lives. Wrong decision, period. And if he okays the Canada-to-Texas Keystone pipeline INSTEAD OF SPENDING MONEY ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF RENEWABLES, he will be guilty of pandering to the oil industry instead of helping our country develop energy sources that are non-polluting.

12
23
BigPeteSep. 12, 11 6:23 AM

Who needs clean air, water, soil, or to keep other life forms from slipping into extinction? The only thing that really matters is maximizing our profits. Right, perronjp?

15
21
Willy53Sep. 12, 11 6:37 AM

Environmental protection is not bad for the overall economy. Another Republican lie. Just like the lie that uncertainty over regulation is holding business back. The rabid animosity over the EPA is a new litmust test of the more radical Tea Party led Republican Party. Abolishing the agency would be an incredible act of ignorance and disrespect toward the American people that it protects. Corporations have all the power and the idea that they are being persecuted to the point of financial collapse is ludicrous. Why so many people have decided to advocate for policies that harm themselves is beyond me.

21
23
gobigblueSep. 12, 11 6:41 AM

Sep. 11, 1110:24 PM So get used to it and quit crying!T he air is cleaner now than thirty years ago even with the burgeoning human population.If it's not a problem-don't fix it! Hmm I wonder how that might have happened? I'm sure it was all the self reglation by well meaning industrial types. Nothing at all to do with government regulation. NOTHING at all. I mean when was the last time you heard about acid rain? Must have been a myth.

20
13
ranger78Sep. 12, 11 7:09 AM

So what you are saying then is that Obama played politics instead of standing on his principles and let the consequences be what they may. A real leader would have enforced the EPA regulations if that is what they thought best. They wouldn't have been worried about the fall out. But Obama knew that the industry and GOP were right, the enforcement would have had a big negative impact on jobs so he countermanded the decision. Pure politics because he's trying to get reelected.

21
13

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT