First, the conservatives spoke up for germs because germs, you see, have no discernible mouths (let alone vocal chords or lungs) and cannot speak for themselves. Conservatives seemed to be telling us that the USDA didn’t really need to inspect as many cattle as they’re supposed to because germs like the Mad Cow Virus and E. coli have rights too and we wouldn’t want to impede on their rights to privacy, interstate mobility or, heaven forfend, profit.
It’s unclear whether it was the cattle producers’ profit or the E. coli’s profit that conservatives were thinking of, though I don’t know of any E. coli bacterium with a bank account.
Now, germs are of course living beings and we all know that Republicans enjoy calling themselves the Party of Life even while supporting never-ending wars and other such deadly activities. (It is interesting to note that with their self-proclaimed morals they’d certainly never want to be considered the Life of the Party). We’ll have to take conservatives’ word for it on that Life thing though it would certainly explain why they’d want to keep germs from being rounded up by meat inspectors and exterminated.
Imagine everyone’s delight at seeing the shear consistency when the Fair and Balanced trend continued with conservatives branching out to also wax poetic on behalf of concentrated masses of nebulous airborne molecules. That’s correct, these straight-as-an-arrow folks are no flip-floppers. The cons are adamant about the rights of air pollution to exist, and they even pipe up to demand smog be allowed to hang out and loiter where it’s not welcome.
And they’re not going to back down no matter how many times our Dirty Skies Act president tries to roll back pollution standards to allow more garbage to be dumped into the air we breathe. After all, our President was Governor of the Lone Star State when the rights of air pollution to hang out over Houston, and throughout Texas, grew by leaps and bounds. No, sirree. Conservatives will not rest when there may be plans afoot to try and shoo away those dark clouds of smog — someone has to stand up for pollution since it cannot speak for itself.
I’m happy to see conservatives’ priorities lie with the most unfortunate and downtrodden among us. Indeed, they give voice to those entities — the germs and the smog — who literally cannot speak for themselves. Good on ya, conservatives.
(H/T ArchPundit for the title idea and Devilstower for explaining the modest Denver clean air plan.)
19 comments
Comments feed for this article
June 14, 2007 at 6:51 am
c-rockjr121
Whats your beef with conservatitives? How do you think our county will survive if we dont make anything over here? We need less government. You cannot have your government cheese, and government housing, without some government wars around there world to make it even better.
Our society is based on energy. Look at this blog. Engergy. Why should a citizen allow its government to limit his access to it? Its failed policies already have us at war. We are fighting a war to control oil.
We have high energy prices at the pump, from its wars, and its enviromental policies. Us in Chicago are stuck with some government blend mandate, that no one else makes outside of our area. Then throw in some gas taxes, and its “them” who are making the money. Government.
Your rally to call for more government control of energy-will kill off our way of life. Maybe that is your goal. If you keep a man freezing in his home, maybe then he will become a better slave to the state.
If we want to be cleaner, we must consider nuclear. Solar and natural gas do not cut it for us. We need energy to stay on top of the food chain.
June 14, 2007 at 6:58 am
c-rockjr121
And lets look at what government does best. It gets in the way of society. Here is one couple, making a difference. They are adapting to the changes, and here comes the ‘man to bust them down. To take them back to the herd.
Why should folks wait till government does something? If everyone did their part, we could be better off.
c-rock
State makes big fuss over local couple’s vegetable oil car fuel
DECATUR - David and Eileen Wetzel don’t get going in the morning quite as early as they used to.
So David Wetzel, 79, was surprised to hear a knock on the door at their eastside home while he was still getting dressed.
Two men in suits were standing on his porch.
“They showed me their badges and said they were from the Illinois Department of Revenue,” Wetzel said. “I said, ‘Come in.’ Maybe I shouldn’t have.”
Gary May introduced himself as a special agent. The other man, John Egan, was introduced as his colleague. May gave the Wetzels his card, stating that he is the senior agent in the bureau of criminal investigations.
“I was afraid,” Eileen Wetzel said. “I came out of the bathroom. I thought: Good God, we paid our taxes. The check didn’t bounce.”
The agents informed the Wetzels that they were interested in their car, a 1986 Volkswagen Golf, that David Wetzel converted to run primarily from vegetable oil but also partly on diesel.
Wetzel uses recycled vegetable oil, which he picks up weekly from an organization that uses it for frying food at its dining facility.
“They told me I am required to have a license and am obligated to pay a motor fuel tax,” David Wetzel recalled. “Mr. May also told me the tax would be retroactive.”
Since the initial visit by the agents on Jan. 4, the Wetzels have been involved in a struggle with the Illinois Department of Revenue. The couple, who live on a fixed budget, have been asked to post a $2,500 bond and threatened with felony charges.
-snip-
David Wetzel was told to contact a revenue official and apply for a license as a “special fuel supplier” and “receiver.” After completing a complicated application form designed for businesses, David Wetzel was sent a letter directing him to send in a $2,500 bond.
Eileen Wetzel, a former teaching assistant, calculated that the bond, designed to ensure that their “business” pays its taxes, would cover the next 51 years at their present usage rate.
A couple of weeks later, David Wetzel received another letter from the revenue department, stating that he “must immediately stop operating as a special fuel supplier and receiver until you receive special fuel supplier and receiver licenses.”
This threatening letter stated that acting as a supplier and receiver without a license is a Class 3 felony. This class of felonies carries a penalty of up to five years in prison.
June 14, 2007 at 8:49 am
robnesvacil
Joke! The post was a snide, sarcastic joke! Lighten up.
Conservatives by and large are a fine bunch. I do disgree with many of their fringe elements however.
Since we do not have nuclear powered cars the Denver plan calls for a reduction in vehicle exhaust pollution. Also, a lot of the Denver plan deals with factory pollution, etc. Not every factory is a power-plant that can go nuke.
The Denver mayor is not talking about taking away anyone’s access to “energy” (which has somehow become an all-encompassing word that conservatives take to mean both fuel and electricity, among other things). The Denver mayor is talking about modifying the manner in which that “energy” is accessed, the ways in which it is used and the manner in which it’s by-products (ie, garbage/pollution) are handled.
The question is whether it is more important to maintain an absolute status quo energy policy lest someone end up spending an extra penny for gas or electricity or to allow smog to continue to affect the health and quality of life of Denverites such that they end up spending several dollars more on healthcare-related costs (asthma, etc).
But go ahead and keep speaking up for pollution, because pollution can not speak for itself.
–
Your case of the Wetzels is an instance of agents following the letter of the law, but perhaps not the spirit of the law (judges and juries often decide the difference). I could see the agents’ point of view if they were with DNR or Dept of Ag or some group that wanted to ensure these folks weren’t going to accidentally blow themselves up. (I don’t see the agents’ point of view on the taxes … you can’t tax thriftiness and these folks, from what I read, are not buying or selling anything. They’re just picking up ‘garbage’ and recycling it into treasure for themselves. I do the same by picking up leftover straw bales, starbucks coffee grounds, etc for my garden which actually ends up saving the people and companies I pick them up from money in lowered garbage fees.)
It is also a case of the statutes not keeping up with society.
Contact your local legislators and ask that they work toward updating the statutes to allow environmentally-conscious folks to do these things. There are a number of other areas such as using stored rainwater for toilets, etc. where the “Prairie” State lawbooks are also behind the current technology. Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn, for all the knocks against him, is a leading proponent of moderninzing our codes in these matters.
June 14, 2007 at 10:41 am
c-rockjr121
Hey,
you live in the burbs, and I bet you have a car, and I can bet that I polute less than you do each week.
So give up your car, see how life is around here without one.
The government workers were getting in the way of progress. Talking to a judge costs money. Who wants to get caught up in the system? Most folks do not want the system in their lifes. They pay their tribute in taxes, hoping they do not get in their business.
I do contact my congresscitters, but only asking them to do something, encourages the growth of the state. We need need less government, so folks can make the choices for themselfs.
June 14, 2007 at 10:58 am
robnesvacil
Try again. I did give up my car (my wife has hers for tootling the kids around — and hers gets twice the MPG mine did). We were a two-car family but are now a one-car family.
I walk to work. The market and most of my local activities are also within walking distance. As a family we walk to family activities like the pool, the park, the local free events. And, for things in Chicago, I can walk to the train.
Once I get a bike (my last one broke down) my range of travel will expand a bit. I keep scouting for them at garage sales and the like but no luck yet.
This is not to say I don’t drive anywhere. We do use the car when it’s needed, but there are weeks where my only mode of travel is two legs instead of four wheels.
I also do what little I can to offset the car use by also using it to recycle other carbon material for garden use (as mentioned briefly in my earlier reply) — growing what plants I can to convert the CO2 I pump out back into solid C and free O2. It’s not a closed loop by any means, but I do try.
—
And the Wetzels’ issue is a state matter, so contacting Congress won’t have any affect.
June 14, 2007 at 12:30 pm
c-rockjr121
I was talking about the state politicans. They have enough to deal with, like budget deficts. Calling them to “do” something is just going to get us more laws, more regulations that hamper progress.
Plus dealing with politcans always leaves me feeling dirty.
June 14, 2007 at 5:43 pm
robnesvacil
With all that dirty air you seem to be favoring with your comments that curbing pollution somehow “limits access to energy” (a completely false dichotomy as it is), feeling dirty when calling a politician shouldn’t be anything new.
June 15, 2007 at 7:38 am
c-rockjr121
To harvest energy, you need to free it from its bonds. That process is not 100%, and byproducts are made.
We need energy, and have a right to it. As it stands, government gets in the way of society changing its ways. We cant build nuke plants. heck, I cannot even put a windmill on my roof, or I would get the city on my back.
If I wanted a well for watering the lawn, same thing.
Government gets in the way of society. Its the noisy aunt at the party.
June 15, 2007 at 3:44 pm
robnesvacil
And those “byproducts” (aka, pollution, garbage…
are precisely what the Denver plan tries to limit specifically because the geography and weather in the Denver area create prime smog conditions — the haze just sits over the city and doesn’t blow away. The mayor is trying to change that. He can’t change the weather. He can’t change the geography. So he’s doing what he can to change what he can — he’s trying to reduce pollution.
Why are you so adamantly encouraging continued pollution, rather than a reduction in pollution?
As for your bigger picture discussion of “harvesting energy” — what “byproducts” are there from wind, solar and geothermal electric production? There are some noise and visual pollution issues with modern windmills, but no solid or airborne pollution concerns. And solar and geothermal are about as clean as you can get. Why the focus on dirty nuclear plants (that radioactive waste has to go somewhere — and Nevada doesn’t want it … perhaps you’ll take the mountain of nuclear waste since you’re so keen on the idea)?
Putting a windmill on your roof would likely cause a hazard with not just your roof but potentially your neighbors’ roofs. You need a rather large blade to power a single home consistently. In a rural, farm setting it’s not such a big deal because you can place the windmill far enough away from the home (and farm neighbors likely live a mile or two down the road).
Solar panels are much more efficient and aesthetically suited for urban and suburban residential use. You would likely make enough electricity to sell some back to ComEd, just as other solar owners do.
As for your well, I don’t know where you live so cannot speak too specifically to that — but most shallow wells in the Chicago suburbs are becoming unreliable because so many people are sucking all that water out. Plus all the pesticides and herbicides seep down into the groundwater and come back up those wells. Yummy, not.
Once all the easy to get groundwater and shallow aquifers are emptied, the next step is to hit the deep aquifer that runs from Wisconsin, through Illinois, to Mizzou… and once enough people plop their straws into that it will get sucked dry too.
I think the problem you have with government is that it forces individuals to think about other people — and apparently not everyone likes to share things and play nice with others. Personally, I’m not so much into greed and selfishness, but to each their own, eh?
June 18, 2007 at 7:44 am
c-rockjr121
Ah,
I see,
your doing this for the “people”, your ideals make you somehow immune to what happens. Its better for mankind, so lets use government to force change on society.
Have you ever looked at the prices for Solar panels? Your talking $1000s to get enough power for a light bulb. What do you do with all of the lead acid batteries for storage? Better yet, where do you put them in your house?
June 18, 2007 at 8:34 am
c-rockjr121
Hey,
if government in a progressive hip democrat town like Chicago cant control itself with energy,
how do you expect them to control society’s needs? Oh,
but they are government. They get a pass. For the ends justify the means. So if they can keep you in the cold, more the better. That will just make you more placent.
From the trib.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-warming_18jun18,1,539335.story?page=2&coll=chi-news-hed
Yet electricity usage by city government last year was 22 percent higher than the 1998-2001 average that the Chicago Climate Exchange used as a baseline, records show.
Some of the rising demand for electricity came from new city buildings promoted as energy-efficient architecture, including the Chicago Center for Green Technology and the Household Chemicals and Computer Recycling Center.
Daley once promised that by now the city would be getting 20 percent of its electricity from renewable, carbon-free sources of energy such as wind and solar power, but the Tribune reported in November that nearly all of the city’s power still comes from nuclear and coal plants.
June 18, 2007 at 8:53 am
robnesvacil
Have I ever said Daley was perfect? No. I don’t know that I’ve mentioned him (if I have it was likely in passing). Even still, I think he’s far from it.
I saw the Trib headline but haven’t had a chance to read the article so can’t speak to it one way or another. I’m curious to learn whether or not they missed any factors in doing their report.
June 18, 2007 at 10:04 am
c-rockjr121
YOu think government is perfect, to make all of these changes on society.
Your love of the state is what blinds you. You wish government on us. Shame on you.
If you want to do your part, so be it. Lead by example, not by the force of a gun.
June 18, 2007 at 10:15 am
robnesvacil
I’m going to need to go on a diet from all the words you keep putting in my mouth C-Rock.
Shame on me? For what? Standing up for my values?
Again you pop up with the made-up falsehoods so shame on you, friend. When did I ever say government was perfect?
I didn’t. In fact, I believe I’ve even said I recognize it is not perfect. My love for the state? Dude, what’s with the hyperbole?
All I’ve said is I believe we as a society can decide that our government (we the people are the government) can either try to be a force for good or not. You have said you think government is unnecessary and overbearing. From that I would take it to mean you believe governmetn should not be a force for anything (let alone a force for good). Such is life.
June 18, 2007 at 12:53 pm
c-rockjr121
How can you be a force of good in government?
All their powers are based on the use of force and legalized theft.
Dont pay your taxes? They come to collect.
Disobey a law? You will be taken to jail, and imprisoned. If you resist, you will be attacked. You will be billyclubed, or tased, or killed with a assualtweapon in the hands of a SWAT team member. Or maybe get a JDAM dropped on your house, with you in it.
That is all that government can do, to cause change in society. The use of force is their only tool.
you do bow down to them. You believe they can change society to fit your ideals.
But some out there understand the beast cannot be controlled, that is why they want it to be limited.
June 18, 2007 at 2:39 pm
robnesvacil
What you comically call legalized theft I call an investment in our community. You come at it from a position of greed and selfishness whereas I come at it from a position of realizing that we’re stronger united than we are divided.
The people in government are also American citizens. On another thread you twisted my words to imply I didn’t trust my fellow Americans, yet here you have clearly stated that you do not trust your fellow Americans. You think your fellow Americans are going to club you, tase you or kill you with the same assault weapons you defend with your every post… Odd.
June 19, 2007 at 7:41 am
c-rockjr121
How is investment when politicans and their cronys are getting their pockets lined? Or how folks go without medical services in cook, while the stroger family gets 6 figure jobs? That aint investment.
Or when roads fall apart, or go overbudget. Or how about the pits of money that has gone already to the CTA? We still have broken down rail lines, and now are theatened with service cuts if we do not bail them out again. Not the first time, but Again.
And now I am GREEDY!! The only one greedy, are those who ask for more laws on their fellow illinoisan. How am I greedy? I want to leave people alone. Let them keep their own money. Dont get involved in their personal life. Not let them get thrown in jail for not wearing a seat belt. Allow people to make choices for themselfs, and be responsible for their actions.
I just question how you think government is going to do all of these wonderful things you want. That is all.
June 19, 2007 at 9:21 am
robnesvacil
Not every poltiician is getting ‘their pockets lined’. Yes, there are some willing to engage in rank nepotism to give unqualified family members and friends a cushy seat to warm, etc — just as there are in any field.
June 19, 2007 at 10:21 am
c-rockjr121
Some?
What you been smoking? We have tons lining their pockets.