L-O-L ‼ Yes‼ It did‼
And I used that stuff as a parts cleaning solvent for years‼ No gloves‼
(It was cheaper than anything else)
Hmmmmm....
Maybe it ain't the beer 'n' whiskey that makes me so ornery... maybe it's the lead.
*
Latest EPA Wood Stove News
- Thread starter huntindog1
- Start date
Help Support Arborist Forum:
And I used that stuff as a parts cleaning solvent for years‼ No gloves‼
(It was cheaper than anything else)
Hmmmmm....
Maybe it ain't the beer 'n' whiskey that makes me so ornery... maybe it's the lead.
*
naturelover
Tree Freak
So all this boils down to is whether or not you agree with the regulation being imposed?
Sent from my iPhone 5 using Tapatalk
What?? That's what you got from all that?? Really??
Try again... I ain't biting.
*
Cerran
Addicted to ArboristSite
That's not what he said at all. The regulation in this case was to protect people and property from actual damage (not just some misconceived perception) which is what all regulations (laws) should be about.
oh wahhhhhhh to the crier.......
Chris-PA
Where the Wild Things Are
From the youralaskalink article:
"The Fairbanks North Star Borough voters rejected a measure to continue banning borough government from regulating air pollution."
OK all you "conservatives", let's hear you cheer about local control! Is this not a great thing to see?
"The Fairbanks North Star Borough voters rejected a measure to continue banning borough government from regulating air pollution."
OK all you "conservatives", let's hear you cheer about local control! Is this not a great thing to see?
slowp , I'll ask you one more time, one final time... what in-the-hell does anything to do with local laws, ordinances, regulations, or voters have to do with Federal actions? Read the damn Constitution, if specifically states in the tenth amendment...
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
By-the-way, that is the complete and total tenth amendment.
What you are totally unable to comprehend is the difference... and even more importantly, why it makes a difference.
I actually feel sorry for you...
*
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
By-the-way, that is the complete and total tenth amendment.
What you are totally unable to comprehend is the difference... and even more importantly, why it makes a difference.
I actually feel sorry for you...
*
zogger
Tree Freak
I hope it is OK if I chime in, not a conservative, nor a liberal..
I think it is OK as long as their ordinances don't violate or infringe on anything in their state constitution. Not knowing a thing about Alaska state government..hard to say, don't feel like tens of hours (potential perhaps..) of research to find out.
Ummm, well, read the article. The locals were not allowing the air pollution laws to be enforced. They then voted, and voted in favor of local officials enforcing the federally figured out levels of pollution. Read the articles.
The constitution, like religious tomes, is open to different interpretations. That's why we have courts of law. Those folks are the final interpreters, until an amendment is passed. I find people who want to infringe upon basic rights--like the ability to breathe, by constantly claiming IT SAYS IN THE CONSTITUTION...to be incapable of even thinking that folks have a basic right to breath. End of discussion. The circle of BS continues.
and all the bs is pouring out of your leftist mind,,,you refuse to believe any truth..only what you've been taught by the leftists of this country,who are destroying America as fast as they can....and certain dupes believe allllll their lies....blind leading the blind...that's why ovomit is doing his best to destroy the constitution,,as the filth said its a flawed document,,,he likes the communist manifesto..................................
I did read the damn articles, and they flat do not say what you claim they do... period‼
The locals had prohibited (by a vote) local government from regulating heating appliances... nothing more‼
The latest vote rescinds that prohibition, which will allow local government to create local regulations on heating appliances that address local needs... nothing more‼
The articles say nothing about blocking the enforcement of "air pollution laws", and they certainly say nothing about now "enforcing the federally figured out levels of pollution". There is mention, by the authors of the articles (but they site no sources), that the area is often out of compliance with with federal air standards established in the "Clean Air Act" and/or exceeds health limits established by the EPA... neither of which are "laws", they are simply standards, or goals to aim for (many areas of the country are regularly out of compliance). I'll quote directly from one of your articles...
"...the community now has the ability to come to the table and work together to find solutions to our air pollution problems."
The "BS" is not in my words... it's in yours. I'm not the one overstating what those articles say, or trying to make them stand for more than they do. In fact, those articles are about nothing more than local citizens and government addressing local issues, it has no relevance to the Federal government or the EPA... and the only relevance to the Constitution is local citizens and government exercising their Tenth Amendment right without unconstitutional interference from federal government. And those articles certainly don't mention a "basic right to breath"
... those are your words.*
slam dunk!!!!I did read the damn articles, and they flat do not say what you claim they do... period‼
The locals had prohibited (by a vote) local government from regulating heating appliances... nothing more‼
The latest vote rescinds that prohibition, which will allow local government to create local regulations on heating appliances that address local needs... nothing more‼
The articles say nothing about blocking the enforcement of "air pollution laws", and they certainly say nothing about now "enforcing the federally figured out levels of pollution". There is mention, by the authors of the articles (but they site no sources), that the area is often out of compliance with with federal air standards established in the "Clean Air Act" and/or exceeds health limits established by the EPA... neither of which are "laws", they are simply standards, or goals to aim for (many areas of the country are regularly out of compliance). I'll quote directly from one of your articles...
"...the community now has the ability to come to the table and work together to find solutions to our air pollution problems."
The "BS" is not in my words... it's in yours. I'm not the one overstating what those articles say, or trying to make them stand for more than they do. In fact, those articles are about nothing more than local citizens and government addressing local issues, it has no relevance to the Federal government or the EPA... and the only relevance to the Constitution is local citizens and government exercising their Tenth Amendment right without unconstitutional interference from federal government. And those articles certainly don't mention a "basic right to breath"
*
you are very articulate,,and thourough.............
That statement, as well as the comparison, is illogically absurd... and frankly, quite bizarre.
The Constitution is the rule book of play, the courts system is the referee system that enforces the rules... the ideology that the constitution is "open to different interpretations" is forwarded only by a minority of non-believers or those who don't like what it says and wish to circumvent it. The constitution, in fact, lays out a set of rules for its own change... the minority of non-believers and haters are unable to make those changes (because the rules don't allow a minority to change it) so they have attempted to advanced an ideology that the constitution is "open to different interpretations." When that ideology has been brought before the courts it has been struck down, and reprimanded, repeatedly.
Seriously, I actually feel sorry for you...
*
brenndatomu
Hey you woodchucks, quit chucking my wood!
Well, this thread is titled Latest EPA Wood stove News (and if I don't dredge up this old thread Gypologger will eventually anyways)...so I'll just park this here. Sorry if it has been posted before elsewhere, it's the first I seen it, kinda interesting. http://forgreenheat.blogspot.com/2015/03/what-consumers-need-to-know-about-new.html
Similar threads
