Etiquette



DP Etiquette

First rule: Don't be a jackass.

Other rules: Do not attack or insult people you disagree with. Engage with facts, logic and beliefs. Out of respect for others, please provide some sources for the facts and truths you rely on if you are asked for that. If emotion is getting out of hand, get it back in hand. To limit dehumanizing people, don't call people or whole groups of people disrespectful names, e.g., stupid, dumb or liar. Insulting people is counterproductive to rational discussion. Insult makes people angry and defensive. All points of view are welcome, right, center, left and elsewhere. Just disagree, but don't be belligerent or reject inconvenient facts, truths or defensible reasoning.

Monday, June 20, 2022

Republican anti-climate change legal strategy verges edges toward victory

Point 11 of Rick Scott's 11 point pro-pollution plan to
"save America" by giving it to ruthless capitalists to freely exploit



The weather is always changing. We take climate change seriously, but not hysterically. We will not adopt nutty policies that harm our economy or our jobs.
 -- Republican Senator Rick Scott making his only statement about climate change in his 11 point plan; Scott means this literally in defense of pollution and polluters; taking climate change seriously means stopping the federal government from trying to deal with pollution and climate change; to pro-pollution Republicans it is nutty and hysterical for government to even try to deal with climate change and pollution 



The Republican Party has been staunchly pro-pollution, climate denier and anti-environment for years. It isn't just blind opposition. Included in the Republican pro-pollution political-commercial movement is an intelligent, focused legal strategy that could mostly neuter the capacity of American law to nudge us toward a pro-environment legal and regulatory climate. The New York Times writes:
Republican Drive to Tilt Courts Against Climate Action Reaches a Crucial Moment

A Supreme Court environmental case being decided this month is the product of a coordinated, multiyear strategy by Republican attorneys general and conservative allies.

WASHINGTON — Within days, the conservative majority on the Supreme Court is expected to hand down a decision that could severely limit the federal government’s authority to reduce carbon dioxide from power plants — pollution that is dangerously heating the planet.

But it’s only a start.

The case, West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, is the product of a coordinated, multiyear strategy by Republican attorneys general, conservative legal activists and their funders, several with ties to the oil and coal industries, to use the judicial system to rewrite environmental law, weakening the executive branch’s ability to tackle global warming.

Coming up through the federal courts are more climate cases, some featuring novel legal arguments, each carefully selected for its potential to block the government’s ability to regulate industries and businesses that produce greenhouse gases.

“The West Virginia vs. E.P.A. case is unusual, but it’s emblematic of the bigger picture. A.G.s are willing to use these unusual strategies more,” said Paul Nolette, a professor of political science at Marquette University who has studied state attorneys general. “And the strategies are becoming more and more sophisticated.”

The plaintiffs want to hem in what they call the administrative state, the E.P.A. and other federal agencies that set rules and regulations that affect the American economy. That should be the role of Congress, which is more accountable to voters, said Jeff Landry, the Louisiana attorney general and one of the leaders of the Republican group bringing the lawsuits.  
But Congress has barely addressed the issue of climate change. Instead, for decades it has delegated authority to the agencies because it lacks the expertise possessed by the specialists who write complicated rules and regulations and who can respond quickly to changing science, particularly when Capitol Hill is gridlocked.

West Virginia v. E.P.A., No. 20–1530 on the court docket, is also notable for the tangle of connections between the plaintiffs and the Supreme Court justices who will decide their case. The Republican plaintiffs share many of the same donors behind efforts to nominate and confirm five of the Republicans on the bench — John G. Roberts, Samuel A. Alito Jr., Neil M. Gorsuch, Brett M. Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett.

“It’s a pincer move,” said Lisa Graves, executive director of the progressive watchdog group True North Research and a former senior Justice Department official. “They are teeing up the attorneys to bring the litigation before the same judges that they handpicked.” The pattern is repeated in other climate cases filed by the Republican attorneys general and now advancing through the lower courts: The plaintiffs are supported by the same network of conservative donors who helped former President Donald J. Trump place more than 200 federal judges, many now in position to rule on the climate cases in the coming year. 
At least two of the cases feature an unusual approach that demonstrates the aggressive nature of the legal campaign. In those suits, the plaintiffs are challenging regulations or policies that don’t yet exist. They want to pre-empt efforts by President Biden to deliver on his promise to pivot the country away from fossil fuels, while at the same time aiming to prevent a future president from trying anything similar.
That is truly an aggressive pro-pollution, anti-climate legal strategy the Republican laissez-faire capitalists have dreamed up. The propaganda is, as usual, based on fomenting fear based on both lies of commission and lies of omission.

It's not just abortion that neo-fascist Republican elites are going after. Their goals are huge. They want to change society, government, religion and commerce. Neo-fascist Republicans intend to force major social engineering changes on all of those targets. 


What about pro-pollution Democrats?
As we all know, Joe Manchin is a staunchly pro-pollution Senator who defends coal and oil industry interests, which heavily fund him. His shameless conflicts of interest are off the charts. Democratic leadership made Manchin the Chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. That gives him enormous power to defend polluters and pollution. Manchin's government propaganda page says this about him:
Senator Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) is proud to represent West Virginia on four critical Senate committees that will tackle the important work of addressing our nation’s energy needs, standing up for members of the military, honoring our veterans and finding commonsense solutions to boost economic prosperity. 

Senator Manchin is proud to serve as Chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, where he will fight for a commonsense, balanced energy approach that recognizes West Virginia’s critical role in our nation’s energy future and helps us achieve energy independence within a generation. Senator Manchin believes it is imperative that this country develops an energy policy that focuses on security by reducing our dependence on foreign oil. Every state must do its part to use its resources – whether it’s clean coal and natural gas or wind and solar – to make energy independence a reality. Senator Manchin will always stand up for energy policies that are good for West Virginia jobs, America’s security and our way of life.  
Well, there you have it. How could anyone stand in the way of dirty energy? Our precious security and very way of life are threatened by even trying to deal with climate change. 

With pro-pollution Democrats like Manchin in charge of the federal non-response to climate change and pollution, who needs pro-pollution Republicans like Rick Scott? They use the same kind of language to downplay climate change, deflect from its seriousness and protect big polluters, while taking campaign contributions from big polluters in return for politician loyalty.

The environment is to be exploited, damaged as much needed and convenient, and the wealth flowing from capitalist environmental rape trickled up to the elites at the top and right into their big, fat bank accounts.

What about us common folks? People can either just go pound sand if they don't like it, or continue to vote for corrupt Republicans and Democrats if they do. 

Q: Does anyone see a pattern in the propaganda here?

Hint: The tactics are the same for polluters, corrupt politicians (Democrats and Republicans), authoritarian demagogues, Christian zealots, ruthless capitalists with no social conscience, QAnon conspiracy crackpots, haters, liars, traitors, etc.

A: Yes, there is a pattern. Because it works so well, it is repeated over and over and over. 

No comments:

Post a Comment