Is ‘Climategate’ Moving Votes?

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by WashIndependent, TMC Member Feed. TMC Member Feed said: Wash. Independent: Is ‘Climategate’ Moving Votes?: Ben Geman, talking to the senators who’ll decide whether o… http://bit.ly/78OApJ [...]

Very interesting take from across the pond:

Barack Obama’s use of the EPA to pressurise the Senate to pass his climate change … shows his dictatorial mentality. He wants to override Congress, which is hostile to his climate gobbledegook because it is representative of the American electorate, and sideline the nation’s elected Senators by ruling by decree, courtesy of the EPA. This is a coup d’état.

Fortunately, the world’s leading democracy, which he is trying to subvert, has guarantees of liberty so deeply embedded in its Constitution that US citizens are well placed to fight back.

In the first place, regulation can be challenged in a way that laws cannot. So the EPA’s proposed ruling on so-called “Greenhouse Gases” can be opposed extensively with litigation, to the point that the ruling might not yet be in force when Obama demits office. In the second place, the EPA is funded by Congress. So, if the Agency is being used to bypass or neuter Congress, why should legislators not play hardball and retaliate by cutting off its funding?

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/geraldwarner/…

Very interesting take from across the pond:

Barack Obama’s use of the EPA to pressurise the Senate to pass his climate change … shows his dictatorial mentality. He wants to override Congress, which is hostile to his climate gobbledegook because it is representative of the American electorate, and sideline the nation’s elected Senators by ruling by decree, courtesy of the EPA. This is a coup d’état.

Fortunately, the world’s leading democracy, which he is trying to subvert, has guarantees of liberty so deeply embedded in its Constitution that US citizens are well placed to fight back.

In the first place, regulation can be challenged in a way that laws cannot. So the EPA’s proposed ruling on so-called “Greenhouse Gases” can be opposed extensively with litigation, to the point that the ruling might not yet be in force when Obama demits office. In the second place, the EPA is funded by Congress. So, if the Agency is being used to bypass or neuter Congress, why should legislators not play hardball and retaliate by cutting off its funding?

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/geraldwarner/…

It seems that things have come full circle. I don't see Weigel complaining about how immoral it is that these emails were leaked, but I bet he sure does feel bad about the leaked email today.