EPA ‘Crucifixion’ Video Pulled From Youtube, The Liberal Cockroach Behind the Move

Earlier in the week a video surfaced on Youtube of Al Armendariz, head of the EPA office in Dallas, saying that he and his agency planned to “crucify” any business that crosses them. The video caused a lot of consternation on Capitol Hill as well as recriminations for the EPA. But by Friday the video had been pulled by Youtube because of complaints from the man that originally made the video. Turns out he’s an extreme environut connected with the gay community.

To quickly recap the video, Armendariz noted that his job as an EPA enforcer was like that of the ancient Romans. He joked that the EPA’s philosophy was like the Roman’s who, when mollifying a populace, would “find the first five guys they saw and they’d crucify them.” This, he laughed, would make the town “easy to manage for the next few years.”

So apparently Armendariz felt that the EPA’s job was that of indiscriminate intimidation as opposed to law enforcement.

That said, how does one guy get a video like this pulled and why did it happen?

First of all, we cannot really blame Youtube. They rush to pull any video that is the subject of a copyright question. You have to admit that Youtube would be setting itself up for major legal trouble if it dallied over such incidents. And that is what was invoked here. Essentially the original poster of the video said use of it by others was copyright infringement.

The man that originally posted the video is a fellow by the name of David McFatridge. Research shows he is an activist for the radical environut group the Sierra Club, has been active in the fight against energy independence and the process of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, as well as a member of the “LGBT” community — or what ever set of letters they are going by this week.

He claimed that use of the small segment of his original recording that had been used by all the TV and radio shows as well as those users that clipped out that segment and put it on their own Youtube account violated his ownership of the video.

Of course, his complaint is absurd. Fair use states that the less than 2-minute segment that others used to show the newsworthy address of a public official does not violate his ownership of the whole recording. McFatridge’s claim is absurd, really. But these laws can be a bit hard to judge, so Youtube rushed to pull the piece from other Youtube accounts to be on the safe side.

So why did McFatridge have Youtube pull the piece and why did he eliminate his own copy of it? Why did this liberal try to send the recording down the memory hole?

I’ll tell you why McFatridge pulled it. There is little doubt that he loved the clip originally. After all, as an extreme envronazi how could he not love it? It showed a government official treating businesses as the enemy, a sector of the economy that should be summarily “crucified” and executed without either trial or cause. That is why he posted it in the first place. It sated his hate. McFatridge is a fan of destroying American businesses and was happy the government’s iron boot heel was about to come down on them.

But as the days rolled on and it began to look like sane Americans didn’t share his hatred, once it became clear that the video was causing trouble for his heroes in the EPA, he panicked.

McFatridge realized that the negative reaction from so many quarters was actually hurting his desire to have the private sector “crucified” by a power mad, Roman-styled government. And so he hastened to have the video deep sixed.

It’s really pretty simple. Like most leftists he hates it when people come to fully understand his real goals and he understands that few Americans agree with him. He knows that the wild-eyed, nuts in the environmental movement are as insane as he but that most people, once they become fully aware of how crazy these nuts are, shy from their methods and his end goals are harmed. So when his real goals get some light shined upon them, he wants to go back into hiding and he scurries away like a cockroach.

That’s what we are seeing here; a cockroach scurrying back into the woodwork so that he can continue his stealth campaign through a government in thrall to his sort of lunatic fringe. McFatridge feared that if too many Americans came to understand that the Obama administration was his kind of extremist they might take action to excise these anti-American nuts from government and remove from power the statist radicals that he so loves.

Yep, it’s really pretty simple.

Shortlink:

Posted by on April 28, 2012.
Filed under Barack Obama, Big government, Business, corruption, Culture Of Corruption, Democrats, Environment, EPA, Hypocrisy, Liberals.
Warner Todd Huston is a Chicago-based freelance writer, has been writing opinion editorials and social criticism since early 2001 and is featured on many websites such as Andrew Breitbart's BigGovernment.com and BigJournalism.com, RightWingNews.com, CanadaFreePress.com, RightPundits.com, StoptheACLU.com, Human Events Magazine, among many, many others. Additionally, he has been a frequent guest on talk-radio programs to discuss his opinion editorials and current events.He has also written for several history magazines and appears in the new book "Americans on Politics, Policy and Pop Culture" which can be purchased on amazon.com. He is also the owner and operator of PubliusForum.com. Feel free to contact him with any comments or questions, EMAIL Warner Todd Huston: igcolonel .at. hotmail.com"The only end of writing is to enable the reader better to enjoy life, or better to endure it." --Samuel Johnson

You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
  • GarandFan

    ” So why did McFatridge have Youtube pull the piece and why did he eliminate his own copy of it?”

    Nailed it.  It was for “insiders” to enjoy.  Evidently Fatty actually believes that conservatives don’t know how to use the internet.

  • http://home.comcast.net/~rfa3936 RFA

    So why are you insulting cockroaches? 

  • Walter_Cronanty

    Wow, that is so wrong, on so many levels, yet I’m not surprised at all – it’s how they roll.  We can start balancing the budget by whacking about 75% off the EPA’s budget.  

    • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

      Why stop at 3/4′s of the obvious solution?

      • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

        Because they’ve actually done some decent stuff in the past.  I can see them having SOME function, it’s just that their idea of their ‘duty’ is way beyond reasonable and proper.  

        • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

          When a surgeon cuts out a cancer, he deliberately cuts out healthy tissue as well…  Same here.

          • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

            When a surgeon does a normal tonsillectomy, he doesn’t remove the entire esophagus.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Tonsilitis is not metastizing, bureacracy is.

          • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

            Ain’t that the truth.  But how much of the baby do we throw out with the bathwater?

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=501456666 Mat Larson

           Yes, but, like MADD, their original mission has been fulfilled and they (or we, actually) are suffering from “mission creep”.

          C. Northcote Parkinson said it back in ’55: there is no hope for this organization.  Fire its complement, raze the buildings and salt the ground.  Any of the old EPA housed in an actual conservation-oriented agency would simply carry the infection to a new host.

        • Brian_R_Allen

          …. 
          Because it has actually done some decent stuff in the past …. 

          In its dreams, maybe. 

          While meanwhile – like all of the rest of the feral government’s machinery — all of it, for decades already, entirely “Democratic” potty-activist-owned-operated-and-controlled – becoming more effectively fascistically paramilitarized by the minute.

  • Guest

    Watching the video it appears he’s talking about companies that are breaking the law.

    Hard to feel sorry if those breaking the law are “scared straight” by these tactics.

     

    • retired.military

      I am quite sure that you dont include the OWS in that crowd, do you?

      Here’s hoping you meet Olaf Soon!

      • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

        If that’s what you think should happen, you should tell Kevin so.

        • retired.military

          I dont like to send emails like that.  Only when it gets so agregrous that it is beyond annoying.  Grumpy hasnt reached that point yet but as with his prevous trolls I am sure he will get there.

  • ackwired

    “So apparently Armendariz felt that the EPA’s job was that of indiscriminate intimidation as opposed to law enforcement.”

    Actually he said just exactly the opposite in the clip.

    • Brucehenry

      Huston has a positive talent for finding stuff like this. Setting examples as a deterrent to crime is what law enforcement is supposed to do.

       Was it a clumsy analogy? Sure. But hardly evidence of an authoritarian mindset.

      • cirby

        One small problem.

        This same guy has a history of “crucifying” oil companies with no proof of wrongdoing.  He’s one of the bureaucratic weenies who’s been going after “fracking” drillers, with scant scientific evidence (or, in at least one case, none).  He’s lost – badly – in court a couple of times, with the judge in one case indicating shock that the government went after someone with such a lack of evidence.

        Authoritarian mindset?  Oh yeah.  Combine that with the YouTube video, and you have an idiot with an agenda, and no concern about anything like actual guilt or innocence.

        • http://2012.ak4mc.us/ McGehee

          you have an idiot with an agenda, and no concern about anything like actual guilt or innocence.

          In short, exactly the kind of guy Bruce loves to defend.

        • Brucehenry

          Oops, see reply below.

      • retired.military

        “Setting examples as a deterrent to crime is what law enforcement is supposed to do.”

        Bruce, I  honestly dont remember you commenting on the OWS threads.  Your comrade in arms Chico was all for them breaking the law though.

        • jim_m

          “Setting examples as a deterrent to crime is what law enforcement is supposed to do.”

          No Bruce.  Fair and equal enforcement is a deterrent.  If it is not consistently enforced then people try to game the system.  But that is exactly what obama wants.  Pay him enough money and you don’t have to worry about enforcement.

          • Brucehenry

            Really? Is that why you advocate doing away with the death penalty? Oh, wait.

          • jim_m

             If the death penalty is applied fairly then it serves as deterrent.

            Again it is about fair and equitable application of the law.  This Marxist tool in the EPA advocates harsh and disproportionate punishment in order to keep the rest in line by threat of destruction.

          • retired.military

            I think it needs to be applied fairly but much more swiftly

          • jim_m

             If the death penalty is applied fairly then it serves as deterrent.

            Again it is about fair and equitable application of the law.  This Marxist tool in the EPA advocates harsh and disproportionate punishment in order to keep the rest in line by threat of destruction.

      • ackwired

        I doubt that Huston was being malevolent, and I doubt that he intentionally misrepresented what was said in the excerpt..  Sometimes emotions color what we think we are seeing. 

        • Brucehenry

          Oh, I agree there is no malevolence here, or even intent to misrepresent. Just garden variety wingnut alarmism.

  • Brucehenry

    That may be so. I would like to see some back up. But, even if it is, Huston wasn’t aware of it, or if he was, didn’t say so. He posted this video as his sole evidence in his article that this guy “felt that the EPA’s job was that of indiscriminate intimidation as opposed to law enforcement.”

    The video is No Such Thing.

    • jim_m

       No, not indiscriminate.  What he was suggesting is that it be disproportionate.  That they would find people who were out of compliance and “crucify them”.  He correctly points out that crucifixion was a method of terror that the Romans used to keep the subjugated territories in line. 

      It is grossly inappropriate to suggest that the way a government agency should operate is to create an atmosphere of terror amongst the people and industries it is empowered to control.  That is what totalitarian regimes do. 

      If that is the attitude of the EPA these people need to leave, not the agency the country.

      • jim_m

         The problem with this whole thing is that the EPA makes judgements on who is in compliance and then punishes them without giving them any opportunity to state their case. As we just saw in the recent SCOTUS ruling the EPA is operating outside the law in the way it chooses to enforce their regs.  So even though this fascist says that they are going to target people who are out of compliance, that means that they will target people that THEY decide are out of compliance and crucify them without the victims being given any chance to prove their innocence.

        Given the recent history of the EPA and how they determine compliance and treat the public, I think that the comparison to the Romans coming into town and randomly murdering a number of men is very apt.

        • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

          And he wonders why he’s png on the comment sections of my articles…

          • jim_m

             While he’s being polite here, I  would suggest that he makes a wonderful example of what the Soviets called a “useful idiot”.  He excuses the excesses of the obama admin and refuses to see where they are violating people’s rights.

          • Brucehenry

            Guys, I’m RIGHT HERE, lol.

            As for being persona non grata on threads from articles”authored” by a cut-and-paste expert extroardinaire, oh well. I’ll live.

            Now, Jim, you definitely have a point as to the heavy-handedness of the EPA, in your comments above and below. MY point was about the video and the hyperbolic, inaccurate description of it by Huston.

          • jim_m

             Come on Bruce.  The whole point is that the EPA has been caught abusing its power and here is a video where they acknowledge that their policy is to abuse that power. 

            Yes it may be an inapt analogy, but given the circumstances it might just as well be an admission.  WHether or not it really was an admission is beside the point.  It looks like one due to the juxtaposition of the SCOTUS case.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Swallowing donkeys while straining at gnats…  That’s our troll!

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Swallowing donkeys while straining at gnats…  That’s our troll!

          • Brucehenry

            So this was another edition of the Huston Report: News That’s Beside The Point!

          • ackwired

            jim m says it is “beside the poin”t if the right changes the facts to make their point, but evil, soviet treachery if the left does it.

          • jim_m

            WHat have I said that is factually incorrect?  The EPA does use unconstitutional methods.  The EPA is advocating using threat and fear to keep the public in line.

            If my point is somewhat different that Huston’s that is not changing the facts. 

          • jim_m

             Come on Bruce.  The whole point is that the EPA has been caught abusing its power and here is a video where they acknowledge that their policy is to abuse that power. 

            Yes it may be an inapt analogy, but given the circumstances it might just as well be an admission.  WHether or not it really was an admission is beside the point.  It looks like one due to the juxtaposition of the SCOTUS case.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            I’m far from convinced as regards the “usefull” portion, but 100% with you on the other.

      • Brucehenry

        Nope. A clumsy analogy, nothing more, used by Huston in another redmeat attempt at rabblerousing.

        Here’s how I would characterize his calling this liberal guy a “cockroach,” were I to adopt the same hyperbolic descriptive techniques favored by Huston, and, apparently, you, Jim: 

        “Wow. Cockroaches, huh? Ever hear of Radio Rwanda?”

        LOL.

        • jim_m

          Yes, a bad analogy, but as I mention above, the EPA’s totalitarian tactics make this look even worse when one considers that they punish without the victim having any recourse to appeal the judgment of the agency.

          But it is still more than just an analogy since he is suggesting extremely severe punishments for the purpose of sending some message that he feels must be necessary. THere is never any attempt o demonstrate that such tactics are necessary. He operates from a presumption that everyone that he regulates is guilty and therefore needs to be punished or controlled via threat of force.

          • Brucehenry

            Where did you get the idea that a company has no recourse to appeal the EPA’s judgement?

          • jim_m

             Until a couple of weeks ago with the SCOTUS ruling that was exactly how the EPA operated.

          • Brucehenry

            But yet the SCOTUS ruling was IN RESPONSE to an appeal of an EPA judgement. The Sacketts had recourse to the courts, and won.

          • jim_m

             Um.  They did not have access to the courts until the EPA took them to court.  In the mean time their liability went into the millions.

            The EPA abuses their authority to coerce people into compliance without giving them access to he court.  Go read the SCOTUS ruling. 

            The whole point was that the EPA demanded that the people pay the fine and correct the infraction and they could not appeal the EPA ruling unless the EPA sued them first.  The EPA denies people of the Due Process rights.

          • retired.military

            As I recall the GIBSON guitar company still hasnt had a day in court. Despite having over a half million dollars of resources confiscated and its main competitor (whose company leadership are Obama backers) have had no such problems using the same resources. EPA may be involved in that case as well.

          • jim_m

             It’s SOP for the obama admin.  Punish first, then deny the rights of the victim to appeal.  Set an example for everyone else.  Rule by terror.

            Nice Utopia the left has here for us.

      • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

        Rather like finding a restaurant that gets a score of 83 on the health check, and the health inspector pushing everyone out and locking the doors, then calling the restaurant’s insurance company to cancel their policy, and then opening it up again just long enough to throw five gallons of gas and an incendiary grenade into the place.  And then stalling the fire department for 30 minutes, just to make sure that there’s nothing left but ashes.

        It’d get the rest of the eateries in the area into compliance pretty damn quick, don’t you think?  So wouldn’t it be justifiable?

        Hmmm.  On second thought, I think it’s kind of disproportionate.  Especially when the purpose of the health inspector is to cooperate with the restaurant to prepare food that’s safe to eat.

        • jim_m

           Exactly.  These are the tactics one expects from the Stasi not the US government.  obama and the left want a totalitarian government.  THe left is more than happy to accommodate them.

  • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

    A troll demands of jim_m:

    Where did you get the idea that a company has no recourse to appeal the EPA’s judgement?

    Perhaps he read and understood the Supreme Court’s decision in Sackett v. EPA?

    [Description of the Issue from Alito's concurring opinion]

    The position taken in this case by the Federal Government—a position that the Court now squarely rejects—would have put the property rights of ordinary Americans entirely at the mercy of Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) employees.

    The reach of the Clean Water Act is notoriously unclear. Any piece of land that is wet at least part of the year is in danger of being classified by EPA employees as wetlands covered by the Act, and according to the Federal Government, if property owners begin to construct a home on a lot that the agency thinks possesses the requisite wetness, the property owners are at the agency’s mercy. The EPA may issue a compliance order demanding that the owners cease construction, engage in expensive remedial easures, and abandon any use of the property. If the owners do not do the EPA’s bidding, they may be fined up to $75,000 per day ($37,500 for violating the Act and another $37,500 for violating the compliance order). And if the owners want their day in court to show that their lot does not include covered wetlands, well, as a practical matter, that is just too bad. Until the EPA sues them, they are blocked from access to the courts, and the EPA may wait as long as it wants before deciding to sue. By that time, the potential fines may easily have reached the millions. In a nation that values due process, not to mention private property, such treatment is unthinkable.

    The mind boggles at the demonstrated ignorance…

    • jim_m

      The mind boggles at the demonstrated willful ignorance…

      FIFY

      • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

        Point.  I was giving the benefit of the doubt where no such benefit has been earned.

      • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

        Point.  I was giving the benefit of the doubt where no such benefit has been earned.

      • Brucehenry

        Again, you are correct about the heavyhanded tactics used by the EPA, and I agree that the unanimous decision was correct. Again, what I was originally commenting on was Huston’s mischaracterization OF THIS VIDEO as some kind of harbinger of doom.

        BTW, anybody else see the cowardice inherent in a blog author snarking on a reader’s comments and refusing to give that reader a chance to respond? Just askin’.

      • Brucehenry

        Again, you are correct about the heavyhanded tactics used by the EPA, and I agree that the unanimous decision was correct. Again, what I was originally commenting on was Huston’s mischaracterization OF THIS VIDEO as some kind of harbinger of doom.

        BTW, anybody else see the cowardice inherent in a blog author snarking on a reader’s comments and refusing to give that reader a chance to respond? Just askin’.

      • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

        Followed by a major shift of the goal posts.

        I keep telling you that you waste your time with this “willfully ignorant” troll…

      • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

        Followed by a major shift of the goal posts.

        I keep telling you that you waste your time with this “willfully ignorant” troll…

        • Brucepall

          When the EPA crossed over from conservation to unaccountable bureaucratic environmentalism, they lost their legitimacy.  

          What I hear from the unconcerned progressives is… so what? No big deal, who cares?

          Why you will care… when it happens to you; and the EPA threatens your property, lively-hood, and everything you have worked for all your life.

          Just another fine progressive example, showing the degree of their concern, as solely based upon their direct proportional proximity to such a threat.

          Semper Fidelis-

          • jim_m

             The lefties are OK with other people’s rights being trashed.  They don’t care.  They make the foolish calculation that because they support Dear Leader, their rights are safe.

            The reality is that obama is more than ready to throw them and their rights under the bus as soon as it becomes expedient.  What they don’t realize is that they are abetting an administration whose policy is that it is OK to lie to the public and that law enforcement is meant as a tool to punish opposition.  When the time comes to restrict their rights the government will be far less kind than it is today.

          • Guest

            Karl Rove: “Demean Always refer to the other
            side as Liberals, Lefty Liberals, Libbies. Never assign them the status of  bona-fide political party. Hang Liberalism around their neck like a burning
            tire. Make Liberalism appear as a moral turpitude or a character flaw. They are NEVER, NEVER to be referred to as the Democratic Party. At best it is the
            democrat party. Never assign them respect.”

          • jim_m

             Yes, I will demean you and your lefty friends, but at least I’m not seeking to take your rights away from you.  In that sense this is a very asymmetric relationship.

          • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

            To get respect, give respect.  Really simple, you know?  But yet, seemingly unthinkable to the ‘Democratic’ party wonks…

            Funny, that…

          • Guest

            (tin foil makes you crazy, take off the hat)

    • Walter_Cronanty

      The un-American tactics of the EPA, coupled with its bureaucratic overreach [while it may have the power to so declare, CO2 is not a pollutant], combined with the Obama administration’s left-wing views on the environment, business [capitalism is evil - except for our cronies who support our left-wing policies] and energy, will retard our economy until it is that of a European, socialist country, begging for a handout.  At that point, Obama will declare: “Mission Accomplished!”

  • jim_m

    What shocks me is the number of inspectors this monster says he has.  150 over 5 states?  He’s got more people doing environmental enforcement in 5 states than the FDA does for the entire nation’s blood supply.

    Yeah, he’s really restricted in what he can do.  Better start some regulatory reign of terror to make sure that those unruly peasants show proper respect for his agency’s power.  This guy is a thug and the EPA is way out of control.

    One wonders if that 150 includes a SWAT team.

  • Commander_Chico

    Goebbels, Castro, and Mao used to use the word “cockroaches” to describe political opponents, too.

    • jim_m

       It’s a pretty common analogy.  However, the only ones using Nazi tactics are your leftist friend in the EPA.  You don’t even notice or care how he doesn’t give a damn about penalties that fit the infraction. He wants to set examples. 

      You want a Nazi analogy?  Lidice, Oradour-sur-Glane, these are the kinds of “keep everyone in line by making a public example of them” kinds of tactics that are the ultimate extension of the obama administration’s tactics of “crucifying” people who get in their way.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Ryan-Murphy/100001624276605 Ryan Murphy

      And actually, the left is fond of Mao, so what is the problem>  Mao, Castro, Chavez …

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Ryan-Murphy/100001624276605 Ryan Murphy

    And there CHico goes straight for the Hitler analogy.   I trust he probably doesn’t see the Irony here. . .

  • Justrand

    The
    EPA, and every regulatory agency, is filled with Little Caesars like the twit
    in the video. They generally exercise their without ANY restraint, shielded by
    layers of anonymity.  Faceless bureaucrats
    and administrators are Obama’s Fifth-Column. 
    Video-Boy just made the mistake of being in the middle of the kitchen
    floor when the lights came on.  There are
    thousands of other cockroaches like him…at least this one is getting stomped!

    • jim_m

       Faceless bureaucrats who think the the best analogy for their method of governance is to compare it to a system of torture and terrorism of the helpless public.

      Yeah.  THAT’s who we need governing this nation:  A bunch of sociopaths who think that causing pain and suffering is the best way to keep the peasantry “in line”.

  • Brucepall

    Cmdr Chico,  

    I can tell you don’t get it; Mr. Huston has a very different take.  Without being too painfully obvious; let me help you out with the metaphor… Visualize this:  What scatters when you shine a little light of truth into the dark recesses of progressivism?  

    Semper Fidelis-

    • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

      One can only conclude that he scatters with the rest of the cockroaches and thus views it as normal and acceptable behavior.

      • Guest

        Karl Rove: “Monitor other posts for vulnerabilities you can exploit. Stay on the
        offensive with Liberal wimps. Don’t let up. Insult their Movement Assign
        as many character and moral flaws toLiberals as you can. You must
        portray Liberals as weak, vacillating, indecisive, amoral, baby killers,
        unpatriotic, effete snobs, elitists, Leftists, Commies, sense of
        entitlement, promiscuous, union lovers, tax raisers, Welfare Queens,
        Socialists, lazy, sex-obsessed, druggies, Jesus haters, moochers, troop
        hater,.etc. Always use these negative epithets when referring to, or
        describing Liberals / democrats.”

  • Pingback: The REAL Fifth Column | Be John Galt

  • MichaelLaprarie

    I’m a day late entering this discussion, but as someone who worked in the environmental field for a decade and interacted on a regular basis with EPA Region VI (headquartered in Dallas) I’d like to offer a few insights here.

    First, EPA VI consists of five states – TX, OK, AR, LA, NM.  150 enforcement agents is rather a small number, considering the geographic size of the region and the fact that they are enforcing asbestos in schools and public buildings, lead paint in schools, public buildings, and homes, air emissions, water emissions, landfills and disposals, and brownfields, just to name a few.  Think about the number of sites over five states that are regulated by at least one aspect of the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, or AHERA, or lead paint rules, or RCRA, or CERCLA, or Superfund (SARA), etc.

    With literally hundreds of sites per state (and I would imagine that TX alone numbers in the thousands) an average of 30 enforcement agents per state is not that much.  So when you can’t keep an eye on everyone, what do you do?  You go after the big offenders and the repeat offenders; the entities who, based on their actions, have only a lackluster interest in compliance. 

    Back in the days when I was in the testing business I could immediately rattle off a list of laboratories and field sampling outfits who were notorious for doing a poor job.  Specifically I could list entities that were known to short-cut procedures in order to save time and money or guarantee “good” results for their clients.  There were others that neglected to keep certification, licensing, and proficiency testing current.

    After a while we simply quit reporting violations that we encountered, because the response from EPA VI was always the same – “we’ll start a file, but we don’t have the resources to really do anything about miscellaneous complaints.  But if we see that these guys are becoming a real problem then we’ll try to look into it.”  We also learned that in a lot of cases, the law specified compliance requirements and penalties for failure to comply, but was very vague about the process of enforcement.

    So the EPA has been left with a pretty limited way of doing its job – tracking down entities that repeatedly or flagrantly violate the law, and concentrating on monitoring those entities for compliance with regulations that have both stiff penalties and clear enforcement directives.   Then, highly publicize their enforcement activities in the hopes that others will be “scared straight”.

    Now, here is the problem.  When you have an enforcement apparatus geared toward concentrating heavily on a small number of targets, it’s easy to make “enemies.”  When that happens it’s not difficult to leave behind your original directive – enforcement of the law – and start to see your mission as manipulation and intimidation of your enemies.   Throw a political agenda into the mix, and you’ve got a real problem on your hands.

    What makes this worse is the fact that there is a mountain of clear evidence that the Obama Administration has no problem directing their minions to enforce laws and regulations (or in the case of Fast & Furious, completely ignore laws and operate as renegades) based primarily on political agendas and their own twisted “now you’ll see what it feels like” interpretation of social justice. 

    In terms of his policy decisions, and the directives given by his Administration, Obama is easily the most divisive president of my lifetime.  He has declared himself an enemy of fossil fuels and has actively set up a system (new regulations, denial of permits, etc.) to punish the fossil fuel industry and drive up the cost of fossil fuels so that expensive, inefficient “alternative energy” becomes economical by comparison.  If the EPA isn’t already part of this plan, they certainly will be if there is a second Obama term.

    • Walter_Cronanty

       “So the EPA has been left with a pretty limited way of doing its job –
      tracking down entities that repeatedly or flagrantly violate the law,
      and concentrating on monitoring those entities for compliance with
      regulations that have both stiff penalties and clear enforcement
      directives.”
      And, if that is what the EPA did, I would applaud them.  Instead, it employs the incredible advantages against those who can least afford to take them on.  If the EPA has as few “enforcers” as you say, and I have absolutely no reason to doubt you, how in the world did they come to persecute the Sacketts, and their small piece of property?  They bought it for 23,000 in 2005.  How much do you think it’s worth today?  How much would you spend to defend you’re right to build on it?  How much would you spend if you’re not guaranteed a “win” and attorney’s fees? 
      The Pacific Legal Foundation took up their case – there is NO WAY an ordinary citizen could “buck the system” and litigate against the EPA.  The Sacketts have won nothing except the ability to litigate against the EPA in federal court.  Unless the Pacific Legal Foundation continues its representation of the Sacketts, their continuation of their case against the EPA would, most likely, bankrupt them.
      Sorry Michael, but the Sacketts appear to me to be one of the poor bastards crucified by the Romans.  And, barring an unlikely win for the Sacketts on the merits of the question of whether a wetland actually exists on their property, the EPA will ultimately declare: “Veni, vidi, vici.”

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Ryan-Murphy/100001624276605 Ryan Murphy

      The solution, then, is not giving them more enforcement capability but instead less job.

  • LiberalNightmare

    I forget, did we win the war with Eurasia? Or was it Eastasia?

    • jim_m

       In the future, everyone will be Emmanuel Goldstien for 15 minutes.

      • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

        “It’s not an instruction manual, it’s a cookbook!”

        “1984″ that is.  Though I’ll admit lately with all the ‘green’ ‘failures’ that end up disappearing billions I’m starting to think they’re looking at “Atlas Shrugged”.  Take billions of dollars, pass them out to your friends who have good ideas, and then absolve them of blame when the company fails and the money disappears.

  • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves
  • Pingback: EPA and Crucifixion : Arnold Safety Blog

  • Pingback: Bigot Watch | Daily Pundit

  • dlg1956

    Never forget that Mittens believes in man made global warming.

    Also never forget that Mittens is the consummate wall street insider, Goldman Sachs is one of, if not, his largest campaign contributor. Goldman Sachs is the primary company that owns The Chicago Climate Exchange, you know a commodities trader.

    You think they may be interested in trading carbon credits….perhaps?

    Al Gore would be so proud! Thanks GOP establishment for squashing the little guy again.

    Stop the RINOs, write in for POTUS and vote for the most conservative candidate from senator to dog catcher.