Reply #23: What are you so angry about? You're winning. Aside from that it makes you sound like a right-winger.

[Bogart]

Then again, there are a lot of people from both sides of the spectrum who are unemployed and they are angry about it.

The left and the right also agree on something at the moment--the American economy is in bad shape. Thus, in the view of the unemployed, and working people in general, it doesn't make sense that some in the government are actually trying to make things worse. By EPA's own 2011 estimates, their new regulations will cost industry $37 billion, 6.3 million paperwork burden hours, and 60,100 jobs.

Now, the EPA is going after farmers and ranchers--threatening to fine them for moving cattle, tilling a field or even driving down a dirt road, if they stir up to much dust.

With 9% unemployment and 2% economic growth, is this level of regulation appropriate today?

You are not just hurting the right, my friend. If you recall, labor unions were for the pipeline that was recently regulated out of reality. But right-wingers need jobs too. Perhaps if they were employed, they wouldn't be so angry all the time.

Here is what another one of "your right-wingers" has to say about it.

We need to avoid the regulatory uncertainty that has slowed investment and job creation over the last three years. Measures that threaten the balance of supply and demand, and the cost, of our electricity do just that. The administration should take these significant concerns into consideration before going forward with the rule by the end of the year. EPA should ensure that, at minimum, the rule is revised to provide adequate time for cost-effective compliance in ways that do not threaten the reliability of… electricity. - Evan Bayh D, former U.S. Senator from Indiana