[Swlugevents] Control Your Appetite! No More Calorie Counting!

[Best Weight Loss Extract]

100% Organic Weight Loss - Pure Garcinia Extract!


http://www.tpcidamr.us/3235/29/73/158/432.10tt74103107AAF17.php



To Unsub - http://www.tpcidamr.us/3235/29/73/158/432.10tt74103107AAF10.html


PO Box 26452
Minneapolis, MN 55426


















 get said many 
of the claimed benefits from EPA clean air regulations "are mostly attributable 
to the reduction in public exposure to a single air pollutant: fine 
particulate matter."The EPA claims that changes made to emissions standards 
and other areas will save billions in health costs for the public.The 
same report estimated that in fiscal 2012, 14 major rules came with 
between $14.8 billion and $19.5 billion in annual costs, but with between 
$53.2 billion and $114.6 billion in annual benefits.The Heritage report's 
estimate of the annual costs imposed in 2012 were not that far 
off -- Heritage pegged the annual cost of 2012 rules at $23.5 
billion.The Heritage report did not delve deeply into the benefits of all 
these regulations, though suggested the administration has exaggerated those 
numbers. The analysis said the "particulate matter" pollutant EPA often 
cites is already subject to EPA regulations, calling the claimed benefits 
of additional reductions "speculative."
 ather the result of the fog of war, or something like 
it. An inquest would be conducted. The bottom of this would be 
gotten to.The slow walk was on.Romney subsequently shied from the subject. 
The one time he made mention of the attack in a debate 
with Obama, the president caught him on a technicality and moderator Candy 
Crowley of CNN helped to humiliate the former Massachusetts governor.The 
press, mostly either cowed or uninterested on the subject, let the issue 
drop too. Obama's strategy was successful. Political disaster was averted. 
Cue the confetti.But having been re-elected, the election strategy re: Benghazi 
is causing something of a hangover for the president.Now that we have 
had the first large-scale terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 9/11, public 
anxiety about Islamists and terrorism is way up. With that backdrop, Republicans 
are re-opening the inquest into the Benghazi attacks. This time the questions 
aren't so much about non-existent riots or why Americans in an Islamist 
country weren't on higher alert.This time it's about allegations of a cover-up. 
Did Obama officials muzzle critics in service of the president's re-election 
goal? Was the inquest full and fair? What did the president know, 
and when did he know it?Given it all to do over again, 
Obama likely would repeat his pre-election approach to Benghazi: denounce 
critics, go slow and minimize any broader significance of the attack. After 
all, he did win a second term.But

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/swlugevents/attachments/20131124/0d62659b/attachment.html>