Bill Online Easily, Fast & Free with PayPal. No Software Needed. Sign Up Now!

I have designed a new collection of coffee mugs & beer steins.  Each design is available in 2 different coffee mug sizes and 1 beer stein.  These will make the perfect gift for almost any occasion.  My original photography, of scenes from the Buffalo area, is featured on each mug.  New designs will be added regularly, so check back often.  You can view the initial set in the left sidebar and follow the link to view all available products.

All items come with a 100% satisfaction guarantee and usually ship within 2 days.

Netflix Delivers DVDs to your home. NO LATE FEES. Try for FREE!

The Supreme Court outdid itself on Monday when it declared carbon dioxide (CO2) a pollutant.  Then, adding insult to injury, it directed the EPA to reevaluate its policy of not regulating CO2 emissions for automobiles.

The last time I checked, carbon dioxide was a naturally occurring gas that has been present in various levels in our atmosphere since the beginning of time.  The difference now is that we have global warming alarmists who refuse to consider that CO2 emissions have nothing to do with what appears to be a warming trend that is quite possibly related to the natural warming and cooling cycles that have occurred throughout earth’s history.

If the EPA acquiesces to the Supreme Court, there is the potential for economic devastation.  Any regulatory action to combat global warming must include a cost/benefit evaluation.  Until there is proof that carbon dioxide emissions are causing a shift in earth’s climate, the costs and long term effects of regulations will prove to outweigh any benefits.  Millions of deaths would most likely occur worldwide should the rush to fight mother nature gain momentum.  Certainly, the economic vitality of our country is threatened by the knee-jerk reaction of the Supreme Court.

The court ruling was 5 - 4 with Roberts, Alito, Scalia and Thomas dissenting.  The voice of reason lies in the dissents and the tyranny by the (slight) majority lives on.  The Supreme Court is not a regulatory agency and should not be setting environmental policy.

“Global warming may be a ‘crisis,’ even ‘the most pressing environmental problem of our time,’” Roberts wrote, quoting from the brief by Massachusetts and other petitioners. “It is not a problem, however, that has escaped the attention of policymakers in the executive and legislative branches of our government.”

“The Court’s alarm over global warming may or may not be justified, but it ought not to distort the outcome of this litigation,” wrote Scalia in a separate dissent. “No matter how important the underlying policy issues at stake, this Court has no business substituting its own desired outcome for the reasoned judgment of the responsible agency.”