Let’s play Jeopardy – I’ll take Credibility for 1,000 – pick the correct statement, either A, B, C, or D below:
A) Senator Robert Torricelli on Christine Todd Whitman during Senate confirmation:
“President Bush has made a very wise selection. The EPA and the country will be getting an Administrator who is qualified, tested and ready to tackle the challenges that lie ahead for this agency. With this nominee, there will be absolutely no learning curve. There are few training grounds that could better prepare someone for this position that the Governorship of New Jersey. […] This is a good nomination and she will be an excellent Administrator of the EPA”
[Source: Whitman EPA Administrator Senate Confirmation hearing transcript
http://bulk.resource.org/gpo.gov/hearings/107s/69822.pdf
B) Senator Corzine on Christine Todd Whitman during Senate confirmation
“It [EPA] needs someone who will fight internal battles to make environmental protection a budget priority. … It needs someone who, when necessary, will be tough on polluters and require them to do the right thing.
Mr. Chairman, I believe Governor Whitman has the background, the experience and the skills necessary to do the job…. These qualities must be matched by a determination to stand firm for the environment, to fully enforce our environmental laws and to fight for justice and equity for all.”
[Source: Whitman EPA Administrator Senate Confirmation hearing transcript
C) Jeff Tittel on Lisa Jackson as EPA Administrator (Philadelphia Inquirer – no, this is not a cut and paste of the Torch’s comment)
“If you can handle environmental problems in New Jersey, since they’ve got more than any other place, you can do it anywhere,” said Jeff Tittel, executive director of the New Jersey chapter of the Sierra Club and one of Jackson’s supporters.”
Source: Corzine’s chief of staff to head EPA
By Jonathan Tamari and Sandy Bauers
Inquirer Staff Writers
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/health_science/daily/20081211_Corzine_s_chief_of_staff_to_head_EPA.html
D) Bill Wolfe on Christine Todd Whitman in statement to Senate confirmation:
[…]
“The Bush/ Whitman rhetoric reflects a dangerous combination of free market and State’s rights conservative ideology. If allowed to go forward, this agenda would severely weaken historic protections for the nation’s clean air and clean water protections that the overwhelming majority of Americans support and have come to expect from the EPA.
[…]
A Bush/Whitman agenda would bar the EPA from developing necessary new standards and will likely lead to a rollback of existing protections. These standards include protections concerning how much cancer-causing substances are allowed to be discharged into our air and drinking water.”
[Source: Whitman EPA Administrator Senate Confirmation hearing transcript – see page 128
[From the Newark (NJ) Star-Ledger, Wednesday, January 3, 2001]
BUSH-WHITMAN AGENDA WILL HURT ENVIRONMENT
[see page 128 of Senate transcript link above)
-
Archives
- January 2025
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
-
Meta
Hey, Bill:
As a fellow blogger at this site, I’d be grateful if you’d be so kind as to not put the full text of each of your entries in the first Movable Type box. It would be considerate of your colleagues if you would just place the first 3 or 4 paras of you text there and then use the second box for the rest, as your fellows all do. By doing it the way you currently do, you crowd out the rest of us. I would appreciate it, for one, if you’d consider my request, so more entries can be posted on the front page. Seems only fair, eh?
Thanks.
Hi Bryan – thanks, but didn’t realize this was a problem.
I was under impression that the site editor had “editors picks” for posts that stayed on front page.
When I complained about my posts not getting FP recognition adn being displaced by trivial posts, I was told by editor that the front page is not what drives traffic to a post anyway. Traffic came not from FP but from links. I didn’t understand it them adn don’t now.
But don’t shoot me , eh? (I note you post on guns!)
Plus, the site seem to lack sufficient content anyway – is there a high volume of posts lately? I haven’t been around for a while and just recently came back
Bryan – you didn’t answer the question!
There’s no link for your statement D.
Bill:
No, I’m the last person likely to shoot you. Ha! Don’t get me wrong, I’m not angry, but…
Whatever you’ve been told in past, it seems pretty clear that filling up the front page with any one blogger’s text (or, in your case recently, a ton of photos), makes it less likely that other bloggers will get high billing on said page, whatever that’s worth. I suspect many readers, myself included, go to the front page and see if there’s anything there of interest. If said page is full of a single entry, or one entry is really long on the page, they may click off. Dig?
And, besides, it’s clear that your fellow bloggers (including yours truly) live by the rule we were advised way back in the beginning. I’m sure you’d agree that, in the interest of fairness, it’s not too much for you to do the same. OK?
Now, I gotta go. Got a ton to do before tomorrow’s critical NJ Senate vote. I hope you’ve called your NJ Senator, Bill, and asked her/him to vote for S-1774. After all, who needs to buy more than 13 handguns per year? Hmmmm?
unprovincial – the link to my statement in D is the Senate Confirmation link provided in A –
My star ledger editorial was submitted into the Senate Record and is in the transcript at page 128.