|
| “
|
An Idaho businessman
and his wife are pleading with the U.S. Supreme Court to stop the
federal government’s “bullying” over the family’s simple plan to build
a three-bedroom home on a plot of ground they purchased in an existing
subdivision in Idaho, plans for which they already have obtained all
the legally necessary building permits.
The issue is that the  Environmental
Protection Agency
claims that the land – which is surrounded by existing homes on three
adjacent lots, has no standing water, and has no streams or creeks on
it – is “wetlands.”
[EPA Horror]
|
” |
The EPA,
boys and girls, is the only reason
Richard Nixon deserved to be removed from office. Reckless
endangerment of the U.S. Constitution (although Newt says The
EPA Was Founded on Sound Ideas). Ahem.
|
|
The definition of wetlands is anyplace where there is a possibility of a puddle forming after a rain storm. Many of our deserts qualify as wetlands.
ReplyDeleteFYI, Richard Nixon was for big government and very liberal but an anti-communist. The left will never forgive him for that last trait.
Freddie Sykes
Who here can see Romney dismanteling the EPA? Thats why we loose either way, for a long time to come?
ReplyDelete