Because they are addressing a specific problem with EPA?

What's more important, having a free society with a vigorous economy, or the ability of political apointees and bureaucrats to decree rules, bans, and burdens on us based on secret science that by definition can't have a concensus?

Intresting that they chose birthdate instead of age, don't you think? Why do you supppose they did that? Have you seen medical research that relied upon birthdate as a key component of the data rather than age?

Their method is sly, but the intent is obvious, and dishonest.

Have you not see the stupid lawsuits brought by fringe environmentalists that greatly drive up the cost of much economic activity for little or no benefit? Have you not seen stupid government regulations that either prohibit various activities or greatly drive up the cost of various economic activities for little or no benefit, or even create actual harm? Surely you can't believe that ALL rules are good rules that must be imposed according to the whims, agendas, or mistakes of bureaucrats and political apointees? Is your thinking that all politicians are evil and untrustworthy, but bureaucrats and political apointees are all sages, angels, sweetness and light? Or is it even simpler: bureaucrats sounds like Democrats and therefore have your unthinking support?

The EPA is part of the government. If you have little faith in the government, why would you want it to be easy for them to act using unpreproducible or other bad science? It is easy for EPA to have a huge negative impact on society and any industry it involves itself in. Surely you don't believe that all of government is filled with bad actors with the one incredible exception of EPA, staffed by only angels and sages instead of political apointees and bureaucrats?

That would impede the politically driven agenda, so it obviously can't be good.

I can see you're trying, but you're not making much progress in getting it right. Is there somebody you know that could coach or tutor you? Maybe all you need to succeed is just a little nudge at the right time or place.

"Muddy the discussion"? You mean like having two opposing viewpoints represented? Having an actual discussion instead of choir practice? Well, that's the problem isn't it? Far too many people are here for choir practice instead of discussion, and a lot of that "music" is pretty crappy given the varous claims about geeks and "superior" intellects. Too few people post correct information about this and related topics.

And your crack about "same worn-out arguments" cuts both ways. Or at least you would realize it if you have any genuine insight. The right answer doesn't change just because you're tired of reading it.

Not many years before that warning the US devoted about 40% of GDP to defense spending. The long term trend of the percentage of GDP devoted to defense spending has been a long decline until today where only aroud 5% of GDP is spent on defense. That wouldn't happen if the "MIC" were all powerful as some people mistakenly claim.

There appears to be a gap between the facts of history and your theories.

There is essentially no chance of that happening. The only prisoners sent to Guantanamo were people known or believed to be members of al Qaida, or its affiliates. That doesn't describe Snowden. Or are you calling Snowden an al Qaida terrorist?

Snowden would end up in ordinary Federal court.

In a post above you made this claim:

What you posted there doesn't seem to support that claim. Would you care to provide an actual example of that happening to an ordinary American (or Briton, or Canadian, or Australian, or New Zealander) with no involvement in terrorism or organized crime? Do you have in mind someone running or office, or what? There doesn't seem to be much to your claim.

You poor soul.

Australia counters Chinese threat
Ascendant China spurs increased military spending in Australia

There is a very large gap between your thinking and reality. Think of the Marines as a "trip wire" protecting Australia.

Most people fail to see that since it doesn't actually happen.

Rather like many do when discussing ..... hating the US?

Well, there is plenty of madness to go around, isn't there? I seem to recall a certain faction of the NZ political establishment thought cozying up to the People's Republic of China was a better "fit" for NZ than allying with the US. I wonder what the people in Hong Kong would think, or the Philippines? Of course, what could possibly go wrong? What madness.

Lawmakers Seek Information On Funding For Climate Change Critics

Its simple to get right. You didn't, and still haven't.