If I can't see it, it's not there.

EPA decided to classify GHGs as a pollutant, pursuant to Massachusetts v. EPA, the April 2007 case that required the EPA to determine whether or not they are. This is, of course, the only logical decision. If you don't think that GHGs are a pollutant (defined as "endangering the public health or welfare), then you are a moron and surely voted for Bush. Twice. Well, it would be a giant leap in the right direction for EPA to make this decision, except that the Bush Administration refused to open the email containing the decision. In refusing to do so, it has de facto refused to accept the ruling, and so it doesn't matter. This is really how it works? If I don't read the email, it didn't happen? So now EPA will go back and write another memo that doesn't come to a conclusion as to whether or not GHGs are pollutants for purposes of the Clean Air Act; it will just review some science and say the evidence is incomplete (along the lines of, we're not sure about climate change/global warming, the science is inconclusive). Stevens is gonna be so pissed.

Remember when?

Remember when I used to have time to read the news and then tell you what you should be reading from NYTimes.com? Remember? I don't. Now it's all just library, library, library. On the upside, I've finished three finals. Only two more. Plus a 30 page paper. Oh how fun it is to be me.

Also on the upside of things, I have an interview with EPA on Monday. The job doesn't pay, but I hear that they are great to work for. Imagine me, a government worker (or slave--isn't that what you are if you don't get paid?). It's pretty much the last thing I would have thought of, but I also never thought I'd be a lawyer. Back to the downside, I'll have a 45 minute commute each way, and if you know me, you know that if I can't walk there I'm probably not going. Unless it's shopping or eating, but a job is neither.