To me, risk equals lives, the lives of our men and women in uniform.

The President's plan lacks balance between cost and benefit.

This is not where the problem is, it is in China and India and Mexico, in other places.

This reveals an astonishing double standard.

Sadly, those who raise legitimate questions are portrayed as 'anti-science.' But there is nothing scientific about discrediting conflicting evidence and asking reasonable questions.

From this point on can we really that we are not going to be activating these regulations until such time as we know the effect it will have on jobs and the economy?

The truth completely contradicts the Presidents' statement and begs the question as to why he and the EPA not only continue to deny the truth of it, but why it has raced to stop this information from disseminating into scientific record.

The message to energy producing communities is clear--if you like your job, community, and your electricity bill, you can't keep them.

This climate plan can pass Congress, and I understand the temptation to ignore our system of checks and balances, pretend the Constitution doesn't exist and implement whatever plans the President would like.

The President may promise that if you like affordable energy, you can keep affordable energy. But like his other promises, we know that that is simply not true.

It's clear, at least in my opinion, that our national security policies have been a disaster and the world becomes more dangerous.

I think the social cost of carbon is a perfect example on point.