- September 20, 2004 at 9:04 pm #1862
Hi group. I guess I’m the lurker turned newbie…so howdy. I’ve been reading the other political posts on this board and wanted to add my $.02.
I was looking at Patagonia’s site for a new jacket for trail running this weekend and found they had a voter site (www.patagonia.com/vote). They had some pretty interesting figures, like 80% of Americans wanting stronger environmental protection while 30% of the Sierra Club (I was definitely the 70%) didn’t vote in 2000. I know everyone has their own party affliation but I know this year my vote’s going to whoever wants to do more for nature before there’s nothing left.
Is the environment even an important issue to people this year or is it just getting buried under all the other scandals?
- September 20, 2004 at 9:29 pm #15852
Is the environment even an important issue to people this year or is it just getting buried under all the other scandals?
I think that the environment should be very important, but I agree that it is being put on the backburner due to the military misadventure we are engaged in, in Iraq. The problem with a third party is that it can only take away votes from the main ones. The green party takes them away from Democratic candidates and in 1992 the “reform” party cause GHW Bush to lose the election. If we had coalition governments in the US or two rounds of voting (where you could vote for a less established party in the first round), then I would be more inclined to vote for a party that has a message like the greens.
- September 21, 2004 at 12:35 am #15853
That Patagonia poll is not going to be accurate, seeing that it would be more frequently reaching environmentalist-slanted people to begin with.
I love the environment, but #1, it is not more important than human life, and #2, people who say they will do good for the environment often have horrible ways of going about doing it. I’m for voting for the most educated person on environmental issues.
Let me give you a personal example that happened here on the Kenai Peninsula of Alaska. People here all love the environment; it’s part of what employs us and keeps the communities alive (fishing is one big draw). If the environment isn’t well-kept, we will not have a future. However, many thought that the way to protect the environment was to lock it up. We had an invasion of spruce bark beetles, and it was evident that something had to be done to protect our trees. Someone suggested controlled logging, and “envionmentalists” fearfully fought it. Now, ten years later, all the trees are dead and each summer we pray that the peninsula doesn’t go up like a struck matchstick. Millions of dollars will be funneled into firefighting and beetle-kill excavation, removing rotten, useless trees. The beetles could have been controlled, plus we could have used the wood if preventative action had been taken earlier.
The salmon runs have a similar situation. Some people believe that they should be locked away and left alone, especially after seeing what happened to the Atlantic salmon runs and Pacific runs in Washington and Oregon. However, scientific studies have shown that too many fish isn’t a good thing, either. They researched and found the optimal amount of salmon needed in each river to produce the best returns, and each year Fish and Game officials work hard to meet that escapement. Compromises happen between the commercial fishermen, sport fishermen, and “environmentalists.” Everyone grumbles a bit, but we are all happy when the river swells with salmon in future years.
People go off on tangents sometimes, about “saving” the wolves, or protecting eagles. Currently, both populations are plenty healthy up here in Alaska. When moose and caribou populations are troubled by excessive predator populations, it is healthy for the environment if a season is established for wolf hunting, if it’s done properly.
We have this lady down in Homer who is exalted and praised by “environmentalists” because she feeds eagles all winter. She alone has raised the eagle population on the Peninsula by over 200 eagles, and now we have an overpopulation. Each eagle on average consumes one waterfowl bird a day. Then scientists come up and study this perplexing problem we are having with failed loon broods. Just ask me; we haven’t had a successful nest on our lake in at least ten years. The eagles eat them. Where are the environmentalists on this issue? They vote to let the lady keep feeding the eagles. Don’t they care about loons? I just wish they would educate themselves instead of going by what feels good to them.
Many people think that the way to protect the environment is to lock it up. I say there is a responsible way to treat it. I think it was created to be used, and we are given an order to take good care of it. Be careful when you vote solely on environmental issues that you educate yourself as best as you can and don’t blindly follow broad generalizations by uninformed politicians.
- September 21, 2004 at 1:56 am #15854puffintoad wrote:I love the environment, but #1, it is not more important than human life…
While I understand the rest of your post and agree with the point, let’s understand one thing. The environment impacts human life and human health. How many people die and suffer diseases every year because of pollution? I saw some numbers on this recently and they were astounding. I wish I could remember the numbers or where I saw them.
- September 21, 2004 at 7:00 am #15855
Yes, and I absolutely agree with you, Ryan. It doesn’t do us any good to trash and pollute our planet. I think it’s scary, the things we put into our bodies and the things we inhale.
How about something like ANWR? If properly done, we could produce our own oil reserve with minimal effect on the environment. I admit, I am an oil user. I think everyone here is. We fight to protect places like the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge from a development the relative size of a postage stamp on a football field, and choose instead to support oil imports from shady countries with less-than-pristine regulations regarding their production.
That is a completely different can of worms, I guess. I raise these examples to explain the point that I was making, that people should research their stances when arguing environmental protection to make sure they are finding the best possible solution for both humans and the planet.
- September 21, 2004 at 1:00 pm #15856
Yes, I agree people should do vast research before saying something is bad for the environment. That said, some ventures into nature are better left undone.
Also, it’s important to look at things other than just what we are doing with our natural areas. In the past few years, federal restrictions on pollution controls in newly built or expanded power plants have been loosened, expected to result in millions of tons of mercury pollution every year that could be avoided with current technology. What’s the result? The local power company is building a new coal burning power plant south of Milwaukee that they expect to help them increase profits by 50%. Instead of building a natural gas plant or a coal burning plant with state of the art pollution controls that would result in lower profits but would be better for the local environment, the Great Lakes environment, and everyone from here to the Atlantic Ocean, they decided on higher profits. While they could have still built a coal burning plant under regulations in place 3 years ago, they would have been required to include more pollution controls than they currently plan to implement.
There are other stories out there like this. One I can remember reading but I can’t remember the details of was a promise by Bush to clean up America’s beaches. Since that promise, he has done nothing to that effect and more beaches every year are closed due to pollution.
While I think Bush has a poor environmental track record, I know nothing of the alternative. I have been able to find little to nothing about what Kerry has done or intends to do with respect to the environment. Instead, all I hear about is what he did or didn’t do 30+ years ago. Once again, I’m back to thinking about how great it would be if we could focus on the issues instead of a past that makes little to no difference in how these guys would run the country. That goes for both sides and their constant rehashing of Vietnam.
- September 21, 2004 at 1:18 pm #15857
While I think Bush has a poor environmental track record, I know nothing of the alternative.
you’ve described in that one sentence the problem with this election – it’s a referendum on Bush. The democrats have dropped the ball in trying to disseminate the message of their platform.
- September 21, 2004 at 1:56 pm #15858
Many people state that “While I think Bush has a poor environmental track record,” but can any one tell me the actual laws that he wrote and passed that changed any of the US polocies? I’ll bet that you cannot.
P.S. No spin I want actual bill numbers ie HR….. or whatever the nomenclature.
- September 21, 2004 at 3:49 pm #15859
yeah, just last month he signed executive order 2504 authorizing the logging companies to use previously protected roads to get into national forests more easily and clear more trees. I think you’re missing the point – it’s not what he has signed or passed, it’s what he could have done that he did not do.
- September 21, 2004 at 4:06 pm #15860
That is not listed under the documents at the White House website – the official list of Exectutive Orders. Could you please clarify where you found that?
- September 21, 2004 at 4:33 pm #15861
How about his “Healthy Forests” Initiative? Even more than what he has done, how about what he has promised to do and has not done, such as his promise to clean up America’s beaches? How about what what has been given to him and he has not signed, such as millions of dollars for Great Lakes restoration?
- September 21, 2004 at 4:57 pm #15862
Has any one here written an e-mail to the President other than me? I have written him concerning the health care issue that is facing us now and most troubling in the future.
One question if the liberal city of Milwaukee keeps dumping untreated waste into Our Great Lake no amount of money will clean it up. So why waste the money – those millions of dollars would act as a bandaide when a tourniquet is needed. Billions of gallons of poop and condoms being dumped into the Lake is more an than anything not done by the President. Maybe the Siera Cub lawyer that keeps dumping the poop into Lake Michigan should be thrown in jail – again another case of liberals forging documents.
- September 21, 2004 at 6:43 pm #15863Ed1 wrote:Has any one here written an e-mail to the President other than me?
Yes. I have in fact written letters or e-mails to every President/President’s office since Reagan. Considering the fact that Carter was out of office shortly before my 4th birthday, I hope it’s acceptable that I didn’t write a letter to him.Ed1 wrote:One question if the liberal city of Milwaukee keeps dumping untreated waste into Our Great Lake no amount of money will clean it up. So why waste the money – those millions of dollars would act as a bandaide when a tourniquet is needed. Billions of gallons of poop and condoms being dumped into the Lake is more an than anything not done by the President.
Here we go again blaming the Liberals on everything that is wrong. Let’s see, where to start? Well, first, I hope you’re not so self-centered to realize that “Great Lakes” restoration encompasses much more than just a small portion of the shoreline of one of the lakes. Remember, there are 5 Great Lakes. Milwaukee only takes up a small percentage of the shoreline of one of those 5. Also remember, there is much more to restoration than simply cleaning up polluted water. What about restoring shorelines eroded by human activity or protecting those shorelines before they are eroded? The fact is one of our nation’s greatest natural resources needs a lot of help in many forms. Yes, locals have to do their part in cleaning things up but that wasn’t Bush’s reasoning for not giving money for restoration. His reasoning was that more research (with no explanation of what “more research” would encompass) was needed on what’s happening in the lakes, that the decades worth of research suggesting we are quickly running out of time apparently wasn’t enough. The fact is we are running out of time. Our shorelines are eroding beyond repair in some areas. Pollution from sources such as power plants, cargo ships, pleasure boats, industrial waste, and yes municipal dumpings of untreated wastewater (which accounts for a miniscule percentage of the total pollution even in the Milwaukee area but should still be fixed ASAP) is killing the ecosystem. Something has to be done before one of our greatest resources is lost forever. This is not a time for politics and it’s not a time for the local/federal debate. Local municipalities have to do their part to clean up, Milwaukee should be forced into a solution for their problem, but the federal government needs to step in, just as it did to restore the Everglades, to restore one of our country’s greatest natural resources before it is lost forever.Ed1 wrote:Maybe the Siera Cub lawyer that keeps dumping the poop into Lake Michigan should be thrown in jail
I seriously hope you’re not actually trying to blame the Sierra Club on Milwaukee’s failures.Ed1 wrote:again another case of liberals forging documents.
Again, trying to look at things in black and white. Have you ever considered the possibility that both sides are right sometimes and wrong sometimes? Have you ever considered the possibility that some issues, such as Great Lakes restoration, are important enough and clear enough that they should (and have for over two decades until Bush) transcend politics?
I find it interesting how conservatives are holding on to the CBS documents so tightly. I didn’t see the liberals holding on to the lies from SBVT like this. Can’t we get beyond the lies from both sides about events of the past and focus on what matters?
- September 21, 2004 at 7:14 pm #15864
First of all – I am glad that you write every President and of course you are excused for not writting to Carter.
I agree about the Lakes they are so very important. I camp in the North woods yearly and watch as the lakes up there literally die. That bothers me tremendously – the lakes that are now dead, died from damage from more than the past three years, it has been decades (includes the President Clinton years).
As for the Siera Club – it is their top lawyer that is the president/CEO of MMSD – the poop dumping specialists. Why did the Siera club not protest the multi-billion gallon dumping? They protest companies that pollute – even if those companies make attempts to correct problems. But no protest ever came at MMSD – explain this please. Also, if you missed it in the news the MMSD people forged testing documents related to all of the dumpings this past year – to make them seem “not so dirty”.
So I guess we should ignore forged documents and outright slander? If a top lawyer for a conservative group ran MMSD it would be National news and the Siera Club would have held candle light vigils begging for that lawyer to be thrown in jail for creating false testing documents. But now that the shoe is on the other foot – conservatives are being asked to ignore the forgeries and slanderous lies. Also the CBS documents are recent forgeries and not from 30 years ago – the slanderous story based on forged documents occured very recently. I swear that if the President Bush camp created fake documents on Senator Kerry the liberals would be asking for an impeachment. Do not deny that.
I do agree that both sides are right and both sides are wrong. Right now I think that both sides are more wrong than right.
Consider this – one of the worst cities in terms of economic recovery is Milwaukee – Democrats have controlled the City for decades. Democrats keep taxing the rich (because they have money) and voila jobs and people are fleeing the city. Wisconsin is one of the most heavily taxed states and lags the National average in jobs coming back and other aspects of economic recovery. Wisconsin is controlled by a Democrat Govenor.
This cannot be the only issue but it is part of it.
BTW have you noticed Senator Kerry’s new position on Sadam? In January 2004 Senator Kerry told Senator Dean that any one who says Sadam should not be taken out of power and the war was wrong was not fit to lead this Country. Yesterday Senator Kerry stated that if he was in power Sadam would not have been taken into captivity. Does this mean that by his own words he is not fit to lead? Or should Senator Dean challenge Senator Kerry again for the Demcratic Nomination?
- September 21, 2004 at 9:21 pm #15865Ed 1 wrote:I agree about the Lakes they are so very important. I camp in the North woods yearly and watch as the lakes up there literally die. That bothers me tremendously – the lakes that are now dead, died from damage from more than the past three years, it has been decades (includes the President Clinton years).
The lakes are struggling from decades and even centuries of lack of care. Over the past few decades, some great strides have been made in restoring the areas most in danger of falling beyond capability of being restored and preserving the rest. During that time, Bush was the first President, Republican or Democrat, to put a halt to the federal support of these efforts. This isn’t about politics, it’s about Bush as an individual showing a lack of concern for a fading resource that all other recent Presidents, including his father and Reagan, thought was worth funding restoration efforts.Ed1 wrote:Why did the Siera club not protest the multi-billion gallon dumping? They protest companies that pollute – even if those companies make attempts to correct problems. But no protest ever came at MMSD – explain this please.
Maybe you missed it but I saw some very strong words from the Sierra Club against MMSD.Ed1 wrote:Also, if you missed it in the news the MMSD people forged testing documents related to all of the dumpings this past year – to make them seem “not so dirty”.
And everyone involved was a liberal, right?Ed1 wrote:Also the CBS documents are recent forgeries and not from 30 years ago – the slanderous story based on forged documents occured very recently.
And the SBVT lies were recent lies and not from 30 years ago. The press dropped that story as soon as it was shown to be a lie. The CBS story will seemingly never end, though.Ed1 wrote:I swear that if the President Bush camp created fake documents on Senator Kerry the liberals would be asking for an impeachment. Do not deny that.
If we want to talk about asking for impeachment, let’s talk about the Republicans looking to impeach Clinton for having an affair but no talks at all of impeaching Reagan for breaking U.S. and international laws. By the way, there is more evidence that the Bush camp was involved with SBVT than there is that the Kerry camp was involved with the CBS story.Ed1 wrote:I do agree that both sides are right and both sides are wrong. Right now I think that both sides are more wrong than right.
No question there.Ed1 wrote:Consider this – one of the worst cities in terms of economic recovery is Milwaukee – Democrats have controlled the City for decades. Democrats keep taxing the rich (because they have money) and voila jobs and people are fleeing the city. Wisconsin is one of the most heavily taxed states and lags the National average in jobs coming back and other aspects of economic recovery. Wisconsin is controlled by a Democrat Govenor.
Wisconsin was one of the most heavily taxed states before Doyle took office. Who was in control before Doyle? Oh yeah, for over a decade it was a Republican who happens to be serving in Bush’s Cabinet now. If you want to look for people to fault for Wisconsin’s tax burden, start with none other than Tommy Thompson. While I believe Doyle has more than his share of faults, don’t blame him for Wisconsin’s tax burden when that was established long before he had any control over it.Ed1 wrote:BTW have you noticed Senator Kerry’s new position on Sadam? In January 2004 Senator Kerry told Senator Dean that any one who says Sadam should not be taken out of power and the war was wrong was not fit to lead this Country. Yesterday Senator Kerry stated that if he was in power Sadam would not have been taken into captivity. Does this mean that by his own words he is not fit to lead? Or should Senator Dean challenge Senator Kerry again for the Demcratic Nomination?
By the way, have you noticed how the story on Saddam has changed? Back in January, Bush “knew” Saddam had stockpiles of WMDs. Now, we know he didn’t have stockpiles or the ability to make stockpiles. We know he had the intent, though. I wonder how many others have the intent.
- September 22, 2004 at 12:39 pm #15866
Do you ever listen to WTMJ radio – they open sometimes with a audio piece of Senator Kerry speaking where he in his own words and voice states that Sadam has had WMD, wants WMD and uses WMD, he in his own words and voice states that we (America) have been destroying those weapons for seven years etc… This is not some one else speaking it is Senator Kerry’s recorded voice.
At any time did I ever say that all the MMSD people are liberals? No I did not.
I have a question for you – if Senator Kerry says he will help to fix the Great Lakes as well as other lakes – will he change his mind in a month or two like he does with everything else that he has made a statement about?
As for the Siera Club I went to their website and there was nothing posted on it about MMSD – I e-mailed them asking about MMSD and never received a response. Actually I e-mailed them a number of times to each listed place to contact asking for it to be forwarded to the appropriate person – no response. I’ll bet if I asked for an anti-Bush bumper sticker I would have gotten 1,000 in the mail the next day. Again – a lack of true environmental responsability. But I’ll e-mail them again asking to see their official statement about MMSD – bet I receive no info.
The idea to impeach President Clinton was not for an affair it was for lying to a Grand Jury – something that would have put you or I into Federal prison for up to eight years. I did not agree with the impeachment – that should in my opinion be saved for grievous actions.
I have an idea here – lets not follow the examples of the two that want to be our leaders and start discussing (without fault or blame) what the serious issues are and how we think they should be handled. Then we can write whomever wins and bring our ideas (from all political sides of the fence) to him.
- September 22, 2004 at 6:00 pm #15867
As for the Siera Club I went to their website and there was nothing posted on it about MMSD – I e-mailed them asking about MMSD and never received a response. Actually I e-mailed them a number of times to each listed place to contact asking for it to be forwarded to the appropriate person – no response.
and I’m sure that your diplomatic and tactful tone made them want to respond at once to your requests.
- September 22, 2004 at 6:12 pm #15868
Actually I was very polite the first couple of times I e-mailed them and if they were in the right why would they not throw it in my face had I been impolite or rude?
Also, I have asked twice for you to give me the info for where you found EO 2504. As I stated it is not listed with all of the other EOs on the White House website. I think that your reference might be wrong – please double check it and get it to me. I will not accept your response on blind faith if it is in print I’ll believe it – if not then its just more forged/bogus/slanderous crap against President Bush.
- September 22, 2004 at 6:38 pm #15869
Just been to the Senator Kerry website and examined “his” plans for the Great Lakes – the billions of dollars that it will cost are not mentioned nor where he will get the money from. If we could afford his ideas I would be all for them. But then you keep these costs in mind and read his section on the economy where he states he’ll cut taxes for 90% of Americans, create tax cuts for businesses that create new jobs etc… Then read his plans on education and healthcare etc … All of these add up to trillions of dollars in increased costs yet cut taxes overall and a claim that he will shrink the deficit. How can you earn less money, spend much much more and not have a deficit? His ideas look good but the numbers do not add up – I wish they would though.
- September 22, 2004 at 6:57 pm #15870
Thought this might interest some of you. It is an exact transcript.
NBC’S TIM RUSSERT: “You said this about Howard Dean, and this is, I think, at the core of your candidacy against Howard Dean. ‘…those who believe we are not safer with [Saddam Hussein’s] capture don’t have the judgment to be President – or the credibility to be elected President.’ As we speak this Sunday morning, Senator, do you believe that Howard Dean does not have the judgment to be president or the credibility to be elected president?” SEN. KERRY: “I think the judgment of a nominee who doesn’t understand that having Saddam Hussein captured will make it extraordinarily difficult to be able to beat an incumbent wartime president who captured Saddam Hussein. And let me tell you why, Tim. Saddam Hussein took us to war once before. In that war, young Americans were killed. He went to war in order to take over the oil fields. It wasn’t just an invasion of Kuwait. He was heading for the oil fields of Saudi Arabia. And that would have had a profound effect on the security of the United States. This is a man who has used weapons of mass destruction, unlike other people on this Earth today, not only against other people but against his own people. This is a man who tried to assassinate a former president of the United States, a man who lobbed 36 missiles into Israel in order to destabilize the Middle East, a man who is so capable of miscalculation that he even brought this war on himself. This is a man who, if he was left uncaptured, would have continued to be able to organize the Ba’athists. He would have continued to terrorize the people, just in their minds, because of 30 years of terror in Iraq.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 1/11/04)
Now Senator Kerry states that he would not have gone after Saddam had he been in power. This bothers me.
- September 22, 2004 at 8:41 pm #15871
Senator Kerry states that he would not have gone after Saddam had he been in power
There, now that the sentence is complete, it makes sense.
Here is a description of what is wrong with the bush administration’s “healthy” forests initiative (HFI):
The initiative is based on the false assumption that landscape-wide logging will decrease forest fires. This premise is contradicted by the general scientific consensus, which has found that logging can increase fire risk. This disconnect between what the administration says and what science says about logging and fire reveals the administration’s true goal which is to use the forest fire issue to cut the public out of the public lands management decision making process and to give logging companies virtually free access to National Forests. The HFI, if fully enacted, would:
1. Limit environmental analysis and limit public participation by (a) excluding environmental analysis for any site-specific project the Forest Service and BLM claim will reduce hazardous fuels, including post-fire salvage projects; and by (b) limiting public participation by allowing “hazardous fuels reduction projects” to be categorically excluded and suspends citizen’s rights to appeal projects.
2. Accelerate aggressive “thinning” across millions of acres of backcountry forests miles away from communities at risk to forest fires.
3. Uses ‘Goods for services’ as the Funding Mechanism by (a) allowing the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management to give away trees to logging companies as payment for any management activity, including logging on public lands; and (b) creating a powerful new incentive to log large fire-resistant trees, old growth, and other commercially valuable forests.
HFI is what I was referring to by EO2504, part of another page I had copied was on the page I was using to cut&paste real quick.
- September 23, 2004 at 12:34 pm #15872
I totally agree with you on the erroneous point about landscape wide logging. That increases fire hazzard by leaving a huge amount of floor debris wich is a major cause of fires. Thinning a forest is the best protection against forest fires I’ve seen numerous PBS documentries regarding this.
I would like to know where you got your info – I am going to go to the White House website and look up the HFI.
- September 23, 2004 at 2:25 pm #15873
instead of going to the white house, why don’t you do a google search and get an independent view? That’s what I did and I’m sorry I don’t have the link for the independent information I got.
- September 23, 2004 at 4:53 pm #15874
You’ve got to be a naive simpleton if you think that President, especially the current one (who wasn’t even elected), or someone important on his staff even looks at your letters let alone gives a crap how you think or feel unless you are a major campaign donor. Presidential policies almost always are for the benefit of his major supporters and if there are any benefits to you then you can be sure that it was either an unintentional side-effect or a patronizing token and at the very least doesn’t come at a real cost to any of his major contributors. You may as well be sending your letters to the editor of the local paper. Don’t be stupid.
- September 23, 2004 at 6:13 pm #15875
The White House web site lists the actual written documents – not a viewpoint about them. Maybe you should take a look as well as I should look elsewhere to get more of the story. But the listings at the White House website (not the RNC website) have the actual documents. Cannot get much better than the actual document.
- September 23, 2004 at 6:39 pm #15876
This is my third request – can we give this a try?
So can we all start over and respond to a post I had about discussing each issue we see as important and come up with ideas to correct those issues? I would like to write to whomever wins the White House in November with those issues and ideas to solve them. If we an obviously spirited group can work together it could be the start of the Runner’s Party. We would be better off with more than two party’s in this Country like when our Founding Fathers founded it.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.