ryanh

[FBI]

just curious, in your hillary thread you stated that bush is trashing the environment. i would like to know how he is doing this? what could he do to improve? maybe what would hillary do?

 

[RyanH]

Bush is quite simply in bed with the big polluters. For instance, Congress has required for years that polluting companies contribute money to a SUPERFUND which then allocates funds to clean-up their environmental messes. Well, Bush chose not to sustain that regulation and instead decided to push the clean-up costs to us, the taxpayers (for environmental messes we had no role in creating).

Second, Bush decided just last week, that our nation's costal waters are beyond the reach of federal conservation law which will, in turn, allow military activity, commerical fishing, oil pipelines and ocean dumping in our nation's precious coastal waters.

Of course, there is the repeal of many Clinton regulations such as those precluding offroad activities in our nation's national parks. Moreover, the insistent on damaging wildlife in the artic refuge is his supreme effort in attacking the environment, along with his rejection of the Kyoto treaty which would have reduced emissions.

the list goes on. Bush's environmental record is deplorable and the Democrats will have a field day with it; the environment is no longer viewed as a "liberal extremist" issue.

Bush and his Supreme Court want to restrain federal intervention in the environment even though commerce and our way of life is severely affected by it.

 

[Code]

Sounds like a Hanah-Barbarra cartoon, The SuperFunds!!

 

[AAP]

Well thank god that after this term, we will never be subjected to another Bush in presidency EVER again.

 

[Sushi X]

unless his daughter decides to run.

 

[VicTusDeuS]

Bush is quite simply in bed with the big polluters. For instance, Congress has required for years that polluting companies contribute money to a SUPERFUND which then allocates funds to clean-up their environmental messes. Well, Bush chose not to sustain that regulation and instead decided to push the clean-up costs to us, the taxpayers (for environmental messes we had no role in creating).

Either way the tax payers pay whether it is from paying directly, or as the result of high prices for goods from the companies that are forced to pay.

 

[mekannik]

RyanH
Moreover, the insistent on damaging wildlife in the artic refuge is his supreme effort in attacking the environment,

Question - Would you rather we tamper with a small percentage of the total square mileage of the arctic refuge in hopes of gaining oil independence? Or rather continue to be bent over a saw horse by the U.A.E. and their cohorts - who will take any military action in their region as another excuse to raise prices and extort more taxpayer money (not tax dollars - but taxpayer income)?

And no - I'm not considering the alternative fuel source(s) argument for the simple fact that the U.S. economy is based (unfortunately) on the oil/gas consuming vehicle.


P.S. - arctic. Unless you were talking about museums and government funded art programs.

 

[dballer]

Bush is quite simply in bed with the big polluters.

prove it.

 

[danielson]

prove it.

he did let industry self regulate emmisions in texas didnt he?

and he got money from exxon as well didnt he? one of the 'dirtier' oil companies if i remember. people got pissed off with them over here but i forgot why