America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 22 years ago by unklebill. 12 replies replies.
Bush on the Environment: The early days
unklebill Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 12-29-1999
Posts: 729
What are your views of the Bush administrations environmental policy actions and stances to date?
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
you must be joking. what enviornmental policies?
tailgater Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
It's too much too soon. I realize that there are strong conservative arguments for each individual act, but I am not happy at all with the agregate effect. It's as though he became the "anti-Gore". Just because I don't want to hug a tree doesn't mean I need to cut it down! He needs to realize that caring for our children doesn't stop at the schools. An environmental middle ground must be pursued.
BrentM01 Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 05-30-2000
Posts: 343
Yeah, this is the guy who wanted to recind Clintons law protecting the Alaskan preserve. According to the experts (who should know), there is only enough oil in Alaska to keep the U.S. heated for about 3 years....no more. I personally feel it would be a mistake. Leave Alaska alone for %$&#@* sake, its beautiful just the way it is....Brent
jjohnson28 Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 09-12-2000
Posts: 7,914
Hi Bill,I initially perceived this post as "bait" wich is pretty much what it is.No?.After all you offer no opinions of your own,you only solicit others.But what the hell I'm bored,so here goes.If you are refering to 1)His decision not to buckle under to the U.N.(United Ninnies)and the Kyoto agreement.I'm all for it,couldn't be happier as a matter of fact.The farther we distance ourselves from this Global Government Entity the better.Global warming is a farce.These are the same scientist that can barely predict yesterdays weather let alone years into the future.2)Reversal of Klintons resriction of drilling in AK.wildernest.For one this shouldn't even be a Federal issue in the first place,it's a state matter,or at least should be.The fact is we should be exploring in a responsible manner.We should also be looking at alternatives,but you didn't see much of that either the last 8 yrs.All we got was more ucconstitutional Federal mandates.3)Reversal of Klintons roadless initiative.This was one of King Klintons most blatent abuses of executive order mandates and should be overturned.This is public land for use by the public.I don't care how they spun it,it was a federal land grab.I'm sure there is more but since you gave me nothing to go by this will have to do for now.I'm all for responsible land use policies,but not when it comes to locking the public out of our own lands.Just to clarify I'm for multiple use policies that do not discriminate against one group of people for another.Side Note:Al Gore is the biggest enviromental hipocrit that ever lived.
tailgater Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Yeah, what he said...
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
tailgater. how eloquent. gore? if he is or was so interested in doing something for the good of all, where is he? i think he is a facade. incidentally, misspelling someone's name to make a point, doesn't, unless of course you misspell bush as shrubet. a shrub comes in a five gallon pot. a shrubet comes in a two gallon starter pot. these scientests that recognize global warming are not unlike those scientests that got us from here to the moon and mars, so they must know something, perhaps calculus. and last but not least, "Global Government Entity", dont you recognize an oligarchy, when you see it.
tailgater Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Rick, first of all, who are you talking to? Please re-address your post. And second, what are you talking about? Was it late when you wrote that? I really don't follow your thought pattern, which is usually quite clear by the way.
unklebill Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 12-29-1999
Posts: 729
Yes, I was partially baiting, but I know how I feel about the topic and I wanted to hear some intelligent defense of Drilling in National parks and reversing his promise to lower Carbon Dioxide emmistions, other than the old party line of 'govt should keep their hands off of business 'cause they will self-regulate'. In my view the Artic Wildlife refuge, was not set up as 'public' land so that it can be used by corporations for private use. It was set up as a Wildlife refuge, and a National Monument to be preserved as a one-of-a-kind national park.....Like Yellowstone only farther and colder. These public lands should be used for the public, not by the corporations with the deepest pockets. I do not see how that serves the public interest, only corporate interest. Oil drilling and transport is not a 'clean & tidy' business that does not disturb wildlife. I remember puget sound, and the recent Galapagos island spills. Incidentally, I don't think that the fact that Bush comes from an oil family is insignificant in his decision. Logging in national forests? That benefits one company, not the national (public) interests. Relaxing regulations on Arsenic in drinking water.... insane. Reversing his stance on reducing Carbon Dioxide emmissions: what a hypocrite, but this should be expected since petroleum is the number one producer of CO2.

Just my views.

I'll have more later.

Bill
tailgater Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
I think you should investigate just when the Clinton Administration activated the arsenic in drinking water regulations. I am quite sure you will discover that it was in the last week of his tenure. It took him 8 years to do it. Could it be that the regulations are either unnesessary or too prohibitive to the vast majority of water companies throughout the country? Could it possibly be true that trace amounts of arsenic are not as lethal as one would suspect? Could Bubba have passed the law at such a date in order to not deal with the ramifications? Nah, Clinton would never set up Bush like that...
Charlie Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 06-16-2002
Posts: 39,751
Joe, it would seem that the Democrats(would they ever stoop this low) are once again barking wolf when they are well aware of just when this was signed by Billie C! As usual "spin" politics at the highest degree. Charlie
gdurfor Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2001
Posts: 288
Bill , you sound like a Bush hater. I think that's what the last administration called anyone who disagreed with them. "Haters" . I guess you get your
news/views from Dan (Democratic fund raiser) Rather.
The Alaskan refuge is 19 million arces we're only
drilling in 1.5 million. With the new tech drilling is like a spider web. It isn't going to look like the old
pictures of oil fields.
Personnally I'd rather be self-reliant then count on any foreign country for our energy needs.
unklebill Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 12-29-1999
Posts: 729
1.5 million acres sounds like allot to me.....
Users browsing this topic
Guest