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