Republicans and Democrats agree on one thing

Falstaff · Mar 2, 2004, 06:31 PM

Public lands are under attack from enviornmental policys within the current administration. Now enviornmentalists and true enviornmentalists, (cattle owners and hunters and fisherman) are up in arms at the drilling, harvesting and cutting and developement of public lands in the U.S. Now republicans are getting squishy about the water quality, the pristine wilderness and the refuge lands for game animals. The issue has come full circle now and if the republicans want another term in the white house, some real issues need to be addressed. Imagine the Tongus, wetlands across the U.S. and off shore areas polluted or developed, because that is exactly what is happening. As the price of gasoline, wood and land goes up, the remaining public lands are being eyeballed by domestic and foreign companies for exploitation. I am removing my "Hunters and Fisherman for Bush" bumper sticker if this matter is not resolved by the next term. I dont want to vote for Kerry and his bullshit "I was a vietnam veteran" campaign, but whatever is necessary to preserve what is left of the wilderness that our children should enjoy in the future. I dont want another Walmart moving into my town on land that used to be a park, so the same argument goes for the lands that have remained anchient by any standard, and represent the only real refuge for megafauna that existed before man arrived here thousands of years ago. ...sigh...I for one am speaking out against the exploitation of the enviornment...I wont hug a tree, but I will stand at the fenceline and wave my american flag ask one simple question...."IF YOU DEVELOPE EVERY SINGLE MILE OF AMERICA...WILL THERE BE ANY AMERICA LEFT FOR OUR CHILDREN?"

raid517 · Mar 3, 2004, 01:03 PM

Hmm... I empathise Jeff... I mean if you don't do something fast, you won't be able to go hunting for those dangnabit endangered species any more.

Oh well who knows - maybe Republicans have a heart after all - or at least they realise that its wise to act - if only in their own self interest.

America has some stunning wildernesses - you are right about that. Unfortunately they are sitting on top of some of the richest oil and mineral reserves on Earth. Bush has never struck me as caring a damn about this stuff before - and indeed put forward several plans to develop Alaska in search of oil.

So if he does get in, under the guise of national security (isn't everything?) all of that - and lots more will go.

The problem is that it's not just America we have to worry about - it's everywhere - and if Bush's hand ever was forced - which is doubtful - he would still continue with his desructive policies elewhere.

Still at least it's nice to see that you care about your own environment - if not all that much about anyone elses.

GJ

Mar 2, 2004, 06:31 PM	#1
Falstaff Old Codger Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: USAFA Posts: 19,048 Rep Power: 207	Republicans and Democrats agree on one thing Public lands are under attack from enviornmental policys within the current administration. Now enviornmentalists and true enviornmentalists, (cattle owners and hunters and fisherman) are up in arms at the drilling, harvesting and cutting and developement of public lands in the U.S. Now republicans are getting squishy about the water quality, the pristine wilderness and the refuge lands for game animals. The issue has come full circle now and if the republicans want another term in the white house, some real issues need to be addressed. Imagine the Tongus, wetlands across the U.S. and off shore areas polluted or developed, because that is exactly what is happening. As the price of gasoline, wood and land goes up, the remaining public lands are being eyeballed by domestic and foreign companies for exploitation. I am removing my "Hunters and Fisherman for Bush" bumper sticker if this matter is not resolved by the next term. I dont want to vote for Kerry and his bullshit "I was a vietnam veteran" campaign, but whatever is necessary to preserve what is left of the wilderness that our children should enjoy in the future. I dont want another Walmart moving into my town on land that used to be a park, so the same argument goes for the lands that have remained anchient by any standard, and represent the only real refuge for megafauna that existed before man arrived here thousands of years ago. ...sigh...I for one am speaking out against the exploitation of the enviornment...I wont hug a tree, but I will stand at the fenceline and wave my american flag ask one simple question...."IF YOU DEVELOPE EVERY SINGLE MILE OF AMERICA...WILL THERE BE ANY AMERICA LEFT FOR OUR CHILDREN?" __________________ "Inspiration is always a surprising visitor."

Mar 3, 2004, 01:03 PM	#2
raid517 DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,518 Rep Power: 0	Hmm... I empathise Jeff... I mean if you don't do something fast, you won't be able to go hunting for those dangnabit endangered species any more. Oh well who knows - maybe Republicans have a heart after all - or at least they realise that its wise to act - if only in their own self interest. America has some stunning wildernesses - you are right about that. Unfortunately they are sitting on top of some of the richest oil and mineral reserves on Earth. Bush has never struck me as caring a damn about this stuff before - and indeed put forward several plans to develop Alaska in search of oil. So if he does get in, under the guise of national security (isn't everything?) all of that - and lots more will go. The problem is that it's not just America we have to worry about - it's everywhere - and if Bush's hand ever was forced - which is doubtful - he would still continue with his desructive policies elewhere. Still at least it's nice to see that you care about your own environment - if not all that much about anyone elses. GJ Last edited by raid517; Mar 3, 2004 at 01:21 PM.