So, republicans (Bush) dont care about the environment?

[shade]

Funny coincidence that very recently some people like nocturnal were saying that bush and republicans dont give a shit about the environment. Well, clicky here:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,87362,00.html

[Nocturnal]

I would much rather bush leave the damn tree's alone and force our military bases to adhere to the same criteria the public sector has to follow.

But then again, why would Bush care if Perclorate from local military bases winds up in Californa lettuce, they are democrats who gives a crap right?

[shade]

Give an example of that actually hapenning please.

And you just said "I would rather have forrest fires kill millions of acres of our nature preserves."

[shade]

Shit, if thats how much you care about our forest preserves why are you scared to have a couple acres - out of millions - be used to pump oil so we dont "have to go to war" for oil, because after all, Iraq was just for the oil.

[Nocturnal]

well actually I was for drilling in Alaska.. but here ya go


perclorate (http://www.nrdc.org/bushrecord/2003_04.asp#1328)

and more

endangered species (http://www.nrdc.org/bushrecord/2003_04.asp#1316)

toxic waste cleanup (http://www.nrdc.org/bushrecord/2003_04.asp#1325)

appointing a pro-timber industry lawyer to protect forests (http://www.nrdc.org/bushrecord/2003_04.asp#1312)

tons more....

[BigMattTheHobo]

bush managed to find something enviroment related that can make big businesses more money.

[shade]

Oh my god matt. If you are going to spew bullshit please go to the joke section or something. The big kids (nocturnal and I) are talking here.

[shade]

President Bush's new budget request for a $150 million increase will do little to address the Supefund's fiscal crisis. In fact, the program is expected to run out of money sometime next year.
Gee. That looks like a previous administration did not set up the program responsibly. This whole specific article (not the other ones in the link) can be placed squarely on the shoulders of Clinton or Bush Sr. I am not familiar enough to know which administration created this agency, but Bush Jr. didnt. Probably just another clinton time bomb. And bush is doing what he can to fix it in an economy that is quite strapped.

As far as the lawyer being appointed, lawyers are lawyers. You get paid more defending the private sector than the public sector. That doesnt mean he is representing his own personal views, that just means he is good at defending what his job dictates he has to defend. Also, have you seen any new logging in national forests? I mean, other than south dakota, the home state of daschle. Believe it or not, timber companies dont just destroy forests. They replant MORE trees than they cut down. Its not just to help the environment, but it is in anticipation of future business.

[Bergs]

Matt, you are beginning to seem more like your fountaining hero every day.

Clearing fire causing brush will help industry? GREAT. What a terrific piece of legislation. It will help prevent fires and give industry a boast. Great plan Mr. President.

Oh one more thing. By saying that an environmental plan is bad because it helps business is like saying the CCC (during the depression) was bad because it gave people jobs and the whole planting trees deal was just a coverup.

[droogsteve]

I can't say whether or not Bush cares about the environment or not. That link that you provided doesn't help your case. Natural forest fires play a vital role in nature. The reason forest fires are growing out of control is because of an agressive fire prevention and supression policy. By not allowing natural fires to clear the forests, massive amounts of dry underbrush is created. Instead of relatively small fires that clear out brush and create soil nutrients, fires grow out of control and destroy old growth forest. Trees that have survived hundreds of years of natural fires are destroyed because of this policy. The law Bush supports is not meant to save the environment. It's meant to protect property. People think all fires are bad. After all, a forest fire killed Bambi's mother, didn't it? In reality they are an important part of natures cycle.

[shade]

Actually I think you are mistaken. This plan involves doing controlled burns. That means that people walk around with miniature flame throwers and burn the brush in a controlled fashion. This then creates the ever so nutritious ash for the other trees to absorb. This then simulates the natural cycle of forest fires, but without harming residents, and still allowing our beautiful forests to flourish.

And this doesnt really have any effect on industry at all. Unless a factory was built randomly in the middle of a nature preserve.... umm...

[BigMattTheHobo]

Originally posted by Bergs
Matt, you are beginning to seem more like your fountaining hero every day.

Clearing fire causing brush will help industry? GREAT. What a terrific piece of legislation. It will help prevent fires and give industry a boast. Great plan Mr. President.

Oh one more thing. By saying that an environmental plan is bad because it helps business is like saying the CCC (during the depression) was bad because it gave people jobs and the whole planting trees deal was just a coverup.

i thought i made it clear he isnt my hero, but my God.

im going to repost a link from Noc, Link (http://www.nrdc.org/bushrecord/wildlife_forests.asp#1235) .


"Bush nominates "timber beast" to oversee national forests
July 10, 2001: In yet another volley in the administration's war on the environment, President Bush has nominated Mark Rey as undersecretary of the Department of Agriculture, a position that would put Rey -- a timber industry champion -- in charge of national forests policy. Rey would oversee national forests and their extraordinarily diverse resources. His nomination continues the administration's practice of putting industry supporters in key regulatory positions."

[BigMattTheHobo]

Originally posted by shade
And this doesnt really have any effect on industry at all. Unless a factory was built randomly in the middle of a nature preserve.... umm...

it will pump more money into big business because you know the government is going to give big contracts to business who Bush might owe favors to.

[Nocturnal]

not saying that the bush plan is bad or good, (havn;t read the full breakdown) but the reason is economic not enviornmental. Controlled burns keeps giant fires from getting out of control and destroying homes

[Delta]

Very true Noct.

I would like to see if anyone here thinks that the forest fires that ravaged Colorado and neihbooring states were caused by too much controlled burning. Its better to keep a more watchfull eye on the forests instead of letting it do its own thing.

[droogsteve]

Originally posted by shade
Actually I think you are mistaken. This plan involves doing controlled burns. That means that people walk around with miniature flame throwers and burn the brush in a controlled fashion. This then creates the ever so nutritious ash for the other trees to absorb. This then simulates the natural cycle of forest fires, but without harming residents, and still allowing our beautiful forests to flourish. No, the plan does NOT involve doing controlled burns. The very first sentence of the article you provided clearly says that the plan is for tree cutting. I don't see anything about a controlled burn. Did you just make that up? I've never seen a chainsaw create nutrition for trees or allow anything to flourish except the logging industry.

[Instigator]

Originally posted by droogsteve
I don't see anything about a controlled burn. Did you just make that up?

That appears to be the situation.

[Instigator]

Originally posted by shade
Oh my god matt. If you are going to spew bullshit please go to the joke section or something. The big kids (nocturnal and I) are talking here.
k, first of all, don't be a dick. second of all, your article has no bearing on whether or not bush cares about the environment; the overwhelming sentiment from his secretary of the interior is that the admin does not..