<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Umbra on politicians and the environment]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by Corey McKrill http://www.grist.org/article/politicians1/ Wed, 15 Mar 2006 06:04:54 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/politicians1/1 Another place to look

A decidedly non-objective, but comprehensive website:
BushGreenwatch.org

]]> Another place to look

A decidedly non-objective, but comprehensive website:
BushGreenwatch.org

]]> Comment #2 by jdhlax http://www.grist.org/article/politicians1/ Wed, 15 Mar 2006 06:28:15 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/politicians1/2 Some Anti-Environmental Acts

How about the "Healthy Forests Initiative" or weakening of water and air quality standards?  This administration has done so many environmentally destructive things in order to support the profits of destructive industries that it's hard to keep track.  Jim Hightower, at the Green Festival in 2004, pointed out that just the environmental regulations this administration has changed for the worse would be the size of a large phone book.

]]> Some Anti-Environmental Acts

How about the "Healthy Forests Initiative" or weakening of water and air quality standards?  This administration has done so many environmentally destructive things in order to support the profits of destructive industries that it's hard to keep track.  Jim Hightower, at the Green Festival in 2004, pointed out that just the environmental regulations this administration has changed for the worse would be the size of a large phone book.

]]> Comment #3 by Tom Turner http://www.grist.org/article/politicians1/ Wed, 15 Mar 2006 06:29:00 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/politicians1/3 Bush

Umbra, dear, you are altogether too polite. It is a matter of fact, not opinion, that this administration is the worst, environmentally speaking, in the history of the republic. Bobby Kennedy wrote a whole book on the subject. So did Carl Pope and Paul Rauber. And a few others. Yes, those people are from NRDC and the Sierra Club, but for corroboration try Republicans for Environmental Protection http://www.repamerica.org/, who don't think much better of the administration than I do. This isn't close. Looking to the EPA for a neutral assessment is akin to asking Ang Lee which is the best movie of the year.

]]> Bush

Umbra, dear, you are altogether too polite. It is a matter of fact, not opinion, that this administration is the worst, environmentally speaking, in the history of the republic. Bobby Kennedy wrote a whole book on the subject. So did Carl Pope and Paul Rauber. And a few others. Yes, those people are from NRDC and the Sierra Club, but for corroboration try Republicans for Environmental Protection http://www.repamerica.org/, who don't think much better of the administration than I do. This isn't close. Looking to the EPA for a neutral assessment is akin to asking Ang Lee which is the best movie of the year.

]]> Comment #4 by Biodiversivist http://www.grist.org/article/politicians1/ Wed, 15 Mar 2006 08:41:08 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/politicians1/4 How about the

gag rule, attempts to drill in the Arctic refuge, and the roadless rule?

]]> How about the

gag rule, attempts to drill in the Arctic refuge, and the roadless rule?

]]> Comment #5 by Icelander http://www.grist.org/article/politicians1/ Wed, 15 Mar 2006 22:00:33 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/politicians1/5 The Best Argument

Here's one that's won me quite a few water cooler debates: If Bush was an environmentalist, he would make the federal regulations a baseline and allow states to have more stringent regulations.

]]> The Best Argument

Here's one that's won me quite a few water cooler debates: If Bush was an environmentalist, he would make the federal regulations a baseline and allow states to have more stringent regulations.

]]> Comment #6 by TreeHuggerBunnyLover http://www.grist.org/article/politicians1/ Wed, 15 Mar 2006 23:52:04 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/politicians1/6 Government

I agree that the EPA webpage is not a good source of information.  EPA is filled with hardworking, hard-core environmentalists at the staff level.  However, EPA is still a Government Agency that gets funding from Congress and must have every move it makes approved by the White House and OMB.  Despite the best efforts of the staff, information gets distorted and the "initiatives" are actually euphemisms for just the opposite.  Clear Skies and Healthy Forests actually give more power to industry to pollute and destroy.  As a Government worker, I agree with Umbra that the environment has not been a top priority of even the recent democrat administrations.  The main difference that I see is that the previous democrat adminstrations did not do very much to further the environmental causes but did not do much harm to the existing environmental regulations either.  Not anymore....

]]> Government

I agree that the EPA webpage is not a good source of information.  EPA is filled with hardworking, hard-core environmentalists at the staff level.  However, EPA is still a Government Agency that gets funding from Congress and must have every move it makes approved by the White House and OMB.  Despite the best efforts of the staff, information gets distorted and the "initiatives" are actually euphemisms for just the opposite.  Clear Skies and Healthy Forests actually give more power to industry to pollute and destroy.  As a Government worker, I agree with Umbra that the environment has not been a top priority of even the recent democrat administrations.  The main difference that I see is that the previous democrat adminstrations did not do very much to further the environmental causes but did not do much harm to the existing environmental regulations either.  Not anymore....

]]> Comment #7 by Backcut http://www.grist.org/article/politicians1/ Thu, 16 Mar 2006 00:32:01 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/politicians1/7 Not defending Bush but....

Despite the dire warnings from "preservationists", our National Forests didn't turn into a 190,000,000 acre clearcut from "Healthy Forests". We also haven't seen rampant old growth liquidation, either. "Chicken Little" was wrong again.

However, Bush hasn't relieved the gridlock, has tried to cut the public out of their opinions and tried a different path towards pillaging Roadless Areas. His attempts to outsource Forest Service jobs has had limited success and he's meeting stiff resistance from many sides on that issue. He also continues to pursue old growth in the Pacific Northwest against formidible and convincing resistance. He's fighting to modify or eliminate things like NEPA and the Endangered Species Act (which ARE still necessary to keep for proper ecosystem management, IMHO).

Bush, Kerry and Gore were all at the extreme ends of the spectrum and I have to say that we're lucky to still be moving towards middle-of-the-road solutions to restoration of our National Forests.

]]> Not defending Bush but....

Despite the dire warnings from "preservationists", our National Forests didn't turn into a 190,000,000 acre clearcut from "Healthy Forests". We also haven't seen rampant old growth liquidation, either. "Chicken Little" was wrong again.

However, Bush hasn't relieved the gridlock, has tried to cut the public out of their opinions and tried a different path towards pillaging Roadless Areas. His attempts to outsource Forest Service jobs has had limited success and he's meeting stiff resistance from many sides on that issue. He also continues to pursue old growth in the Pacific Northwest against formidible and convincing resistance. He's fighting to modify or eliminate things like NEPA and the Endangered Species Act (which ARE still necessary to keep for proper ecosystem management, IMHO).

Bush, Kerry and Gore were all at the extreme ends of the spectrum and I have to say that we're lucky to still be moving towards middle-of-the-road solutions to restoration of our National Forests.

]]>