or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why does George W

post #1 of 9
Thread Starter 
and his band of Republican compadres WANT us to ingest arsenic? Aside from the fact that they're all (well, except for 19 of them in the House, based on yesterday's vote) in the pocket of big industry, don't they realize that they should be tossed out based on these votes alone?
I'm just curious if any of the Republicans out there can offer any sort of defense for this. Even fellow R.s (like CT's Shays) admit that Bush's refusal to enforce sensible limits is not based on good science. C'mon guys, let's hear about Dubbya's 'thought' process.
post #2 of 9
The present limits on arsenic in the water supply have been in place for decades. ( and you're still alive) clinton went ahead and paid off his tree-hugger buddies in the waning days of his sick administration just to make trouble for the new administration. clinton's new rules weren't scheduled to go into effect for 3 yrs anyway. What's wrong with finding out what some really sensible and needed limits would be without bankrupting every small town and municipality by imposing standards on water that would constitute retooling the present infrastructure of the water depts? Don't believe the all the doom and gloom scare tactics of the left. Use your head.<FONT size="1">

[This message has been edited by Bridgeman (edited July 29, 2001).]</FONT>
post #3 of 9
Well philth, your question forces one to assume that Dubbya's decisions really do involve a thoguht process, a conclusion we are certainly not yet ready to make. What I am wondering is why all these polls show Bush has something like a 55% favor rating every week. Nearly everyone I talk to or hear talking about politics dislikes Bush, even alot of conservatives. Where the hell do they take these polls, the Republican Natl. Convention??
post #4 of 9
Thread Starter 
"bankrupting every small town and municipality," but you talk about discussing this without using "gloom and doom" scare tactics.
What's that about the left? Are those nineteen Republican scare-mongers doing the same thing?
post #5 of 9
This all silliness. You want to see things change suddenly?! In direction the people want?

Limit all campain contributions - personally or corporate to something very small $100 or less. Sick the NSA on making sure there are not fraudulent mutliple contributions from the same source.

Every candidate ends up with the same advertising resources. Things would change.<FONT size="1">

[This message has been edited by Todd Murchison (edited July 29, 2001).]</FONT>
post #6 of 9
Now I know there was a good reason why I don't like the taste of coffee (the aroma is a different story)!


Dante non ha mai immaginato questo cerchio dell'inferno!
post #7 of 9
Didn't he make his environmental commissioner from New Jersey!?! Nuff said there! And his educational director is I think from Texas where its "less $ for schools, but funny - suddenly we need to build more prisions".
post #8 of 9
Correct you are, Todd. Christine Todd Whitman (or is it Whitless?) is the EPA guru, having left the gov's mansion of Drumthwacket to take the helm. Whitman never did too well in state with the Sierra Club or whomever rated her on environmental policies and they didn't like the nomination. I think a good number of folks saw this as a way of being open to a more moderate republican (e.g., Whitman is pro-choice) but ghettotizing her somewhere that isn't damaging to the things that matter as priorities to the right wing. Hard to assert pro-choice as EPA head, after all.

NJ however gets a bad rap as a pollution haven, whereas the state has been very progressive before in terms of being tough on environmental laws. Having medical waste wash up on your beaches (e.g., used needles) tends to make people mad, after all, so suffice to say that hasn't happened in ten years or so (I think).


Dante non ha mai immaginato questo cerchio dell'inferno!
post #9 of 9
Well, apparently things are changing in Jersey. They just reniged (sp?) on the Mountain Creek expansion, about 2000 acres, golf course etc. under re-review and in front of the AG. This was land already ok'd. It should result in Intrawest putting it up for sale, something they have never done.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion