Kyoto Protocol and the Bush Administration

[Neb]

I get your point. I am not in favor of violence either.

[Fljotsdale]

Originally posted by Neb: Y'know, I had expected someone to either flame me or say I was sick because of my earlier post, and now it seems as though noone has noticed it.

I saw it, Neb, but I didn't understand it. Who are these Danish men? What did they do? Or is a joke?



------------------

[Neb]

I haven't read much about it, but apparently six danish men were planning to assasinate Bush, (un)fortunately their plans were discovered before they could do anything.

[Charean]

Originally posted by Neb: I haven't read much about it, but apparently six danish men were planning to assasinate Bush, (un)fortunately their plans were discovered before they could do anything.

You have to wonder why the Danes of all people wanted to do him in... I would think it would be GreenPeace!

------------------

Defender for the Light -
Goodness knows there is a lot of Dark out there!! - Where are my matches?!?
Wandering Soul - Finding my life's calling is Bodhisattva
You are what your deep driving desire is; As your deep driving desire is, so is your will; As your will is so is your deed; As your deed is so is your destiny.
The Upanishads

[DawnChaser]

The analogy is: If Bush ran a company that was dumping toxic waste, he would choose NOT to clean it up because of the cost to the company to "do it right."

As the president, his responsibility is not to the short-term cost, but to the long-term effect.

How can the United States, through the United Nations, force other nations to "do what's right, morally or environmentally" through embargoes and other sanctions, but blatantly disregard its own responsibility when notice is given. One word: Arrogance.

I am reminded of the situation when Big Tobacco was told that nicotine was addictive and hazardous to the health. They denied the findings and shot down the reports stating those findings, so that they would not be held accountable for the consequences of their actions. Bush has just done that. However; he didn't stop there. He tried to justify his position by saying it wasn't cost-effective. Since when has providing a safe environment had to be balanced with a bottom line? His position should be "whatever it takes."

That is the only stand I want to hear from my representative when it comes to providing for the "common good."

"Is it too late for a recount? What? That's been done? GRRRRR!"

------------------

[Ratweed]

Lets put it this wat think about it like this now say your at a car dealership amd you see a new hydrogen car for 30000 and a new gas powered car for 10000 which on are you going to buy.
Maybe if they started mass producing the cars but there has to be a huge demand for them

Originally posted by Fljotsdale: Interesting replies! What is even more interesting is the number of people NOT replying! Has everyone suddenly developed ostrich syndrome

I haven't replied to this thread because it is one of those areas where discussions between people who otherwise like each other can get heated and people end up getting angry over things that in the end, we are powerless to change without killing the people in charge or buying them out.
I am in no position to do either.

I will state for the record though that even though I smoke, I'll put a cigarette out and stick the butt in my pocket in order to keep from not having to litter.
I clean up the street around the sides of this house on a regular basis and have even considered chaining a trash can out on the other side of the gate and painting on it "PUBLIC TRASH DISPOSAL, PLEASE DON'T LITTER!" But since people have paid attention to the fact that I do pick up after them, they don't seem to think this yard is a handy tossing ground anymore.
One of the benefits of living in a small town...lots of small talk and people need something to gossip about in that so and so drops trash there and "she" has to pick it up so now so and so waits til they get another block and uses an already placed public trash can.
More people should take the small town view on things and realize that we all live in glass houses.
No one can overlook the corruption in our govt' or others but until true power is returned to the people, we can only watch as it all slips through our hands, and do our part to try and keep a hold on it anyway.

Ziroc's quote from George Carlin said it all.


Moni


------------------


[This message has been edited by Moni (edited 06-16-2001).]

[Gaelic]

Originally posted by Wulfere: I will post only this reply to the above...I would prefer not to get into politics. There have been alot of studies and to boil it all down they still are not sure that this rise in temp is not natural. Too many conflicting studies, too many people with agendas running them. When it is all said and done it seems to get down to who you want to believe. In one of the lastest studies they blame the cows.

BINGO! That is true, even Clinton, the most unholy *&^$*$(*%%# ever elected to any office, realized that.

Only one country in the world signed the Kyoto accords (I forget who). Everyone realized that the treaty is badly flawed and based on arbitrary numbers that sound good and are not based on science.

As for Bush himself, he is a darn sight better than the alternative and a step in the right direction towards making this country a better place. In addition, if anyone is under the impression that any elected official is not plugged into any "special interests" I would venture to say that you are sadly mistaken.



------------------
Gaelic

president bush is the rich mans president. he has backing of big buisnesss therfore he will not do anything that would harm the amriecan economy even at the cost of the enviroment. Therefore even tho i dont agree with what the protestors are doing i can understand their feelings. Also its obvious that global warming is happening. Most studeis that claim it doesnt happen or the current studies are wrong are funded by people or buisness that dont want cutbacks in co2 emmisions.

aslso the usa refuses to sign the kyoto treaty beacuse of developing counttirs not haveing to make much cutbacks. Yet the usa is the worlds biggest producer of greenhouses gasses. The hypocracy is enough to make me cry.

aslo one thing people would have to accept is a drastic lowering of thier liveing standereds. That would mean thingsl like not leaveing your computer on all the time, petrol at 4-6 £ per gallon. no air cond walk more bike more etc. and most people when asked to chose between their childrens future or their livieng standereds will chose the latter.

[This message has been edited by Dramnek_Ulk (edited 06-16-2001).]

[Gaelic]

Originally posted by Dramnek_Ulk: president bush is the rich mans president. he has backing of big buisnesss therfore he will not do anything that would harm the amriecan economy even at the cost of the enviroment. Therefore even tho i dont agree with what the protestors are doing i can understand their feelings. Also its obvious that global warming is happening. Most studeis that claim it doesnt happen or the current studies are wrong are funded by people or buisness that dont want cutbacks in co2 emmisions. aslso the usa refuses to sign the kyoto treaty beacuse of developing counttirs not haveing to make much cutbacks. Yet the usa is the worlds biggest producer of greenhouses gasses. The hypocracy is enough to make me cry. aslo one thing people would have to accept is a drastic lowering of thier liveing standereds. That would mean thingsl like not leaveing your computer on all the time, petrol at 4-6 £ per gallon. no air cond walk more bike more etc. and most people when asked to chose between their childrens future or their livieng standereds will chose the latter. [This message has been edited by Dramnek_Ulk (edited 06-16-2001).]

Paragraph 1: Bush was elected by rich and poor alike. Even though this has nothing to do with the topic, "harming the economy" would hurt the poor more than the rich. The extra burger flipper gets laid off in tough times, not the CEO. As for the comments about Bush saying the plan was not economically sound, that is ONE part of a response that focused on the lack of science supporting the Kyoto plan. Yet again, the media picks one bit and blows it up to be inflammatory.

Paragraph 2: The USA was not the only country that did not sign. Only ONE country in the whole world signed. Suddenly, this is all Bush's fault? Ridiculous.

Paragraph 3: We can live with the things we have if people adopted reasonable ideals of conservation and increased supply by using nuclear power (the cleanest and most efficient source supported by current technology). Reasonable conservation consists of recycling, not littering, turning off lights when you leave a room, carpooling where feasable, encouraging telecommuting, and putting reasonable limits that are supported by science on all types of emissions. That is the long term solution. It's like losing weight. People can go on a fast and drop a ton of weight quickly, but it won't last. If they take a healthy, measured approach they can make a real change. The same can be said of this problem.



------------------
Gaelic