Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: sakic

You’re right - I should have kept things in perspective.

The environmental advocates did do quite a bit of good. I hear, for example, that in the 70’s Lake Erie was so bad someone put a match to it and it actually burned. Many horror stories from that period, which is likely why President Nixon had little choice but to authorized the creation of the EPA.

I think it’s absolutely consistent with being conservative to desire a clean environment. Years ago I heard Michael Savage say as much. No thinking person wants to drink contaminated water or breathe polluted air. Jobs and a clean environment need not be mutually exclusive.

And since we’re being fair, the EPA never would have been necessary if corporations and everyday citizens had been doing the right thing with waste all along.


13 posted on 05/17/2015 6:39:03 AM PDT by Paulie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]


To: Paulie; sakic

I don’t think many would disagree with the statement that things have improved, cleaner water, air, etc.

What most of us object to is the tremendous cost of these advances. Not in dollars, but in freedoms.

That tremendous cost of freedom isn’t a one time thing, it goes on and on, losses of freedom compounding in the same way interest compounds.

Considering the costs, I, for one, would prefer the dirty water.


14 posted on 05/17/2015 8:38:02 AM PDT by Balding_Eagle (Is Ted Cruz himself as mean-spirited as the FR 'Click-it or Tick-it' Cruz Contingent?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson