[Cincinatus' Wife]

These ten points give us a principled ideological framework for supporting the environmental measures that are actually worthwhile while refusing to go along with the dangerous liberal version of environmentalism and all it entails. I do not claim these are original ideas, and conservatives have been applying them in the daily cut-and-thrust of politics for years. What is somewhat new is the idea that we need to not just apply these concepts but make known to the electorate that these are the concepts we are applying. We need the public to know in a detailed and explicit way that we have a coherent ideology on the environment and that this is it. We need to get the electorate to grasp at an intuitive level that we DO stand for a form of environmentalism, just not the liberal form. The electorate strongly suspects we don't like environmentalism at all, a suspicion that grows when all we can say is that we're against liberal environmentalism. It needs to be told, explicitly, the nature of what we are for. We can fight for a generation on these points.

You'll have to take your children out of public schools to combat the environmentalist wacko education being fed to them.

[Carry_Okie]

We need the public to know in a detailed and explicit way that we have a coherent ideology on the environment and that this is it.

These were leading ideas, ten years ago. This "coherent ideology" of his is so poorly developed as to be hardly worth the comment. He reminds me of R.J. Smith at the Competitive Enterprise Institute or, for that matter, PERC.