Posted on 02/05/2002 12:34:26 AM PST by kattracks
Edited on 04/13/2004 1:39:07 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Got it?
There are laws that were passed by the enemies of our country because good men stayed home or voted for impotent third party hacks. Those laws still have to be abided by...unless you're one of those creative patriots who suggest breaking the laws you don't like.
Gale Norton called for the study to be done last year at the height of the water war. You and your pals had nothing but contempt and trash talk for her efforts, but there were those of us who knew she was going to do the right thing by the farmers, while she put a calm face to the press. Thank God this administration knows how do this stuff...no thanks to blowhards like you.
Get off your sanctimonious high horse and honestly admit that all your pissing and moaning was just your usual self-righteous grandstanding. Yeah, that'll happen.
The fact that you feel the need to misrepresent what I said in order to hurl yourself into high dungeon says something about the guilt you must (should) be feeling.
Link?
Are you sure that pressure from the ground didn't have something to do with the "new attitude?"
Also an opinion is just that. An opinion.
It wasn't until the 9th Circuit acted on an opinion that water rights were denied.
This is good news but hardly a solution for farmers who have lost everything in some cases while their deeded water was flushed down the Klamath out to sea.
And I'm not suprised that the current administration admits that it caved to Sierra Club demands in a veiled attempt to defend against energy contacts.
Are you sure you want to do this?
They did everyting they thought they were supposed to do. They bowed to the green weasels and cut the water off to patriotic American farmers in hopes of impressing some environmentalists....If Bush and Norton decide to cut your livelyhood off, can you go a year in HOPES that they'll do something...
BTW, THEY did nothng but call for another friggin study without knowing the outcome...
...THEY FIRST SHUT OFF THE WATER...THEN THE STUDY........
Both BUSH and Norton deserve to be "bashed" over this one...
It wouldn't matter about any "pressure on the ground" if Norton can't back up her actions for the farmers using real science and the law.
It's amazing to me the number of people who don't understand the burden of being a conservative administration that must deal with agencies and departments that have been controlled by Democrats for 40 years!
Unless the Republicans can get back the Senate and a larger margin in the House, the Bush people are at a huge disadvantage overturning these socialist policies. If it turns out Norton's hands become tied, thank Jim Jeffords and those "principled" patriots who vote third party.
I'm quite familiar with the issue. However you predicated your position based on a fact that you haven't provided. You've been here long enough to know how it works.
It wouldn't matter about any "pressure on the ground" if Norton can't back up her actions for the farmers using real science and the law.
The "science and law" was presented to anyone from the Bush administration who cared to show up. And that included Ann Venneman who flew around the lake in a plane piloted by one of the farmers affected by the cutoff. The lake was overflowing it's banks. I was there and I've got pictures to prove it.
If it turns out Norton's hands become tied, thank Jim Jeffords and those "principled" patriots who vote third party.
And this is when your house of cards comes crashing down. You frame the debate in partisan politics when the fact is the farmers and ranchers voted overwhelmingly for Bush but when it came time to deal with the loss of water they didn't care that they lived in a liberal state while being affected by an opinion by a liberal judge during a conservative administration.
They sought relief from the agency that had a noose around their neck. The Department of the Interior chaired by Gale Norton who was appointed by George W. Bush. What were they going to do, find Babbitt at home and ask him to draft a letter to the current Secretary?
What you fail to realize is they don't care who is holding the rope they just want it off. And in this case it was the bunch you are trying to defend.
Like I said. Are you sure you want to do this?
She didn't.
This administration had ample recourse within the law short of doing that ... even up to an including forcing a constitutional crisis. ... and when families and whole basins of people are being destroyed by frivolous applications of the "law", then it's time to do just that ... or risk gifhting. But they didn't ... in fact, they continued to abett the circumstances until the pressure was turned up by people who were on the verge of losing it all at the hands of their own government.
Like I said, when lives, livelihoods and ways of life are on the line ... YOU TURN UP THE PRESSURE. We did that and I do not feel guilty about it and I do not apologize for it. I would do it again tomorrow. I feel incredably sad that it was necessary, but grateful to have met some outstanding people who understand when the time to draw the line is.
Like I said, I am glad that the Bush administration is doing something now, the prior one would have done nothing at all and forced a worse confrontation. But, what this administration is good at is being politicians. And that is fine up to a point. That point was more than crossed in Klamath whether you are willing to open your eyes to it or not. I understand it's tough to open your eyes when your are hundreds or thousands of miles away living in "your" world and not touched by these things. Come down to the real world sometime where the animated struggle is really going on.
WRT to blowhard ... that's someone who is all talk (or all write) and who is not willing to put it on the line. I would not characterize anyone at the headgartes that way Deb ... they walked the walk and put everything on the line to face down an intolerable situation. All I see from you is talk, so remember that the acorn doesn't fall too far from the tree.
Anyway, I'm repeating in principle what I already said in post number 30. No need to take it any further than that. I'm more than content to let people decided for themselves, particularly if they are willing to look into the matter and not just scratch the surface. Either way, the presure applied last summer made a difference, that and a whole lot of praying by and for those good people there ... and those things trump politics when the rubber ultimately meets the pavement ... ask Sam Adams.
And after that, I'd like to see Norton negotiate a long-term settlement that protects their water rights in perpetuity.
The terms of that settlement have already been written down and agreed to. They are the terms for the project itself being paid off and given to the irrigators, and in the water right and property deeds.
We just need people in positions of power who will stop politicing, who will remember the rights they are supposed to uphold and then will act directly and forthrightly on it.
Regards and God bless you and yours.
WHEN THEW WATER FLOWS!
... hope to see all of you and many more there!
It was also amazing how they "found" this political morsel when their own recent studies at the time indicated otherwoise with respect to the level of the lake.
The pressure of those good people reaching the end of their rope caused that piece of politics and it is causing the current action as well IMHO. I'm glad the current action is being taken and am grateful to God that we have ad administration in there who, despite their politicing, are at least willing to ultimately do what is right. But I suffer under no allussions as to why they did it.
Regards and thank you again for all your support last year. God bless you and yours.
I intend to be at the headgates when that water is turned on ... when they ...
LET THE WATER FLOW!
I will find out the exact date as we get closer and post a thread about that specifically.
Report: No Scientific Basis for Shutting Off Irrigation Water (re: Klamath Basin )
Source: CNSNews.com; Published: February 4, 2002
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.