Conservatives Angered by Environmental Provision [Bush pulls another Al Gore]

The Washington Times ^ | June 18, 2002 | Audrey Hudson and Amy Fagan

[callisto]

Please see post# 52.

And someone please tell me how come all of you so-called "conservatives" completelty disavow any of these actions on his part. Have any of you ever been in business where you actually had to negotiate a deal and to do so resulted in a compromise with those you were dealing with? Everyone loves to refer to him as King George, but if that appelation was really true he would dis the Congress and declare all orders by fiat.

[ravingnutter]

It might behoove you to go to the following site and gain some perspective:

Sierra Club Bush Watch

[sauropod]

This is exactly why I could not vote for W. in Nov. of 2000. He is so weak on environmental and land rights issues, there is next to no hope of slowing the envirofascist juggernaut.

Deus Vult! 'Pod

[callisto]

I've always had a hard time swallowing the idea that folks will vote for a GOP candidate implementing liberal policies; they could simply vote for a Dem and get the real thing.

It's not a far leap when Sept. 11th reminded them that they do hold some conservative values.

[callisto]

My apologies, but I have to run out of the house for a while, but I'll rejoin the debate upon my return.

[DoughtyOne]

Can I ask you what any of this has to do with Bush offering a 50% tax break to nature's conservancy type organizations? You shills are completely missing the incrementalist aspects of what Bush is doing. You never subsidize the left. What part of that do you not understand? Throwing all sorts of other data on this thread has nothing to do with this issue, and is embarassingly CYA on you part. It was wrong to offer the 50% tax credit, end of story. Go back and report that I think it sucks and I'm not buying the info whitewash.

[Freedom'sWorthIt]

(Just a ping to post #58. I probably didn't say things as well as they could be said.)

[niki]

When people act like a mother protecting a child, "your boy" is appropriate.

As far as respect for the "Office" and/or our government - I am no longer a sheep. This is not a government of the people, by the people and for the people. These bozos don't give a rat's ass about the people, we're subjects, nothing more.

Bush is a "smoke and mirrors" president. Example, these "world government" summits and treaties. These address domestic issues. Our government has no business making domestic/social policy in a world government setting. Instead of being lauded for our continued participation is this crap, he is applauded for sticking to a pro-family agenda. The truth is a pro-family agenda would be that the parents and American citizens will decide these matters and Iran and France have no say.

Bush is President but he is not a leader.

[ravingnutter]

Everyone loves to refer to him as King George, but if that appelation was really true he would dis the Congress and declare all orders by fiat.

Yeah, I really love the bozos that keep harping "Bush should issue an E.O. immediately to take care of this!" in response to one of their perceived crises, LOL!

[AAABEST]

Go back and report that I think it sucks and I'm not buying the info whitewash.

LOL! D00d, you're a rip when you get mad.

[E.G.C.]

Oh, Man!!!!

[madfly]

UNDUE INFLUENCE

The Golden Rule: Who has the gold rules.

Private foundations have taken substantial control of the environmental movement in America.

But don't call it plutocracy (the rule of wealth) because that will end your credibility among the plutocrats. And don't call those who rule by wealth an oligarchy (rule by the elite few) because that will end your credibility with the elite few.

So we're reduced to calling them rich guys who give the money and the marching orders. And we call them the ecoligarchy. Smile, it's a joke. You know, a story with a humorous ending? Or a an unexpected juxtaposition of two disparate planes of thought that produces a sudden insight?

Only the products of the plutocracy and their ecoligarchy are not funny to the people whose lives they ruin.

Many liberal foundations have become prescriptive, that is, they design their own programs for leftward social change and then pressure a highly orchestrated network of environmental groups to perform their projects.

Some foundations no longer accept applications, but only fund pre-selected groups.

Case in point: The former W. Alton Jones Foundation's policy statement once advised applicants:

• The foundation works principally through foundation-defined initiatives addressing its priority issues. These initiatives usually take the form of coordinated grants to multiple institutions, each of which focuses on one or more components of an overall campaign defined by the foundation’s mission. Proposals for participation in these initiatives are invited by the foundation.

Numerous foundations have some version of this exclusionary policy.

"Prescriptive" also means pressuring applicants from the open application process into programs they would not have originated themselves.

The Environmental Grantmakers Association (EGA) is an unincorporated group of more than 200 foundations with important environmental programs. The EGA foundations meet in closed sessions to plan strategy in shutting down every economic action that affects the environment.

lOTS MORE AT WEBSITE!

[Black Agnes]

Answer to your question re: funding of environmental groups can be found in post #72 and associated link.

[ravingnutter]

Get over it, he threw them a bone...no one is forcing private landowners to sell to environmental groups. The link I posted shows that he has done alot to anger the environmentalists too, so it negates your argument that he is subsidizing the left. And YOU were the one that brought up the Heritage Rivers Initiative, I just showed you where he had rescinded it. Whatsamatter...are you upset because I pointed out that your anti-Bush rhetoric has no basis in fact?

[browardchad]

The Washington Times has a few lefties

I'm sure they do, but if you define "lefties" as anyone who voices disapproval of Bush administration policies, then you will find many more "lefties" in virtually any Conservative organization or publication.

[DoughtyOne]

Many of the items you list have offsetting issues that substantially nullify any of their positive effects. Even if every one of them stood on their own unopposed by offsetting issues, would that explain away the implementation of clearly leftist policies? No.

[blackie]

Thanks for taking on the little cliqué of Axis of Whining Weasels that show up to complain about something GWB did do, didn't do, might do or shoulda done...

I wonder what this little cliqué would do with their time if there wasn't something to snivel about...

I'm in a full-tilt-boogie-dance-with-life and enjoying every minute of it !!

GWB is the man !!

Freedom Is Worth Fighting For !!

Molon Labe !!

[newcats]

Answer to your question re: funding of environmental groups can be found in post #72 and associated link.

What question? I have not posted in this thread....

[Black Agnes]

Explain in this context then, what W's brother Jeb is doing in FL. Seems like the enviro groups wrote the legislation, Jeb signed it, and the landowners are *screwed*.

Commissioners to take final look at rural fringe growth plan

[Black Agnes]

You posted the question to me in another thread yesterday I believe. I got sidetracked and didn't return to answer your question.