Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Al Gore vs George Bush: the moderate's perspective -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: puborectalis who wrote (1156)	10/4/2000 12:06:13 AM
From: Rarebird	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 10042

Here are a few thoughts about the debate: I thought Bush did a good job of raising the philosophical differences of the role of Gov't between Al Gore and himself. However, I thought Bush was mighty stupid insulting the East Coast (and the energy predicament here) in regard to the Clinton/Gore recent decision to release some of the strategic petroleum reserves. Any chance Bush had of carrying a state from Maine to Maryland is now finished. That was not to smart. It was a good debate though in the sense that it brought out the major differences in the 2 candidates and it helped inform people who needed to be informed. Nothing earth shattering either way, I think. If you liked Gore going in, you thought Gore won. If you liked Bush going in, you thought Bush won. I'm more interested in how the undecided votes will turn here, rather than engaging in the same boring liberal vs conservative debate.

To: puborectalis who wrote (1156)	10/4/2000 12:18:03 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10042

Stephen, There was a time in this nation's history where environmental concerns were not even factored into the business model. I congratulate the environmental movement for changing this arrogance of unfettered capitalism. But d*mmit, when the eco-liberals try to tell us that we can't TEMPORARILY exploit the resources that lie beneath what equates to an arctic desert, its going just a bit too far... They tell us "oh.. you can't build a pipeline there and you can't disturb the traditional calving grounds of the Arctic caribou"... But they conveniently omit the FACTS about how porcupine caribou herds INCREASED AS A RESULT OF OIL DRILLING on the north slope. In fact, it is widely believed that outside of herd depletion due to rough weather in 1990-92, where many calves died of exposure, were it not for the presence of man on the north slope, NO SAFE HARBOR would exist for the porcupine caribou from their natural predators (who also were suffering during those harsh winters). The Caribou are commonly seen congregating around human habitats and calving. They also appreciate the food that is made available to them by the local oil drillers who appreciate ANY SIGN OF LIFE UP THERE. Do you REALLY think that someone would have spent government money to preserve those herds to the same degree that oil companies, under constant scrutiny, have assisted in preserving those animals? There is a balance that can be struck between business and nature. And it certainly benefits those endangered species when environmentalists exert their influence to the extent that these businesses are forced to set aside a percentage of profits to ensure that they don't cause extinctions or major disruptions of wildlife. It can be done Stephen... And certainly it can be done in the case of oil drilling on the barren north slope, where some folks estimate that undiscovered reserves exist that could SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCE OUR IMPORTS of crude oil, and certainly will provide a greater measure of national energy independence in times of international crisis. Regards, Ron