SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: AllansAlias who wrote (24340)10/4/2000 12:17:11 AM
From: Ilaine  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 436258
 
The environmental issues are problematical for me, because I don't believe any party truly has a vision of the serious damage the world is sustaining environmentally. I know Gore thinks he does, but all you have to do is look at the record of the Clinton adminstration to know he doesn't. And I think he's a hypocrite, he's got a large family but he pretends to espouse (wrong word under the circumstances) the virtues of ZPG, and there ain't no way in hell his brood ever would have fit into a CAFE car. And I think Babbitt is a lying bastard.

Is Bush any better? No way to tell now. Historically, recent Republicans were not, but historically, Republicans were better for the environment that Democrats early in the last century. My guess is that he really doesn't care right now, whether he will care in the future I can't say.



To: AllansAlias who wrote (24340)10/4/2000 9:10:14 AM
From: LLCF  Respond to of 436258
 
<do you really think we should have a guy in there who thinks that we are fine as long as there is a drop of
hydrocarbons left to burn. He has no notion whatsoever of a larger debate, a longer-term view.>

Actually I believe his position is that the market will take care of it, and most other problems. This is not an easy question IMO, as there is tons of anecdotal evidence to support markets over government on many issues. Not an easy question.

DAK