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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (528897)	1/24/2004 10:06:42 PM
From: TideGlider	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

surprise your husband and bring him a beer..

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (528897)	1/24/2004 10:07:43 PM
From: Thomas A Watson	Respond to of 769670

No if you could read you would know you are full of it still. As it is you have no clue about why saddam was removed. And it was not WMD. It was written down for any one to read. Fools cannot read. So fools run off at the mouth and make complete asses of themselves.

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (528897)	1/25/2004 1:20:00 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 769670

Warming Up ___________________ Editorial The New York Times Published: January 25, 2004 nytimes.com That President Bush ignored the environment in his State of the Union address was either an admission that he has nothing to boast about on the issue or a judgment that nobody cares enough about it to make a difference in the presidential race. Whatever the reason, he has created a policy vacuum that offers substantial rewards for any ambitious Democrat willing to fill it. Nowhere is this truer than on global warming. Each day brings evidence that the climate is changing, that the consequences are likely to be unpleasant and that the responses offered by the administration and its allies in Congress are inadequate. Two recent reports illustrate the dangers. A study by an international research team, published in Nature, warned that unabated warming could drive 15 to 37 percent of 1,103 living species the team studied toward extinction by 2050. Shortly thereafter came an ominous report by The Times's Andrew Revkin on warming's impact in the Arctic, where the sea ice is in rapid retreat, and its potentially devastating effect on Alaska's fragile tundra. Two other reports, meanwhile, documented the need for more aggressive public policies. A Washington Post survey found that only a tiny number of American companies, 54 at last count, have agreed to participate in Mr. Bush's program of voluntary reductions of global warming gases — the strategy Mr. Bush chose when he rejected the mandatory emissions caps called for in the Kyoto Protocol. As further evidence of industry's indifference, The Times's Danny Hakim disclosed recently that Subaru — a company that has marketed itself as environmentally friendly — had decided to redesign its popular Outback wagon as a "light truck," so as to avoid the tougher fuel economy standards that apply to ordinary cars. Subaru, of course, is hardly the first car company to take advantage of this country's porous fuel economy regulations. But like the companies that feel safe in ignoring Mr. Bush's half-hearted appeals for voluntary restraints, Subaru's decision reflects the failure of the administration and Congress to send tough regulatory signals that will make industry sit up and pay attention. As this page has noted before, simply closing the so-called S.U.V. loophole, and making light trucks as efficient as ordinary cars, would save a million barrels of oil a day, reducing global warming gases while easing our reliance on imported oil. More broadly, the country needs something along the lines of the bill sponsored by Senators John McCain and Joseph Lieberman, which would require economywide reductions in emissions while establishing market mechanisms to ease the cost of compliance. It is encouraging in this regard that nearly all the Democratic candidates, some more aggressively than others, have embraced the idea of binding limits on emissions of carbon dioxide. Mr. Bush regards mandatory emissions caps as "top-down" regulatory management and therefore unacceptable. But his own bottom-up voluntarism is going nowhere. Meanwhile Alaska melts. The McCain-Lieberman bill did better than anyone expected last year. It deserves another try.