Why not just ignore the liberals' plea to help the environment and focus on issues YOU feel are more important, rather than drawing more attention to an issue you call ridiculous?
I'm truly curious, here.
2007-02-28 01:17:49 · 13 answers · asked by Bush Invented the Google 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Great point! I really wish the RINOs would focus more on the border.
2007-02-28 01:21:04 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
You are making an incorrect assumption here. Most Republicans would agree that the protecting the environment is an important issue. The disagreement comes over the whole Global Warming debate and whether it is first happening, second wholly man made or a natural phenomenon, and third what can reasonably be done which will not destroy our economy in the name of feel good solutions based on an as yet unproved scientific model. You cannot just ignore the debate and allow liberals to make whatever claims they choose without challenging them because there are many people who are uninformed and will believe anything if it is presented as factual whether it truly is or not. Most people are not one trick ponies they can feel and act passionately on a variety of issues at the same time.
2007-02-28 09:43:14 · answer #2 · answered by Bryan 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think most people - Republicans and Democrats - would agree that protecting the environment is an important issue. I think the difference between the two platforms is where it ranks in order of importance, and this is due mostly to who finances each party. I think we'll find that if comprehensive campaign finance reform legislation is passed, environmental issues will be addressed somewhat similarly by both parties. Of course, the age-old debate over environment vs. economic development would be settled more quickly if there was more of a push to develop PROFITABLE alternative energy sources.
2007-02-28 09:34:06 · answer #3 · answered by Michael B 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Well,it's a no lose situation for them.
They can ignore the vast majority of the scientists of the world and carry on endlessly about Al Gore and Jesus don't like us and how Liberals are trying to sabotage Capitalism because they've realized that the worst effects of global warming will begin after they're dead.They won't have to face the scorn and the blame of their descendants.
From people who claim that they know what's best for children,they've just exposed more of their propaganda.They care more about big business than they do their children.
BTW-Those who cite the global cooling theories of the seventies are being dishonest.Global cooling advocates were a tiny minority.The global warming advocates of today are the VASTmajority of scientists,Furthermore,those who deny global warming are overwhelmingly employed by energy and oil companies.
2007-02-28 09:38:30 · answer #4 · answered by Zapatta McFrench 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
As they drill into the pristine areas of Alaska for oil, no matter that parts of Alaska still feel the effects of the Exxon tanker Valdez!
They are also drilling in Georges Bank now! Why don't we just kill off all of the wildlife!
Repubs care about the environment? Ha, they pollute it and have their bean counters do actuarial tables!
It is the same about Iraq! All of a sudden they are interested in a war that has been bringing body bags home daily for over 4 years! Even the troops say the "war" is a farce!
2007-02-28 09:30:47 · answer #5 · answered by cantcu 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I'm sure Al Gore is leading the way. It's time to squash the Al Gore lie machine. After that report on his house came out, his press secretary announced that Al Gore participates in the TN Green Power Switch and was installing solar panels. Both are supicious. Why is he just now installing solar panels on this house? Also the Tennessee program to convert over to green electricity is not on-line or is in limited capacity. No one in Tennessee can purchase or switch to this green electricity. One buys a kilowatt block of electricity at $4.50 each and then TVA uses that money to fund windmills that will go on the grid and is distributed through out the state evenly. There is no way that Al Gore can be getting this electricity all to himself.
Not to mention that 5 months ago the papers here in Tennessee said that more money was coming in for these windmills than they could ever build them, mostly because of the lack of skilled contractors. The only green power Gore uses has a dollar value on it.
2007-02-28 09:25:48 · answer #6 · answered by phxfet 3 · 4⤊ 2⤋
this always makes me LOL... let me ask you a question.. do you think people that vote for the GOP need air or drink water... yes we do.. but we dont buy into every wacko that says
HEY!!! I dont like cars lets stop driving.. or computers cause cancer lets stop making them...
just because someone on the left says OMG GLOBAL WARMING doesnt mean its true..
last year 186 BILLION tons so co2 hit the air... 90 billion tons came from green dead things.... 90 billion tons from volcanos
humans did 6 billion tons... so if we removed all the cars and co2 things... we make we would still have 180 Billion tons in the air every year OMG....
by the way.. I dont pay them any attention what so ever...if I did I would have already freaked out. with the lets see
OMG GLOBAL COOLING in the 1975s
OMG when we hit 6 billion people world wide we are all going to starve to death( we are at what 12 or 13 billion now)
OMG we made the atom bomb if we set one off it will destroy the worlds air supply ( we have as humans set off over 300 nukes world wide)
OMG the ozone layer is going away... yeah i know... but the earth has lost its air supply what 9 times in its long history and that was before humans.
OMG GLOBAL WARMING... yeah yeah yeah.. what was the number of ice-ages earth had before humans came around? what what caused earth to come out of those ice-ages...
OMG i know I am forgetting something..
OMG YOUR SCARED OF YOUR OWN SHADOW...
if we did everything these freaks said.. we would have stopped people from having kids world wide stayed under 6 billion people.. we would have stopped making all cars or drilling all oil... fuel of any kind would be banned.. we would have stopped techonolgy back in the 1970s. and when it hit 1983 11 months 29 days we would have all shot our self in the head because the world was going to end in 1984 because the world clock said so..
2007-02-28 09:34:00 · answer #7 · answered by Larry M 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
It's done to point out the hypocrisy of the left. If one is serious about the dangers of global warming, is it really compatible with that position to have two homes which use FAR more electricity than others?
2007-02-28 09:32:22 · answer #8 · answered by Rick N 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Are you confusing those who get their news from talk radio with the guys in office? The ones in office are listening to the Pentagon's report that we're in trouble...the ones on talk radio are listening to the oil companies that support their station.
2007-02-28 09:23:58 · answer #9 · answered by mamasquirrel 5 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Because big business would have to spend some of their profits to actually clean up their act, and that becomes their issue.
2007-02-28 09:21:31 · answer #10 · answered by ropemancometh 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋