..threatened with extinction]..you think the morally bankrupt major parties will deliver into your grubby, greedy little hands, a few more lousy stinking "pieces of silver"...as payment for robbing your decendents of their natural birthright?
2007-11-02 09:50:10 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
ie: will you take the dollar over doing whats right for everyones future?
2007-11-02 09:51:18 · update #1
the biggest threat to nature isn't pollution, its loss of habitat, it doesn't matter what the air is like if there is no where for animals to live and hide from predators
now nothing destroys habit more than farm lands, so i ask where are we going to get the new corn for this e85 ethanol
are we going to sacrifice virgin land for clean air?
and don't think both sides of the isle don't know this, they do, why would the politicians be mandating the retooling of petroleum refineries to manufacture "new" grades of petroleum if they were planning to redo the entire structure of our energy supply to corn based ethanol? because its a lie, but its a lie that panders to their bases so its a lie they will say with a smile on their faces
and you baught it
2007-11-02 10:11:53 · answer #1 · answered by eyesinthedrk 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I wouldnt vote Green because in most cases they are irrational and highly ignorant of the ramifications of their actions. Anyone that opposes thinning forests and taking out underbrush and deadwood is a fool and we all suffer from the magnitude of fires that quickly get out of control in these situations. They fail to understand how environmentally friendly oil drilling has become and too seek to stop needed human improvements because it might hurt the animals contrary to all evidence that it wont- For example, removing a causeway will cause the extinction of a species of turtle- even though the turtles live in area BEFORE the causeway was even built and not just the species of turtle but the exact same turtles that are 100 yrs old. They are irrational and worse than the goons in the major parties by far and that is saying something
2007-11-02 17:01:16 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have no problem with paying higher taxes if it means giving that money to not only people on welfare who deserve it, but for health care needs. However, I do have a problem paying higher taxes if it is for a war that has never been justified. George Washington before he left office said that the United States needed to make sure it never became a two party system, and now look at how we've taken his advice. I think we should just invent another party that is not necessarily just green, but uses common sense instead of praying that the war will go well.
2007-11-02 16:56:53 · answer #3 · answered by Ellie 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
What is voting green anyway?
Bush's estate in Texas is the most "green" home I have ever heard of. It uses a geo-thermal heat pump.
So is a vote for Bush a green vote or what?
Will you now only allow horse-drawn ambulances to take injured children to hospitals?
2007-11-02 17:07:33 · answer #4 · answered by Darth Vader 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yep, that's exactly right. I will also refrain from voting green because not only do I disagree with much of their party platform, they also have no chance of winning.
2007-11-02 16:58:33 · answer #5 · answered by VoodooPunk 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I will refrain because the green party are a one policy party
2007-11-02 18:16:26 · answer #6 · answered by bill 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋