What "doesn't work" is continuing w/ the Bush Cartel's insane (and insanely anti-environmental) energy policy. Even the damn *Pentagon* game out and said we MUST address global warming.
Here's a "positive solution" for you: Invest in and provide incentives for renewable energy development, and slap *real* fines on corporate polluters. Develop hybrid SUVs. Demand better fuel economy. Provide tax breaks for fuel-conserving vehicles (and *not* for H2s, which is Bush's break). Practice smart fire control -- engage in controlled burns, and allow naturally-occurring (i.e., lightning-sparked) forest fires to burn (within reason, and not at the expense of personal property or safety).
As for Saddam, well he *was* our friend, wasn't he? We certainly had no qualms about selling him lots of nasty chemicals in the '80s, did we? He became our much-needed boogieman after the Cold War ended when he oh-so-conveniently stepped outside his "good puppet" boundaries. While we pretended not to look...
Of course, on the plus side, if ill-informed knee-jerk nature haters like yourself get your way, my house will be oceanfront property by the time my kids retire! If only they could still breathe the air...
-eh
On May 6, 2004, at 1:22 PM, Bill Howard wrote:
This is the kind of thinking that got us into this energy mess in the first place. This enviroment first is not working. Forest fires in California, energy shortages. It just doesn't work. Give us a positive solution to the problem and being friends with Hussein is not a positive response.
On May 6, 2004, at 9:51 AM, William Shannon wrote:
Not if it means further degrading our environment...no thanks.
