camplate wrote:
> Did you even read the article? Did you completely miss the
> paragraph about diesel fuels?
All the article said was that he _upheld_ the regulation, not
that he originated it, promoted it, signed it, or anything. He
merely failed to reverse it. If you really want to lower your
standards so much that you can call that a sweeping pro-environment
action, don't expect to convince me of anything.
> Where does the article SCOLD clit and junior? It just states
> that President Bush is continuing the policies of the glitter
> twins but the press is howling because he doesn't act on their
> pet issues.
(rest of rant snipped)
??? My email was responding to the first one, which advertised
that the article would convince me that GW was "much greener than
you think." It hasn't.
I've seen _during my lifetime_ the positive effects of having strict
pollution control standards. There's more to the environment than
just activist groups.
-- Matt Grimaldi
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
