Presidential Choices 2008

[forrestkc]

I agree with you forrest.

Yes there are some differences, but for the average US citizen things don't change that much. The federal government although important. is only one player in what impacts our lives.

To be honest with you, despite the fact that I argue a lot of issues on here, the only issue I really care about in terms of national politics is conservation / public lands. Thats one of the few issues that presidents can either do a lot for or really do a lot of damage to. A president's policies can result in a recession, but the economy will rebound. However, if a president allows an old growth forest to be logged or a wilderness to be developed, it's no longer a wilderness. These things are in very short supply anymore. There are just not to many places left where one can see a pre-settlement forest or a true wilderness and when they are gone, they are gone. The reason why I care is I am an avid backpacker / fisherman, and having pristine wilderness is very important to me. In fact, I don't know of any wilderness backpackers or canoists for which public lands and conservation is not just a huge issue. Of course most people don't take vacations that consist of strapping a 50 pound backpack on and heading into the wilderness, so for the average joe I am sure wilderness preservation and conservation is not such a huge issue.

President Bush is easily one of the worst presidents we have ever had in terms of conservation and environmental protection, but I am confident that any of the Democratic Candidates or for that matter Huckabee or McCain (I don't know about Romney or Guiliani yet) would be far better, and thus I am cool with any of them winning.

[Smalcald]

I really come close to agreeing with you Forrest.

I also enjoy the wilderness.

Clinton had a proposal I found smart and that was to limit road building in these forests. You could still log/mine etc, but the type of logging you could do would have to be done without ripping out roads all over the place, which as you know is just as destructive as the actual logging or mining.

Anyway we should start a thread about outdoor activities.

[forrestkc]

I really come close to agreeing with you Forrest.

I also enjoy the wilderness.

Clinton had a proposal I found smart and that was to limit road building in these forests. You could still log/mine etc, but the type of logging you could do would have to be done without ripping out roads all over the place, which as you know is just as destructive as the actual logging or mining.

Anyway we should start a thread about outdoor activities.

You are referring to the Roadless Rule. It was submitted to public comment and had more public comment in favor of it (millions wrote the Whitehouse) than any other proposal before or since. Even the immigration bill did not have the level of public comment that the Roadless Rule did. It went into effect toward the end of the Clinton years. Basically, as you say it stated that no new roads would be built in inventoried roadless areas on public lands. President Bush's first action, before doing anything else, the first thing he did upon taking office was to rescind the rule.

[Arthur Durnan]

Okay, let's go to 2012, Marnie: two gals....Condoleeza Rice VS. Rodham-Clinton! Hmm. Could be. Could quite possibly be.

GOD BLESS THE USA!

http://arthurdurnan.freeyellow.com

[Marnie]

Okay, let's go to 2012, Marnie: two gals....Condoleeza Rice VS. Rodham-Clinton! Hmm. Could be. Could quite possibly be.

GOD BLESS THE USA!

http://arthurdurnan.freeyellow.com

lol Yeah, maybe, but Hilary will be a bit long in the tooth by then. Condi, I think, is genuinely not interested in the process, although I do agree with you, she is an awesome woman with all the brains the GOP needs at the moment, yet doesn't seem to possess. I rank her very high on the list of people I admire most. I also am not sure if the party is courting her anymore.

Good to see you, Arthur! Hope your Christmas was wonderful.

[Arthur Durnan]

Ah, merci beaucoup indeed! You too tend to radiate joie de vivre from deep in Appalachia! So let me retrace my earlier steps: Re 2008 Prez & VP: what about Guiliani & Huckabee; VS. Clinton & Obama? Reason? In a time of WW3, why unring the Guiliani Bell? In our books, the UltraLibDem, pro-abortion, pro-homosexual 'marriage', pro-village-instead-of-a-family, "Hello-Castro!" candidate, Rodham-Clinton, would probably have America memorizing the Zensunni blessing, Sallamaka al-lahu wa-nasaraka!

GOD BLESS AMERICA! AND W. VIRGINIA TOO!

Have A Joyful & Prosperous 2008.

http://arthurdurnan.freeyellow.com

[Marnie]

Ah, merci beaucoup indeed! You too tend to radiate joie de vivre from deep in Appalachia! So let me retrace my earlier steps: Re 2008 Prez & VP: what about Guiliani & Huckabee; VS. Clinton & Obama? Reason? In a time of WW3, why unring the Guiliani Bell? In our books, the UltraLibDem, pro-abortion, pro-homosexual 'marriage', pro-village-instead-of-a-family, "Hello-Castro!" candidate, Rodham-Clinton, would probably have America memorizing the Zensunni blessing, Sallamaka al-lahu wa-nasaraka!

GOD BLESS AMERICA! AND W. VIRGINIA TOO!

Have A Joyful & Prosperous 2008.

What's disconcerting is that I know exactly what you are saying.

I put Huck is the same boat as Obama, both footnotes, nothing more. Huck's numbers are falling, as they should. Guiliani is popular because the media hypes him for a variety of reasons and he has some name recognition. Can he run a country as well as he did a city? I think he could. I would vote for him if he gets the nomination, but he is definitely not my choice. Our best hope is the next election cycle, though. 2008 is best viewed as a stop gap measure to keep the Democrats at bay.

[AnExample]

McCain and Clinton