Rise up and fight back

“ThinAir, a translation: when bacpac says 'thinking for yourself', he means accepting what he says without question. When he says 'brainwashed by all the liberal spin', he means disagreeing with him.”

“tehipite, I look forward to walking a trail with you someday.”

“Allrightey Then. Hey Mtn. Gal, I'm not compleatly disagreeing with you, and I'm not calling Bush names. I just don't think that what he and his cabinet have decided on many environmental issues is what is necessary or best for our country. I believe he is apealing to big business more than the wishes of the common people, and with little reguard to the environment. There have been many good ideas spoken on this subject, and we are not just pointing fingers and whining. My point of starting this thread was to get people to look at the direction this administration is headed. I assumed that the average backpacker would be a little worried about these places which are now a little closer to being threatened. Maybe I assumed wrong, but I for one will remain concerned, I want my kids and Grandkids to be able to someday enjoy the world the way I do. Thats why I take some concern to these issues. If this stance offends anyone, I have no apology.

ThinAir”

“Yes, I think I will just ignor his banter. Some people can't discuss anything for too long and remain civil. His regression only took a couple of posts.”

“BaSO4, I have no idea what you mean by 'social re-engineering', but I'll try to respond to the rest of your post.

The Sierra Club has taken a lot of heat over their support for Democratic candidates--some from within, and some from the left as well as right. The way I see it, though, they didn't jump into Democratic arms so much as get pushed there by the Republicans. IIRC, they didn't make a presidential endorsement at all before 1984. What made the difference was Reagan, Watt, and the GOP's lurch away from pro-environmental positions. Remember that Nixon presided over the creation of the EPA; before 1980, there was a strong strain of pro-environmental politics in the Republican party. Today, there are a few Republicans (Jeffords, Snowe, etc.) who are friendly to environmental causes, but they're few and far between.

So if you ask why the Sierra Club supports Democrats, I have to ask you: why has the Republican party abandoned the environment?

As for the Greens...well, the Club has always been pragmatic (too pragmatic for some), and they obviously made the decision to support people who have a chance of getting elected over people who are ideologically pure but will never be in a position of authority. And as a pragmatist, I support that decision.

On immigration, I think the key is this sentence: "The Club is working towards the goal of an environmentally sustainable population by dealing with population as a global issue [italics added]." Keeping Mexicans in Mexico (for example) does nothing about the overall problem; it just means environmental degradation in Mexico instead of here. Sustainable development, on the other hand, has the potential to improve the environmental situation in third world countries and make it less attractive (or necessary) to leave. That's the kind of effort the Sierra Club should focus on, IMO.”

“thinair,

You insulted me. Good spin though.”

“tehipite,

The Republican Party has not abandoned the environment. You are a kook for suggesting such a thing.”

“Sorry, but could you really blame me?”

“tehipite,

The Sierra Club did not support the Green Party, because the Green Party could not support the Sierra Club. The Sierra Club is more about collecting money and providing lots of recreational opportunities for its leaders than saving the environment. If their first priority was the environment they would have been Green, baby.”

“Thin ? I know you are not the name calling cry baby. You even told us some of the things you do as an individual to reduce demands for resource extraction. By all means try to influence the policy to be as you wish it was. I will continue to do the same myself. There are some posting here that appear to be without any positive contribution to solutions. These are the name calling, crying, chicken little types. I have a real problem with people that want others to make sacrifices that they themselves will not. If we are to maintain our standard of living we need leaders not whiners. Leaders are out front showing the rest of us what to do to accomplish the goal. If the solution is to get by with less oil then the leaders will start living that way before they ask for laws to force others to do the same. It is like when Rosy O?Donnell calls for the outlaw of all guns but hires an armed bodyguard. Is that courageous leadership or hypocritical whining? Advocating the use of less oil (or any other product) and not personally reducing your own dependence on oil is not leadership. I like the way the Nature Conservancy works. Look at it this way, some poor family in the rain forest lives in abject poverty. Some American environmentalist comes along and tells them not to cut down and sale his trees because we need to preserve the forest. Then the American goes home to his 3,000 s.f. house, drives his SUV, etc. What do you think the poor family thinks about the American environmentalist? Compare that to someone that buys the trees from the family with the deal being that the trees remain standing and alive. Maybe that someone even pays a salary to the family to care for and protect the trees. One case is the whiner the other is the leader. Which do you want to be?”

“bacpac said:

Blah blah blah blah kook blah blah blah.

And:

Blah blah blah Sierra Club blah collecting money blah blah blah blah.

Sure, bacpac. Whatever you say. <eyeroll>”

“Mtn gal, two points: you have no business making assumptions about what people who post here do or don't do outside of this forum; and you have an extremely caricatured view of most environmental groups.”

“tehipite the great environmentalist leader? Tell us how please.”

“does the shoe fit? I think you protest to much.”

“I like what mtn gal says about the 3,000 sq ft house and suv...in my city it seems as if all the new homes are HUGE 2 story types that must take quite a bit out of a family's budget, use more engery to heat and cool, more trees, etc. Most today have both spouses at work and take the kids to every recreation imaginable...when do they have time to even enjoy such a big house? Seems like consumption has gotten things out of whack..the 3,000 sq ft house might even be just the starter..then bigger and better. Seems like this can't go on forever...where will it end?”

“BASO4, I think tehipite's original post was about the John Muir's and the Sierra Club's founding philosophy, which I agree with, and not their current policies, which I don't. I stopped supporting the Club a number of years ago when it became apparent to me they were turning into a social justice organization instead of an environmental organization. The final proof was the cabinet controversies this year, when they put their weight into fighting John Ashcroft and completely ignored Gail Norton. How does John Ashcroft pose a danger to the environment? He doesn't. And don't get me started on Gail Norton.

That said, your own statistics undermine your thesis. The Sierra Club supported 10 Republican candidates last year? Then they are not an arm of the Democratic party, are they? It's just dumb to argue that environmental organizations have to support Green Party candidates to be pure (and bacpac makes the same dumb statement). They have to be practical and look at who's actually going to wind up in Congress making the laws. A group that I do support and highly recommend, the League of Conservation Voters, does the same thing. They analyse the voting records of sitting Congressman and then target the very worst environmental reps and senators (the "Dirty Dozen") for removal while championing the 12 best candidates for the environment. The latter 12 are usually, but not always, Democrats. The LCV has been extremely effective in a number of the races they have targeted over the years; how useful do you think they'd be if they became shills for the Green Party?”

“NPR had a discussion today on its "talk of the nation, science friday" show. The subject...drlling for oil in Alaska. They spoke of recent innovations in drilling technology,like a new platform that is 1/5 the weight of the type used earlier. It and its support machinery have a 5 acre "footprint". This machine can drill 2 miles vertically and 5 miles horizontally(in any direction). Its is the type of machine that will be used in ANWR. They also said that eskimoes (their word not mine) on the coastal plain are in favor of the drilling.”

“Explorer, believe it or not, I too was a member of the Sierra Club at one time, until like you, I realized that they becocome another instrument for social justice.

Now my support goes to The Nature Conservancy. I like what they do. Check them out at www.tnc.org.”

“Explorer, I'm curious about what specifically you mean about the Sierra Club turning into a social justice organization. I'm not being argumentative--I'm just not sure I know what you mean.

By they way, they opposed both Norton and Ashcroft. The Ashcroft opposition had much broader backing from other (civil rights, etc.) groups, so it got much bigger coverage, but the Club did fight Norton. Ashcroft was a target because a) as a Senator, he had just about the worst environmental record of the bunch, and b) as Attorney General he has broad discretion to enforce or not enforce environmental laws.”

“Agreed. I have touted the Conservancy on this site before. The smartest, most effective group out there, making some of the most intelligent partnerships (such as with ranchers, as mentioned by someone earlier). By the way, their new site is www.nature.org.”

“BaSO4, I think the Nature Conservancy is doing great work, and I'm glad you support them. I think that's just one piece of the puzzle, though, and I see influencing governmental policy as another important piece.”

“What is the matter with you mtn gal? Tehipite is the only person allowed to make assumptions. You are not allowed to express an opinion.”

“So you equate opinions with assumptions, bacpac? That explains a lot.”

“tehipite, you told her not to make any assumptions and then ridiculed her opinion in the same post.

Maybe you should give a little thought to what you post before you post it.”

“Ditto, you smelly bad icky man!

Wheeeee!”

“This from someone whose 'contributions' to the thread have all been unsupported, ad hominem potshots at people with whom you disagree? Look, bacpac, if mtn gal sees fit to defend her position she can do it herself (and I would welcome the discussion); your semi-coherent soundbite attacks aren't helping anybody.”

“Mtn gal, you address your post to me and then you keep saying "you" over and over but I honestly don't know who you're talking to, since none of what you say, after the part about not praising Bush, addresses me or my earlier posts. So I'm going to assume you're addressing someone else and let it go.”

“tehipite, Your lies and insults are standard fare. I admit to dispensing potshots from time to time, but you simply abandon the truth and lie. Your supporting data is nonexistent, but you expect everyone else to spend a night at the library before they call you on it.

If you would try posting some factual infomation pehaps we could expand the debate.

The fact that George Bush disagrees with policy that Clinton cooked up doesn't make him anti-environmental. The fact that Houston, Texas has returned to a booming economy naturally impacts the enviroment. You don't expand an economy without a impacting the environment. More people, more mess. Have you been to Dallas lately? It is a model of environmentalism.

Developing oil in the United States is a matter of National Security more than a supply issue. I guess you avoided that argument, because you have always let someone else to do your fighting for you. You just expect everything to be nice and safe, because you have never known anything else. George Bush and bacpac are just paranoid. If a couple Nuclear bombs go off in the Persian Gulf we will just continue the rolling black outs.”

“This is worse than the gun thread.
What I want to know is, what will the environmental consequences be 100 years from now?
How will drilling in ANWR now eventually affect the wilderness that is left behind?
Drilling will take the wild out of wilderness.
Once taken, it can not be returned.
You can't return virginity to a whore.
Bye.”

“Amen to that!”

“Biting my tounge”

“Whew! I am glad I didn't say that.

Mel, the analogy is a little odd. I don't have much experience with virgins or whores, but land can certainly be returned to wilderness in a surprisingly short period of time. Ducks Unlimited and Quail Unlimited have been very successful. The focus of these groups has been habitat preservation and hunter ethics. The Sierra club on the other had spends too many resources on social agendas not related to the environment as BaSO4 stated.”

“Bacpac you forgot Whitetails Unlimited and Pheasants Forever. If wild land that was abused cant be returned to its former state, what the heck did Aldo Leupold do in The Sand County Almanac ? Folks dont give "nature" enough credit. No matter how hard I try I cant keep weeds and grass outta my garden. I imagine if left alone my "whorish" garden would look quite "virginal" in a few short years.”

“Don't forget Trout Unlimited. What they've done for cold water streams is pretty impressive, at least the projects I've been aware of.

As I said the other day here, humility not holy cloth is what is needed by all concerned in this debate. Name calling and innuendo get us nowhere.”

“No name calling and innuendo? Where is the fun in that? Tehipite is my favorite punching bag and he enjoys kicking sand in my face.”

“bacpac, I like banter and smart a$$ remarks as much as the next person (my wife would say more so), but we've got a couple big environmental issues going on around here -- the Crandon Mine project near the Wolf River, and now a proposed power line extension from Duluth to Weston -- and the insult slinging and shouting just gets wearisome. Go ahead, punch away at Tehipite if you must, but boy does it get old. This isn't some crap tossed back and forth about favorite movies or who did something silly, or even who the heck is John Muir. Should I lighten up? Maybe. But I see some nasty encounters in the near future in this country if we don't watch our rhetoric a bit. It seems like TT is a good place to practice when discussing the nitty gritty of the environment we all seem to enjoy so much in our own ways.”

“Deer Unlimited? That sounds like my road! LOL!
Wheredafuh are deer LIMITED?

100 years from now? We can't BEGIN to imagine the technological state of affairs that will exist in 2101.
I give us credit for doing the right thing when the brass tacks start to show. We'll be okay - give human ingenuity a little credit.”

“pekka, good point. I am sure tehipite and I agree that the environment is important, but when he attacks conservatives and calls them anti-environmental I gotta call him on it.”

“Here ya go, gojo Deer Unlimited”

“bacpac, REAL conservatives would have to be environmentalists by definition. I read Barry Goldwater's "Conscience of a Conservative" when I was 15, in fact right before I went to Philmont. I remember being impressed by all but the chapter on war. Can't say I became a Young Republican, but Barry struck me as being very misunderstood. I just find that there are a lot of unscrupulous persons cloaking themselves in the term.”

“Theodore Roosevelt was a Republican.”

“For anyone whos interested in trying to protect ANWAR go to this web site:

http://www.wilderness.org/arctic/action/

They have info on how to write your House and Senate Reps. For those who are not articualte eneugh to express there thoughts the way they wish in written words, they have some letters already written you can send. They have info on a lot more envriomental issues as well.”

“you might want to go for the form letter, bro.”

“Yea, I bet a whole bunch of form letters sent to a few people is going to be really convincing.”

“Bro?
Way to intelligently contribute Rad. Nice to know you have a constructive way of expressing your stupidity.

Death, I suppose you have a point a bunch of form letters wont change much, of course they'll do more than petty squabbling on a web site. A solid coherent voice of many is always better than the ramblings of a few. Especially when they have the backing of a legitimate organization like The Wilderness Society that has been around since 1935 trying to protect Americas wild lands.”

“"bro" is a popular slang term of affection, unlike "whos", "articualte", "eneugh", "there (as opposed to "their"), and "envriomental".

go for the form letter, unless you use spell-checker again, like you did in your last post.

chill out or get bint!

i meant "bent"!”

“yes, i did have to cut and paste those words. i can't even fake spelling that bad.”

“The best defence is a good awfence!”

“I hope I never become as awfencive as yi ;-)”

“ok, now yoo guyz r just beeing meen.”