Organization: /usr/lib/news/organizatoin
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 13:16:44 -0700
From:         Andy Freeman <andy@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Gore on the Environment

>> >It is difficult if not impossible to fight a clean political battle.
>                    I should have said  "win"
>>
>> No it isn't.  It's easy.  All you have to do is respect the electorate
>> EVEN though they might not go along with your plan when honestly
>> presented.  That's easy for a "good" person....
>  an electorate that elected Reagan twice....you must be kidding!!!!!

Wowsers!  Democrats can't win an election honestly.  Wouldn't it be
better to just let the democrats pick a king?

Democrats are behaving like their caricature of Republicans; now we
know why.

>> >The GOP folks have made it clear that they will use any tripe they
>> >can get their hands on to justify inaction on domestic or
>> >environmental problems.
>>
>> Not so fast.  The GOP folks claim that certain measures don't make any
>> sense.  Maybe they do, and maybe they don't, but their ACTUAL claim
>> doesn't justify Leader's misrepresentation.  If you can't make your
>> argument without misrepresenting your opponent's position....
>   so, I exaggerated a little......
>   but NOT MUCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

But it was for a good cause, so it's okay.  Right?

>> >At this point(early a.m.) I can't imagine
>> >what sort of "news" could in any way offset the realities of
>> >environmental degradation that we have been bombarded with over the
>> >past 15+ years.
>>
>> You mean like the reduction in air pollution, the reduced leakage from
>> landfills, and other cleanups?  We really should have a national
>> legislature and state and local govts.  What?  We did?  And they had
>                                        huh?

I'm pointing out that the record isn't what Leader asserts and
even if it is, the credit/blame is shared.

>   The primary reason why these minimal(and I do mean MINIMAL)
>   improvements have been made is because the public was convinced
>   that the environmental situation was extremely critical and
>   corrective action could not be postponed any longer.

Hold it.  First Leader claims that we're going downhill fast, and
now we're going uphill slowly.

>   that they owe to Mother Earth that it is going to take to ensure
>   our descendants survival on this planet!!!

So, I take it Leader support's China's population control measures.

>> Sure, things aren't perfect, but if you have to distort the direction....
>  Speaking of distorting direction: Remember Reagan: "trees cause
>  polution" ?

Yes, I remember what he actually said.  He was right.  The LA basin
has always had certain kinds of pollution because of the vegetation in
that basin and the air patterns.  We're eliminating that vegetation
through population increases, which is the most effective means of
habitat destruction.

>  (and a side note: what about Bush
>  and his cohorts claiming that Bush was responsible for the breakup
>  of the Soviet Union and the rise of democracy in Europe? distortion?)

What about it?  I'm perfectly willing to agree that Bush lies.  I'm
looking at whether or not other people are different.  Leader isn't.

-andy
--
UUCP:    {arpa gateways, sun, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!andy
ARPA:    andy@cs.stanford.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU