From: tilley@fsh.UUCP (Tom Tilley)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.environment
Subject: Re: You have to question that the media is/isn't
Date: 19 Nov 92 21:18:34 GMT
Reply-To: tilley@sunfse.ese.lmsc.lockheed.com
Followup-To: alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.environment
Organization: LMSC, Sunnyvale

In article <1992Nov17.125448.3233@nic.csu.net> jtinkle@sparc1.sparc1.csubak.edu (j. tinkle ) writes:
>In article <9NOV199200031401@pearl.tufts.edu> ddeocamp@pearl.tufts.edu (DANIEL M. DEOCAMPO) writes:
>>In article <1992Nov8.161303.3098@nic.csu.net>, jtinkle@sparc1.sparc1.csubak.edu (j. tinkle ) writes...

>>>>	How is the Sierra Club "extreme"?
>>>Being from California, I should know.  Some of their leaders are environ-
>>>mentalist extremist tree-huggers.
	    ^^^^^^^^^
>>That doesn't answer the question.  

>Read again.

Query: How is the Sierra Club extreme?
Answer: Some of their leaders are extremist.

I have to agree that this is circular.

To say a position is extreme is to make a relative comparison between the
position and current political debate, asserting that the position is outside
the bounds of the debate.  Since the Sierra Club is very much a part of
current political debate, it is hard to assert that its positions are extreme.

>>They are one of the most centrist
>>environmental groups.  Any more conservative and you start talking about
>>wise-users.
>What's a wise-user? 

In my view, the "wise use movement" favors anything BUT wise land use.

The "wise-use movement", as a collection of groups and individuals, tends
to oppose mining and logging restrictions on federal land (including National
Parks).  They oppose efforts to change the General Mining Law of 1872 which
allows anyone to establish a mining claim on public land without paying for
the right (and without regard to any other public use of the land).  That
law gives the land to the miner free-and-clear once he's been mining for
a while.  They oppose efforts to restrict cattle grazing on public land.
They tend to oppose coastal development restrictions.

This movement doesn't simply object to organizations that lobby for public
policy changes: the "Nature Conservancy" (which buys land in order to
protect it) has drawn their ire (I guess they don't believe in the private
property rights of the Nature Conservancy!).

>We're not in a recession!  Well, California sort of still is, but much of
>it is due to our governer.  ...

According to the accepted definition of recession (two or three [I forget]
consecutive quarters of GNP decline),  we are not in a recession.  On the
other hand, what little GNP growth that has occurred is not consistent
with an economic recovery.

I'm not thrilled with the governor of CA either, but it is a bit much to
blame the decline of the aerospace industry (the largest contributor to
current CA unemployment) on Governor Wilson.

>>I guess Bushy didn't have the big MO. Thank God! :')
>Huh?

"the big mo": a Bush quote from 1980 immediately after the Iowa Republican
caucus (momentum: he claimed to have it).   He had no mo (1980, or 1992).
I too am glad.

Tom.
#--------------------------------------------------#
| Tom Tilley                                       |
| Internet : tilley@sunfse.ese.lmsc.lockheed.com   |