NBC: Real Bush Quotes

On 24 Mar 2004 23:44:48 GMT, (GAUBSTER2) wrote:

Doubt me if you will - but I lived through it. I went to
the funeral.


I'm sorry your friend died, but
don't twist the story to make it the fault of environmentalism.

Thank you for a most enlightening post, Karen


Karen, where do you see that Steve is "twist"ing his story? Perhaps you just
don't agree with his experience (and how can that be since you weren't there)
and that equates in your mind to a "twist"?? You seem to be embarassed by the
environmental agenda for you to attempt to cover for them.

Let me take a shot, at least as it worked for me. Steve may have had a
valid complaint, but then it got paired with the old "they plant
another tree for each one they tear down - they don't want to run out
of trees" argument (not a quote, I don't have it in front of me - it's
about what I recall).

That is a straight out press release from the logging companies. It
makes no distinction between an existing eons old forest and clearcut
land with trees planted in neat rows for future logging. Therefore I
have to consider that perhaps the original story may be a bit slanted.
Particularly because it doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
Environmentalists generally understand the interaction of ecological
systems pretty well and would not have a problem with a quarantine of
a problem area.

Perhaps this was an over-reaction by a particular group because of
some previous incident(s) that we don't know about? I can't say. All I
can say is that it sounds odd.

From: dgk

Let me take a shot, at least as it worked for me. Steve may have had a
valid complaint, but then it got paired with the old "they plant
another tree for each one they tear down - they don't want to run out
of trees" argument (not a quote, I don't have it in front of me - it's
about what I recall).

That is a straight out press release from the logging companies.

Instead of acting emotionally, think about it for a minute. Why wouldn't
logging companies replant trees for future use? Do you think their goal is to
cut down all of the trees in the world, causing environmental havoc and
ensuring they, themselves, don't have a future?

It
makes no distinction between an existing eons old forest and clearcut
land with trees planted in neat rows for future logging. Therefore I
have to consider that perhaps the original story may be a bit slanted.

That's where your particular bias kicks in. You don't know one way or the
other, so you assume the worst.

Environmentalists generally understand the interaction of ecological
systems pretty well and would not have a problem with a quarantine of
a problem area.

No, environmentalist whackos generally don't want *any* progress made--at all.

Essentially all of us are environmentalists--who among us wants to wipe out
everything around us and then wants to suffer the consequences? Not me. I
don't litter, I recycle, etc.

From: dgk

Let me take a shot, at least as it worked for me. Steve may have had a
valid complaint, but then it got paired with the old "they plant
another tree for each one they tear down - they don't want to run out
of trees" argument (not a quote, I don't have it in front of me - it's
about what I recall).

That is a straight out press release from the logging companies.

Instead of acting emotionally, think about it for a minute. Why wouldn't
logging companies replant trees for future use? Do you think their goal is to
cut down all of the trees in the world, causing environmental havoc and
ensuring they, themselves, don't have a future?

It
makes no distinction between an existing eons old forest and clearcut
land with trees planted in neat rows for future logging. Therefore I
have to consider that perhaps the original story may be a bit slanted.

That's where your particular bias kicks in. You don't know one way or the
other, so you assume the worst.

Environmentalists generally understand the interaction of ecological
systems pretty well and would not have a problem with a quarantine of
a problem area.

No, environmentalist whackos generally don't want *any* progress made--at all.

Essentially all of us are environmentalists--who among us wants to wipe out
everything around us and then wants to suffer the consequences? Not me. I
don't litter, I recycle, etc.

From: (-L.

Ahem. He wasn't elected...


What planet did you come from?? He most certainly was. Ever heard of the
Electoral College?? You people really need to get over it.

From: (-L.

Ahem. He wasn't elected...


What planet did you come from?? He most certainly was. Ever heard of the
Electoral College?? You people really need to get over it.

On 25 Mar 2004 14:59:17 GMT, (GAUBSTER2) wrote:

From: (-L.

Ahem. He wasn't elected...


What planet did you come from?? He most certainly was. Ever heard of the
Electoral College?? You people really need to get over it.


Yep, I can just imagine you if Gore had lost the popular vote and won
anyway with an assist from the activist court.

On 25 Mar 2004 14:59:17 GMT, (GAUBSTER2) wrote:

From: (-L.

Ahem. He wasn't elected...


What planet did you come from?? He most certainly was. Ever heard of the
Electoral College?? You people really need to get over it.


Yep, I can just imagine you if Gore had lost the popular vote and won
anyway with an assist from the activist court.

From: dgk

Ahem. He wasn't elected...


What planet did you come from?? He most certainly was. Ever heard of the
Electoral College?? You people really need to get over it.


Yep, I can just imagine you if Gore had lost the popular vote and won
anyway with an assist from the activist court.

Let's see....Gore and the Democratic (there's a misnomer) Party disenfranchised
hundreds of thousands of vote in CA, FL, and all over the country. Add those
votes in and the numbers will tell a very different story.

As for an activist court...which one(s) are you talking about? The Florida
Supreme Court (just count the votes you want to count, Gore) or the 9th Circus
Court of Appeals in CA? Which one?

I notice you didn't answer the rest of my post, dgk. Too much logic there for
you to handle?

From: dgk

Ahem. He wasn't elected...


What planet did you come from?? He most certainly was. Ever heard of the
Electoral College?? You people really need to get over it.


Yep, I can just imagine you if Gore had lost the popular vote and won
anyway with an assist from the activist court.

Let's see....Gore and the Democratic (there's a misnomer) Party disenfranchised
hundreds of thousands of vote in CA, FL, and all over the country. Add those
votes in and the numbers will tell a very different story.

As for an activist court...which one(s) are you talking about? The Florida
Supreme Court (just count the votes you want to count, Gore) or the 9th Circus
Court of Appeals in CA? Which one?

I notice you didn't answer the rest of my post, dgk. Too much logic there for
you to handle?

These stories seem to tell a different story about the N. Idaho
forests. Fires are a part of the forest's natural cycle, and these
beetles are also a part of the cycle. I'm sorry your friend died, but
don't twist the story to make it the fault of environmentalism. Let's
also be honest that the environmental groups are concerned about the
old growth forest harvest that always seems to the focus of these
"thinning" projects to "reduce the risk of wildfire". Old-growth is
the most immune to forest fire, they teach you that in first-year
forest biology.

I think you need to get your tuition back from your first year forest
biology class. Of course you don't define what your vision of "old growth"
is but I'll take exception to the statement anyway. Just after the turn of
the previous century ~1910 I believe, there was a massive fire that took
most of northern Idaho, much of western Montana and few pieces of Wyoming
and Washington for good measure. Like all fires it was erratic, sometimes it
went down into canyons and sometimes it skipped them. Old growth forests may
have been less likely to burn in the early 1900's but that has ceased to be
the case for at least half a century. When fires raged without control, they
periodically cleaned away lower shrubs and other fuel. That hasn't been the
case for over half a century. Going back to my earlier story of the 1910
fire, there were three areas that fire skipped - one just happened to be the
center section of the Haughton Creek fire where magnificent 100 plus year
old ponderosa pines lined Haughton creek in an area about 3/4 of a mile wide
by 5 miles long. Nothing but old growth for these trees. How many of those
Old Growth trees survived? About a dozen out of hundreds. Let's take a look
at a small area the 1910 fires skipped up on the north fork of the Coeur
D'Alene and another place south east of St Maries which contained
magnificent old growth white pine. Some of the finest specimens anywhere in
the world. They used to be a pretty sight but they all burned down. Your
comments about Old Growth being "immune" to fire is just plain erroneous. I
sometimes wonder how these urban myths get started and then get "taught" by
some professor who couldn't find a forest if it fell on her. These are just
three examples in one small are where old growth forests were definitely not
"immune" to fire.