46 replies to this topic

[Green Thumb]

I came across this as I was reading NYTimes.com

----

TO THE EDITOR:
Re “U.S. Review Expected to Delay Oil Pipeline Past the Election” (front
page, Nov. 11):

Environmental groups are dismayed that President Obama has withdrawn the Environmental Protection Agency’s smog-reducing proposal and moved forward on offshore drilling in Alaska. Some threatened not to support his reelection effort if the Keystone pipeline were approved, and the decision has been delayed until after the election. Mr. Obama’s green base will most likely soften anyway.
But Mr. Obama faces opponents for the presidency who call climate change a hoax, evolution iffy and E.P.A. a cuss word.
It might be emotionally satisfying for environmental groups to take their marbles from the electoral table. But if their cause seeks outcomes rather than appearances, the right course for them is to fully support the best candidate, whether Democrat or Republican, and to take the current administration to task directly for actions they believe are wrongheaded.

WILLIAM Y. BROWN
Washington, Nov. 11, 2011
The writer, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, was the science adviser to Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt in the Clinton administration.


----

The world is aware that another U.S. election is nearing. May everybody support the candidate whose heart runneth for the environment, who have ears for the masses voice for progress and change, who would stand for even the littlest cause if it means saving lives, livelihood and life's habitat.

[Shortpoet-GTD]

Granted, he's not as pro environment as I would like him to be, but for now, he's focused on jobs
and hopefully the eco part of his resume will become stronger.

But quite frankly, at this point, even if he was totally pro oil and proposed more drilling (which I strongly oppose)
he would still get my vote.
Why?
Because the "candidates" running are clueless, stupid, and mean. Too many are koch funded.
They want to dismantle everything good about the government and act like children.
The EPA is a large bureaucracy granted, but without them, we're be up sh*t creek-literally.
No thanks.
You can disagree with Obama, and I do on some of his policies, but he's smart and kind.
That combo goes a long way in my mind.
And he didn't ok the XL pipeline right off the bat. It's delayed for further study and that's a good thing.
bushwacker would have said, "Get er' done."

[DW Wood]

I love American politics, for me it's a blood sport with more casualties than an MMA fight, faster paced than Nascar and the winner is almost never who you expect it to be.

The long and short of the 2012 election is that if a Republican gets in, anyone of them, you can kiss the EPA good bye. Although the EPA is needed, it has been over the years allowed to become bloated and bureaucratic. Obama needs to streamline it and stick to it's recommendations when made.

Obama has been big on pushing a future with green jobs. That has come back to bite him in the ass several times. Not the least of which was pushing the Solyndra deal. Politics in the US is all bout keeping power and almost never about doing the right thing no matter what the party. The political game will never change, let alone green up until they allow and vote into office a third party candidate. The current system of two parties who are two sides of the same coin, will ensure that, real and lasting environmental changes will never happen.

[Germs]

Well, he certainly could be doing a better job in environmental terms, but hes certainly the best in this case we've seen for a while.

[Shortpoet-GTD]

http://www.blm.gov/c.../fasttrack.html
http://www.wind-watc...egon-wind-farm/
http://www.whitehouse.gov/energy

Moving in the right direction but walking instead of running. We must keep the pressure on for his
administration to do more, and do it now.

[mariaandrea]

DW Wood, on 17 November 2011 - 01:48 PM, said:

I love American politics, for me it's a blood sport with more casualties than an MMA fight, faster paced than Nascar and the winner is almost never who you expect it to be.

The long and short of the 2012 election is that if a Republican gets in, anyone of them, you can kiss the EPA good bye. Although the EPA is needed, it has been over the years allowed to become bloated and bureaucratic. Obama needs to streamline it and stick to it's recommendations when made.

Obama has been big on pushing a future with green jobs. That has come back to bite him in the ass several times. Not the least of which was pushing the Solyndra deal. Politics in the US is all bout keeping power and almost never about doing the right thing no matter what the party. The political game will never change, let alone green up until they allow and vote into office a third party candidate. The current system of two parties who are two sides of the same coin, will ensure that, real and lasting environmental changes will never happen.

Well said.

No matter how idealistic a politician is in the beginning, that kind of outlook never survives in the cutthroat world of politics, where deal making is the norm and essential to survival.

For many of us it will be a choice of the lesser evil. With a 2 party system it's inevitable.

Obama has disappointed me on many issues, seriously ticked me off with a couple and made me happy with a few. He's still a better choice in my book than anyone at all backed by the GOP, whose sole policy the last 3 years has been to oppose anything Obama does, even if it's a policy they supported or even proposed in the past. They've made it crystal clear that environmentally-friendly policies are not even at the bottom of their priorities - they're non-existent.

[Green Thumb]

It’s also good to be having faith with our leaders and supporting them in their projects or endeavor because yes, they could come up with development plans where people will benefit and if they know, from the people’s response that they are doing right and that they are helping people they would surely be inspired to continue doing worthy or do better. Now, hope they would be wise enough to realize their need for change when they hear people going against them or criticizing their project proposals, and take a step back, pause to think, “Hey, why such violent reactions?” They should continue to reassess and reinvent themselves as to how they can serve better, how to be more trustworthy. Politicians should have honor to make their brilliance iridescent.

[msterees]

I don't support President Obama for re-election, but not because of his stand on environmental issues. Frankly, Obamacare scares me, and is unconstitutional in my book. Not to mention the "stimulus" and his stance on gay marriage and abortion which are too liberal for me as a Christian.

[JBMedia]

I don't support Obama for a re-election myself either. I understand cleaning up a huge mess can be quite difficult. However, the approaches he has made with his time in office to certain matters are those I do not agree upon. Not to mention, he's definitely not focused on the environment in the least bit, even though at this point it's somewhat understandable.

[tigerlily78]

Well, we will have to see...

Personally I can't fathom voting for any of the current Republican candidates. They are all rather frightening in their own ways and I don't forsee any of them doing anything proactive for the environment. And if you vote for Perry or Paul, they have been quite open about their wishes to do away with the EPA entirely. Nor am I a fan of their long history of putting votes on controversial wedge issues like abortion and gay marriage ahead of voting on the issues that actually affect ALL of us Americans. Too much grandstanding and preaching and not enough actual problem solving. And personally I support EQUALITY for all Americans, so I would not give my vote to someone who believes in continued discrimination and persecution against gays and women.

As tempting as it might be to vote for an intelligent, moderate, rational independent candidate (if any such person might exist and rise to the occasion... Trump and others so far rumored to consider running as independents don't meet the aforementioned criteria in my opinion) I feel it might be horribly irresponsible (and potentially catastrophic) to split the "progressive" leaning vote and risk giving a Republican the win. Really sad that the only way we might send a strong political message that we are fed up is to hand a win to the party we least support.

It seems this might be the most important election cycle in decades, and we are really hard pressed to select anyone who will actually constitute a "win" for most of the American public. We will simply vote for the lesser of two evils, and when you are already pushed to the edge of a cliff overlooking Hades, the lesser of two evils doesn't really seem to account for much.

[Hydrotopia]

If you compare what is bloated and bureaucratic in this country it ain't the EPA. I think there's some green wolves in sheep's clothing lurking and injecting right-wing rhetoric. What is the difference between "streamlining" and weakening the EPA?

[Shortpoet-GTD]

msterees, on 02 January 2012 - 08:23 AM, said:

I don't support President Obama for re-election, but not because of his stand on environmental issues. Frankly, Obamacare scares me, and is unconstitutional in my book. Not to mention the "stimulus" and his stance on gay marriage and abortion which are too liberal for me as a Christian.

Obama is trying to drag this country into the 21st century, even though the #gop is kicking and screaming all the way,
to stop him.
We are the only industrialized country in the world that doesn't have health care for it's people.
We need universal health care. You can call it "socialism" but if we had gone with medicare for all, it
would have been better. But at least he started it. It will improve over time.

People with pre existing conditions can finally be covered. And btw-woman (according to the insurance
giants) have pre-existing conditions just from the fact of being a woman-menstrual cycles, child bearing, etc.
As for gays, whether you agree with their lifestyle or not; they should have all the same rights as every other American.

But we're getting off topic a bit here. Suppose to be about his eco record not his other policies.

[sculptor]

some days, i think of our politicians as actors on a stage
puppets with strings running up behind the curtains
with a host of wind up fiduciaries chugging hither and yon
collecting taxes and rewriting laws programed by their corporate masters

who holds the strings behind the curtain?

on other days, i write to my elected representatives with hope

[joeldgreat]

Once in power, will want to stay on power. At first I was too optimistic that Obama will turn the tide and bring the economy of the US back to where it should belong. But now, things are different and many promises had been wasted. I just hope that maybe the next US President will really turn the tide on.

[Shortpoet-GTD]

joeldgreat, on 03 January 2012 - 09:37 PM, said:

Once in power, will want to stay on power. At first I was too optimistic that Obama will turn the tide and bring the economy of the US back to where it should belong. But now, things are different and many promises had been wasted. I just hope that maybe the next US President will really turn the tide on.

You do realize the do nothing congress has control now? Obama got quite a lot done during the lame duck,
and through executive order, but the house/senate are the ones holding up progress.

The rate of job loss from bush's policies were horrendous-750,000 jobs lost a month before Obama was
sworn in. It takes time to come back from that.

Low wages in other countries and our tax structure led many employers to abandon America and
move off shore.
If anything, you should be upset with the companies that outsourced so many American jobs,
not to mention wall street. They brought this country to it's knees with their greed.

It's been slow, granted, but the country has added jobs since he's been in office.
And it's the private sector that makes the jobs, not the government.
The congress/senate have to work together to make the thing run, and obviously, they're not willing to work with Obama.

[E3 wise]

President Obama should have made jobs his first concern, yes we need health care but as James Carvel told President Clinton during the election of 1992 – it’s all about the economy and jobs.   President Obama promised jobs through an Alternative Energy and Sustainability revolution.  Now with this said we were in the worst economic crisis since the great depression and also  Republicans have done everything they can to make him a one term president by sabotaging most of his policies.  This said he a lot better – I feel- than anyone else I have seen on the other side so I will stick with him because for all the ups and downs he has stuck with Sustainability and Alternative energy more than any other President before him.

[Shortpoet-GTD]

It's not particularly green related, but Obama did push through the consumer protection he's wanted
by appointing Cordray, Wednesday.
That will no doubt anger a lot of business minded repubs, but it will sure make a lot of Americans
happy that have been ripped by predator lenders, crooked bankers, and payday loan shysters in the past.
The up-front bankers/lenders should be happy too because it will bring them more business.

They can say what they like, but I still believe he is looking out for us-the 99%.

[Shortpoet-GTD]

We're (I'm guilty too) wandering off topic here.
It's supposed to be about Obama's eco achievements, and not about his policies.

We can start another thread on that if you like in that forum.
Ok, back to topic.
Thanks.

[Shortpoet-GTD]

This one deserves kudos. There are still over 3,000 active mining claims in the area that
are not affected by this new ban.

"The Obama administration announced a federal ban Monday on new mining claims affecting a million acres near the Grand Canyon, an area known to be rich in high-grade uranium ore reserves.
In doing so, the administration brushed off pressure from congressional Republicans and mining industry
figures who wanted a policy change.

At an early afternoon event, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar announced a 20-year ban on new mining claims

on public land surrounding the Grand Canyon.
On Monday, he said that while uranium remains an important part of a comprehensive energy strategy,
the Grand Canyon is a national treasure that must be protected.
Conservation groups call the 20-year ban a crucial protection for an American icon.
Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., and other GOP lawmakers are backing legislation to prevent Salazar from moving
forward with the 20-year ban.
Despite significant pressure from the mining industry, the president and Secretary Salazar did not back down.
The Bush administration had opened up the land to new mining claims.
Salazar reversed the Bush policy in 2009 and called for a two-year moratorium on new mining claims around the canyon.



http://www.huffingto....html?ref=green

[Shortpoet-GTD]

"Seeking to draw clear lines between himself and a field of Republican presidential hopefuls
who have been openly hostile to environmental regulations -- and to shore up his own image among his environmental base -- President Barack Obama told a vocally appreciative gathering of Environmental Protection Agency employees
Tuesday that they have his thanks and support.

The agency has unveiled a number of aggressive and in many cases expensive measures --
including tough new efficiency standards for vehicles, new limits on emissions of
mercury and other air toxics from power plants, and vigorous rules aimed at
curbing air pollution that crosses state lines -- often in the face of furious opposition from affected industries
and their supporters on Capitol Hill.

EPA overreach has become a familiar refrain among GOP candidates in the run-up to the primary season,
and a record number of bills aimed at reversing established environmental regulations or hobbling the agency's
ability to introduce new ones were introduced in Congress in 2011.
But speaking Tuesday, Obama told EPA employees that he remains committed to sensible environmental regulation. And he praised the agency's accomplishments over the last 40 years."


http://www.huffingto....html?ref=green