logo 
spacer
  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

If you have an opinion, you should share it! Register Now!

America's Debate hosts the best in news, government, and political debate. Register now to take part in the most civil and constructive debate on the Internet. Join the community, and get ready to be challenged!

Click here to start

> Sponsored Links

Register to remove these ads!

> Welcome to the America's Debate Archive!

Topics that have had no new replies in the last 180 days are moved to the archive.

New replies are not accepted once a topic is moved to the archive, and new topics cannot be started in the archive.

> Kempthorne appointed Secretary of the Interior, Another rotten choice
DaffyGrl
post Mar 17 2006, 09:57 PM
Post #1


********
Millennium Mark

Sponsor
November 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 1,758
Member No.: 2,889
Joined: April-10-04

From: California
Gender: Female
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: None



It would be funny if it weren’t so damned sad. Bush has appointed former Idaho governor and biking buddy, Dirk Kempthorne for Secretary of the Interior. As a senator, Kempthorne was rated by the League of Conservation Voters a consistent zero (except for the first year, when he rated a 6) on a scale of 0 to 100. As governor, he once threatened to evict the EPA from the state over Superfund cleanup, and managed to raise Idaho’s toxic emission level by 2% while the rest of the country’s level declined. Source

In my opinion, he is the worst choice since James Watt brought his “dominion theology” mindset to the job. Mr. Fox, welcome to the henhouse. Help yourself. sad.gif

Is Kempthorne a wise choice to be steward of America’s public lands?

Why or why not?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 2)
BoF
post Mar 17 2006, 11:13 PM
Post #2


**********
Giga-bite: "I catch mice & rats - 2 & 4 legs."

Sponsor
October 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,128
Member No.: 3,423
Joined: August-14-04

From: Texas
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



Is Kempthorne a wise choice to be steward of America’s public lands?

Not only no, but hell no. This "ranks" (rank has two meanings that fit this nomination: "hierarchy" and "offensive smell") right up there with his appointments of John Bollton, Margaret Spellings and Harriet Miers.

Why or why not?

Given the potential inolved in global warming and other issues, I think the job should go to someone with a scientific background. The concept of the "best and brightest" has been replaced with "the blindly loyal and dumb."

Kemperthorne has a degree in political science from the University of Idaho. I have nothing against political science degrees, but they don't qualify someone to run this particular agency.

http://www.nndb.com/people/171/000032075/

There's a song playing in my head. It's called "Filabuster's in the Air."

This post has been edited by BoF: Mar 18 2006, 07:38 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AuthorMusician
post Mar 18 2006, 11:42 AM
Post #3


**********
Glasses and journalism work for me.

Sponsor
November 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,393
Member No.: 297
Joined: December-1-02

From: Blueberry Hill
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



Is Kempthorne a wise choice to be steward of America’s public lands?

Why or why not?


Depends on what the priorities are. For those interested in opening up public lands for private enterprise exploitation, great choice. For those interested in preserving public lands, horrible choice.

Oil/gas exploration permit authorizations are at an all time high in Colorado. The Grand Mesa is peppered with sites, but you can't see them from the road. Oil shale is back in vogue on the Western Slope, and that's really good for the local economy.

Who cares about the Grand Mesa? It's just a big flat rock with sage brush and rabbits, mule deer and coyotes. Nobody ever goes up there. Drill the thing until it's Swiss cheese.

That seems to be the attitude these days. If you can't see it, let it go.

I've been by the old oil shale digs that started up during the 1970s oil embargo. Oil shale became too expensive to mine after oil prices dropped, but now it makes sense again. The town, back when I went through it, 1994 I think, had turned into a retirement community. Nice little place, quiet. But now the boom mentality has taken over. So let's mine the place, bring in the big noisy rigs, get those property taxes out the roof, get rid of the old timers.

This is also an attitude these days. We're tired of the bust and want another boom. Actually, the real estate folks want this more than others. Thar's gold in them thar hills.

I wish we could have a more environmentally friendly mindset, but that seems beyond us right now. For example, why drill for oil/gas on the Grand Mesa when we could put up wind turbines? Why dig for oil shale when we could drill for geothermal? One hopeful thing is that alternative energy is at least getting some lip service as Republicans discover what the rest of us have known for thirty years.

Gosh, the USAF has even discovered that you can use solar heat for hangers, thus saving a ton of money on the gas bill. Who would have thought that you could do that in Colorado? What won't they think of next.

Anyway, this appointment is probably moot. We aren't quite ready yet to embrace alternative energy, but flirting with it seems to be gaining momentum.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

  
Go to the top of the page - Simple Version Time is now: December 2nd, 2021 - 10:41 PM
©2002-2010 America's Debate, Inc.  All rights reserved.