Hello everyone, I told you I would be back soon, I am sorry again and thank you for being patient. I've got a good topic here and one that I feel is very fitting with an election coming up. It will be controversial and it may seem obvious where I stand with my political views, but I feel that it is necessary to address.
I hope you all enjoy and consider some of the facts that are told here. I look forward to your comments (good or bad) at the end of this post.
--------------------------------------
I've been looking for a GOOD topic to write about that might stir some things up and get people a little heated. I am an Environmental Science and Policy major with a concentration in Environmental Politics and Policy, after reading this article, I was fuming; so mad that I hope neither of these morons are elected as our next President (by the looks of the recent caucuses, primaries and debates, they won't). But if they are, well than I, including millions of others need to look for a new major and career.
Republican Presidential hopefuls Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum have both expressed how they feel about the environment and our Federal Governments environmental agencies (like the EPA) and environmental policies. It seems like the only Republican nominee who somewhat cares about the environment is Romney, although he still favors drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Back to Santorum and Gingrich; they both plan to shut down the Environmental Protection Agency as soon as they get into office, they feel that it is taking too much unnecessary money from our budget. Newt believes that climate change has nothing to do with humans and our actions over the past few hundred years; Santorum on the other hand, believes that the whole concept of climate change is a hoax. A hoax, really? Coming from someone who could run our country, that is a ludicrous statement. Romney is the only nominee who believes that climate change is impacted by humans and that it is occurring and threatening life on Earth.
If you look at the Republican political views, they are very much for fossil fuel use and the destroying of the environment and misuse of its resources. The nominees of this election believe that fossil fuels are the future of the US, when science clearly shows that it is not. Increased use of fossil fuels have continued to prove otherwise and that it is a major contributor to climate change. They have also shown their support for the Keystone XL Pipeline proposal that has recently been shutdown (temporarily). Romney opposes the protection of endangered species like Polar Bears, and the protection of our national and state parks from development/industrialism (forest clearing for timber, etc.) I wonder how much the big oil companies are paying these guys to say some of the idiotic, false statements that have been said in the past few months. More or less than what Bush was paid? Who knows.
This party, for years, has refused to take action to support our environment. It seems that the nominees and past Presidents have more of a "well sea levels wont rise 10 inches right now, the climate wont radically change right now...________(fill in the blank) won't happen right now, so who cares" attitude. It can be seen with Bush, Bush Sr., Santorum, Romney, Gingrich, the list goes on and on.
While I have been bashing the hell out of the Republicans for their lack of support to the environment, Democrats aren't out of the clear either. While Obama has shown his support and taken action to protect our environment, he has done a few things that I don't necessarily support either. But hey, it happens. Overall, President Obama has done a phenomenal job taking care of the environment. I am not here to argue about other political and economic views of the President or the Republican nominees, just how they view the environment. I feel that if any of the Republican nominees are elected than you can kiss many environmental laws, regulations and acts good-bye. Believing that the environment will always be here and we can do no harm (Santorum), that climate change is a hoax (Santorum), that oil is the future (Gingrich), and environmental protection is not very important (Romney, Santorum, Gingrich) proves that their priorities and what they care about is not fitting to be a President and lead our country.
It amazes me that some people, including these men, regardless of political view, do not care for the environment. Earth was here billions of years before Humans, and will be here long after we are gone. We are simply tenants living here temporarily. We use and abuse Its resources. We have had such a negative impact on the Earth that we have been able to change the environment and climate so drastically since the beginning of the industrial revolution (a few hundred years). We have done something that took the natural world tens and even hundreds of thousands of years to do, again in only a few hundred years. If we keep on this path, exhaust all of our fossil fuels (which we are close to doing and will get even closer with a Republican president since that is what they believe is the fuel of the future) and don't protect our environment, we will kill ourselves off. It may not happen in 2012, but it will be our kids and their kids and their kids who will have to suffer the consequences of our idiocy and unwillingness to change our ways. Whatever your political views are, think about what is the right thing to do, who the right man for the job is and what kind of world you want to live in. Remember, we are living off of the environment, we need it to survive. So even if some of us don't care about the NOW, think about the future, our legacy and the world we want our future generations to live in.
Sources:
http://coloradoindependent.com/111924/santorum-and-gingrich-dismiss-climate-change-vow-to-dismantle-the-epa
http://glassbooth.org/explore/index/mitt-romney/14/environment-and-energy/7/
Vince, you seem to oppose the Republican candidates' and past presidents' views about what/what not to do concerning the environment. What plan of action do you suggest concerning the EPA, endangered species, etc, etc? Do you also recognize the other issues facing America keeping in mind that we do not have the budget to give everything to every cause?
ReplyDeleteAlso, Romney 2012.
ReplyDeleteAlso, the environmentalists caused the oil spill in the gulf....they are never satisfied with anything.
I understand where you are coming from and yes I do understand what our country and the Obama Administration faces in the upcoming months.
ReplyDeleteDoing away with the EPA is one of the worst things that we could do to this country; it will put our citizens health at risk, cripple our environment and could hurt our economy as well.
As for your first accusation, environmentalists had nothing to do with the BP oil spill. It was BP ignoring international and national regulations on oil rigs that caused the oil spill. Environmentalists are actually very much against off-shore drilling.
The EPA is much more than what many people think. Since most Republicans are against having the EPA funded, they don't realize all of the good things that the agency has done for not only our country but also what it has done for the international community. Also, the EPA was introduced and set forth by an Executive Order under President Nixon, who was a Republican himself. Doing away with this agency will have more negative effects than positive. While it may allow for more money to put towards other Republican ideas, like the Keystone XL Pipeline (which is another horrible idea), you will lose many environmental regulations and laws that the EPA set; there will be NO ONE to regulate our environment and protect the health of our citizens; and our country will lose the only agency dedicated to everything related to our environment...Not to mention the hundreds of thousands whom are currently employed the EPA and its umbrella agencies.
Their is simply no good that could come from terminating the EPA. If any of the Republican nominees are elected as President for the next term still think that this is a good idea after talking with their cabinet and executive officials and still decide to follow through with their "promises" I can guarantee that the current state of our environment, health and economy will fall drastically. That President will not last long in office. This just proves my main point of the post in saying that the Republican ideology when it comes to the environment is "it wont hurt us now, so why care"; well the reason to care is because, whether you want to believe it or not, the environment is the future of this country and this world, if it is in a bad state, WE are the ones who will suffer the consequences. It is the backbone to all that we have in our life and the EPA is all that we have to protect it in America.
i love lamp
ReplyDeletewww.allthingsyoublog.blogspot.com
DeleteI really like your proposals Vince. Keep up the good work
ReplyDeleteDON'T PISS ME OFF. Protecting the environment does not involve the government giving money to causes. You guys aren't old enough to remember what this country looked like before the implementation of even the weak environmental laws we have today. ALL the cities were so choked with smog that you couldn't see the tops of buildings. In cities powered by coal you couldn't see house numbers from the street. You couldn't drive with your windows down without getting the inside of the car and yourself coated with gritty, greasy dirt. In the winter, snow would be filfthy within 24 hours of falling and not just by the roadside. Untreated sewage and industrial waste was dumped directly into the ocean and rivers including right where people lived. Houses and schools were painted and insulated known poisonous and cancer-causing materials. Water in lakes and rivers, even in the mountains and other supposedly pristine areas, was opaque with sludge caused by dumping and chemicals leeching up through the ground water. Trash was freely dumped everywhere, the sides of roads especially highways were covered with trash, paper, bottles and cans - people just tossed everything out their car windows. People smoked everywhere including on planes - even if you didn't smoke you reeked of cigarette smoke all the time. Eagles, hawks and songbirds were practically extinct from pesticide use. Vincent, ask your dad what it smelled like as soon as you crossed the Walt Whitman Bridge into South Philly; ask him about the "mosquito" trucks that used to drive through our neighborhoods spraying huge, opaque clouds of pesticides and how we used to ride our bikes behind the truck so we could be invisible in the cloud. The cost to society of environmental degradation, of health costs, of destruction of property was in the billions every year, even in the 60's and 70's. My parents and my generation supported the creation of the EPA and environmental laws so our kids could live in a cleaner world than we did. Don't believe for a minute that we can't afford to protect our physical environment. WE HAVE TO! American environmental laws are some the most effective legislation this country has ever passed. Just because politicians can't think beyond the next election doesn't mean we have to be that simple-minded.
ReplyDeleteVince I'm glad you wrote this issue! This is such an important issue in 2012 because of the U.S dependence on oil. By summer gas is suppose to reach
ReplyDelete$4 a gallon!!!!!The U.S needs to continue to invest in more fuel efficient cars and alternative modes of transportation that will free us from our expensive dependence on oil..Not offshore drilling!!!! The reason why Republicans are for offshore drilling is because they are being lobbied by big oil companies who fund their campaigns! Republican mindset is all about protecting their money not the environment..... The EPA is in charge of so many important issues from protecting marine life to controlling air pollution, the thought of getting rid of them is ridiculous.