"riverman" wrote in message
...
For those who insist that Bush really has had no different impact on our
resources than anyone else....


http://oregonlive.com/news/oregonian...e/110190629210
1830.xml


Add this recent article to the list, too: http://tinyurl.com/5bvzl

Some quotes from the second article:
--------------------------------------------
Environmentalists see some of their worst fears playing out as President
Bush moves to cement a second-term agenda that includes getting more timber,
oil and gas from public lands and relying on the market rather than
regulation to curb pollution. Bush's top energy priority - opening an Alaska
wildlife refuge to oil drilling - is shaping up as an early test of GOP
gains in Congress.
.................................................. ..................
Bush's environmental priority is to rewrite the Clean Air Act to set annual
nationwide limits on three major air pollutants from power plants and to
allow marketplace trading of pollution rights rather than regulation to meet
those goals.

--------------------------------------------



I'm as tired of the political tirades as any of us, but I really do have a
deep-seated fear that the landscape in America, as we know it, will be
fundamentally changed forever from Bush's administration. These aren't
one-off changes..."first development" of virgin land is an irreversable
step. And he intends to rewrite laws which will continue to impact us once
he is gone. If anyone can offer any alternative press that shows that Bush's
intentions are to _preserve_ the wilderness, or even to add anything to it,
and to ensure that at least *some* of our undeveloped, unmanaged land will
remain protected and undeveloped, I'd like to read it.

--riverman