Reply #43: You mean [View All]

[Spangle]

The guy that said there wasn't any difference between Gore and Bush? LOL! Yea, I doubt you will get Gore to run on that platform.

After watching the documentry and seeing Gore's passion for this and what he has honestly tried to do.... Can you really understand how Nader's comments really cut deeply.

I'm not talking about Gore's campaign here. I'm talking about Gore personaly. That had got to have hurt! I know I was!

But back to the topic. I'm going to be honest with you about this. I've already said how I personaly believe about extreamists. They are the same on both sides and I don't like them talking for me. This next point is sorta a different issue.

There are a few that have had some personal suprises that have come from the extream envirmental movement. Nothing that really makes natioanl media attention. Hence, the suprise. People whoe ARE envirmentalist themselfs, who live.. say.. next to major forests.. wanting to know why the govenment isn't taking care of 'fire hazzords', etc. THey get the major suprise that some of the groups that they have been funding has been going to court, tying the government hands, preventing fire hazzords from being taken care of. Actualy, doesn't see a problem if a a fire does happen. Because to 'them' the only way it should be removed, should be naturaly. Which means by FIRE. The fact that their house might get burned, not an imporant issue. And that it goes along wiht some extreamist groups that consider the removal of the home and possible loss of human life also quite acceptable.. cause there are to many humans in the world anyway.

To put it bluntly, people are waking up to the dangors of extreamists. Just because a group claims to be an envirmentalist, doesn't mean they are a 'logical' envirmentalist.

For these people who have had to deal with the effects of these extreamist, they become just as heated over the subject, as those who have been extreamly harrassed by extreamist Christians.. when the word CHRISTAN is even mentioned.

That makes it HARDER for us to FIGHT for the ENVIRMENT!

It makes it HARDER for us to get ELECTED persons who understands.. much less have an actual passion for envirmental causes!

Which brings up a reminder of what exactly IS our GOAL as envirmentalists? That is something that we seriously need to think about.

I don't hate the extreamist with a passion. I actualy think we need extreamists of alsorts. They point out things that everyone messes. And they monitor their 'passion' closely. WE NEED THOSE KINDS OF SAFE GAURDS. But not to rule. Cause an extreamist in anything, can't see past their 'passion.' Kinda one sided, when there are so many other sides to consider.

So, that is a real problem that we have. The word 'envirmentalist' is getting to be a 'red flag' along the lines of 'radical christian' is. Unless we START making the verbal difference and start ading 'radical' in front of envirmentalist, so thatthere is a line. So people don't run from the 'label.' We don't need it to become a dirty word.

And it IS in some places. For the past several years people have been dealing with fires that could hae been prevented if people were allowed to do their job. This is important. Cause after the fires, local people start asking questions. When they find out about the law suites, etc.. created by the exreamist... They don't forget quickly. come the next election and one of the canidates is considered an 'envirmentalist'.. do you really think they are going to vote for that person?

Now you have an 'electiblity' issue. The canidate is now hampared by the 'envirmentalist' label.

I'm sorry. What was our goal again? Oh yea, getting envirmentalist elected.

If we want to get any sort of envirmentalist elected, we have GOT to make that verbal difference from envirmenalist and extream envirmentalist. Or NOW envirmentalist will be able to get elected. Not your sort and not my sort.