Bush vows to clean up National Parks by removing toxic petroleum
 

WASHINGTON, DC?Vowing to "restore the pristine splendor of America's natural treasures," President Bush Monday unveiled "Project: National Parks Clean-Up," an ambitious program to remove all toxic petrochemical deposits from national parks by 2004.

"Places like Yellowstone and Yosemite were once pure, unspoiled wilderness," Bush said at a White House press conference. "But over the course of the past 10 million years, we have allowed them to become polluted with toxic fossil-fuel deposits, turning a blind eye to the steady build-up of vast quantities of dangerous pollutants. It's time to end this terrible neglect."

http://www.theonion.com/onion3724/bu...to_remove.html

:1orglaugh

I love that site :)

From the article...

"The Democrats talk a good game about the importance of cleaning up the environment, but when it comes to actually eliminating the threat of enormous oil deposits lurking under the surface of our nation, no one can hold a candle to George W. Bush."

Ditto! I must have missed this article when it first appeared. All their stuff is worth reading, but this one is a classic. Right up there with the one about Clinton deploying "Very Special Forces" to Iraq.

on a side note..

ever notice....

the same people that say this war is about oil, are the same people that have a problem with us tapping into our own supply?

Bush is all about the oil.

Scroll to bottom, answer the questions:

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showth...hreadid=120750

:)

Why? Did I state a position either way?

Personally, I'd say, let the fucking Alaskans hold a binding vote on it.

Most Alaskans support drilling, but i guess the environmentalist wackos should have more of a say than the people who actually live there.

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

The Bush adminstration, in concert with oil companies and automakers, is SUING the State of California to stop its new clean air & fuel efficiency standards. Bush also scrapped a program that provided government money to automakers for the development of fuel efficient (50+ MPG) family sized cars.

Don't try to tell me that supporting 1 hydrogen fuel cell program that he knows will not yeild results for decades is anything but a pathetic attempt to provide political cover for his anti-environmental, pro-oil raping of clean air and fuel efficiency standards.

This is "Hitler wasn't that bad, look at all these train tracks he built" level logic. :winkwink:

blah blah blah.

It's amazing how absolutely *nothing* was done under clinton, or bush I, or reagan, or anyone prior, other than applying enough window dressing to shut people up, and everyone seems to blame every last fucking thing on the current bush.

I didn't vote for the guy, but from where I sit, he's getting a lot of unjustified heat for the utter failures of his predecessors, including especially, his daddy, who fucked up and dropped the ball on Gulf War I.

George W Bush accomplished the following in his first few months in office:

* Cut funding for research into renewable energy sources by 50 percent

* Delayed rules that would reduce "acceptable" levels of arsenic in drinking water

* Cut funding for research into cleaner, more efficient cars and trucks by 28 percent

* Allowed Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton to request suggestions for opening up national monuments for foresting, coal mining and oil and gas drilling

* Broke campaign promise to invest $100 million per year in rain forest conservation

* Nullified a proposal to increase public access to information about the potential ramifications of chemical plant accidents

* Pulled out of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol agreement on global warming, ultimately signed by 178 other countries

* Cut half a billion dollars from the Environmental Protection Agency's budget

* Abandoned campaign pledge to regulate carbon dioxide emissions, a major contributor to global warming

* Nominated former mining company executive Dan Lauriski as Assistant Secretary of Labor for Mine Safety and Health

* Appointed Lynn Scarlett, a global warming skeptic and an opponent of stricter standards on air pollution, as Undersecretary of the Interior

* Approved Interior Secretary Gale Norton's controversial plan to auction off areas close to Florida's eastern shore for oil and gas development

* Announced plans to allow oil drilling in Montana's Lewis and Clark National Forest

* Tried to reverse regulation protecting sixty million acres of national forest from logging and road building

* Made Monsanto executive Linda Fisher deputy administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency

* Canceled the 2004 deadline for auto makers to develop prototype high-mileage cars

* Appointed oil and gas lobbyist J. Steven Giles as Deputy Secretary of the Interior

* Named Bennet Raley, who has called for the repeal of the Endangered Species Act, as Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Water and Science

Of course, a lot of the above is supported by many Democrats

Nice list Rocky. I have to say that I agree with the decision to opt out of Kyoto though. It was definitely unfair in its demands on the US and would never have been ratified by Congress.

Most of the rest are inexcusable, imo.

Global warming is a myth.

So is evolution, plate tectonics, and every other scientific theory that conflicts with the kooky right wing republican religion.

You people should put bumper stickers on your cars saying "I deny basic scientific theories.. AND I VOTE!"

That'll show those pointy headed academics.

the real myth is democracy
:winkwink:

A: I'm not now, nor have I ever been a republican.
B: I've never Voted for a single Republican.
C: Most, if not all "global warming" theory is based on inaccurate, and incomplete data.