Comments for ConservAmerica http://conservamerica.org Conservatives for the Environment Thu, 10 May 2012 17:35:01 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 Comment on Maddow: Wrong About Us and Our Name by Jim http://conservamerica.org/2012/04/maddow-wrong-about-us-and-our-name/#comment-143 Jim Thu, 10 May 2012 17:35:01 +0000 http://conservamerica.org/?p=257#comment-143 Thanks, Rob for responding. Please let me know of the 12 environmental initiatives you speak about. I would like to check them out, follow them, and I would like to track how votes go. You may be able to find minor faults with LCV, but when the results are so extreme it clearly says something. I remember when GW Bush was running for President the first time, he campaigned on reducing carbon. One of the reasons I voted for him. Big mistake. Again, I applaud your efforts...keep up the good work. But you will have a long way to go in convincing me that a general vote in the Republican direction is a vote to protect the environment. Alas, I think it is a vote in the opposite direction. But I am willing to listen. Thanks, Rob for responding.
Please let me know of the 12 environmental initiatives you speak about. I would like to check them out, follow them, and I would like to track how votes go.
You may be able to find minor faults with LCV, but when the results are so extreme it clearly says something.
I remember when GW Bush was running for President the first time, he campaigned on reducing carbon. One of the reasons I voted for him. Big mistake.
Again, I applaud your efforts…keep up the good work.
But you will have a long way to go in convincing me that a general vote in the Republican direction is a vote to protect the environment. Alas, I think it is a vote in the opposite direction.
But I am willing to listen.

]]> Comment on Maddow: Wrong About Us and Our Name by Rob Sisson http://conservamerica.org/2012/04/maddow-wrong-about-us-and-our-name/#comment-142 Rob Sisson Thu, 10 May 2012 16:54:14 +0000 http://conservamerica.org/?p=257#comment-142 Hi Jim- Thank you for your comments and questions. All are good! No, what I'm saying is that people should wait on endorsements and "deciding" until the general election plays out. I've been around long enough to know that candidates for either party say some pretty extreme things during primary races to try to cater to the respective base. I do not expect a President Romney to just go with the flow of the congressional leaders you list. Romney will approach governance in a thoughtful, deliberative manner, based on facts; just as he did as governor of Massachusetts and in the business world. Regarding the LCV scorecard, I know that many of the votes scored are cherry picked...procedural votes or votes with other amendments or with language not pertinent to environmental issues. "Gotcha" votes, we call them. Not to diminish its importance or relevance. Unfortunately, in Congress, there is rarely a straight forward vote. There are 12 bills pending in Congress, right now, introduced by Republican lawmakers, to extend significant protections to public lands. Other than through ConservAmerica, though, you probably haven't heard about those. It's our job to be the voice for grassroots Republicans who believe conservation is conservative. Our job isn't to cheerlead poor policy put forward by the right, nor is it our job to tagalong with progressive command and control policies. To many, it certainly must seem like threading a needle. To us, it is a wide open market ready to explode. Hi Jim- Thank you for your comments and questions. All are good! No, what I’m saying is that people should wait on endorsements and “deciding” until the general election plays out. I’ve been around long enough to know that candidates for either party say some pretty extreme things during primary races to try to cater to the respective base. I do not expect a President Romney to just go with the flow of the congressional leaders you list. Romney will approach governance in a thoughtful, deliberative manner, based on facts; just as he did as governor of Massachusetts and in the business world.

Regarding the LCV scorecard, I know that many of the votes scored are cherry picked…procedural votes or votes with other amendments or with language not pertinent to environmental issues. “Gotcha” votes, we call them. Not to diminish its importance or relevance. Unfortunately, in Congress, there is rarely a straight forward vote.

There are 12 bills pending in Congress, right now, introduced by Republican lawmakers, to extend significant protections to public lands. Other than through ConservAmerica, though, you probably haven’t heard about those.

It’s our job to be the voice for grassroots Republicans who believe conservation is conservative. Our job isn’t to cheerlead poor policy put forward by the right, nor is it our job to tagalong with progressive command and control policies. To many, it certainly must seem like threading a needle. To us, it is a wide open market ready to explode.

]]> Comment on Maddow: Wrong About Us and Our Name by Jim http://conservamerica.org/2012/04/maddow-wrong-about-us-and-our-name/#comment-141 Jim Thu, 10 May 2012 16:37:26 +0000 http://conservamerica.org/?p=257#comment-141 Forgot to attribute that last quote: Grover Norquist. Forgot to attribute that last quote:
Grover Norquist.

]]> Comment on Maddow: Wrong About Us and Our Name by Jim http://conservamerica.org/2012/04/maddow-wrong-about-us-and-our-name/#comment-140 Jim Thu, 10 May 2012 16:35:22 +0000 http://conservamerica.org/?p=257#comment-140 Rob- Are you seriously suggesting that if I am to cast my vote in the next election for a party that will look to protect the environment that I cast that vote with Republicans? You are correct in saying that as Governor, Mitt Romney demonstrated concern for the environment. But even you must admit that since running for President he has waffled on that stance. He now emphasizes that the world’s climate has changed throughout history, and says “we should not take extreme measures when we are unsure of human role in global warming.” Unsure? That ends it for me. Science is saying we are very sure, and getting more sure everyday. And quite honestly, Mitt is only part of the problem. Even if he was to act like Governor Romney (which he repeatedly tells his base he will not- is he deceiving them?), and even if he wanted to take action on environmental issues, he too would be faced with (a most likely) skeptical Republican House, and a Republican minority in the Senate who will filibuster any attempt at strengthening environmental efforts. I too have been disappointed in President Obama's track record on the environment, but it is not negligible. Fuel efficiency standards, blocking Keystone for now to be sure that environmental impacts are studied, investment in green energy, moratorium on drilling in Gulf after BP disaster. Let me ask you, would President Romney put a moratorium on drilling in the Gulf after that catastrophe? Please. Even if he wanted to, he would be so criticized from Joe Barton, Rand Paul, John Shimkus (who quotes the Bible in the House to denigrate environmental efforts), Michele Bachmann, James Inhofe, Jim DeMint, Chuck Grassley, and many many many others. You know that League of Conservation Voters releases a scorecard every year, and almost all who score 100 are Democrats and those scoring 0 are almost always Republicans. Romney will stand up to them? Not a chance. And as key Republican thinker said: “We’re not nominating a candidate to tell the party what direction to go. All of them ran as Reagan Republicans. We know what we’re doing and who we are — we just want a guy to sign the bills. We’re electing a coach of a team that knows the plays.” That tells you how Governor/President Romney will be steamrolled on the environment. Rob-
Are you seriously suggesting that if I am to cast my vote in the next election for a party that will look to protect the environment that I cast that vote with Republicans? You are correct in saying that as Governor, Mitt Romney demonstrated concern for the environment. But even you must admit that since running for President he has waffled on that stance.
He now emphasizes that the world’s climate has changed throughout history, and says “we should not take extreme measures when we are unsure of human role in global warming.”
Unsure? That ends it for me. Science is saying we are very sure, and getting more sure everyday.
And quite honestly, Mitt is only part of the problem. Even if he was to act like Governor Romney (which he repeatedly tells his base he will not- is he deceiving them?), and even if he wanted to take action on environmental issues, he too would be faced with (a most likely) skeptical Republican House, and a Republican minority in the Senate who will filibuster any attempt at strengthening environmental efforts.

I too have been disappointed in President Obama’s track record on the environment, but it is not negligible. Fuel efficiency standards, blocking Keystone for now to be sure that environmental impacts are studied, investment in green energy, moratorium on drilling in Gulf after BP disaster.

Let me ask you, would President Romney put a moratorium on drilling in the Gulf after that catastrophe? Please. Even if he wanted to, he would be so criticized from Joe Barton, Rand Paul, John Shimkus (who quotes the Bible in the House to denigrate environmental efforts), Michele Bachmann, James Inhofe, Jim DeMint, Chuck Grassley, and many many many others. You know that League of Conservation Voters releases a scorecard every year, and almost all who score 100 are Democrats and those scoring 0 are almost always Republicans.

Romney will stand up to them? Not a chance. And as key Republican thinker said:
“We’re not nominating a candidate to tell the party what direction to go. All of them ran as Reagan Republicans. We know what we’re doing and who we are — we just want a guy to sign the bills. We’re electing a coach of a team that knows the plays.”
That tells you how Governor/President Romney will be steamrolled on the environment.

]]> Comment on A Faith-Based Perspective on Climate Change by Rob Sisson http://conservamerica.org/2012/04/a-faith-based-perspective-on-climate-change/#comment-138 Rob Sisson Wed, 09 May 2012 19:47:23 +0000 http://conservamerica.org/?p=280#comment-138 Thank you, Mark, for your comment. Thank you, Mark, for your comment.

]]> Comment on A Faith-Based Perspective on Climate Change by Mark http://conservamerica.org/2012/04/a-faith-based-perspective-on-climate-change/#comment-136 Mark Tue, 08 May 2012 19:24:24 +0000 http://conservamerica.org/?p=280#comment-136 he interpreted that we have the responsibility* he interpreted that we have the responsibility*

]]> Comment on A Faith-Based Perspective on Climate Change by Mark http://conservamerica.org/2012/04/a-faith-based-perspective-on-climate-change/#comment-135 Mark Tue, 08 May 2012 19:23:28 +0000 http://conservamerica.org/?p=280#comment-135 A person I know gave i believe such a great interpretation of the quote in the bible that I felt I should share it. In the bible it says "And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” He said that because we have dominion over the earth it does not mean that we can take advantage of it but instead that we must take care of the earth. He interpreted have responsibility to take care of everything below us. Felt I should share that A person I know gave i believe such a great interpretation of the quote in the bible that I felt I should share it. In the bible it says “And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” He said that because we have dominion over the earth it does not mean that we can take advantage of it but instead that we must take care of the earth. He interpreted have responsibility to take care of everything below us. Felt I should share that

]]> Comment on A Faith-Based Perspective on Climate Change by Jim http://conservamerica.org/2012/04/a-faith-based-perspective-on-climate-change/#comment-134 Jim Tue, 08 May 2012 13:59:16 +0000 http://conservamerica.org/?p=280#comment-134 Good news indeed...I recently read "A Climate for Change," by Katherine Hayhoe, a climate scientist and Christian, and she too is sounding the warning bells. But sadly, American opinion in general about climate change is trending in the wrong (in my opinion) direction. But the tone on this blog is correct...it is dismaying that something like conservation, which was historically a Republican issue, has been almost completely forsaken by that party. Is there one single Republican of national importance who is championing more effort to save the environment? I cannot think of one. Not one. Sad. Good news indeed…I recently read “A Climate for Change,” by Katherine Hayhoe, a climate scientist and Christian, and she too is sounding the warning bells. But sadly, American opinion in general about climate change is trending in the wrong (in my opinion) direction.
But the tone on this blog is correct…it is dismaying that something like conservation, which was historically a Republican issue, has been almost completely forsaken by that party. Is there one single Republican of national importance who is championing more effort to save the environment? I cannot think of one. Not one.
Sad.

]]> Comment on A Faith-Based Perspective on Climate Change by Rob Sisson http://conservamerica.org/2012/04/a-faith-based-perspective-on-climate-change/#comment-133 Rob Sisson Tue, 08 May 2012 12:11:57 +0000 http://conservamerica.org/?p=280#comment-133 The good news is that polling is showing rapid growth in the number of traditional and evangelical Christians who believe it is a significant issue. A new demographic group--Young Evangelicals--is bumping that number higher each week. Also, polling completed by GOP pollsters in the past few months reports that the Republican Party must adopt better positions on the environment, overall, or it stands to lose the under 30 vote in 2016 by a wide margin. The good news is that polling is showing rapid growth in the number of traditional and evangelical Christians who believe it is a significant issue. A new demographic group–Young Evangelicals–is bumping that number higher each week. Also, polling completed by GOP pollsters in the past few months reports that the Republican Party must adopt better positions on the environment, overall, or it stands to lose the under 30 vote in 2016 by a wide margin.

]]> Comment on Republican Meteorologist Says: Climate Change Is Real & Al Gore’s Got Nothing to Do With It by Jim http://conservamerica.org/2012/03/republican-meteorologist-says-climate-change-is-real-al-gores-got-nothing-to-do-with-it/#comment-130 Jim Mon, 07 May 2012 22:45:17 +0000 http://conservamerica.org/?p=229#comment-130 Forget Al Gore. He is the boogeyman to most Republicans. Instead, go research what trusted scientific organizations have to say about climate change, such as National Academy of Sciences, American Geophsyical Union, Royal Society, World Meteorological Organization, Geological Society of America, American Physical Society, and on and on and on. None have anything to do with Al Gore, and all tell us that man plays a major role in the warming of the planet and we better do something about it. A better question is "Are there any major scientific organizations who deny global warming, or who suggest man definitively plays no role in it?" The answer? There are none. Forget Al Gore. He is the boogeyman to most Republicans.
Instead, go research what trusted scientific organizations have to say about climate change, such as National Academy of Sciences, American Geophsyical Union, Royal Society, World Meteorological Organization, Geological Society of America, American Physical Society, and on and on and on.
None have anything to do with Al Gore, and all tell us that man plays a major role in the warming of the planet and we better do something about it.
A better question is “Are there any major scientific organizations who deny global warming, or who suggest man definitively plays no role in it?”
The answer?
There are none.

]]>