united VS. divided

[mellowyellow]

after a recent thread here that once again asked<br />people to take sides, I thought it was time for<br />a discussion of important issues that we could<br />ALL agree on... threads that bind perhaps? <br /><br />let me start it off...<br />"US reliance on foriegn oil"<br />the good news is that we actually have a few nice<br />"Hybrid" cars folks can buy nowadays. even better,<br />people are actually lining up to buy them! <br />a good sign IMHO.<br />yet, everyday, I see some new use for plastic.<br />(made from oil right)<br />I understand why it is used... IT'S CHEAP!, but if<br />we think about it, all it does is feed our sorry<br />dependence on other countries???... HELLO?<br />at the same time, most people are too lazy to recycle the <br />HUGE amount of plastic they use???<br />like scrap metal drives during the great wars<br />IMHO.<br />united we stand,<br />M.Y.

 

[SCO]

Re: united VS. divided

LEt's see... Lets Unite behind our President. Nope<br />Lets all pull our own weight to help have a healthy society... MAybe some agreement here.<br />We outta all conserve the environment why cant we get agreement here. That's it. Why can't the left and the right see eye to eye on environmental issues? That also dovetails with your point MY.

 

[18rabbit]

Re: united VS. divided

SCO - problem is not everyone can agree on what "conserve the environment" means. We know a lot less about what is really damaging to the environment than most folks have ben lead to believe. And the ecological/enviromnetal movement is replete with endless corruption.<br />--------<br />disclaimer: MS-Word just went away. I've no idea where it went!?! Until its return I'm humpin' along on Notepad without a sytax or spell chequer...sorry.

 

[Boomyal]

Re: united VS. divided

Originally posted by 18rabbit:<br />[QB]SCO - And the ecological/enviromnetal movement is replete with endless corruption.<br />--------<br />QB]

Going one step further 18rabbit, it really has little to do with the environment. It is 99% political subterfuge having a much different agenda than their title lets on.<br /><br />edit: this is not to say that I disagree with responsible environmental stewardship. It is the radical environmentalists who set fire to SUV's, try to keep us out of the forests and advocate the tearing down of dams, etc etc. These are the types that are driving the highly visible environmental movement today.

 

[Link]

Re: united VS. divided

I think mellowyellow got spring fever for lack of fishing and decieded to troll here LOL<br /><br />MY your a "stand up type of Guy" in my book from what I've seen here in IBOATS in the last year since I joined. IMO!<br /><br />"Hybrid" cars. A Baby step in the right direction!<br /><br />We only import about 10% of the oil we use here in the US. And we don't need to except That our 10% exceeds other third world countries (COMBINED) that import sometimes 90 to 100% of their oil. And we help control oil prices to them.<br /><br />As a "World Community" we should be looking at maybe Hydrogen fuel.(sp)<br />Take trees for a example.. (I hate logging) Growing up in a logging community. But my brother who was a logger and now (was then) a forrest manager! Spends $20,000 per 25 acre plot to re-plant! He could get away with $7,000 but as a logger who loves trees knows that 2/3 of the trees will be eaten by Elk and Deer! So he spends the extra bucks to make sure his trees have a chance to live. To tie this in to my'S POST: THE INDIANS : Who Lost the WAR! Well they Had the Since to BURN the forrest every 7 years! Keeps the under brush down.. and no major fires! <br />lINK

 

[SCO]

Re: united VS. divided

This illustrates my point. We should be able to understand as fishermen and boaters the effects to fishing ect from agri runoff, overfishing, littering, bilge washhing by tankers as they leave port etc. We all have a common sense about it and know that we need to be stewards of the world we live in, but the issue has become so politicized that we either dont believe there is a problem or believe it too much. I think it is something we should all be able to agree in principle on. My position on hunting/fishing of course is that it is a good thing. Were it not for ducks unlimited for example, there would be a lot fewer ducks. We can lose things, as illustrated by the loss of the great plains prarie and bison, and that didn't take too long to do in the 19th century. Think what we do now with the technology and population we've got. Rush is an ignoramous on this subject though I am with him on most political subjects.

 

[mellowyellow]

Re: united VS. divided

the point of this thread was to offer some things<br />that all of us could be united about...anything!<br /><br />perhaps the following saying is really true???<br />"people are like dogs, in the absence of true<br />leadership, they'll follow anybody"...