Bush and Kerry on the Environment

[mr_gyptian]

Some of the scientist mags might have already seen this( looks at Viva). Pretty good questionnaire. There really isn't a marked difference between the two.

It's a .pdf file, so I couldn't paste. lo siento.


http://64.4.48.250/cgi-bin/linkrd?_l...3419%3a2EBBFF9


Oh and I have no fucking clue how to clean up links. again, sorry.


edit: here is the original link. there is also a link from Nature. hopefully this works.

http://65.54.246.250/cgi-bin/linkrd?...3419%3a2EBBFF9

[Viva]

The link ain't workin'. Cut & paste some of the salient bits?

[schuss]

if it's a questionnaire for an organization endorsement, I wouldn't pay too much attention to it. Unfortunately, candidates pander to whatever group they're seeking endorsement from in the questionnaire, and frequently let their campaign people do it for them. Sadly.

[Grange]

I don't care how they answer questions. Politicians have no problem answering questions to boost their status. It's actions that I care about and Bush's actions shows the environment takes a back seat to corporations. Bush isn't going to jump out and talk about the problems mercury causes and then discuss how he roles back smoke stack emission regulations, which is the source for much of the mercury. He is just going say that we need to find ways to better understand the effects of mercury and how to fix the potential problem.

When it comes to the environment Bush get a D at best and there is no way to spin that.