Greg,
Good job or not, it must be something wrong. It is so many well researched investigations, that link air pollution and premature death. It is no doubt and you can almost directly quantify the premature death at different pollution levels. It is a difficult problem and a concern for any who understand it. For any President or nations leader to put his signature under weakening of pollution regulations, is a matter of dooming a certain number of his own people to a premature death. Your current president has done so and the effects and casualties will be larger than any modern US push button warfare. I do not call that to do the best, hard job or not, if the goal should be to serve his country and citizens. Beside that, it is good with high pollution standards, because most of them also lead to energy conservation and less dependence of foreign supplies. Hakan At 01:26 20/02/2004, you wrote: >Perhaps, but, you know what they say, " Expect the unexpected ". > >I once blew my personal reputation out the door, back when I was a teen, >and now I work at keeping it in good shape, but, despite all the good I >have done since then, people still hold it against me, almost 20 years >later. Add in the fact that others would hold my religion against me, >saying it would make me unfit for any political office, because I would be >unable to maintain separation of church and state. > >I despise the mud slinging that the race for political office has become, >and I despise even more the media that pushes it for all it's worth, it's >no longer even a veiled attempt at honesty, is has become " a best of the >worst - popularity contest " ( indeed I personally think that it has >become as bad as it is because of the extent that the media drives it ). > >I personally wouldn't want the job, but, for one big qualification, unless >I had no other choice in supporting the Constitution. > >Like any President, he walks a fine line, a tightrope if you will. Not >only that, every third person is trying to push him off. The other two >people fall into one of 3 categories: The first category are trying to >hold him up, the second category, flat out don't care one way or the other >so long as they get what they think belongs to them ( which to my way of >thinking is the worst possible category ), and the third type is willing >to try work with him to make things better, despite differences. > >I always hope that when push comes to shove I can respect and support the >office of President of the United States of America, even though I may >despise and/or disagree with the man in it ( not mentioning any particular >Presidents past, present, or future ), because he has the hardest bloody >job in the world, and only a fraction of the support. > >Greg H. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Appal Energy > To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2004 14:53 > Subject: Re: [biofuel] Moral Dilemma... > > > Sorry Greg, > > That was a rhetorical question. Not one that I either sought or expected an > answer to. > > Rising above the devasting practices of another sometimes requires insuring > that the other no longer has the opportunity to practice such devastation. > Hence my response of the third option - to do nothing. > > I have no clue as to your personal reputation or desire to follow a honest > and forthright path. But I can tell you that George Bush has chosen > neither. > He's a desecration to his faith and to the nation he swore to serve. If > that > makes him a better man than anyone, then everyone has a serious problem - a > problem which has been recognized for four years. Sadly, a stop wasn't put > to it before the last three began. > > Todd Swearingen > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Greg and April" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <biofuel@yahoogroups.com> > Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2004 12:19 PM > Subject: Re: [biofuel] Moral Dilemma... > > > > By rising above what the other person did, although there must be some > limits. > > > > In some cases, it must be with an olive branch of peace in one hand and a > weapon of war in the other. > > > > I welcome people into my house, when invited, but, at the same time, I > will defend my family and others ( even if it means my own death ), from > anyone intent on harm. > > > > The hardest thing to do, is to determine if an action is going to do more > harm than good, some cases are clear as crystal, but, many are not. It is > even worse if your a leader trying to do the best for your country, more so > if your trying to help the world as well. > > > > I would never want to be the President of the U.S. More is expected of > them, than any other citizen of the U.S. especially with such deep > divisions > as we have. > > > > For all his faults, the President is a better man that I, not just > because > he deals with major issues, on a daily basis, but, because he *willingly* > does it and in general, probably with more of a even hand than I would want > use. > > > > > > Greg H. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Appal Energy > > To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2004 09:46 > > Subject: Re: [biofuel] Moral Dilemma... > > > > > > > > How do you lend aid to those who wreak so much devastation? > Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/biofuel/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
