The Winner from the NY Newsday:
Bush doesn’t protect forests
I believe the national forests were designated as wild places to be forever in our trust for preservation. Since George W. Bush took office, he has decided that the forest lands should be handed over to private industry for private profits. He plans to open up the remaining 60 million acres of pristine wild forests in our country to timber and mining industries.
In contrast, John Kerry will work to protect our national forests by outlawing logging in old-growth areas. Kerry knows that more of the forest management budget should be directed to protecting lives and property in forest communities – not to logging in remote wild forests. The Kerry-Edwards plan will take $100 million of government subsidies that are currently being given to the timber industry and invest it in a new Forest Restoration Corps. The corps will create jobs and invest in the long-term health of our forests – and the communities that depend upon them – by restoring forests, streams and rangeland
Theresa Garraffa
Mount Kisco
Note: Ms. Garraffa obviously didn’t catch the 2000 report by the GAO that said the areas of the forests that were cut off and not cleaned because there was no access to remove the dead brush from the forest bed were the reason that forest fires were so big, frequent, and out of control. If you can’t get to the brush to thin it, all it is is kindling when someone drops a cigarette butt or a bird gets electrocuted and its burning body hits the ground. Opening up access roads will allow maintenance in now-unreachable areas, and with regulation there is no need to worry about how thin the forests get. As for taking money from the timber industry, isn’t it odd that a man who talks about caring for the little guy and struggling for working class folk would yank $100 million from areas like the Pacific Northwest, which is almost the only industry sustaining the area? Way to go, oh Champion of the “little guy.”
From the NY Daily News:
Poor, poor pitiful Linda
Hollis: Whatever happened to freedom of speech? At an appearance at the Aladdin in Las Vegas, Linda Ronstadt referred to the film “Fahrenheit 9/11″ and called Michael Moore “a true American patriot.” Predictably, those in the audience who disagreed made quite a scene. But she was then escorted off the premises with the promise of never being invited back. Did the punishment fit the crime? Moore’s film is an example of freedom of speech at work, but what about those who get treated in the manner Ronstadt did for her beliefs?Thomas Colbert
Note: Linda Ronstadt can say whatever she wants. Aggravated fans cannot. Aladdin was well within their rights if they kicked her out for anything she said. The Constitution does not guarantee acceptance of your free speech, and does not protect speech from being encroached upon by a private entity. When last I checked, the Aladdin Hotel & Casino was not a government entity.
From the NY Daily News:
Look it up
Yonkers: Republicans throw words like “treason” and “traitor” around so effortlessly, it is clear they do not understand the depth of these words. Timothy McVeigh was a traitor. Terry Nichols is treasonous. Disagreeing with President Bush is not an act of treason nor is it unpatriotic. If Republicans would stop attacking for five minutes and maybe do some research on the man they seem to think can do no wrong, they might start using that term differently.Edward De Cesare
Note: Yet another person who worries about “treason” and “traitor,” yet gives no examples. Of course, examples are not necessary. We all just know that it’s true.