General Discussion

rwsanders

(3,176 posts)

16. This is an infuriating one.

Sat Jul 25, 2015, 02:24 PM

Jul 2015

Everytime I got a call during the 2010, 2012, 2014 campaigns asking for money I brought up this issue.
I'll be doing it again during 2016.
I'm just as frustrated with the environmental groups though. I still give to Sierra Club and Defenders of Wildlife, but I think it is time they both step up and try some other tactic rather than just another court case.
Pushing a "wildlife safe" label, like the campaign for the dolphins is needed. It is about time that the public realized everytime they buy a burger, their funding the slaughter.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

46 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Anyone prepared to defend the admin's go ahead on Arctic drilling? [View all] G_j Jul 2015 OP

Nope Hydra Jul 2015 #1

The corporations DEMANDED it. immoderate Jul 2015 #2

no Mojorabbit Jul 2015 #3

I HEAR you on the wolf issue!! G_j Jul 2015 #5

This is an infuriating one. rwsanders Jul 2015 #16

thank you G_j Jul 2015 #45

NO. Nor the TPP. Triana Jul 2015 #4

No! Nor TPP! haikugal Jul 2015 #6

This is yet another example... Oilwellian Jul 2015 #7

You think Jeb/Scott wouldn't do even more drilling? lark Jul 2015 #13

Maybe it is time for the 3rd way folks to cave and admit it isn't working. Bernie could coast to rwsanders Jul 2015 #18

Absolutely not, Blue_In_AK Jul 2015 #8

Hmm. Crickets from the usual fans. nt truebluegreen Jul 2015 #9

Oh gosh, I hate to spoil your stereotype. I don't approve. Hekate Jul 2015 #10

Lead by example: crickets Ned Flanders Jul 2015 #28

Oh gosh, I'm way ahead of you truebluegreen Jul 2015 #37

Why is the question for me. He's a lame duck, he doesn't need poitical capital at this point. jalan48 Jul 2015 #11

Getting his take. lark Jul 2015 #14

I had the same feeling though a fellow DUer was quite offended when I voiced it the other day. jalan48 Jul 2015 #15

It's exactly *because* he's a lame duck. Marr Jul 2015 #25

because he's a corporate conservative? Doctor_J Jul 2015 #35

LOL-well, I was hoping he would be an environmentally friendly one. jalan48 Jul 2015 #36

Not here. lark Jul 2015 #12

Not me. City Lights Jul 2015 #17

Hows this? A Simple Game Jul 2015 #19

No and I'm heartsick. eom. Cleita Jul 2015 #20

Oh please, what is the point even discussing it? Sen. Walter Sobchak Jul 2015 #21

The fact that if all the oil dried up overnight that probably 4-5 BILLION people ... brett_jv Jul 2015 #27

They are committing to delaying the use of multiple alternatives. dougolat Jul 2015 #32

That's because fossil fuels ARE Bad! Oil is BAD! truebluegreen Jul 2015 #38

No. Nae. Never. hifiguy Jul 2015 #22

This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Jul 2015 #23

I FOUGHT HARD against the "Moderate Republicans" policies back in the 80s. bvar22 Jul 2015 #34

Whose State Department former Presidential candidate head was responsible for initializing this? marble falls Jul 2015 #24

Clearly, this is Bush's fault... hughee99 Jul 2015 #26

Arctic drilling is a really BAD idea. PatrickforO Jul 2015 #29

To play the devil's advocate, here, how many of the people opposed don't drive a car? Warren DeMontague Jul 2015 #30

Unless everything in your home was personally acquired by hand and produced by hand, MerryBlooms Jul 2015 #39

Still, the larger problem is fossil fuels in general. And as long as we're all using them, they need Warren DeMontague Jul 2015 #41

I was using your/you in the collective... MerryBlooms Jul 2015 #43

I know this one! A troll paid by Exxon/Mobil. Spitfire of ATJ Jul 2015 #31

No, because it's a monumentally stupid idea. NuclearDem Jul 2015 #33

What could possibly go wrong drilling in the harshest environment on Earth? neverforget Jul 2015 #40

I'll pass, it's indefensible. CanonRay Jul 2015 #42

No AuntPatsy Jul 2015 #44

Not publicly. raouldukelives Jul 2015 #46