So far I've deleted my reply to your "Gore never won Florida" comment three times. Quit antagonizing me.

We aren't blaming Boy George for the current problems. We are merely pointing out how his recent decisions have a strong likelihood of making things a whole lot worse. If you don't see that, then you've got your eyes closed.

I got one word for you Jacob...........gullible.

So you'd rather vote for a candidate who's shown time and time again that he has no interest in saving fish, has shown he will not do anything to save fish, and in fact, has interests with the tribes and commercials than a candidate who at least promises to do the right thing by the fish?

No, but Carlson didn't do the thing that required a spine, which would have been to ban the nets he, as Governor, would have had control over; the non-tribal commercial nets.

Instead he did the spineless thing. He proposed legislation that would ban ALL nets. Legislation that surely would have been shot down in the courts since state laws can't override Federal treaties. So we would have spent time, money and effort for no reason.

In my mind, promising something you know damn well you can't deliver makes you a liar.

Locke has lied numerous times too. Remember Locke pledging that there would be no tax increase for transportation unless it was approved by a vote of the people? If Carlson couldn't hold up his promise, what's the worst that would have happened, things would have remained the same. When Governer Locked ignores his promises, we get higher taxes. Go figure.

Well, you're not going to catch me defending Locke here, Jacob. I didn't vote for him in the last election. The term before that, when the state GOP decided that Ellen Craswell was the best they could offer, I voted for Locke to make sure Craswell wasn't in Olympia. Then after the Bern Shanks debacle at the WDFW and Locke's appiontment of Koenings as WDFW Director, Locke gave up any chance of me ever voting for him again.

But just because I won't vot for one liar doesn't mean I'll vote for the liar running against him.

I guess I can agree with you on that

Just out of curiosity, do you ever listen to the John Carlson show on KVI?

I was wondering how long it would take before people started whining about Bush.
All of a sudden this week, that's all I've heard.
You have to consider who we almost had in that office. Kind of funny how you didn't hear much about Gore leasing his "ranch" to a mining operation. You don't hear about how bad it screwed up the river downstream from it either.

I thought it was funny how he kept pushing auto makers to make more small cars, and yet everytime you seen him he was accompanied by a FLEET of suburban type SUV's.

Considering the state of the world right now, aren't you glad Bush is in that office? Clinton/Gore had ample oppurtunities to take action in their 8 years but didn't. There was countless attacks and threats and they sat on it.

I better not rip on Gore to bad on here, if it weren't for him inventing the internet we couldn't do this.

Sinker:

And this has to do with fisheries...how?

I can get into Boy George debates until the Earth reverses rotation but we need to at least TRY to keep this fishing/outdoors related.

DJ, you crack me up!
You post more NFR stuff than anyone (10 on this thread alone)and then you reprimand others?

The parent post is about President Bush and his environmental record during the scant 14 months that he's been president, with some other politician/environment discussion thrown in. If you all wanna talk about whether George W. Bush IN GENERAL is fit to be in the White House then I can tap that dance too. I'll give ya so much information about this goofball that it'll make your head spin, and the best you'll be able to come back with is "Well Gore was this" or "Gore would do that" or "Nader something else" instead of admitting that this "President" is doing his best to sell us all down the river. Environmentally, politically, internationally, corporately (is that a word?), every way you can imagine and a few you cannot.

I'd like to pretend that the contributions that you classify as NFR do have some value (note that all posts in this thread were on topic), so don't spoil it for me. But what I'm also saying is that a full-out, no holds barred debate on the Thief in Chief would spiral horribly out of control until it earns a rarely-administered (but likely earned) lock by the mods.

Call it fair warning. I've done my homework.

I believe he was making the point that when it comes to voting for a President, there are much more important issues to consider that what his policies on wild salmon are.

As for your second post, I doubt you could post anything about Bush that I don't already know or would make my head spin. Consider that a challenge if you wish, but I believe you'd be wasting your time.

Bernie you gonna hit me "upside the head" with your float like you threatened other people who don't agree with you?

All in good fun dude