|
|
|
|
anykineclimb
Oct 1, 2004, 2:14 PM
Post #1 of 65
(2763 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 30, 2003
Posts: 3593
|
Found this earlier, decided to post it here.
thoughts?
Dear Fellow Americans:
We are business leaders in the outdoor industry and we have come together because we can no longer be silent. Outdoor businesses depend on abundant and available recreation opportunities so our customers can enjoy outdoor activities. In return, outdoor businesses employ over a million Americans, contribute $18 billion to the U.S. economy and work together to promote an active and healthy lifestyle to the 149 million Americans who love the great American outdoors.
In our opinion increasing the number of venues for active outdoor recreation, staunchly protecting the environment, bolstering recreation and conservation funding to our public land agencies and reducing health care costs go hand-in-hand. They are essential for the health and well being of the outdoor industry and its customers.
Senators John Kerry and John Edwards share our values and goals. They know that promoting active outdoor recreation promotes good health. They know that proactively protecting and supporting public lands for recreational use means future generations will enjoy them too. They know that improving the quality of the air we breathe and the water we drink is not negotiable for any industry or business in America. They know that health care costs will continue to increase unless we are united in reducing obesity in America.
John Kerry and John Edwards are committed to preserving our national parks for the benefit of current and future generations. President Bush has promoted policies that break that commitment and endanger the future sustainability of our national parks. President Bush's policies have severely under-funded our national parks resulting in rampant understaffing, site closures, elimination of visitor education programs and neglected cultural and natural resource preservation, demonstrating indifference towards unsafe trails, unclear facilities and the growing shortage of safety staff.
As importantly, the Bush administration has rolled back basic environmental protections that undermine parks including:
Rolling back Clean Air Act requirements that ensure visibility and healthy visits to our national parks; Eliminating federal protections for our public lands that will allow mining, logging and development in national forests; Slashing the Land and Water Conservation Fund, which enables the National Park Service to acquire new land and protect and enhance existing parks facilities. In contrast John Kerry and John Edwards have a plan to protect the scenic landscapes and vistas for the appreciation of future generations through rigorous enforcement of clean air and water regulations and will preserve the resources that embody our cultural heritage through committed funding for parks operations by:
Increasing the operating budget of the National Park Service by $600 million will put our parks back on the path toward recovery and restoration. We will pay for this important objective by modernizing the sale of mineral rights and using the revenue generated to increase the operating budgets of our national parks. We know that Senator Kerry is a champion on the environmental issues that are central to our industry and customers. We also believe that Senator Kerry's economic and health care policies will keep our businesses competitive and health care affordable.
Therefore, we the undersigned are proud to endorse Senator Kerry as the next President of the United States.
Sincerely,
Lee Fromson, president, Cascade Designs (Seattle, WA)
Peter Bragden, vice president, general counsel, Columbia Sportswear (Portland, Oregon)
Menno Van Wyk, CEO, Montrail (Seattle, WA)
Paul Fish, president, Mountain Gear (Spokane, WA)
Carn Nielsen, vice president, Mountain Gear (Spokane, WA)
Dan Nordstrom, CEO, Outdoor Research (Seattle, WA)
Jeff Bowman, vice president, Cascade Designs (Seattle, WA)
Doug Phillips, president, Metolius Climbing (Bend, OR)
Tim Leatherman, president, Leatherman Tool Group, Inc. (Portland, OR)
Dunham Gooding, president, American Alpine Institute, Ltd (Bellingham, WA)
Larry Harrison, president, Earth Games (San Clemente, CA)
Jim Clark, CEO, Watermark (Arcata, CA)
Steve Barker, CEO, Eagle Creek Travel Gear (San Diego, CA)
Peter Metcalf, CEO, Black Diamond (Salt Lake City, Utah)
Ashley Korenblat, president, Western Spirit Cycling (Moab, Utah)
Mike Wallenfels, vice president, Mountain Hardware (Richmond, CA)
Roody Rasmussen, CEO, Petzl America (Clearfield, UT)
Tony Post, president, Vibram (Concord, MA)
Kelly Stone, director sales and marketing, Werner Paddles (Seattle, WA)
Joe Hyer, president, Alpine Experience (Olympia, WA)
Mike Sullivan, president, Sullivan Agency (Wimberley, TX)
Bob Olsen, president, Peregrine Outfitters (Williston, VT)
Michael Crooke, CEO, Patagonia (Ventura, CA)
Brian Bennett, director national accounts, Patagonia (Ventura, CA)
Adam Forest, managing partner, The Forest Group (Lotus, CA)
Gordon Seabury, president, Horny Toad Activewear (Santa Barbara, CA)
Paul Gagner, vice president, Gregory Mountain Products (Temecula, CA)
Tom Campion, founder and chairman, Zumiez Inc. (Everett, WA)
Malcolm Daly, president, Trango (Boulder, CO)
Rodney Smith, president, American Outdoor Products (Boulder, CO)
Joan Keller, president, Le Travel Store (San Diego, CA)
|
|
|
|
|
traddad
Oct 1, 2004, 2:25 PM
Post #2 of 65
(2763 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2001
Posts: 7129
|
Hey Mal,
Good on ya! I'm personally going to go out and buy something Trango tonite.
|
|
|
|
|
scrapedape
Oct 1, 2004, 2:42 PM
Post #3 of 65
(2763 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 2392
|
Amen.
|
|
|
|
|
treesail
Oct 1, 2004, 2:48 PM
Post #4 of 65
(2763 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 16, 2004
Posts: 204
|
Plus he kicked Bush's a## last night.
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Oct 1, 2004, 3:44 PM
Post #6 of 65
(2763 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
In reply to: Plus he kicked Bush's a## last night.
I love how quickly both sides jumped in and claimed 'victory'
All the neutral pundits I saw seemed to think that it was more or less a draw, and I tend to agree.
|
|
|
|
|
euleto
Oct 1, 2004, 3:54 PM
Post #7 of 65
(2763 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 20, 2004
Posts: 85
|
Yeah, i consider myself way "right" (politically), so my instinct of course is to shout BUSH WON BUSH WON.....
HOWEVER,
I think from a non-biased observation, it would seem more of a draw last night.
Although I support Bush, I do acknowledge that Kerry plans to work things out a little better with mother nature.
|
|
|
|
|
stirfry
Oct 1, 2004, 3:58 PM
Post #8 of 65
(2763 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 8, 2003
Posts: 34
|
I cant believe people actually believe anything a politician says.
Kerry will be no better for the enviroment then Bush, he might even be worse!!!!
Kerry definitly won the debate but not my vote
|
|
|
|
|
sauron
Oct 1, 2004, 4:02 PM
Post #9 of 65
(2763 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 15, 2001
Posts: 1859
|
In reply to: In reply to: Plus he kicked Bush's a## last night. I love how quickly both sides jumped in and claimed 'victory' All the neutral pundits I saw seemed to think that it was more or less a draw, and I tend to agree.
A friend of mine, of the opposite political leaning as me - asked me what I got from the discussion last night...
My answer: Nothing I didn't know before.
My friend's answer: I got to hear two party lines.
Draw.
- d.
|
|
|
|
|
scrapedape
Oct 1, 2004, 4:05 PM
Post #10 of 65
(2763 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 2392
|
In reply to: I cant believe people actually believe anything a politician says. Kerry will be no better for the enviroment then Bush, he might even be worse!!!! Kerry definitly won the debate but not my vote
You don't have to believe his words. His 20 year record of standing up for the environment speaks for itself.
|
|
|
|
|
danbensen
Oct 1, 2004, 4:14 PM
Post #11 of 65
(2763 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 27, 2003
Posts: 47
|
I dont think I'm one to judge who won the debate since I've already made up my mind and I know my opinion would be biased, but I did notice that President Bush had a hard time staying within the time limits (by my count, Bush went over his limit 8 times to Kerry's 2) after his long pauses when the questions were first delivered. Furthermore, Bush interrupted Kerry on 3 or 4 occasions (I only saw Kerry do so once). Overall, I spent most of the night laughing because of how much the camera angle was adjusted to compensate for the size of Kerry's head, and whenever I looked at Bush I couldn't help but think of MAD Magazine (what? me worry?)
|
|
|
|
|
stirfry
Oct 1, 2004, 4:15 PM
Post #12 of 65
(2763 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 8, 2003
Posts: 34
|
Yea its his 20 year record that worries me
|
|
|
|
|
micahmcguire
Oct 1, 2004, 4:23 PM
Post #14 of 65
(2763 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 18, 2002
Posts: 889
|
While I agree with Kerry's stance on just about everything, I was reading an article in Outdoor Life or some such magazine in which George W. said he would strive to add another 1.4 million acres to the Chugach National Forest. Of anything that has happened or could happen in relation to the federal government and its imposition into the lives of civilian Alaskans, this issue actually hits closest to home, that and the opening of ANWR. These are two issues on which Bush and I (and the vast majority of Alaskans) strongly agree.
I'm still going to vote for Kerry, but I guess I win either way, eh? Happy day!
|
|
|
|
|
sauron
Oct 1, 2004, 4:32 PM
Post #15 of 65
(2763 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 15, 2001
Posts: 1859
|
In reply to: I dont think I'm one to judge who won the debate since I've already made up my mind and I know my opinion would be biased, but I did notice that President Bush had a hard time staying within the time limits (by my count, Bush went over his limit 8 times to Kerry's 2) after his long pauses when the questions were first delivered. Furthermore, Bush interrupted Kerry on 3 or 4 occasions (I only saw Kerry do so once). Overall, I spent most of the night laughing because of how much the camera angle was adjusted to compensate for the size of Kerry's head, and whenever I looked at Bush I couldn't help but think of MAD Magazine (what? me worry?)
News article I read last night while watching the debate (can't find it now), said that the Kerry side had tried to remove the timing lamps from the lecterns - arguably because Kerry is known for being long-winded, and they wanted it to be less obvious when he went over time.
- d.
|
|
|
|
|
treesail
Oct 1, 2004, 4:44 PM
Post #16 of 65
(2763 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 16, 2004
Posts: 204
|
[quote="euleto"]Yeah, i consider myself way "right" (politically), so my instinct of course is to shout BUSH WON BUSH WON.....
HOWEVER,
I think from a non-biased observation, it would seem more of a draw last night.In reply to: Among those already decided one way or the other though, I notice it's only Bush folks who say the debate was "pretty much even."
|
|
|
|
|
bones
Oct 1, 2004, 4:45 PM
Post #17 of 65
(2763 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 17, 2003
Posts: 253
|
In reply to: Yea its his 20 year record that worries me
Funny, it's Bush's 3.5 year record that worries me... well maybe only 3 years if you count all the time vacationing in Crawford.
|
|
|
|
|
jeffstephan
Oct 1, 2004, 4:51 PM
Post #19 of 65
(2763 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 4, 2003
Posts: 183
|
The Bush administration has based all their actions on utilizing FEAR for self interest. Personally I am sick of this direction. It was refreshing last night to hear a clear, consience direction leading away from this......
Keep in mind how sucessful you are when climbing scared. :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
hasbeen
Oct 1, 2004, 4:54 PM
Post #20 of 65
(2763 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 17, 2003
Posts: 543
|
In reply to: I cant believe people actually believe anything a politician says. Kerry will be no better for the enviroment then Bush, he might even be worse!!!!
This is the dumbest thing I've ever seen on this, or any, site. You must not have been paying attention to what's been going on in America since Nixon fired oil man/governor Walter Hickle for being to sympathetic to protecting nature.
Hickle, a good ol' boy Republican got the axe because, simply, he thought some places deserved to be protected instead of blindly exploiting every resource in order to improve next year's stock value. One of my favorite anecdotes from Hickle's book, Who Owns America, is about how all republicans assumed he would support virtually anything asked of him, no matter the rational behind it. Some ranchers in Wyoming and Idaho were trying to eradicate the eagle popluation. Suspicious about how much eagles could truly hurt ranching profilts Hickle wanted to know why. They all stated the eagles killed their sheep. Hickle went to visit and told the group he was there to see an eagle fly off with a sheep and that he'd sign the legislation as soon as they could prove this preposterous accusation. Off course, he never signed it.
Since then, the Republicans have taken to appointing people with absolutely no record on any environmental actions other than drilling for oil. Their land-use management appointees resemble that of the mob appointing cousin Guido to head the transportation board even though Guido's only experience in transportation was standing on the running boards gunnin' down guys with his Thompson and, incidentally, Guido didn't speak English.
Example: James "once you've seen one tree you've seen em all" Watt, appointed by Regan and Bush's own Gale Ann Hurd, a Watt protoge (she worked for him) gone bad (even though this didn't seem possible). I challenge you to do a little homework and check out the appointees Bush has made and their "environmental record." It is abhorrant, or non-existant. Almost all of them have a background only in oil.
My point is that your comment has no record to run on. It's not only speculation, it's blatant un-informed lying on the scale of the type of crap Ann Coulter slings. No Democrat in any of our lifetimes has made such a slap in the face of our public who elect them to do their job. Could you imagine the outcry should Clinton have appointed the head of the Sierra Club as our Secretary of Defense? That is what this Republican insanity is akin to.
I recommend that you turn off your AM radio and stop watching FOX and make some attempt to inform yourself with a few facts before you begin to interject your opinion into a debate on issues. This blatant uniformed spewing seems to be effective for, say, Rush Limbaugh but it has no place in an informed discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
cosmokramer
Oct 1, 2004, 4:58 PM
Post #21 of 65
(2763 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 1, 2004
Posts: 191
|
Perhaps the only function these debates serve is to speak to undecided voters. I think as much as any other time in history more people than ever are tuned into what is happening on the world stage, and have had their minds made up LONG before last night. If you were gonna vote Kerry before the debates, chances are you're still going to, and if you were going to vote Bush before the debates, chances are you haven't changed your mind. The focal point of this election is national security, where Bush is obviously dominant.
And what were those poll numbers before the debates? Bush had significant (beyond the margin of error) leads over Kerry BEFORE the Republican Convention on almost every category according to this ABC poll from one month ago.
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/Vote2004/bush_convention_poll_040829.html
I am not saying by any means that W. has it in the bag, but that the notion that a 90 minute debate is going to bring down Bush's dominating numbers is laughable.
|
|
|
|
|
tgreene
Oct 1, 2004, 5:05 PM
Post #22 of 65
(2763 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 7267
|
In reply to: My democrat friend last night, after running a psychology language-research related program that analysis written speech for specific traits, made the comment that Kerry would loose because people thought him too arrogant, and he talked down to people too much. This seems pretty consistent with what I've seen in many Kerry supporters. - d.
Unless Kerry plans to turn the Presidencey into a dictatorship if he wins, he had better damn well understand that one man can't actually do anything without the House and Senate... Likewise, everyone that is so quick to smear Bush on specific issues, also needs to learn a thing or three about the way the system works! :roll:
Bush said it best last night when responding to Kerry, when he said "You read the exact same intelligence reports that I did!"
|
|
|
|
|
hasbeen
Oct 1, 2004, 5:16 PM
Post #23 of 65
(2763 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 17, 2003
Posts: 543
|
K-Man,
I'm not sure what kind of point you're trying to make, since those statistics show likely voters even at 48%. Even given that the largest turnaround in all of those polls looks poor for Kerry, the 18-point switch on favorable opinion within a month, how would it be possible that it couldn't switch back that same number of points in another month?
Kerry's low numbers seem to be on the natioanl security issue and even John McCain admitted last night that Kerry was very well informed on those issues and this is likely to clear-up anyone who believed otherwise (a large part of Bush's "lead"). Therefore, I submit that your entire argument makes no sense. These debates do matter.
I think seeing Bush hopping up and down like a kid who can't wait to be called on in class, then only to repeat something he had already said a dozen times, might give the public a clue that this guy ain't quite as good under fire as he tells us he is.
Oh, that and the fact he just sat and flipped pages in a book in front of a room full of kids after he heard about the 9/11 attacks. Shoot, I'm not even the President and I swung into action when I heard about the attacks, immediately shelving everything I was supposed to do until I was sure there was nothing I could do to help. You think we could count on that type of behavior from the guy who's supposedly running our country, wouldn't you?
|
|
|
|
|
benpullin
Oct 1, 2004, 5:17 PM
Post #24 of 65
(2763 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 14, 2003
Posts: 360
|
In reply to: ... The focal point of this election is national security, where Bush is obviously dominant.
I agree that a focal point in the election is the issue of national security.
Bush is dominant?????
Yeah, you're right. I feel a lot safer now that N. Korea has nuclear weapons, Iran is working on it, Osama Bin Laden is still on the run, we're spending billions PER WEEK on a war with no clearly established goals, we've pissed off most of the world (travelled abroad lately?), and there are so many 'dominant' changes we've seen here in the US to prevent against another terrorist attack.
How do you figure???
|
|
|
|
|
stirfry
Oct 1, 2004, 5:18 PM
Post #25 of 65
(2763 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 8, 2003
Posts: 34
|
No place in an informed discussion. wow. I get my information from the same place you do.
I take alot of pride in doing my own research and not becoming a mind numbed robot.
I am glad to see you gave specific examples of your reasoning as this is rare.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
