On state DNR board, no future for a ‘green conservative’
Warren Budd, the vice chairman of the state Board of Natural Resources, calls himself a “green conservative” and claims there are a lot of people like him.
A lifelong active Republican, the insurance agent from Newnan is also an avid outdoorsman. “I care about conservation, and I care about this state,” he said in an interview last week. “I represent the average guy who likes to fish and hunt. This is a beautiful state, and I like to think that there will be something of it left for our grandchildren to enjoy.”
However, even though he was in line to become chair of the 18-member DNR board next year, Budd has been informed that he will not be reappointed when his seven-year term ends on Jan. 1. According to Budd, a “green conservative” point of view is no longer welcome by Gov. Nathan Deal, who wants no dissent from a pro-development agenda that favors special interests.
“”They are very into message-control,” Budd said. “They don’t want board members to act like a board.”
Budd acknowledges that as a DNR board member, he pushed the state Environmental Protection Division to move more aggressively in dealing with a major fishkill on the Ogeechee River in May. Tens of thousands of fish were killed along an 80-mile stretch of river, and an investigation traced the cause back to King America Finishing, a textile plant that had been dumping flame-retardant chemicals into the river for as long as five years, undetected and without a permit.
In the end, the company agreed to spend $1 million on environmental projects in the Ogeechee watershed, a small price to pay considering the nature of its violation and the fact it could have been fined more than $90 million. The settlement was strongly criticized by environmentalists, outdoorsmen and civic leaders in the Ogeechee watershed as too lenient.
“We talk about protecting business, but I talked to one bait-shop owner whose business was down 70 percent because of that fishkill,” Budd said. “He’s a businessman too, and he wasn’t alone. A lot of people who make their living off that river were hurt.”
According to Budd, the DNR board has been told it can no longer elect its own officers, and instead those officers will be named by the governor. Deal’s top spokesman, Brian Robinson, says that the board remains free to elect its own officers, but that “several board members have asked the governor for his opinion.” According to Robinson, the governor wants to appoint board members “who are excited team players ready to carry out his agenda for our state.”
“Some are reappointments, some fill openings and some are replacements,” Robinson said. “It’s part of the process. It allows new blood, new ideas and new people a chance to serve the state on a volunteer basis. If anyone on any board considers himself indispensable, this is what educators call a ‘teachable moment.’ It takes an eyebrow-raising amount of self-regard for someone to suggest publicly that, out of 10 million Georgians, only he or she brings a diverse viewpoint to a board.”
While Budd is complimentary to his fellow DNR board members, the truth is that the 18-member panel charged with protecting the state’s environment has long been dominated by developers, real estate interests and business people, with conservationists and environmentalists all but excluded.
For example, Aaron McWhorter, appointed to the board by Deal in May, sells “mitigation credits” that allow wetlands to be destroyed for construction projects, housing developments and, just by happenstance, major reservoir projects. Budd, on the other hand, has expressed doubts about the governor’s plan to build major new reservoirs in north Georgia, noting that such projects destroy miles of streams and rivers. And he believes that the decision not to reappoint him means that such sentiments will no longer be tolerated.
“Governor [Zell] Miller, [Roy] Barnes and [Sonny] Perdue all had diverse boards,” Budd said. “Moving toward a monolithic board is not healthy in a state of 10 million people with all of these competing interests.”
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
587 comments Add your comment
getalife
December 28th, 2011
2:18 pm
LSU – 35
Bama – 9
SoCoBro- Sobbing hysterically. Again.
There will be no doubt.
LSU National Champs.
Again.
Peter
December 28th, 2011
2:19 pm
Old Timer.. Well you do have a point sir….. WE all were very Unpatriotic, being Pissed at Bush about the War in Iraq….. and spend very little at home.
Of course he bankrupted America at the same time, so I wonder why we were upset ?
DebbieDoRight
December 28th, 2011
2:20 pm
josef: Hey, Girl…folks been askin’ ’bout that boa… it’s a relic now…
Don’t let them have it, it’s mine!!! Tell them to get their own! Oh and Happy Hannukkah!! (Hope I spelled it right). Hope you and yours were a little happier, wealthier and wiser!
Dusty: Perhaps you skipped a line in my post. I repeat: I believe all our leaders take info given them and make decisions..
Nope — it was in there…
Dusty: You think THAT might include Prez Obama? It did. It also included Prez Bush whom you dumped disgust on repeatedly.
Yeah but he earned his. PS: Just in case you missed any of those posts from me….. I’m also disgusted with Obama’s bending over and giving the repubs everything their evil little hearts desire too.
Dusty: Tht is not to say that I agree with all that presidents do. They do make bad decisions sometimes just like everybody. But I still stand by my statement that they draw conclusions from info they receive. Get it?
Oh sure Dusty…can’t imagine why you’d mention……oh wait!!! Now i remember, YOU were the one who said it was unpatriotic to disagree with the President (Bush)!!! I KNEW it’d come back to me!!
Adam: You’re implying there was only one?
Debbie –
getalife
December 28th, 2011
2:22 pm
Oh I have seen Dusty angry.
Toil toil…….:)
Matti's Grasp of Reality
December 28th, 2011
2:23 pm
I’m also disgusted with Obama’s bending over and giving the repubs everything their evil little hearts desire too.
Yup. It would appear they’re all on the same side: THEIR OWN.
Who’s on our side?
Darvoset spending
December 28th, 2011
2:26 pm
Peter
December 28th, 2011
2:17 pm
Darvoset spending. did you watch the game ?
It was a spectacular battle, and there should be another as exciting…..The kicking game lost it for Bama.
Again..if Bama hits one of the 4 or 5 missed field goals.they win and LSU is never in the title game.
Exactly. If Alabama was truly the better team, they would have had a kicker who didn’t miss.
This isn’t that hard, y’all.
Thomas
December 28th, 2011
2:26 pm
Tax the undeserving winners and you start to recycle the money to productive hands.
which is in fact a timing difference as it tends to revert back. go watch a poker game for proof.
josef
December 28th, 2011
2:27 pm
DDR
A lot happier, less wealthy and no wiser! The one out of three in this case ain’t all bad…hope you and yours are having the best of the Season…
DebbieDoRight
December 28th, 2011
2:28 pm
josef: Are we to assume that Bosch’s bidness is going well?
I hope so!! He deserves good things happening in his life.
Peter: DebbieDoRight .. Not sure you have a clear understanding of the title game. If Bama could only kick field goals………LSU wouldn’t even be there.
I didn’t understand that part. LSU beat THREE ranked teams this season, how many did Bama beat? One? And that one was Penn (Child molesting) State. They , PSU, probably had bigger things on their minds when they played “Bama”. They were probably wondering what time the local elementary schools let out…..
Peter: Bama clearly out played LSU, but got unlucky.
They didn’t get unlucky they LOST. Big difference…
Peter: I don’t have a side in the issue, but it is really hard to beat the same team twice in a season, and they seem to be very evenly matched.
We’ll see. BTW by rights of Marriage (hubby is an Auburn Grad), I have to hate Bama (sorry) so GEAUX Tigers!!! Beat those no-good BAMERS!!!
stands for decibels
December 28th, 2011
2:29 pm
Oh I have seen Dusty angry.
Her other car is a broom?
williebkind
December 28th, 2011
2:29 pm
stands for decibels
December 28th, 2011
7:14 am
Yep it was Deal or a progressive liberal!
DebbieDoRight
December 28th, 2011
2:31 pm
Doom: 35-9 LSWho? Surely you jest. Tide rolls in a rematch. Interestingly Bama is favored by 1 in Vegas.
Not even cracking a smile Doom! Tide gets ROLLED like a drunken prom date. REMINDER: There’s a lot of drinking and drugs in Vegas. I wouldn’t trust those odd makers. Just saying
getalife
December 28th, 2011
2:31 pm
“Her other car is a broom?”
You remember too
Darvoset spending
December 28th, 2011
2:31 pm
The collective denial of Bama fans harkens back to Tennessee’s glory days a decade or so ago… if anything didn’t go the Vols’ way, it was someone’s fault–but certainly not their own!
Darvoset spending
December 28th, 2011
2:33 pm
Nathan Deal makes me pine for Sonny Perdue
stands for decibels
December 28th, 2011
2:35 pm
You remember too
I kid Dusty because I love, of course.
Stevie Ray
December 28th, 2011
2:36 pm
PETER,
While Bush certainly contributed to annual deficit, we’ve been bankrupted as a nation for years…the only thing covering up that fact is that the FEDs, unlike private entities per GAAP, don’t have to account for unfunded future obligations…currently 60+ TRILLION as result from failed Medicare and SS ponzi schemes…additionally, it is deteriorating geometrically with each administration as the boomer age…
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-06-06-us-owes-62-trillion-in-debt_n.htm
Why don’t we ever want to discuss this 300 pound gorilla instead of trying to assign blame to annual deficits?
DebbieDoRight
December 28th, 2011
2:38 pm
Keep: Is this where the Church Lady says “Satan!”?
Peter: It was a spectacular battle, and there should be another as exciting…..The kicking game lost it for Bama. Again..if Bama hits one of the 4 or 5 missed field goals.they win and LSU is never in the title game.
AHHHHH [Buzzer sounding in background]
Wrong answer sir!! The Bama TEAM lost the game, not the “kicker”. If the TEAM was so dang great they would’ve won by those “4 or 5″ TDs — but they didn’t.
I say this time around, Miles pulls out his voodoo doll and puts some serious mojo on that “Bama” elephant. We’ll all be a-eatin’ Elephant gumbo in a coupla days. I got my bowl and spoon ready!!!
Stevie Ray
December 28th, 2011
2:39 pm
MATTI,
That’s the question at the root of all political follies…none of them are on our side. Of course, they play to up to the minute polls to get our votes but after elected, game over…makes much of this “I’m right and you are not right” that so compromises this and other blogs meaningless and of no value toward us taking our government back..
getalife
December 28th, 2011
2:39 pm
“I kid Dusty because I love, of course.”
One of my favorite cons
Darvoset spending
December 28th, 2011
2:39 pm
I liked a line in that article you posted, Stevie Ray:
The false claim that Social Security and Medicare are about to bankrupt the United States has been repeated for decades by conservatives and libertarians who pretend that their ideological opposition to these successful and cost-effective programs is based on worries about the deficit”…
getalife
December 28th, 2011
2:42 pm
Bama players should man up like the Falcons players and say they did not make the plays after their second defeat.
Mad hatter 2.
Satan 0.
Adam
December 28th, 2011
2:43 pm
GT: My favorite attempted usurping of a phrase? “Class warfare.” As though the rich have something to worry about from the poor, and the rich are utterly defenseless against the poor taking their money.
Oh, and the best part? It doesn’t work! Everyone KNOWS that class warfare is when the rich attack the poor, regardless of whatever dictionary definitions they would like to throw up to try to say otherwise (when you’re explaining, you’re losing).
A dad
December 28th, 2011
2:44 pm
Adam – my apologies then. And I would never accuse you, seriously, of living in your folk’s basement. Like I said earlier. despite all the name calling and insulting, etc. (unless it’s clearly done in jest like Dusty and josef) that goes on in this blog, I’m going to refrain from doing so myself. Will do my best to hit back with something even dirtier … facts and logic.
Peter – my hydroponic farm consisted of a bunch of 55-gal aquariums, drilled so flow tubes could connect them. Basic stuff at first, but am sure that someone with cash could link some ponds or something simlar to make it economically viable. But still, some of the herbs were mighty tasty. Or at least I remember them being that way. Sort of. Well, maybe….
Stevie Ray
December 28th, 2011
2:44 pm
DARVOSET,
Yes, unlike most here, I find it useful to present both sides and make up my own mind. The idea that in one ear the spending liberals cry “what about our kids” they say 61 trillion of unfunded debt with actuarially sound data indicating this number will grow geometrically in the next 15 years, possibly eclipsing 100 Trillion in short order is ridiculous. Not surprising that neither party is interested in addressing this as one wants spending as usual, damn the torpedoes, while the other really is clueless as to how to address the issue and keep voters in tow..
DebbieDoRight
December 28th, 2011
2:44 pm
Matti: Who’s on our side?
God Matti! i hope that was a rhetorical question because I dont have an answer! The only one answer that’ll come close is Ralph Nader. And with the way this system is set up (Dems & Reps); there’s no way Nader could get in on any ballot on any state without massive litigation and billions of dollars.
Peter
December 28th, 2011
2:46 pm
Well the sides are being drawn and wow I am ready for another spectacular football game between the two.
I do think whom ever wins should indeed be the champs..of course if you are from Oklahoma State, then you are pouting !
Stevie Ray
December 28th, 2011
2:52 pm
DARVOCET,
Are you suggesting that programs that have costed us 61 trillion more that we can afford are cost effective and successful? Surely you must agree that is an absurd postion, impossible to defend…
Where do you suppose this money will come from? Punting the ball down the field? Fact is our outflows have exceeded our inflows for decades and will continue to do so, getting worse than better in the near term…
Jay
December 28th, 2011
2:52 pm
Josef, are you familiar with this:
http://crookedtimber.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/winston_churchill_on_gettysburg.pdf
TaxPayer
December 28th, 2011
2:55 pm
Why is Stevie Ray arguing against his own linkee.
DebbieDoRight
December 28th, 2011
2:56 pm
josef: A lot happier, less wealthy and no wiser! The one out of three in this case ain’t all bad…hope you and yours are having the best of the Season…
Me and mine are doing well. My steps are here and I hadn’t seen them since last year and they’re getting BIG!! The oldest starts college next year, he’s thinking about becoming a Techie (His aunt’s happy, his dad and grandad might catch the vapors though), or go to USC — i’m hoping he goes to USC; he’ll have a great time and can get FAR AWAY from his family (mom). He needs to be able to man up — with his mother around that’ll never happen.
Dudley bought me a new car for christmas!!! It’s a minivan. I was like “WTF?” — but i pretended to like it. It wasn’t until my mother-n-law bought the CAR SEAT that it finally dawned on me that these people have lost their ever-lovin-mind!! The steps laughed until they were blue in the face and I had to slap them on their backs to restart their breathing. I guess for my birthday they’ll drop me another “subtle” hint and give me a crib.
I have a new nephew this year!! He’s beyyoooottteeefffullll!! and I’m really, really happy that there’s another baby around for me to spoil. I got my neice an iPad — so that she can learn to read, and I’m going to redo her room so that its no longer a baby room but a “big girl” room.
This year I’ve decided to do more for my family and friends, as well as spend more time with them. Since grand died, it has shown me how fragile and quickly life really is.
Paul
December 28th, 2011
3:04 pm
’bout the only thing I have to say on topic is, sounds like Texas.
Which segues into our gov’s soaking the taxpayers of Texas hundreds of thousands of dollars for his security detail while off campaigning for a position that he doesn’t have a chance of winning. But he’s a fiscal conservative, so it’s okay.
Hi DDR!!
Went to see Breaking Dawn yesterday. Great themes! Sacrifice. Service. Rising above one’s nature to serve a greater good. Loyalty, morality, the importance of family. You really should see it!
Paul
December 28th, 2011
3:06 pm
Oh, and DDR, I figured the minivan was to make it easier for you to take the niece and nephew and take them about to do DDR stuff. Leastwise, that’s how I’d portray my understanding to the in-laws and The Dudley.
Stevie Ray
December 28th, 2011
3:06 pm
TAXPAYER,
Not in the least…the article presents two views, the first about the poor decisions that are being made due to the lack of accounting of unfunded liabilities until the check is stroked…the latter from a liberal thinktank suggesting no problem…..ridiculous position but I presume most of left (and right) leaners suffer from severe information based bias…
http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TRSUM/index.html
Check out the %GDP numbers for each program and tell me these are cost efficient programs…funded prudently over the years…complete ponzi funding..
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 28th, 2011
3:08 pm
josef…. I thought Jay was sending you this important Gettysburg link: http://www.nbc.com/the-office/video/the-battle-of-schrute-farms/1369016
Stevie Ray
December 28th, 2011
3:10 pm
JAY,
I read that Gettysburg piece before (a couple of times)…it’s amazing the so much of history has been decided by vagaries and poor communication (ie flanking error by LEE)….another great one is around 1775 during siege of NYC, had the winds been blowing a different direction we may still be under the monarch..
AmVet
December 28th, 2011
3:13 pm
The only one answer that’ll come close is Ralph Nader.
Debbie, have I told you recently, that I love you?!
Sadly, it appears Ralph will not be a candidate in 2012; and his powerful message, which outlines exactly how this nation has benefited from progressive action, including championing (is that a real word?) consumer, shareholder and taxpayer rights, will be forgotten…
Peter
December 28th, 2011
3:14 pm
Stevie Ray Yup out flows have been getting worse and they have been doing it for decades.
So why do the right wingers want to save the world, even though it will cost us dearly ?
dawgfan
December 28th, 2011
3:15 pm
I know this is very late to this discussion, but just to clarify something. A “mitigation credit” doesn’t come out of thin air. It comes from a process certified by the Corps of Engineers whereby former wetlands mostly used for agricultural purposes are returned to wetlands. (creeks rerouted, native plants replanted) and permanently set aside. This results in no net loss of wetlands and the credits can only be used in watershed they originate in. This allows important projects like reservoirs to be built without having an overall negative effect on the wetlands of a watershed. It’s a straight one for one trade. For every unit of wetland destroyed one is preserved. I just thought I add that little bit of info.
DebbieDoRight
December 28th, 2011
3:15 pm
Paul:Hi DDR!! Went to see Breaking Dawn yesterday. Great themes! Sacrifice. Service. Rising above one’s nature to serve a greater good. Loyalty, morality, the importance of family. You really should see it!
Hi Paul!! I will see “Breaking Dawn” when hell freezes over OR when Dusty repudiates Dubya. Which means NEVER!!!!
Paul: Oh, and DDR, I figured the minivan was to make it easier for you to take the niece and nephew and take them about to do DDR stuff. Leastwise, that’s how I’d portray my understanding to the in-laws and The Dudley.
ha!! I smiled and said thank you……’cause I’m going to trade that bad boy in for a Cadillac! I was going to use my bonus for something else, more investment property, but since they did that I figure all bets are off!! Besides, Dudley’s oldest will be in COLLEGE next year!! WTF is he thinking about?!?! I think he has some sort of trauma to his brain — that’s the story i’m going with anway. As for the in-laws, ……………… no comment.
PS: Dudley has me so freaked out that everytime he wants to get “close” I feign a headache! That’ll have to do me until I can get to the doctor in January…….i just hope I can hold out that long.
TaxPayer
December 28th, 2011
3:20 pm
I just noticed that I have plans to draw maybe $60,000 per year during retirement but I do not have the money today. I’m no better than the government with my unfunded liabilities.
Check out the %GDP numbers for each program and tell me these are cost efficient programs…funded prudently over the years…complete ponzi funding..
No, Stevie Ray. If you wish to make such a claim, then you provide the basis.
Bruno
December 28th, 2011
3:21 pm
Bruno: Not finding a 90% figure in either link, and I also am taking the first link with a grain of salt, just fyi.
Adam–If you’ll look a little further into the article, you’ll see that Bill Clinton received approximately 90% of the media’s votes in 1992, the last year for which data is provided. I think it is reasonable to believe a similar percentage voted for Obama. In return, the links you provided which you claimed proved that conservative bias now dominates the media were all bunk, as I demonstrated earlier.
My point is pretty simple: Despite glaring, incontrovertible evidence that the media in this country leans left, you and the other Libs here persist in believing it’s not true. Which, in the end, strikes deeply at your credibility.
Finn McCool
December 28th, 2011
3:21 pm
hehehehe:
Latinos Support Obama, Despite Deportation Policies
The Pew poll is the first to put numbers on the growing discontent among Latinos with Mr. Obama’s immigration policies, which have led to nearly 400,000 deportations in each of the last three years. According to the poll, 59 percent of Latinos disapprove of the deportations; only 27 percent approve.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/28/latinos-support-obama-despite-deportation-policies/?partner=rss&emc=rss
What do Republicans have to do to get a non-white vote? hehehehe
DebbieDoRight
December 28th, 2011
3:23 pm
AmVet: Sadly, it appears Ralph will not be a candidate in 2012; and his powerful message, which outlines exactly how this nation has benefited from progressive action, including championing (is that a real word?) consumer, shareholder and taxpayer rights, will be forgotten…
Hi AmVet!! Even if Nader were to run this year, the system is set up so that in order for him to be in the ballot of all 50 states,(even as a write-in); he’d have to go through tons of litigation. The Dems and the Repubs learned a lot from the Whig party (remember them) and made sure that we (the people) will never again be able to control our own destiny.
In order for Nader’s message to be heard forever, is if there is someone strong enough, wealthy enough, AND know where all the political bones are buried (enough), can stand up to the established parties and fight for EVERYONE — not just the ones with money.
carlosgvv
December 28th, 2011
3:24 pm
RB – 12:34
What makes you think all liberals believe Islam is a peaceful religion? Anyone, liberal or conservative, who looks at Islam honestly can see that Islam AT THIS TIME is anything but a peaceful religion. It very well may be that, in the years to come, Islam will constitute a greater threat to the West than anything else. If Islam can manage to come into the 21st Century like other major world religions, we’ll be OK. Unfortunately, the odds of this happening seem to get smaller and smaller every day.
Paul
December 28th, 2011
3:25 pm
Well, DDR, Edward held out for a hundred years, so a few days is no problem. See? Another Twilight life lesson.!
(And I figured it was only guys who endured the movie in resolute grimness, enduring a couple hours of emotional transparency for the sake of peace with their wives and girlfriends. Think of the service you’d provide by going, letting them know that ‘ha! you guys blew it! You coulda had me and then neither one of us would be here!).
Bruno
December 28th, 2011
3:27 pm
Now, on the other hand, in spite of no factual evidence to support your claim, you and the other Libs here like to perpetuate the myth that most racists are conservatives, which means that as a group, conservatives are more racist than liberals. Sorry, but the bogus “Google search” study that you linked proves nothing. In the end, all you have is anecdotal evidence and your “gut feeling”. Which, in my opinion, isn’t strong enough evidence to make an across-the-board, hateful charge like that.
Adam
December 28th, 2011
3:32 pm
Bruno: See, from my point of view, you are the one who has questionable credibility because you have not at all demonstrated that my links are bunk, especially your very weak “that hasn’t been my personal experience” argument, and you simply insist that there is liberal media bias when the overall effect of the “liberal media bias” charge is that nearly all outlets lean right instead in order to try to stave off the charge that will never go away no matter how much they try to cater to what they believe their audience is – mostly conservatives.
They are probably wrong about their audience, and committing the same flaw as many retailers – those who complain the loudest get the most attention, and are thus encouraged to complain even more. As one banker said (paraphrased) “I don’t believe Obama is a socialist or that he is hurting the banking industry. We only say that stuff because the more we do, the more he gives us what we want.” Bottom line: You’ve either a) been suckered into believing the liberal media bias lie, or b) you know full well I am right and are just arguing the point because you want to remain on top politically.
The fact is, right now, the media is conservative leaning. I could care less whether or not you believe that, especially after I have presented you evidence, but you refusing to acknowledge it and “fighting back” with flimsy reasoning isn’t helping your case.
AmVet
December 28th, 2011
3:33 pm
Rock on DDR.
I believe Nader’s legacy will embolden future vanguards, who will continue to speak truth to power. And who will try to dismantle the stranglehold that the dual incumbency protection rackets have over us all…
The liberal media?
Other than FOX News (Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, John Gibson, Neil Cavuto, Steve Doocy, E.D. Hill, Brian Kilmeade, Brit Hume), Clear Channel, Laura Ingraham, Dr. Laura, Rush Limbaugh, Hugh Hewitt, Ann Coulter, Newsmax, G. Gordon Liddy, Michael Reagan, Michael Savage, The New York Post, Sinclair Broadcast Group (WLOS13, Fox 45, WTTO21, WB49, KGAN, WICD, WICS, WCHS, WVAH, WTAT, WSTR, WSYX, WTTE, WKEF, WRGT, KDSM, WSMH, WXLV, WURN, KVWB, KFBT, WDKY, WMSN, WVTV, WEAR, WZTV, KOTH, WYZZ, WPGH, WGME, WLFL, WRLH, WUHF, KABB, WGGB, WSYT, WTTA), David Horowitz, Rupert Murdoch, PAX, and MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough, you may be right, B!
Bruno
December 28th, 2011
3:33 pm
From earlier:
On topic…what I can’t seem to get a handle on is how anyone can call self a conservative and not be a near fanatic on environmental protection. If ever there were an issue that is conservative to the core, that would be it.
Can’t speak for the other conservatives here, josef, but I’ve donated a small fortune to environmental causes through the years, from the Sierra Club to the Wilderness Society to the World Wildlife Fund to the Nature Conservancy and so on. My particular favorite is the Nature Conservancy, whose philosophy and MO most closely match my own. Rather than tying things up in court for years on end ala the Sierra Club, the Nature Conservancy directly purchases the endangered lands.
Bruno
December 28th, 2011
3:35 pm
Back in a minute, Adam, to show how your links do NOT support the claims you made.
Doggone/GA
December 28th, 2011
3:36 pm
“Anyone, liberal or conservative, who looks at Islam honestly can see that Islam AT THIS TIME is anything but a peaceful religion”
Nope. Anyone, with any sense, can see that there are radicals within that religion who corrupt it’s message for their own vicious ends.
DebbieDoRight
December 28th, 2011
3:36 pm
carlos: If Islam can manage to come into the 21st Century like other major world religions, we’ll be OK.
Oh really? Do you mean religions like, ooohhh, the Orthodox Jews?
The ultra-Orthodox consider the school, which moved to its present site at the beginning of the school year, an encroachment on their territory. Dozens of black-hatted men jeer and physically accost the girls almost daily, claiming their very presence is a provocation.
The televised images of Naama sobbing as she walked to school shocked many Israelis, elicited statements of outrage from the country’s leadership, ……”Who’s afraid of an 8-year-old student?” said Sunday’s main headline in the leading Yediot Ahronot daily.
Beit Shemesh’s growing ultra-Orthodox population has erected street signs calling for the separation of sexes on the sidewalks, dispatched “modesty patrols” to enforce a chaste female appearance and hurled stones at offenders and outsiders. Thousands of secular and religious Jews attended Tuesday evening’s demonstration.
Protesters held signs reading, “Free Israel from religious coercion,” and “Stop Israel from becoming Iran.”
A dad
December 28th, 2011
3:38 pm
adam – stop, yer killin me bud. The media is conservative leaning right now? Oh man, how do you come up with them. Jeff Foxworthy got nothing on you son….
Funny, I haven’t heard any stories about some of the shanty towns that have popped up in cities such as LA. Folks who lost their homes, have been unemployed too long so their beneifts expired (thereby dropping off the unemployed statistics), living in shacks and tents. And no, I’m talking about the OWS crowd.
Doggone/GA
December 28th, 2011
3:40 pm
“Beit Shemesh’s growing ultra-Orthodox population has erected street signs calling for the separation of sexes on the sidewalks, dispatched “modesty patrols” to enforce a chaste female appearance”
Kind of sad, really, to see men who are so afraid of women. Makes you wonder, doesn’t it?
Adam
December 28th, 2011
3:40 pm
Bruno: Sorry, but the bogus “Google search” study that you linked proves nothing. In the end, all you have is anecdotal evidence and your “gut feeling”.
Personally, I thought the 2008 election was string evidence AGAINST racism. And THEN I saw what happened to the loud conservatives after he was elected. There is no way to explain away some of the bogus and obviously false charges against the President with “I just disagree with his policies.” You can’t tell me that the reason people thought he was not born in this country had anything to do with whether or not they agreed with his policies.
I know there is a tendency here to get butthurt and think I am calling YOU racists when I talk about how some conservatives ARE racist, and show it. But if you’re not racist then you have nothing to worry about anyway. It’s not like I was going to hunt down racists or anything.
Anyway what you seem to be doing here is saying your studies are valid, and all of mine are anecdotal, and that it’s ok for you to use “personal experience” as a reason the Pew Research study must be wrong, but when you presume I might be doing the same thing (which I am not, btw), it’s not ok. Basically: you think all your evidence is right and all of mine is suspect.
For the 2010 midterm study, I will say again: It matters not that Obama got more than everyone else. He wasn’t running in 2010. What matters is the coverage of the candidates, and whether or not that coverage was positive. For the GOP primary, the evidence is pretty clear, but you dismiss it because “that hasn’t been [your] personal experience.” Personal experience does not trump facts, data, statistics, and the like.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 28th, 2011
3:42 pm
Bill Clinton received approximately 90% of the media’s votes in 1992, the last year for which data is provided
So based on an election in which there were 3 main candidates and individuals could vote for whoever they chose, the claim that 90% of the media voters determined that Clinton deserved their vote means that those voters are now liberal and also biased. They cannot be independent, they cannot be conservative. They MUST be liberal (well except for that nasty little analysis by social group) One must obviously follow the other. It could not be at all that the economy was the main issue and the Bush campaign was emphasizing foreign policy.
That is some weak indirect “evidence” to then expand into evidence of media bias.
Adam
December 28th, 2011
3:42 pm
Bruno: I hope you hurry, I only have about half an hour left before my drive home
Adam
December 28th, 2011
3:44 pm
And btw saying the people in the media voted 90% for Clinton as evidence of liberal media bias is weak, because that was in 1992, and it presupposes people have absolutely no ability or desire to report on things that do not follow their personal political ideology.
DebbieDoRight
December 28th, 2011
3:45 pm
Paul: Well, DDR, Edward held out for a hundred years, so a few days is no problem. See? Another Twilight life lesson.!
Paul – Edward is a fictional character!!! The only men (fictional or otherwise) who can hold out for hundreds of years are the ones who are eunuchs!
Paul: (And I figured it was only guys who endured the movie in resolute grimness, enduring a couple hours of emotional transparency for the sake of peace with their wives and girlfriends.
Ha!! Dudley only likes slasher movies (thank god!!) and the only thing i actually try to “bribe” him to go to are events that are community events (like a Feed the homeless dinner); and then, only if I am a part of it, (which I usually am).
Paul: Think of the service you’d provide by going, letting them know that ‘ha! you guys blew it! You coulda had me and then neither one of us would be here!
They have to learn to suffer Paul — how else will we train them to become great husbands?
Dusty
December 28th, 2011
3:47 pm
WHAT? No new blog subject to work on here? Just ’cause Bookman is on vacation is no reason to goof off.
Well. let’s see. DDR wants me to repudiate Bush. What for? He was a good president. Wish he were around to scare off Iran. But what do we get? Pineapples! and Biden! Whoopee!
Paul is here not lovin’ Texas. He’s mad at Perry for having a security expense. Didya hear about the guy that went to Hawaii and cost the taxpayers millions? Nawwww….
Anyway, Bruno is here so we may have a modicom of good sense exhibited. At least some math problems with hot dogs but no chili.
Soooo, after a lovely turkey sandwich (will it ever end) I feel GOOD! I shall go hunting in the back yard to see if I can find the COYOTE. If I don’t return, you will know I found him. But I think he only likes turkey, not sweet things like me!! Fare thee well…
Doggone/GA
December 28th, 2011
3:48 pm
“And btw saying the people in the media voted 90% for Clinton as evidence of liberal media bias is weak”
And if that’s the study I think it is, it didn’t indicate anything at all about how they voted. I know there’s a study that indicated that a large percentage of REPORTERS self-identified as “liberals”, and that study keeps cropping up as some kind of “proof” of the liberal media.
But no one has ever been able to provide any proof that the reportING had a “liberal slant” Not one. I know at one point we asked one poster after another, over and over and over, to provide proof of a liberal slant to the NEWS reporting and all we ever got back was either crickets…or opinion pieces.
DebbieDoRight
December 28th, 2011
3:50 pm
Doggone: Kind of sad, really, to see men who are so afraid of women. Makes you wonder, doesn’t it?
Yep. One of my instructors at Spelman told me that’s the first sign of systemic oppression. First they come after the women. Then they come after a certain “group” or faction. Then they come after / question your faithfullness or your patriotism. Then they come after your rights. By that time, they got you.
Adam
December 28th, 2011
3:51 pm
Doggone: Looks like you’ll get your chance. Bruno seems intent on unscientifically proving to us all that the liberal media exists EVERYWHERE
Adam
December 28th, 2011
3:52 pm
DDR: First they come after the women. Then they come after a certain “group” or faction. Then they come after / question your faithfullness or your patriotism. Then they come after your rights. By that time, they got you.
Tell me that does not sound like EXACTLY what the Republican party has done for the past 3 or so decades!
DebbieDoRight
December 28th, 2011
3:53 pm
AmVet: …..will try to dismantle the stranglehold that the dual incumbency protection rackets have over us all…
Dual Incumbency Protection Rackets! oooh I like that!! Mind if i use it sometime?
Doggone/GA
December 28th, 2011
3:54 pm
“Doggone: Looks like you’ll get your chance”
Shoot, all we have to do is ask him to provide a comprehensive listing of NEWS reporting that is slanted to the liberal side. He’ll never be able to do it.
Doggone/GA
December 28th, 2011
3:55 pm
“Tell me that does not sound like EXACTLY what the Republican party has done for the past 3 or so decades!”
I would have said it sounds like what they’ve SAID. They haven’t really DONE much of anything.
St Simons - we're on Island time
December 28th, 2011
3:59 pm
“then they come after your rights. By that time, they got you.”
but some of us have infiltrated the system.
proletariats waiting for the signal…
grrrr
TaxPayer
December 28th, 2011
3:59 pm
I heard that someone on Fox “news” said the word, “Democrat” the other day. They’re no longer “fair and balanced”. They’ve gone liberal!
Jay
December 28th, 2011
4:01 pm
sheets
DebbieDoRight
December 28th, 2011
4:03 pm
Adam: Tell me that does not sound like EXACTLY what the Republican party has done for the past 3 or so decades!
God Adam! I’ve never even THOUGHT about that! (Even though I should have). Their (repubs) strategy, I guesss, is like water wearing down a rock. You don’t notice it, but slowly and effectively that once big strong rock is now just a little pebble.
Bruno
December 28th, 2011
4:04 pm
But no one has ever been able to provide any proof that the reportING had a “liberal slant” Not one. I know at one point we asked one poster after another, over and over and over, to provide proof of a liberal slant to the NEWS reporting and all we ever got back was either crickets…or opinion pieces.
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/08/mccainobama_media_bias.html
godless heathen
December 28th, 2011
4:06 pm
“On topic…what I can’t seem to get a handle on is how anyone can call self a conservative and not be a near fanatic on environmental protection. If ever there were an issue that is conservative to the core, that would be it.”
I’m a conservative and I am strongly in favor of environmental protection. Who isn’t? On the other hand, I understand that without the intelligent use of natural resources civilization cannot continue to improve generation by generation. The industrial revolution, so vilified by the environmentalists, did much to improve the lives of mankind as a whole. Did we wipe out a few species and pollute waterways? Sure, but the benefits have far outweighed the negative effects. Now that we have matured technologically we can do a better job of protecting the environment and managing our resources, but to think we can ever go back to self-sufficient farming and energy use is naive and ludicrous, unless you want to see millions of people starve to death, that is. But that seems to be what some greens seem to want. Would like to see about 1/2 the earths population starve to death so we’d be more in touch with nature?
My problem with the environmentalist movement is that the extremists have mated with the nanny state, trying to sell the belief that we can live in a 100% safe world, no matter what the cost is. And they particularly have no regard for freedom.
Adam
December 28th, 2011
4:10 pm
Don’t think just because I have to go soon that you can sneak in after I leave, post a bogus argument to “show how [my] links do NOT support the claims [I] made,” and I won’t be back to notice that the argument is bogus and call you on it.
Just so you know. Simply having the last word doesn’t mean you win, btw.
Iconoclast
December 28th, 2011
4:17 pm
Immanentize the eschaton!
Doggone/GA
December 28th, 2011
4:22 pm
“http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/08/mccainobama_media_bias.html”
Sorry, that is not a COMPREHENSIVE survey of NEWS REPORTING that proves any sort of liberal bias.
Bruno
December 28th, 2011
4:22 pm
Anyway what you seem to be doing here is saying your studies are valid, and all of mine are anecdotal, and that it’s ok for you to use “personal experience” as a reason the Pew Research study must be wrong, but when you presume I might be doing the same thing (which I am not, btw), it’s not ok. Basically: you think all your evidence is right and all of mine is suspect.
In case you didn’t notice, Adam, the Journalism.org piece you cited CLAIMED that Perry got a lot of “positive” news coverage, while stating that Obama received “negative” news coverage in the same time period. No where in the article did it define “positive’ or “negative” in any scientific way, but instead referred to undefined “computer algorithms”.. Without any such standard delineated, it comes across as an opinion to me. The conclusion of the article stated that Rick Perry and Michelle Bachman have received very “flattering” media coverage overall. That doesn’t match my experience at all, which draws into question the methodology used to determine “positive’ or “negative”.
Your first article was presented to “prove” that media coverage during the midterm elections “heavily favor the Republicans”…In fact, the article showed that Obama got more than twice the press coverage of any other politician mentioned. In comparing the other politicians mentioned, the number of articles ranged from 49-160 stories for each candidate, with no clear advantage to either political party.
Put up some higher quality studies, then we can talk. In the meantime, your cred is 0.
Ron Burgundy
December 28th, 2011
4:27 pm
I think Green people should move to China. They are the real problem. They teeteed in the river so much it turned yellow.
ken
December 28th, 2011
5:37 pm
Go blow your windmills and charge your batteries with fossil fuel.
Adam
December 28th, 2011
6:27 pm
Bruno: My credibility is just fine, but thanks for your opinion. If you wanted more information about how the study was conducted, all you would have had to do was read past the article. The fact that Obama got more coverage during the 2010 midterms says nothing about whether it was positive or negative. And.as I have said before, the fact that Obama got coverage is immaterial because he was not running. And as I have also said before, your personal experience does not trump statistical analysis. The fact that I have to keep repeating myself shows you really don’t understand this, and you are not approaching this subject seriously.
Attack my credibility all you want. From my point of view, your own credibility was in question before you even started with your flimsy rebuttals. You presented your initial links and drew a conclusion from them that can be found nowhere in either link. Further, you then took the evidence I gave you and accused me of the exact same thing you’re doing. In essence, once I challenged you on these things you projected both your lack of credibility and your lack of proper evidence for your conclusion onto me. And that lets me know all I need to know about this entire argument. You know you are wrong, and your only defense is projection. You’re welcome to try again when you’re willing to take the subject more seriously than that, but for now you have not made your case at all.
Paulo977
December 28th, 2011
8:48 pm
And…what of this?????
….http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/28/christa-dias-fired-artificial-insemination-catholic_n_1173139.htm
On state DNR board, no future for a ‘green conservative’Green Business Ideas | Green Business Ideas
December 28th, 2011
9:46 pm
[...] Warren Budd, the vice chairman of the state Board of Natural Resources, calls himself a “green conservative” and claims there are a lot of people like him. A lifelong active Republican, the insurance agent from Newnan is also an avid outdoorsman. “I care about conservation, and I care about this… Read more of On state DNR board, no future for a ‘green conservative’ [...]
Bruno
December 28th, 2011
9:58 pm
And as I have also said before, your personal experience does not trump statistical analysis.
Put some legitimate statistical analysis up, and we can talk. The “study” in which articles are judged to be positive or negative doesn’t count because the standards by which the judgment is made aren’t included. Their conclusion that Perry and Bachman in particular have received the most positive coverage doesn’t pass the smell test. Nor does your “Google” study prove anything about how many people didn’t vote for Obama based on race. Total crap, but it did give you the chance to pull the race card out of your butt.
My challenge was for even one Lib to admit the obvious. If the situation were reversed, and you could show me that 80-90% of the media voted Republican year after year, and that media coverage was disproportionately allocated to the Republican candidates, I would have no problem in agreeing with you that the press tilted right. Any reason why you can’t admit the obvious??
The fact that I have to keep repeating myself shows you really don’t understand this, and you are not approaching this subject seriously.
Adam
December 29th, 2011
8:51 am
Bruno: The “study” in which articles are judged to be positive or negative doesn’t count because the standards by which the judgment is made aren’t included.
This is not true. I’ll let you try again to find the parts of the study that show you exactly that, not that it will do much good. You will, predictably, attack the basis once you find what the basis is, regardless of whether or not it’s actually a reasonable basis. But, as I said, if you want that info all you have to do is read a little deeper than just the article that overviews the study.
Their conclusion that Perry and Bachman in particular have received the most positive coverage doesn’t pass the smell test.
It doesn’t matter whether or not you personally think your own experience is different, as I keep trying to tell you. The study is based on overall data, not how many media stories you PERSONALLY saw.
If the situation were reversed, and you could show me that 80-90% of the media voted Republican year after year
Your problem, of course, is that you still have not showed this for the “liberal media.” It’s questionable at best that you’ve even shown it for one year, let alone “year after year.” Also, this is the very first time I’ve seen you make this particular “roles reversed” claim, so you’re hardly repeating yourself here. Instead, you’ve decided to present a new logical fallacy, thinking that it will somehow help your original argument. You’re still not approaching the subject seriously, but you are always welcome to try again.
David Montane'
January 2nd, 2012
2:38 pm
‘retired early’ wrote, “If you want more examples of Republican conservative ECO values, look no further than their Presidential front runner….Ron Paul. What a joke…and he leads pack.”
‘retired early’ — obviously a pro-regulation, big-government Democrat — misunderstands the difference between neo-conservative, big-business Republicans such as Nathan Deal, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich, classical conservatives such as my friend Warren Budd, and libertarians such as the great statesman Ron Paul, who now resonates with Americans of all stripes and colors. The crux of this misunderstanding seems to be the meaning of “free market”. What many Americans think of as the free market is actually big government using the facade of regulation to protect big businesses at the expense of small businesses and individuals. We have so few examples of a truly “free market” we think justice is incompatible with it.
In a libertarian, free-market economy, private property rights are recognized to the point where there is no public property. However, your rights end where my property begins. If America had a truly free market, King America Finishing would pay 5 years of damages to all of those downstream who were affected by the pollution, plus all costs of attorneys, the court and enforcement. A judge, a jury, an arbitrator or a mitigator would decide how much money or other mitigation would be required of the defendant. It would not be an arbitrary amount set by a government regulator who would then use the money for another purpose. (For instance, I doubt if the bait-shop owner will see any of that $1 million fine.) Also, no one would be put in jail, which does little to promote justice but is a great expense to all.
The big problem with the socialist view, to which most Democrats subscribe, whether knowingly or not, is that private property rights are not even recognized. The river and the fish in it belong to “everyone”, and “everyone” has elected to transfer responsibility to the state. In the end, no one is responsible.
Obama has been exposed as a neo-conservative, just like Romney and Gingrich. If Ron Paul is not elected, everything will continue as before.
sheepdawg
January 2nd, 2012
8:31 pm
Warren Budd is a gentleman and outstanding citizen who speaks an unsurprising truth. deal was a certified crook when he fled congress, we knew that yet our state’s ignorant electorate put him in charge anyway. Georgia will suffer mightely in many way, including our environment, during his reign.