Kasz216 said:
insomniac17 said:
DragonLord said:
I did. Nobody better at the time to vote for. Gore and Kerry were both terrible choices. My biggest regret with Bush isn't the war in Iraq but that he failed to convince people to drill for oil in Alaska. Even now, it would take 5+ years of time to have a major benefit if they began drilling. It's a time consuming, slow process.
If we would have ok'd it in 2003 when he tried, we'd have $1.25/gallon prices right now. I own two oil wells in Oklahoma, but the reserves in Oklahoma and Texas are nothing compared to Alaska...but oh yeah, we have to protect the moose and duck |
That bothers me. I mean, its great and all that we want to save animals, but aren't we really just killing off future species that would evolve? So wouldn't that mean that there's no point in saving all the animals because some will die off and more will come? OT: If I was old enough, I would have voted for him twice. As with many others on here, I don't think he's all that great, but compared to the competition... Its like choosing the lesser of two evils. |
Not really. I mean... if i shoot a puppy a mystical new kind of puppy doesn't generate somewhere on the other side of the earth. There really aren't any animals that would benefit from oil drilling. |
Well, at the moment it seems we would.
But in order for new species to evolve they have to evolve from a pre-existing species. However, not all species evolve equally. Most just die out eventually, especially those that are highly specialized for their habitat (like pandas).
