Grandpa,

I'd thank you not to answer for me. I don't need that, and I don't think you'd appreciate me doing so on your behalf. We are each capable for answering for ourselves.

I would bash Bush for what he actually does and for what he tries to do when it goes against my interest. I don't have to wait until he succeeds in destroying the resources that are important to me before I say something against him.

As for my politics, if they appear partisan it is only because Republicans have over the past 20 years or so become generally predisposed to environmental degradation. Perhaps it would interest you to know I long ago supported Slade Gorton in a couple elections before he turned to the "dark side," environmentally speaking. I've actually voted for other Repubs, too, when their environmental politics corresponded with mine. But that's getting to be some time ago, now.

Regarding your point about Bush being the demon in the beginning, he has appointed several high-ranking figures at NOAA Fisheries who have and are working hard to undo salmon protection, just has been alleged here and elsewhere. For example: no Jeopardy determinations are allowed in ESA consultations (with a couple exceptions) even when the science and law so dictate; and the enviromental baseline for consultations in some branches is limited to other than the plain reading of the ESA. These are conveniently unwritten policies that directly contradict science and law that did not exist prior to the Bush appointments. These policies have the direct effect of reducing the protection extended to listed fish. Demon? Each decides for his or her self.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.