Recently I've heard alot of campaign retoric about health care a presciption drugs for seniors. It seems like everytime Al Gore or Bill Clinton has visited us in the good old northwest he mentions some talk about restoring habitat and protecting the environment for salmon, BUT no action. Also Govenor Locke continues to blow smoke our way on the same issues. The only thing I heard that might have been a good idea was remove the Ehlwa damn out on the pennisula.

Does anyone know the stance that Bush is taking on these issues because it seems like we are back-pedaling with the democrats at the healm and its time for a change.

If anyone knows a little more abour Gores ideas on saving our salmon/steelies let me know also. This seems to me like it might be the deciding issue I might use to vote for since its pretty much the only thing that hits close to home that effects me except for taxes.

I don't think either of them could catch a salmon. .... Or would want to even. - We just had a 70 post debate on this subject that was very partisan (seemed like a session of congress). If you think things have gone backwards for the fish under the demos, it will get very ugly fast under the repub.'s! They, and Bush, very strongly favor big business (electrical power, timber, agriculture, shipping/barging, poluting industries, etc., etc.). They will surely vote favorably toward their wealthy constituents, not fish or fishermen! Gore decidedly has a better voting and advocacy record toward the environment. - RT

Neither, Ralph Nader!

I agree big time! I would love to see Nader beat them both. Unfortunately, because those that would vote for Nader (who has virtually no chance to win) would more likely vote for Gore if Ralph weren't in the race, a vote for him would amount to a vote for Bush. There are better ways to protest than helping Bush get elected! - RT



[This message has been edited by Reel Truth (edited 08-30-2000).]

GW Bush spoke in Puyallup several months ago. There he stated that he would veto any bill that involved breaching of the snake river dams. I believe that both of these guys ( Gore and Bush) are corrupt but we must choose a lesser of two evils. I have considered voting for Nader but know the vote would not help. Nader has too small of a following, and could not win the election. Unfortunately I will be perpetuating the two party system in the process, but will more than likely vote for Gore.
Gore has tried to bring about some good changes. Before the election was near he was a strong participant in bringing about new information on global warming. This activism has calmed down a bit ( understandably to not ruffle any feathers in an election year).
I have only one problem TIPPER!!! yikes....

Hey folks, I hate to go against the grain of the majority of you fine fellow anglers here, but unfortunatel I see a trend for the bad here. The Demo's have done nothing except to blow a lot of smoke which sounds good, but have failed to do anything good for our streams. If you recall, the Demo's have taken Communist $$, corrupted the morality of the White House, and stuck together like pigs in the mud. I believe if you go with your instincts here, you should feel that it's time for a change...one for the better. I think there are enough "liberal environmentally driven" folks in the PNW to cease any building of more dams here in the PNW, so don't worry about a "renegade" republican in office! Here's a scenario for you...go fishing in TX and then go to Gore's home state and try to fish! Tell me how you feel then!

Only one real choice, Gore. Bush has a real bad track record with environmental issues. And as far as Nader goes, do you really think his vice presidential choice could do the job if called to do so??

Peace

For all you Demos on this board(which seems to be the majority)I want to ask you to think about a few things.. First off, do you guys really believe that the Republicans are enviromentally unfriendly?? They wouldn't be in politics very long if they voted against the enviro. Some choices politicians make are not exactly what we all want to see but that will never change!!! Most importantly to me is the stance Gore has taken against gun ownership.He is nothing more than a ANTI-Hunting/fishing liberal piece of "manure". Trust me if he gets in office we will see a change in our style of life!! Maybe alot of you people don't own guns or even hunt with any kind of weapon...If you don't you should still realize the importance of being able to retain these rights!! The anti-everything organizations strongly support Gore and his fellow Democrats. For this very reason I wouldn't even give Gore a slight thought.. As for you Nader lovers I would personally take two Gores over one Nader! If you want and explantion for my thoughts on this idiot just ask and I'll add my opinion on him as well.There is no such thing as the perfect choice, we just have to decide which person's ideals best fit your ideas and ways of life....Vote Bush!!!!!!!!!

I like RT's thinking but I have one vote and I believe Nader is the one. I've seen Salmon in all are rivers I hope everone gets a chance to hook into one. Good luck and good health the Swami.

Just found out that Bush has lead the way in the state of texas to reduce offshore oil drilling in the gulf of mexico to protect the environment. Also he has been involved with protecting sailfish, bluefin tuna, and marlin in the gulf and east coast waters. Gore hasn't done jack squat while in office for 8 years. I think I might have found my answer. Thanks for all your input.

You all knew my two cents were coming.

If you recall the slade post you will know quickly that I am a proud republican. With the full disclosure out of the way I will begin.
I was an invited guest of the White House to the "Year of the Ocean" conference in Monterey Ca in 1998. I was invited because of my achievements in environmental protection and pollution prevention.(just another republican saving the planet LOL) Among the attendees were Al Gore and Bill Clinton, both of whom I had the opportunity to converse with on these very issues. I also talked with B. Boxer, Ted Danson, Ron Sims, Navy Sec. Dalton, ADM James Loy USCG, Carol Browner, Leon Panetta, Interior Sec. Bruce Babbitt and many more. The subject of the conference was the Law of the Ocean Treaty and its effects on the freedoms of the US. I can tell you that it would inflict upon the US foriegn authority on all of our coastlines and coastal rivers. This analysis is not mine but that of several attendees at the conference that have much more liberal views than I. I can assure you all that Al Gore will sign the treaty as quickly as possible as he said as much directly to me and three top ranking officers of the US Navy. He will do this over the objections of many, but with the blessings of greenpeace, sierra club and other left wing special interests. The same special interests that think sportsmen inflict undue pain and suffering on fish with hook and line. HMMMMMM!!!!! This will directly affect the freedoms we enjoy as anglers of coastal rivers and ocean going fish. This is just one reason to think twice about voting for Al Gore. As I stated in an earlier post, being a single issue voter is a dereliction of your duty as a citizen, something I take very seriously. I don't believe that Algore will be good for the country. I think our taxes will go up from their already too high rate and our freedoms will diminish. Those of you who favor even the current tax rates please make the moral argument for taking my life energy, perhaps against my will, and giving it to someone I may not want to have it. If you think folks should be taxed more, how much EXTRA did you give to the gov't last year with your return. Those of you who think we haven't had our freedoms trampled upon please read the federalist papers and then make the argument as to why I must purchase from the gov't a license to exercise my God given rights to feed and care for my family. Perhaps you could also explain why the gov't has a right to read every piece of email I send regardless of content or recipient.(which is the case now) For a more complete argument against the current crop of democrats (algore included) review the Slade question? post of around 40 days ago. I think GW Bush is a progressive, forward thinking republican. (not all that common I admit) He is among a handful of reforming young(politically) governors from around the country who have done great things in their states. He has already assembled a top notch team and will continue to add talent. As for you vets.....I can't begin to think that any of you could consider voting for algore after what he has let happen to the morale and readiness of our fighting forces in the last eight years. This man has no respect for the warrior spirit or the warrior ways and will not help get even one of our military families off of food stamps. As long as our prisoners eat and live in more favorable conditions than our recruits I cannot support politicians without clear and unshakable support for our armed forces. Al Gore also has a severe problem telling the truth (a quality I don't think he posessed until working with Bill) which disturbs me greatly. I know politicians all lie, but telling me he invented the internet or discovered Love Canal (an environmental disaster he tried to take credit for beginning the cleanup)...thats a little over the top. If he's willing to lie about such easily disproven items what else is he willing to lie about. (i didn't know it was a fundraiser....$5000 from a buddhist monk??)
On a personal note, I found Mr. Gore to be a bit dim. Bill Clinton is charismatic, likable and very smart no matter how much I disagree with his politics. Al Gore, on the other hand, is more wooden and seemingly not bright in person. He is actually better on TV. He is much further left than Clinton politically and sees in his minds eye a socialist utopia existing in America. His book "earth in the balance"is an eye opening tome. The title alone suggests his elitist, humanistic view of the world and the text proposes that humans are nothing more than a threat to the ecosystem as opposed to another part of the ecosystem. This is a VERY important election and we would all be served better if you all spent lots of time researching these candidates. Look at voting records, pre-election year quotes and upbringing. How the parents of these two view the world has a great effect on how they will view it. Both of their fathers were prominent political figures. Don't you share alot of the same opinions as your father???

Regards,
Lance

There are many sources of information to glean facts about our political "leaders" one that I like to check on from time to time is the leauge of conservation voters it was started by other disillusioned republicans like myself when the party made a shift from its Rooseveltian Conservation Ethic (Teddy the guy who started it all remember he was a Republican) to whatever it is you would call the lunacy we are engaged in now regarding the Enviroment.
One issue that is of intrest to all who read this board is water quality so here is the report card for both canidates.
Govenor Bush
More than 4,400 miles of Texas rivers one third of those monitored are so polluted they fail to meet federal standards for recreational and other uses.
Despite the harm, Texas ranks 46th among states for water resource protection, yet Bush continues to condem federal regulations.
Gore
Supports strengthening the clean water act
and investments in clean water to achieve fishable and swimable waters nationwide. He also vows if elected to veto congressional attacks on clean water.
There is alot more information available that show there is a choice I will try to supply information and keep my comments non partisan even though I still register as a Republican( I live in hope I may some day get to vote that way again)

wit45,

Since you seem to be a truth vs. opinion kind of guy, it's time you looked at the truth.

1) Our freedoms will diminish under Al Gore: This is opinion only. You may think that's the case, but I don't see it that way. You just put the freedom to own firearms ahead of the freedom to dictate your own reproductive choices, and choices of whom you sleep with. Conservatives always view the 2nd Amendment as written in stone, but don't seem bothered by assaults on the 1st Amendment.

2) Government access to email. This one is really funny, wit45, since your pal, Slade Gorton voted to INCREASE the governments ability to stick its nose in your electronic correspondence. So don't support Slade, and then whine about the powers HE voted to keep in the FBI/CIA's hands.

3) Inventing the Internet: Al Gore didn't "invent" the internet. But the internet would NOT be what it is today without the efforts of Gore. Without Gore the evolution of the ARPAnet into the internet would be years behind where it is today. Your GOP friends didn't even know what the ARPAnet/internet WAS back in the 80's and early 90's, but Al Gore saw what it could be and helped secure government funding to expand the infrastructure that would allow the internet to become the tool it is today. And the ecomomic boom of the 90's is largely due to the performance of technology-based companies that were helped a great deal by Al Gore's attention to technology. You can play all the word games you want about "inventing" the internet. But remember that without capital, NO invention is viable. Ford didn't "invent" the automobile, either, but without his implementation of the assembly-line, the auto wouldn't be what it is today. I give Al Gore much credit for making the internet the tool it is now.

4) Al Gore's intelligence: This one is a laugh. You think Gore is a dimwit? Then challenge him to a match of IQ's, wit45. You may be embarassed by the results. Stephen Hawking doesn't exude much personality either, and he's not very good with humor, but that doesn't say ANYTHING about his intelligence. Lack of an electric personality doesn't have a damn thing to do with one's intelligence. You should be embarassed you even brought this up. Match Gore up with Bush in this case, and your argument makes even less sense. GW isn't exactly the sharpest tool in the shed.

Once again, opinion takes place of fact. If the GOP is so good for business, then why has the Dow Jones Industrial Average performed its WORST when the GOP controls the White House and Congress? Like 6-10% annual growth vs. 1.3% annual growth with a GOP Pres/Congress. That's a hell of a difference, and those are FACTUAL numbers from historical data, not opinion and innuendo about which party is better for business.

You sound like a political TV commercial, wit45. Gore is far from perfect, and if you want to criticize him on REAL issues, feel free to do so. But so far, your reasons are shallow and lack substance, much like a TV commercial. Watch the debates (if Bush isn't afraid to debate) and judge for yourself who has more to offer the country. I get the feeling that even if Bush showed up to debate in a pink tutu and answered "yabba-dabba-do" to every question, you'd STILL vote for him.

Fish on.......

Silly question. If you want to save salmon and the environment, working with the executive branch of government is a waste of time. I'm not saying to ignore the executive branch of goverment, but come on, the Judicial branch of government is the only place where we have any power.

Neither Bush nor Gore can be trusted. I'm voting for Nader. And voting for someone with integrity is not a wasted vote. Even though my candidate will not win, I'm pleased with having an honest person on the ballot.

New Zealand,first off I'm going to tell you that nader has zero integrity!!He's nothing more than a HSYTERICAL *****LIBERAL with zero substance!! My feelings for him stem from an incident that happened back in 1988..As America's self-proclaimed watchdog he and Meryl Streep devastated the apple industry..Some of you are too young to remember but there was a product our industry used called Alar(we never used it once). Nader and his clones decided he would do America a favor and divulge how dangerous it was for you and your children to eat apples..He went on 60 minutes and told the world that eating apples would cause cancer. Sales immediately stop the following day!! Our industry lost millions of dollers, alot of people filed bankruptcy others just had to absorb huge loses.. Our business was personally hit very hard and we never even used the product! I guess the old saying "guilty through association" really applied.. This man that you hold so high in integrity failed to disclose the real truth about the percentages of apples eaten that were actually treated with Alar(less than 20%). He just gave a grave generalization. The levels of this chemical that were being applied to the apples was practically negligible. In order for the average human body to be subjected to the same levels of Alar being given to the test rats(they did show cancerous levels) a person would have to eat 5000 lbs of Alar treated apples a DAY for 50 YEARS!!!! Then you would have a high risk of getting cancer from eating apples... This man that you claim is so high in integrity never mention "the rest of the story" he just walked away looking like an American savior. Since then I have held ZERO respect for him as a human being. Anybody that can do something so devastating to an industry and doesn't have the backbone to come back and tell the real story is a spineless individual.PERIOD! Next, if you think that Gore isn't going to take away your guns your dead wrong!! He will put in place the needed things(laws) to substantially reduce rights of ownership!! DanS, you appear to be very well read but your camebacks merits nothing more than opinion also... All you demos that believe that clinton and his collegues turned the economy around need to step back away from your EMPLOYERS workplace and see what it actually takes to make a business work..GO out and start your own business(there's plenty of opportunities)and see how easy it is to make it successful..The economy of the 90's fed off what took place in the 80's..PERIOD!!

I know this post started out as a Salmon/steelhead issue. I agree with the above, when the comment was made about Federal government and local issues. You can't expect the Feds to solve all of our problems and be of any help. They (the feds) already have a large percent of our population beleiving that we can count on them to do all of our thinking. What a joke. Bottom line is that they are completely out of touch, and really don't care, as long as they get your vote. These issues need to be resloved at the local and state level. This is the area where we as sportsman have the greatest opportunity to make a change. Get involved with local chapters of conservation groups, and spend your free time educating your children, and other children about the value of the outdoors.

Time to hop on the pulpit. A little twist on the gun issue. If you don't think the "right" to retain weapons is a big issue, cal the folks in China and ask them what they thought about Tianemen Square. Any country that has taken away guns from it's people, has had the opportunity to march all over it's citizens, and generally taken that opportunity. You have a right to reproductive choices, if you don't want the responsibility of children, don't make them. Run a load by hand, if your that short sighted. Thank god your parents thought enough of you that they didn't have you axed before you were born. Don't think our forefathers ever intended the freedom of speech to be twisted to the point, that people would go to a town square, and burn our flag, after thousands of men and women died to keep us free. Let your conscience be your guide, as to who you vote for, but for everyones sake, take 10 minutes out of your busy schedule, and vote for your candidate of choice. There are millions of people in this world that would love to exercise that provelage, and can not. See ya at the poles. Go G dub

steelyhorn,

I beg to differ. This is what I said of the issues raised. 1) Gore isn't a dimwit. 2) Gorton voted to increase gov't access to your email 3) Increased productivity due to technological advances helped the economy surge in the 90's. 4) The loss of "personal freedoms" depends on how you look at it.

Those statements are NOT opinion. My OPINION is that Gore is a better choice than Bush. You want to refute my statements above, fine. But the FACT is the DJIA performs horribly with a GOP Pres/Congress. You want a 1.3% ROI ?? Not me.

Fish on......

DanS, I appreciate your reply, However, you of all people(I'm assuming your eduacated and have a good grasp of history)should beaware that your 1.3% statistic you keep throwing out may have its faults.Any statistician can manipulate numbers anyway they want. It all depends on when and where you start your study..For example, If you just considered the last 30yrs. would your example of 1.3% still hold?? Can you still remember America's worst leader ever? Can you say Jimmy Carter!!! I was a teenager through this time but I vividly remember the interest rates of 21-22%!!! Wow, with high interst rates there will and was ZERO progress made in America!!The Reagan era put in place many tools that promoted and pushed for economic development.. Remember the tax investment credit??? This upstarted many businesses(it actually hurt our industry) that created employment and generated the almighty dollar.. Dan was your rate of return <3% through the 80's?? I doubt it very much. I'd guess you were working hard to get what you now have(I have zero idea what it is).You at least had the opportunity to work. As for the Demos creating or helping out the tech sector(internet) this is ridiculous. The economy of the 90's was tech driven and it would be were it is today whether a Rep. or demos. were in office. Even the Gov't couldn't stop this rush of wealth and technology.However, they are currently trying with Microsoft right now.. What a shame!!!! As far as gun ownership you should ask your beloved gore if he favors complete registration?! That right there is the start of knowing exactly what you own so they can someday ask for them BACK!!!Vote Bush