<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2 PTSIZE=10>
<BR>Paul (whoever you are):
<BR>
<BR>Kerry's comments on his intentions for development and promotion of alternative energy sources that can impact the US production of greenhouse gases are well known. It is a no brainier that Kerry will attempt to implement policies more favorable to stopping greenhouse gas emissions than W. Bush.
<BR>
<BR>As to the detailed specifics of these policies, both for the Bush and Kerry campaign, it is also a no brainier, as you indicate (wink, wink), that ANYTHING they say about what they will do in the White House if elected (appointed?) should be viewed as only campaign propaganda that may or may not followed through on or may or may not be totally sincere.
<BR>
<BR>Kerry may talk like an environmentalist at this time, with grand detailed plans to save the planet, but when in office his actions may be watered down by special interests and partisan politics, etc., to the point where little significant change happens.
<BR>
<BR>And as to W. Bush and his integrity, remember his comments that he was against the idea of nation building? He really carried through with that campaign position! Now the USA is trying to rebuild two foreign nations.
<BR>
<BR>And the Republican spin machine calls Kerry a flip-flopper!
<BR>
<BR>Paul wrote:
<BR>
<BR>"I'm not that fond of Bush myself, but really!"
<BR>
<BR>How fond is "that fond?"
<BR>
<BR>You don't sound like you object to Bush's murderous irrational foreign policy.
<BR>
<BR>And you also wrote:
<BR>
<BR>"And back to Ted's statment.
<BR>Yes. Bush does need to have an eye on global warming and what is
<BR>happening in regards to the enviroment."
<BR>
<BR>What sort of "eye" does Bush have? One filled with oil wells and dollar signs?
<BR>
<BR>Ted Moffett</FONT></HTML>