RK ARCHIVE - How Green is Bob Marshall??

When I ran against Bob Marshall one of the things I was slow to figure out was the support he received from the environmental protection community. I was really dumbfounded when the League of Conservation Voters did not even offer me a courtesy interview. They just happily endorsed Bob. And of course little old progressive me got bupkus.

Knowing Bob’s record on environment issues fairly well I have a perspective that a lot of his votes on growth were much less about environmental issues, but more about keeping the flat earth society and Grover Norquist and the ultra rich in the green. I was especially upset when Bob voted against millions of dollars to clean up the Chesepeake Bay in 2004 included in Governor Warner’s historic bi-partiasan tax revision budget to finalize the clean up of the Gilmore mess.

Now he votes FOR off shore drilling with a bogus statement that when congress approves it, we Virginians want to get our money for transportation. What? Of course Bush the clueless made a statement today about his support for this canard. The Sierra Club, who’s endorsement Bob in his recent US Senate bid touted as his strongest indication that he’s got support of we lefties, must be very proud.

UNLESS you read their position paper from 2006 on off shore drilling.

Off shore drilling is more of the same from these “feed the rich” types. The oil companies get richer. And they probably need much more than the 68 million acres the are already sitting on with mineral leases. NOT. The is no effect on gas prices for the forseeable future (ok 10 years). Transportation fixes are put off to much further in the future (Oh and thanks for the great session to solve our road issues). And the national security implications are huge too.

We need to listen to T. Boone.

But I guess the energy lobby has some legislators by the _________.

Not me.

cross posted at www.GettingAround.org

Comments

1/2 a year of U.S. oil consumption (Lowell - 7/15/2008 4:31:21 AM)

To put all this into perspective, what we're talking about is the potential - emphasis on the word "potential" - for 3.82 billion barrels of oil off the Atlantic coast. According to today's Washington Post, "That would meet U.S. petroleum needs for about half a year, according to federal estimates." Another way to look at it is that world proven oil reserves are 1,317.4 billion barrels, meaning that an extra 3.82 billion barrels would increase world proven crude oil reserves by a grand total of 0.3%. That's right, zero point three percent. Big. Freaking. Deal. So why are we wasting our time talking about this nonsense? (short answer: many if not most politicians are craven and ignorant "pander bears")

The landscape has changed (TheGreenMiles - 7/15/2008 8:04:47 AM)

There are lots of environmentalists who don't get political strategy. It's not about the individual delegate -- it's about getting a majority of Democrats in the House. And sure, Marshall might vote the right way on a few little individual bills to protect the trees and streams and such. But if he'll vote on the side of Big Oil on the big issues, those same trees and streams are going to be screwed because of global warming, so what good are those little bills?

No Surprise Here (HisRoc - 7/15/2008 4:40:16 PM)

Gerry Connolly has presided over the clear-cutting of thousands of acres of Fairfax County green space and high-density re-zoning to increase traffic and air pollution. Then, when he is running for re-election and preparing for his run for Congress, he comes up with his "green county" charade. And who does the Sierra Club endorse? Gerry Connolly.

I am convinced that the Sierra Club is either on the take or run by a bunch of gullible rubes. Their political endorsements are incredible.