this deserves its own thread, I do believe . . .

[OneBlueSky]

Kerry missed a major opportunity tonight . . .

the environmental issue was served up on a silver platter, and he bunted . . . calling Bush "one of the worst environmental presidents in recent years" (or something like that) is letting the little weasel off the hook . . . big time . . .

Bush is not one of the worst environmental presidents . . . he is, by far, the worst environmental president ever! . . . he is an environmental disaster, which is precisely what Kerry should have called him . . . he should have hit with things like the wholesale turnover of our natural resources to private firms for their own profit (Bush even opened the door with his talk of forest "management") . . . the failure to address global warming . . . the use of depleted uranium weapons in Iraq and Afghanistan . . . and any of a thousand other disastrous Bush policies that are well known and well documented . . . http://www.bushgreenwatch.org /

instead he let him off the hook . . . Kerry should seriously rethink this approach for the next debate, because the environment (despite the polls) is an issue that resonates strongly with a LOT of voters of all persuasions . . . not capitalizing on this gift is a mistake of major proportions . . .

and it's important, dammit! . . .

[Warren DeMontague]

1. He hit the Orwellian "Clear Skies Initiative" pretty hard

As someone pretty committed to environmental issues I felt Kerry was on the ball. Remember, he's been criticized for being way too wonkish.

Here's the transcript of the answer Kerry gave. Remember, he wasn't dealing with a whole ton of time:

Now, when it comes to the issue of the environment, this is one of the worst administrations in modern history.

KERRY: The Clear Skies bill that he just talked about, it's one of those Orwellian names you pull out of the sky, slap it onto something, like "No Child Left Behind" but you leave millions of children behind. Here they're leaving the skies and the environment behind.

If they just left the Clean Air Act all alone the way it is today, no change, the air would be cleaner that it is if you pass the Clear Skies act. We're going backwards.

In fact, his environmental enforcement chief air-quality person at the EPA resigned in protest over what they're doing to what are calling the new source performance standards for air quality.

They're going backwards on the definition for wetlands. They're going backwards on the water quality.

They pulled out of the global warming, declared it dead, didn't even accept the science.

I'm going to be a president who believes in science.

Remember, the guy has a limited amount of time to convey broad ideas; getting too bogged down in specifics could cause people to miss the general point.

I think his committment to environmental protection came across pretty clearly.

[annabanana]

2. I agree...

He could have smacked him down much better on the environment. I thought that was a missed opportunity.

[Was_Immer]

3. Rest assured, plenty more chances at next debate

Grab a seat for the next one, cause they're going to line 'em up, and Kerry's going to wack 'em all out of the park!

[baltodemvet]

4. I agree it's important

But focusing on environmental issues per se is not going to win the election.

Kerry has to keep pounding Bush on the high visibility issues--the botched war on terrorism and the econmoic impact of Bush's on average americans.

I agree,however,that environmental issues should be be wrapped effectively into the latter theme. You put it succinctly, "the wholesale turnover of our natural resources to private firms for their own profit." The Enron screwing of Califoria over energy fits nicely in this package.

[KharmaTrain]

5. Priorities

Yes, the environment is an important issue, and this regime's record has been attrocius, but do we need this fish to fry at this point?

This issue is of a lesser priority to a majority of people and for those who rank this high, just like abortion or any other "special interest issue" minds have been made up on that already. The folks in Nevada have been pissed about Yucca Flats for years as have those against ANWAR and so on. It's a pretty stagnant issue where "loose" or undecided voters come from.

The outsourcing of our government with Halliburton and KBR as poster children haven't been played up enough by Kerry, but I see that more toward Iraq than in other areas.

We've got so many thinks we can in on Bunnypants, it's to a point where there's too much. With 3 weeks left, the focus has to be on shoring up our base and pick off a voter here and there...and the Iraq war and the economy are the issues that can do that.

[Polemonium]

6. Agreed, but hard to sum up the worst environmental record in 2 minutes

One of the problems tackling this administration has been that there is too much material. The Bush administration has rolled back environmental protections, in a thousand small ways, which are hard to clearly sum up and show the American people.

None-the-less I think the environment will continue to come up, and Bush's terrible record will come shining through. Perhaps something along the lines of Federal agencies now working to protect the poluters that endanger human health etc.

[Toucano]

7. I'd rather he keep doing what he's doing.

Haven't you noticed that whenever Bush is "attacked" too vehemently, his poll numbers rise? People think we're picking on the mentally disabled, and they rush to his defense.

Do you really think that the voters for whom the environment is "an issue that resonates strongly" are considering voting for Bush?

If they're not on board with Kerry already, I don't think calling Bush the worst President for the environment ever will make a difference.