Happy Earth Day from President Obama

[bigtree]

@BarackObama The President announces the launch of Environmentalists for Obama: http://t.co/c0eTSa8b #EarthDay2012

http://www.barackobama.com/news/entry/happy-earth-day-from-president-obama

[NYC_SKP]

1. bigtree DU rec. (nt)

[ProSense]

2. Photos from America’s Great Outdoors

Photos from America’s Great Outdoors




http://americasgreatoutdoors.tumblr.com/

Awesome images!

[bigtree]

3. coolness

[glinda]

4. Will vote for him but he did not protect the Polar Bear and

he is allowing way too much damage to the planet and it's creatures.

[bigtree]

5. you mean he's not labeling pollution from coal-burning plants and others

. . . as part of the restrictions in the Endangered Species Act? I think I understand that right.

I can see environmentalists and others reasoning behind wanting the linkage, but I can also see that the President would be jumping over a whole morass of opposition in so many forms in Congress to the restrictions on plant pollution. I can't see him effectively taking on that issue from this backdoor, although I do think it would be a clever way to confront the pollution which is responsible for climate change effects.

He's not precluding the polar bear from most other protections in the ESA, though, as I understand the rule that's being objected to, and the administration is confronting the effects from climate change in many other ways.

Also, the Obama administration set aside 187,000 square miles in Alaska as a "critical habitat" for polar bears, an action that could restrict future offshore drilling for oil and gas. The total, which includes large areas of sea ice off the Alaska coast, is about 13,000 square miles, or 8.3 million acres.


DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
(Docket No. FWS-R7-ES-2009-0042)
(92210-1117-0000-FY09-B4)
RIN 1018-AW56
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Polar Bear (Ursus maritimus) in the United States
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), designate critical habitat for polar bear (Ursus maritimus) populations in the United States under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). In total, approximately 484,734 square kilometers (km2) (187,157 square miles (mi2)) fall within the boundaries of the critical habitat designation. The critical habitat is located in Alaska and adjacent territorial and U.S. waters.
http://www.fws.gov/home/feature/2010/pdf/Polar_Bear_Critical_Habitat_Designation_11-22-2010OFR.pdf

[Wits End]

7. Creatures includes us!

I won't vote for him again. I was a huge supporter last time, but he has reneged on every promise he made during the first campaign. I never thought I'd say this, but I don't believe we live in a democracy anymore. Corporations own the government, and no matter what party is in power, only sham changes in policy will be made, enough to pacify the bulk of the population and give them the illusion that something is being done. The really difficult decisions have been, and will continue to be, shoved off until it's too late to do anything about species extinction and catastrophic climate change.

[bigtree]

8. all that capacity to build a such a nice website

. . . and you make such a ill-informed, demonstrably false statement as, 'he has reneged on every promise he made during the first campaign.'

There's certainly more to criticize of his environmental policy and record than to just engage in bullshit. Hey, good luck finding something to support in the republican alternative.

[Wits End]

10. I didn't say there is anything to support in the republican alternative.

I said, there is essentially no difference between the two parties. The differences are all show. Perhaps I should have said, Obama has reneged on every promise OF SIGNIFICANCE he made during the first campaign. What ever happened to prosecuting the war crimes of the Bush administration?

When it comes to the really big issues, the ones that matter to the survival of modern civilization and quite likely a good portion of our species - like the size of our military, and what we do with it, the endless pursuit and subsidizing of fossil fuels, the failure to do anything that will significantly slow fuel emissions contributing to climate change, ocean acidification and ecosystem collapse - voters don't have a real choice. The system is rigged by the two parties to perpetuate, in fact consolidate, corporate power - and the only thing corporations care about is short-term profit, period. That's not compatible with a sustainable culture.

There's no need to be insulting. I liked Obama. Personally, I think somebody took him into a room right after he got elected and left him alone with the Zapruder film. It's either that, or he's been a phony his whole life, not just while campaigning.

[Ruby the Liberal]

11. Hi Wits End,

It isn't considered insulting to ask for clarification from someone who joins here and immediately states that they will not be voting to reelect a sitting Democratic President. Per the TOS of this site, the PRIMARY function is politics, meaning to see Democrats elected/reelected. People who work against that goal typically find their stays here a short one.

[Wits End]

14. engaging in bullshit = asking for clarification?

[Ruby the Liberal]

15. Okay, 'challenging for clarification' then.

Members here take advocacy against Democratic candidates pretty seriously. As I mentioned, that is the primary purpose of this site.

From the TOS:

Vote for Democrats.

Winning elections is important — therefore, advocating in favor of Republican nominees or in favor of third-party spoiler candidates that could split the vote and throw an election to our conservative opponents is never permitted on Democratic Underground. But that does not mean that DU members are required to always be completely supportive of Democrats. During the ups-and-downs of politics and policy-making, it is perfectly normal to have mixed feelings about the Democratic officials we worked hard to help elect. When we are not in the heat of election season, members are permitted to post strong criticism or disappointment with our Democratic elected officials, or to express ambivalence about voting for them. In Democratic primaries, members may support whomever they choose. But when general election season begins, DU members must support Democratic nominees (EXCEPT in rare cases where were a non-Democrat is most likely to defeat the conservative alternative, or where there is no possibility of splitting the liberal vote and inadvertently throwing the election to the conservative alternative). For presidential contests, election season begins when both major-party nominees become clear. For non-presidential contests, election season begins on Labor Day. Everyone here on DU needs to work together to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of American government. If you are bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for our candidates during election season, we'll assume you are rooting for the other side.

[Wits End]

18. What is the TOS and where is it?

I looked around this site before I signed up and didn't see it. Actually, I ended up here because I was looking for a contact for Chris Hedges, and he had posted here - about how he was going to vote for Nader!

So I'm sort of arrived by accident. I didn't realize this is an extension of the Democratic Party (of which until recently I was a life-long member).

Now the truth is, I think if we have any hope (which I sincerely doubt, especially for the American empire) it's in Occupy.

And that's a such a slim chance that it's darn near non-existent.

[Ruby the Liberal]

19. The Terms of Service you agreed to when you joined.

Here is a link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice

This site is not an extension of any party. It is an independent site formed by and for people who are politically minded and share an interest in seeing Democrats elected. Chris Hedges is not a member here. His advocacy of Ralph Nader has been reposted under DMCA copyright for critique.

[dionysus]

20. troll on bro, troll on...

[ProSense]

13. Your comment

I said, there is essentially no difference between the two parties. The differences are all show. Perhaps I should have said, Obama has reneged on every promise OF SIGNIFICANCE he made during the first campaign. What ever happened to prosecuting the war crimes of the Bush administration?

When it comes to the really big issues, the ones that matter to the survival of modern civilization and quite likely a good portion of our species - like the size of our military, and what we do with it, the endless pursuit and subsidizing of fossil fuels, the failure to do anything that will significantly slow fuel emissions contributing to climate change, ocean acidification and ecosystem collapse - voters don't have a real choice. The system is rigged by the two parties to perpetuate, in fact consolidate, corporate power - and the only thing corporations care about is short-term profit, period. That's not compatible with a sustainable culture.

...is a laundry list of nonsense.

Obama Administration Maps the Way toward Better Oceans Management
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511111

I mean, I could understand how one could missed the announcement of the first-ever national ocean policy, but emissions? How exactly do you follow environmental policy and miss the significant fuel efficiency standards, including the first-ever for trucks and buses, and other emissions rules?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002476217

And there is a difference between the parties

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002585875

[Wits End]

17. Well, it's getting kind of late

so I won't get into what the BINGO's (Big Non-Governmental Organizations) like NRDC (otherwise known as Gang Green's) have to gain by pretending that anything substantive is being done to save the oceans, but as regards the emission rule you cite, on NEW not existing coal plants, this analysis is better than anything I could do:

https://act.credoaction.com/campaign/ghg_rule/index.html?r=5543052

"If EPA fails to take action on existing power plants, then the measured progress represented by yesterday's rule will go down in history as a symbolic though essentially empty gesture."

To point out any symbolic gestures as meaningful misses the essential fact that we are BEYOND on track to have an uninhabitable climate - as in, hostile to life, never mind life as we have known it.

In other words it's like appeasement. It's like meeting the attack on Pearl Harbor with wind-up paddle boat toys and balsa wood model airplanes powered by rubber bands. It's ludicrous and doesn't come close to what is necessary.

If people actually think Obama wants to do what's needed, then they should be demanding that dirty sources of fuel be rationed, just like during WWII.

Move the center, as Naomi Klein is wont to say: http://www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/articles/article/6598/

Tim DeChristopher: "She was talking about Obama, and talking about where he was at with climate change, and the things he was throwing out there as campaign promises, you know, the best things he was offering. And she was talking about how that’s nowhere near enough. That even his pie-in-the-sky campaign promises were not enough. And she talked about how, ultimately, Obama was a centrist. That he found the center and he went there. And that that’s where his power came from. She said, “And that’s not gonna change.” And so if the center is not good enough for our survival, and if Obama is a centrist, and will always be a centrist, then our job is to move the center. And that’s what she ended the speech with: “Our job is to move the center.”

[muriel_volestrangler]

9. Be realistic - the next president is Obama or Romney

Romney would be a complete disaster for the world. He denies man-made global warming, he is adamant that Keystone XL must be built, and has spent his entire life wanting as few regulations on corporations as possible.

There is a real difference between them. Obama acknowledges climate change science, appointed a serious scientist to head the Department of Energy, and under him, the EPA declared CO2 a pollutant, so it can be regulated. He may yet reject Keystone XL (especially if there's pressure on him to do so - and declaring that there's no difference does not put pressure on a politician - it makes them write you off as a hopeless case).

If you care about the natural world, you've got to vote for Obama.

[glinda]

16. The other choices are far worse though.

I do agree with much of your sentiment though and we need to find someone as well well as more people to elect who will take this on big time asap.

[Faygo Kid]

6. I will never forget the first Earth Day, in 1970. But then. . .

I was wrapping up my freshman year at Wayne State University. Frisbees everywhere; Golden Retrievers with neckerchiefs, and small children playing in the sunshine of a beautiful day.

And then just a few days later - Kent State. We shut down the university, and the weather was terrible. You know the rest. Mitt was in France.

[unkachuck]

12. arrest, try and execute wall-street executives and save the planet!....n/t

[Raine]

21. Words are good, but action is better. nt