| REVIEWER | RATING & REVIEW |
 | supremecritic (2)
09/15/2006 | i would immediatly begin working with forign goverments to stop and reverse deforrestation. forrests help get rid of cadon dioxide. i would offer grants and subsides to firms offering cleaner solutions to pollutents. i would also use pollution permits to reduce pollution. i would set a side a bit more land to national parks.
(0 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | TB 303 (5)
09/08/2005 | Our government is doing fair in environmental issues but gets quite a bit of kickbacks still which we may not notice in our lifetime from larger companies. We could start immediately two things in particular to solve alot of problems. 1) Quit cutting down trees for products that hemp could be used to manufacture instead. 2) Start the switch to hydrogen/electric power for vehicles to stop this madness about oil gasoline products that polute our environment. It is not the most important problem right now. Not yet.
People come first but the land gave and gives us life.
(1 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | cutegurl (16)
05/25/2005 | I would tell PETA that if they pull one more stunt I will have every crime and terrorist fighting organization in the United States on their tails. I would also tell Greenpeace that if they get in the way of U.S. commerce one more time I will personally see to their disabandment. That is my dealing with environmental issues. I will deal with the people that cause them.
(3 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | randomoscity (3)
05/25/2005 | Okay, I like trees. Who doesn't like trees? They're green, tall, and give us oxygen. Also, I like chickens. I like bunnies and puppies too. However much I like them, they DO NOT HAVE RIGHTS!! Sure, you shouldn't malisciously harm them, but they don't have that right!
As president, I would not support any movement from Greenpeace, PETA, or anything. You can do a funky dance with your picket signs, I don't care! The country and it's people come before the butterflies and bushes.
(2 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | lincolnsandcadillacs (4)
07/23/2004 | I would continue to preserve national treasures such as the Grand Canyon and Yosomite. However, I would roll back environmental standards that are ineffective and too costly. Just like the reviewer below says, I believe many environment policies are emotionally driven and based on junk science. Air quality has improved significantly in the last 40 years thanks to stringent emission standards. Making modern cars cleaner would do very little to improve air quality but add enormous costs. Research shows that just 1% of cars on roads (namely older and modified cars) produce 95% of the total auto emissions! Those are the cars that need attention. Environmental protection needs to focus on realistic solutions that merits the biggest change without levying too much costs. I would also eliminate many of the EPA's pork barrel projects.
(2 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
| Habanerobuck (0)
06/21/2004 | I give environmental issues a 1. Do I feel like they are that low on the priority scale? No, but I feel there needs to be some semblance of balance when talking about environmental issues, many of which are driven by emotion and bias rather than sound science. Changes are being made in regulations all the time, and everyone is basically in favor of clean air, water, and soil. However, the idea that fossil fuels are leading to an environmental disaster, or that drilling for oil in other places in order to lessen Western dependence on OPEC is to be completely forbidden, is ludicrous and irresponsible in a number of ways.
(3 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | ClassicTVFan47 (38)
06/08/2004 | Force an end to primitive fossil fuel vehicles and bring on the road to hovercars--solar, hydrogen, battery, and eventually fusion! This would keep us from avoiding all of the oil envrionmental disasters of the past. Also, if possible, the development of oxygen generators or filters would be approved to supplement the air-cleaning qualities of trees.
(2 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | Anonymous (1)
03/14/2004 | I would pressure Congress to pass laws making it harder for the industries to release their dangerous chemicals into our air, rivers, and groundwater. I would also make preservation of the environment an important national issue.
(1 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | Jaws (10)
02/02/2004 | The last thing I would do is make industry cut back their production. I would push for newer and better technology that cleans up the different emmisions that are released into the air.
(1 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | Poison Tongue (0)
01/27/2004 | I'd deal with this the same way as the Kyoto Accord, I'd make preserving the environment a priority. There is so much more that could be done that isn't. I don't just mean little things like turning the lights off when you leave a room or taking shorter showers; I mean optimal public transportation, making big companies that rely on heavily polluting fuels to get there act together, reducing chemical levels in water, a dramatic reduction in the cutting down of trees on a comercial level, force vehicle companies to make their vehicls more efficient, actaully working towards finding and using cleaner energy. But I'm just 16 going on 17 what do I know? Right?
(4 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
| 1-10 OF 10 | View All |
