What goes around ...

[Willy]

Gawd.
Just reading the article title and the first sentence was enough to make me throw up in my mouth.

That was a perfect example of amateurish, high school quality journalism. At least the author didn't have any bias.

Think about it this way, perhaps the very things that make our broken system dysfunctional may keep the MLPA process frozen for a good amount of time.
I still find it appalling that in the midst of a massive budget crisis this process is even being considered. What a huge waste of time and money.

Bleh!

Willy

[dgax65]

That was an editorial, so it doesn't have to be objective. What it does show is the institutional bias towards the environmental movement. I saw lots of grassroots work against the MLPA. Many hard-working fishermen taking time off from their jobs to have their voices heard. That's not astroturfing. Maybe the douchebag who wrote that piece of garbage should have looked more closely at the pro-MLPA crowd. Clueless school kids bussed in to act as props, paid environmental activists and lawyers who live off of enviro-lawsuits is what he would have seen if he had opened his damn eyes. The Packard Foundation buys their own private government agency and that is OK for this tool, but we get help from a lobbying group and its astroturfing? F**k him.

[Gino]

Originally Posted by dgax65

That was an editorial, so it doesn't have to be objective. What it does show is the institutional bias towards the environmental movement. I saw lots of grassroots work against the MLPA. Many hard-working fishermen taking time off from their jobs to have their voices heard. That's not astroturfing. Maybe the douchebag who wrote that piece of garbage should have looked more closely at the pro-MLPA crowd. Clueless school kids bussed in to act as props, paid environmental activists and lawyers who live off of enviro-lawsuits is what he would have seen if he had opened his damn eyes. The Packard Foundation buys their own private government agency and that is OK for this tool, but we get help from a lobbying group and its astroturfing? F**k him.

well said! This is obviously a 1 sided article. Nothing new in that newspaper these days.

[tagyak]

Originally Posted by dgax65

That was an editorial, so it doesn't have to be objective. What it does show is the institutional bias towards the environmental movement. I saw lots of grassroots work against the MLPA. Many hard-working fishermen taking time off from their jobs to have their voices heard. That's not astroturfing. Maybe the douchebag who wrote that piece of garbage should have looked more closely at the pro-MLPA crowd. Clueless school kids bussed in to act as props, paid environmental activists and lawyers who live off of enviro-lawsuits is what he would have seen if he had opened his damn eyes. The Packard Foundation buys their own private government agency and that is OK for this tool, but we get help from a lobbying group and its astroturfing? F**k him.

dgax65, well said, love the last part F**K him. LOL