Friday, April 16, 2004
Bruce, enjoy the laugh...should the W prevail in November, then my husband, the girls & I are moving in with you. (my blood pressure can't handle four more years). Hope that's ok....
Re the Sierra Club, if you google the phrase, "the greening of hate," you'll learn a lot. But here it is in a nutshell. Some environmentalists have been concerned for a long time that as the population of the USA grows, the environment within the borders has degraded. These folks have felt that the Sierra Club should endorse stronger immigration controls. Many in the Club don't feel that way (environmentalists often being bra-burning, tree hugging liberals after all). So the Club has always been officially neutral on the topic.
(Seems odd to me that environmentalists would get riled up over this issue. The real issue is that it's global population we should be worried about. It's the house that's grossly overcrowded. Who cares who's sleeping in what bedroom? )
Well, there are some anti-immigration groups (one might call them hate groups...why yes, in fact, I would call them exactly that, now that I think about it) whose leadership has figured out that for $25 each anyone can join the Sierra Club. So those groups are signing up their members as Sierra Club members, so they can vote for board of directors. The Sierra Club has vast resources and if outside groups, with their own anti-immigration agenda, are large enough, they could in fact vote in their own people as members of the board. That would give this conglomerate of outside groups with a single agenda a majority on the board, and would give them access to all the funds, all the lobbying power, all the everything that Sierra Club has.
So now prominent civil rights advocates are weighing in on the issue as well. There are many outside influences on what usually is a boring little vote for directors, that probably half the time, regular Sierra Club members don't even bother with.
In essence, a hostile take over of Sierra Club. Such an American Idea. John Muir would be so proud.
Here's a good news article about it...probably a little more objective than my version:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0220/p01s04-ussc.html
Re the Sierra Club, if you google the phrase, "the greening of hate," you'll learn a lot. But here it is in a nutshell. Some environmentalists have been concerned for a long time that as the population of the USA grows, the environment within the borders has degraded. These folks have felt that the Sierra Club should endorse stronger immigration controls. Many in the Club don't feel that way (environmentalists often being bra-burning, tree hugging liberals after all). So the Club has always been officially neutral on the topic.
(Seems odd to me that environmentalists would get riled up over this issue. The real issue is that it's global population we should be worried about. It's the house that's grossly overcrowded. Who cares who's sleeping in what bedroom? )
Well, there are some anti-immigration groups (one might call them hate groups...why yes, in fact, I would call them exactly that, now that I think about it) whose leadership has figured out that for $25 each anyone can join the Sierra Club. So those groups are signing up their members as Sierra Club members, so they can vote for board of directors. The Sierra Club has vast resources and if outside groups, with their own anti-immigration agenda, are large enough, they could in fact vote in their own people as members of the board. That would give this conglomerate of outside groups with a single agenda a majority on the board, and would give them access to all the funds, all the lobbying power, all the everything that Sierra Club has.
So now prominent civil rights advocates are weighing in on the issue as well. There are many outside influences on what usually is a boring little vote for directors, that probably half the time, regular Sierra Club members don't even bother with.
In essence, a hostile take over of Sierra Club. Such an American Idea. John Muir would be so proud.
Here's a good news article about it...probably a little more objective than my version:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0220/p01s04-ussc.html
