Posted on 05/04/2009 6:02:16 PM PDT by Former MSM Viewer
Not only that, but DDT was very useful here in our own country, long before lefty environmentalists took control of the EPA (which, IMO, should be controlled by each state, solving your purple voter problem; you could not use it, protect your birds and deal with the mosquitoes, we could use it and stay mosquito free, but I digress), and decided to protect animals over humans.
Personally, being part of the oh-so-annoying "breeding population", I would prefer that my children be protected from mosquito borne disease rather than defer to the health of specific wild animals. Call me crazy. Same reason I don't give a crap about the caribou in Alaska, and prefer drilling there.
I love animals, and in fact have been a rescuer for years. I do, however, realize that humans come first.
Just like with the birds, your attitude drives people away from voting Republican (which is at least marginally more conservative than the Democrat party). Your approach will have purple states turn blue instead of red. A lot of people don't fall 100% at one end of the political spectrum. They don't like big government, but anarchy isn't too appealing either. If they're forced to have to choose between "To Hell with progress" and "to Hell with nature" many will choose protecting "nature", however they define that in their minds.
The best plan is not to boldly say that you don't give a crap about the effects on nature, but to inform people that the solutions won't harm nature... as is the case with drilling in Alaska. Don't force people into thinking its an all-or-nothing choice. Saying "Who cares about the birds?" or "I don't give a crap about the caribou" sends the message that following your choices will get rid of the birds and caribou. You're inadvertently helping the liberals out by implying the same thing the liberals do.... If people vote conservative, they'll destroy nature.
Since I was typing to a conservative, I shortened it up a bit. The baloney about thinning eggshells due to DDT was bunk too, and has been proven as such. It was yet another enviro push by the left, and it worked because it was framed in such a way as to have animal lovers believe it was an all or nothing deal. Eagles came back and are thriving because of captive breed/release programs, and a ban on hunting, not because of the ban on DDT.
Again, because I was posting to a conservative, I declined to flesh out my positions. I assumed you knew the facts behind both. I apologize.
If you wanted me to be the only person to read your comment, you probably should have posted a private reply. By the way, just an FYI, I don't appreciate getting snarky comments apologizing for not assuming I was an ignorant boob.
Your posts declaring your disdain for birds and caribou feeds into the stereotype that that is how conservatives think. Saying "Who cares about the damn birds" and "I don't give a crap about the caribou" is taking a position that is not in synch with the "fleshing out" arguments saying they haven't or won't be harmed.
I just got back for Bass Pro Shops and asked them the same thing. They said Deet is the best thing to use, and that there’s no sunblock/repellant that works that great. He said that one could put on the sunblock on first, then the repellant. Going fishing now and will try this.
If I sprout a third eye or something, I’ll report back.
I’ve been bit as a smoker too, but always less than the non-smokers who were in the same place at he same time. Of course one always has to keep in mind the target of opportunity problem. I don’t think they like the taste or smell of smokers, but if there’s no other “food” around... So maybe that’s the best natural defense: present them with other “food”, sort of along the lines of “you don’t have to be faster than the lion”.
From experience I’ll tell you that being a smoker does NOTHING in the way of repelling stinging/biting insects.
Deep Woods OFF is about the only thing I have found that gives me even the smallest amount of relief from the skeeters which are the regional bird in this area. The lotion form with the SPF 15 sunscreen works particularly well when I’m working in the garden.
Sounds like old wives tale, but it does work for some (not all) people:
A product from Avon called “Skin so soft” marketed as a ladie’s skin cream.
I thought this sounded silly, but a lot of people in Florida Keys swear by it.
Doesn’t have any strong chemicals like some repellents - guess mosquitos think it stinks:-)
But take a look at "How to keep mosquitos away". It has some truth to it.
That company also made a feminine hygene product. I wish I could remember what it was called. LOL
LOL!!
I haven’t seen either a scorpion or a black widow in years and years either.
McQuegg and Nappy are unpopular now on KFYI, just as they were last year.
Best luck in Minnesooooota. You know the state motto there, “Come for the weather ... Stay for the taxes.”
Cheers.
When I say a tongue test, I don’t mean gulping the stuff. It’s just an interesting effect...and if it were as dangerous as you imply, it would not be for sale.
...and with this bunch in DC, don’t bet on it being around much longer. Time to stock up (the black market will be AWESOME).
Actually, I thought YOU implied it. I wouldn’t taste it - the smell alone is enough to keep me from doing that.
Yeah - it’s bad enough I’m being forced to buy the new lightbulbs which I despise. Gotta stock up on the old kind b/f they’re gone too.
Late to this thread...Believe it or not, there are still Avon ladies. One lives in my neighborhood. You can order Skin So Soft at avon.com.
Thanks for the info.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.