I think you messed up the years there.

Barack Obama:

Regulate CAFOS: Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), which raise more than 40 percent of U.S. livestock, comprise a larger share of the livestock industry every year. Barack Obama has worked for tougher environmental regulations on CAFOs. He has supported legislation to set tough air and water pollution limits for livestock operations, including limits on nitrogen, phosphorus, hydrogen sulfide, ammonia, and other pollutants. In the Obama Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency will strictly monitor and regulate pollution from large CAFOs, with fines for those who violate tough air and water quality standards. Obama strongly supports efforts to ensure meaningful local control.

Limit EQIP Funding for CAFOs: Barack Obama believes that we should help farmers find the resources to comply with environmental requirements. The Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) provides important financial support to farmers seeking to improve the environmental quality of their operations. Unfortunately, the 2002 Farm Bill lifted the cap on the size of livestock operations that can receive EQIP funding, enabling large livestock operations to receive EQIP payments and subsidizing big CAFOs by as much as $450,000. Obama supports reinstating a strict cap on the size of the livestock operations that can receive EQIP funding so that the largest polluters have to pay for their own environmental clean up.

Hillary Clinton:

Tightening Controls on CAFOs - Hillary believes that we can strike a better balance between animal agriculture and protecting our environment and rural quality of life. She recognizes the hazards that CAFOs pose to health and the environment, and strongly supports local control over CAFO siting decisions. She also supports federal rules to control air and water pollution from corporate factory farms, and believes we should take steps to ensure that conservation funding reaches more family farms.

maybe a media coronation wouldn't have been such a bad thing after all.

It's sad, but everyone owes somebody something once in office. We aren't voting for a leader, we're voting for the sum of lobbyists that we most agree with.

#9, No matter what regulations are put into place or enforced, your choice to eat meat is still worse for the environment than if you drive or any other choice you make.

anyway i guess i should just shut up since clinton clearly comes off as the bad guy-person here.

Have you ever even stopped to calculate your kids' carbon feetprints? They're evil--evil!

So go ahead and feel free to eat meet, Greg. Just don't have kids. And if you do, don't let them eat meet--you're pretty much digging a hole at that point that Mother Earth can't climb out of.

Ack!

Hippie.

Just saying.

The point I'm (barely) making is that argument, eating meat = bad for the environment, is misleading and oversimplified.

ditto for most organic items.