marcia sinclair writes:"
 
This message is one of many rude responses to a simple question. Steven
tossed out an idea and deserves a reasonable response, not political
ranting. Please, folks, back off. We are cheering for Cherios, hoping for
federal funding for research, so why is it so outrageous to consider
assistance to beekeepers? Farmers and ranchers have been subsidized for
years. In the midst of a crisis in pollinators in this country, Steve's
concept deserves consideration. I'd rather have my tax dollars go toward
beekeeping than bombers. Whether you agree, disagree or want to ponder it,
at least keep the dialogue more civil.
 
-----------
 
marcia and others -
 
the problem is that faced with bombers or bees, the gov't will choose
bombers.  and bees.  and raise our taxes and / or dump us further into
the national debt.
 
less government is better government.
 
when i vote, i usually vote no to all proposals which will raise taxes,
no matter how "worthy" the cause is.  we live in a society with roughly
50% of all workers working for the government.  this isn't good, especially
for those who don't work for uncle sam.  we all complain about taxes, so,
why give any consideration for efforts which are designed to raise them?
can anyone out there really believe that given the choice between bombers or
bees, the government would choose bees over bombers AND reduce taxes to boot?
 
marcia - this isn't a flame against you, just a little reality check.  stop
thinking about how uncle sam can help you out and more about how you can
solve your own problems.
 
let the flames begin, i can see it now....
 
         (\     John     /)
       {|||8-    in    -8|||}
         (/  Santa Cruz  \)
             California