It's Earth Day. Whoopie.

It's Earth Day. During the Clinton years, that was an excuse for a huge Woodstock-like party every year on the National Mall. I could always tell when it was Earth Day because driving to work that night, there would be trash blowing down Independence Avenue like tumbleweeds. The tree huggers would always leave tons of garbage littering the Mall. Here's an interesting article I lifted off the wires last night. By TERENCE CHEA Associated Press Writer SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- As the world marks the 35th anniversary of Earth Day on Friday, environmentalists are debating the future of a movement that seems to be losing the battle for public opinion. President Bush's re-election, the failure to slow global warming and the large number of Americans who dismiss them as tree-hugging extremists have environmental leaders looking for new approaches. How exactly does one "slow global warming" when we don't even know what causes it? It wasn't too long ago that the self-appointed environmentalists were warning us of a coming ice age. They changed their tune when someone figured out that there's no money to be made from an ice age. It seems logical that human activity could cause global warming, until you see the eruption of Mt Pinatubo throw more garbage into the air than human activity has since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. I personally think that global warming is caused by all those Kennedys burning in Hell. When Teddy kicks off, it will spark a grease fire that will melt the polar icecaps. And while polls show most Americans want clean air, clean water and wildlife protection, environmental issues rank low on their list of priorities -- behind jobs, health care, education and national security. Maybe we'd have the luxury of hugging trees if we didn't have to work so hard putting food on the table because the government is taking half or more of what we earn. "There's this paradox where Americans hold these views, but when it comes time to take action, there are many, many issues that trump environmental concerns," said Peter Teague, environmental programs director at the Nathan Cummings Foundation. Some think it's a message problem -- that environmental groups simply need to improve their communication with the voting public. Others are calling for more fundamental changes in how the groups operate. The challenge goes beyond the environmental movement, said George Lakoff, a University of California, Berkeley linguistics professor who has written about how language colors political discourse. Lakoff argues that the entire public agenda has been seized by what he calls a "right-wing ideological political movement that's extremely powerful and well-funded." Nooo, the entire environmental movement has been seized by a left-wing ideological political movement that's extremely powerful and well-funded. Why does environmentalism have to be left or right? Everyone wants clean air and clean water. Why have environmentalists allowed their movement to be hijacked by Socialists? And what's with eco-terrorism? Burning down car dealerships is going to advance your message? The Bush administration's environmental philosophy has centered on the idea that most environmental decisions are better made by the marketplace, landowners and state and local governments. And certain proposals that the Bush administration has floated -- such as changes to the Clean Air Act -- would lead to weaker regulations than required by laws already in place, many environmentalists argue. Who is more likely to take care of land than the person who owns it and makes his living off it? If you want to see environmental devastation, just go to a Communist country. Land that is owned by everyone isn't owned by anyone. And nobody cares what happens to it. Many green leaders say they deserve some of the blame for the situation. Bush "was re-elected in a campaign in which neither candidate talked much about the environment," said Buck Parker, executive director of Earthjustice, who chairs a coalition of 30 national environmental organizations called the "Green Group." It wasn't always this way. In the decade after Sen. Gaylord Nelson, D-Wis., started the first Earth Day with a series of teach-ins on April 22, 1970, environmental activists achieved some of their biggest victories -- the passage of the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act and Environmental Policy Act. Lately, environmental groups have been fighting to hold on to the gains of the 1970s and 1980s, but the battles have not been resonating with the voting public. To win public support, leaders say they are trying to present the problems and potential solutions in language that connects to people's lives. "We haven't done a good job communicating about the solutions," said Carl Pope, who heads the Sierra Club. Many environmental groups are also finding new allies outside their old political coalitions. The Sierra Club has paired up with ranchers and hunters against increased oil and gas development in some Western states. The environmental law firm Earthjustice is working with Hispanic groups and public health advocates to fight air pollution in California's Central Valley, with American Indians to restore salmon runs in the Pacific Northwest, and with native Hawaiians to protect wildlife in Hawaii. "We're building bridges and finding how you can work with other organizations that don't define themselves as environmentalists," said Earthjustice's Parker. Now, THIS sound promising. In other words, they're working with people. Just out of curiosity, of all those who DO define themselves as environmentalists, how many have a degree in environmentalism? Others believe more fundamental changes are necessary. Last fall, pollster Ted Nordhaus and public relations consultant Michael Shellenberger prompted a heated debate with their paper called "The Death of Environmentalism." "What the environmental movement has failed to do is give Americans a compelling sense of what's in a post-global-warming world for them," Nordhaus said. "We live in an aspirational culture. Gloom and doom narratives don't work. We need to give Americans a vision of the world that is optimistic and hopeful." I'm thinking beaches and palm trees in Alaska. Where's the downside to that? This is not rocket surgery. What environmentalists have to do to gain acceptance is get out of politics, get a haircut, stop wearing sandals, stop blowing up research labs, stop smoking dope and get a REAL job!