Part: 1234         Session: 12345         Page 422423424425426427428429430431432433434435436437438439440441442443444445446447448449450451452453454455456457458459460461462463464465466467468469470471472 of 512

couple of papers -- and there were more. I have the Oregonian, somehow in my mind. But certainly the Milwaukee Journal, without any question, and certainly the Post-Dispatch of St. Louis were -- And the Louisville Courier Journal. I would say those three, along with the Times, stick in my mind as the best newspapers for covering and taking seriously environmental affairs earlier than anybody else did. Never adequately -- certainly in my view, prejudiced view, never adequately until -- I'm not even sure ever adequately [chuckling], but certainly not satisfactorily from my point of view until the '70s or even later. But I remember those other newspapers and the Times as certainly being better than anybody else.

Was there ever a political candidate whom you decided to vote against or write against simply because of his or her negative attitudes toward conservation?

You're asking me if I would vote? Did ever?

I'm asking you if that issue, the issue of conservation, preservation, environmental defense ever was paramount enough for you in judging --

For me, personally?

Yes, in judging a political candidate's merits.

Oh, yes, yes.

So that would be a major issue for you in deciding?