|
skibabeage
Deleted
Mar 1, 2005, 4:05 PM
Post #1 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
sublimeclimb
Mar 1, 2005, 10:26 PM
Post #2 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 4, 2004
Posts: 49
|
you've gotta be kidding me... like $700m is going to make any difference in a multi-trillion dollar deficit! I'm definitely voicing my opinion on this matter... arghhh
|
|
|
|
|
sublimeclimb
Mar 1, 2005, 10:30 PM
Post #3 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 4, 2004
Posts: 49
|
oops, i spoke too soon :) not yet trillion dollars. either way, the idea sucks.
|
|
|
|
|
tenesmus
Mar 1, 2005, 10:50 PM
Post #4 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2004
Posts: 263
|
One more reason to not vote Republican. Land use issues alone has made me hate them.
|
|
|
|
|
rockhound71
Mar 1, 2005, 10:56 PM
Post #5 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 29, 2002
Posts: 225
|
And you're surprised? Republican, Democrat they're all the same--politicians all out for their own interests (can you tell I'm a cynic?)
|
|
|
|
|
mtnjohn
Mar 2, 2005, 1:01 AM
Post #6 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 17, 2002
Posts: 230
|
It won't do any good
george only cares about george
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Mar 2, 2005, 1:08 AM
Post #7 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
In reply to: It won't do any good george only cares about george
The latter statement is true. The former is false.
Organized, spirited opposition is the only thing that will ever stop the enemies of the common man from exploiting everyone who is not a crony of theirs. Sunlight is the best disinfectant -- make sure everyone you know, Republican, Democrat, Anarchist, or Green, is aware that this is the sort of ''solution'' our president is proposing for his wasteful budget deficit.
Personally, I am convinced that the neo-conservative 'starve the beast' strategy is what George W. Bush is driving after -- spend so much that the federal government effectively collapses, forcibly downsizing itself as a result. Needless to say, I am not impressed with the philosophy nor its implementation.
Make a stink and don't ever forget that politicians hate to be at the center of a controversy. Especially one like this, as clear an example of hands-in-the-cookie-jar as I have ever seen.
|
|
|
|
|
yomomma
Mar 2, 2005, 1:48 AM
Post #8 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 26, 2003
Posts: 65
|
In reply to: Organized, spirited opposition is the only thing that will ever stop the enemies of the common man from exploiting everyone who is not a crony of theirs.
Amen, Brotha.
What an ugly, pitiful joke. As if this administration cares at all about the deficit. Can't say that I'm surprised by this, though.
|
|
|
|
|
lazyjammin
Mar 2, 2005, 8:51 PM
Post #9 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 2, 2004
Posts: 200
|
I am convinced that republicans hate those who love the outdoors. :evil:
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Mar 2, 2005, 9:27 PM
Post #10 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
In reply to: I am convinced that republicans hate those who love the outdoors. :evil:
Generally disagree.
I for one feel that LESS rangers is the answer, not MORE.
LESS regulation and rules. Leave us in peace, we don't need baby-sitters/bosses.
As far as the budget goes, you can find thousands of things to argue no matter if it is Democrat or Republican, but the war is driving our deficit. We all can pitch in. People need to drive a vehical with good gas milage, and maybe we can bring our guys home sooner.
|
|
|
|
|
capcom1701
Mar 3, 2005, 4:26 AM
Post #11 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 22, 2004
Posts: 79
|
George could probably balance the Budge by going to a fair tax (i.e. consumptive tax, sales tax, etc.), can income tax, fire the IRS, and then Red Rocks could keep its money. Damn I'm good like Cincinnatus. Me for dictator for a year!
[edited for spelling]
|
|
|
|
|
kalcario
Mar 3, 2005, 5:12 AM
Post #12 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 25, 2002
Posts: 1601
|
* In addition, diverting this money may also result in the elimination or cutting back of climbing rangers, park rangers, and key staff within the federal land agencies.*
Cool! Maybe they can eliminate the BLM too!
|
|
|
|
|
rocknpowda
Mar 3, 2005, 10:58 PM
Post #13 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 16, 2002
Posts: 418
|
I doubt the federal government is just going to say, "looks like we're out of money. Let's just board up the visitor's center, pack up the rangers and let people have a free for all out here at Red Rocks."
They will have to come up with some money to keep the reserve going and pay the rangers and staff who do stay on. My guess is that they will raise the money by charging users more to get in to Red Rocks and the other areas. That is what happened in the park service. Remember when the price for a one week pass to Zion was only $10. (I am sure some people here remember when it was even less than that)
Just my $0.02.
|
|
|
|
|
bones
Mar 3, 2005, 11:28 PM
Post #14 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 17, 2003
Posts: 253
|
So let me get this straight; Bush is going to use the profit from selling our federal lands to pay for the debt he got us into. Damn, that's borderline theft!
|
|
|
|
|
mccooljc
Mar 4, 2005, 1:56 AM
Post #15 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2003
Posts: 25
|
In reply to: And you're surprised? Republican, Democrat they're all the same--politicians all out for their own interests (can you tell I'm a cynic?)
How exactly is trying to pay government debt "out for their own interests"? 99% of politicians I've seen are just interested in spending my money and still getting us more in debt. Spend whatever you have to to get the votes and don't worry about how much it costs because that's debt that people will be paying long after you're out of office. I'm glad to actually see a president even trying to divert money towards the deficit. Yeah, it might hurt climbers, and it might hurt various other interest groups, but sacrifices sometimes have to be made. I have sacrifice buying climbing gear to have a balanced personal budget, so I'm glad to see the government trying to make sacrifices like I have to. So everybody quit your griping. We'll survive, and we'll still climb, and believe it or not, there are some things more important to this country than climbing (I can already hear the shouts of "Blasphemy!" starting).
|
|
|
|
|
boardline22
Mar 4, 2005, 10:38 PM
Post #16 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 18, 2005
Posts: 652
|
are goverment sucks, I say we overthrow the goverment and have capcom1701 as the dictator until we get out of debt which will be forever!! By the way who are we in debt to? I mean becasue since we have a war president we can jsut capture the country until they are in debt to us. synical an't it?
|
|
|
|
|
cschnur
Mar 8, 2005, 12:56 AM
Post #17 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 12, 2004
Posts: 63
|
Bush and his entire administration are bunch fucking idiots. I have never experienced a president care as little about the environment as he does. He is about filling his own pockets by whatever means necessary. Bush is completely incompetent and has no business being in office. So fuck you George W. And to all the Bush supporters out there, i hope you are offended. Supporting bush is supporting the loss of our natural resourses.
Abstince: No Bush, No Dick
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Mar 8, 2005, 6:10 PM
Post #18 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
all i can say is no suprise. something has to give. you voted for him, you defend him, now sit back and clean up the mess for the next 15-20 years.
And this is a long term mess. we are not in a situation that we can turn around in a few years. the administration has sunk our country and keeps digging a deeper hole for all who follow.
no matter who is in the white house and congress for the next 2 decades we are in for a long battle to get out of a deep deep hole. say it was all for the greater good of our country but we all know the war in Iraq was a witch hunt and bears a great part of the responsibility for the economic situation of the US government.
regardless of how you want to defend this administration and congress you have to admit if we never entered Iraq. we would be better off as a nation now and 10 years down the line.
And the idea that people throw out that Iraq was a showpiece for what America will do to it's enemies is baloney. What Iraq showed is that we can be bogged down to easily with underfunded, undermanned military (despite being the most funded, and one of the largest manned in the world). Because of Iraq we have no military presense in the rest of the world. N. Korea and Iran couldn't be happier.
Furthermore, the light manueverable and quick strike military Rumsfield wanted was a failure. Yes, it can overrun a lightly/poorly equipted country in days, but it can't occupy. Even if you want to say the US casualty rate has been acceptable than you would have to conceede that the US has not done a good job keeping the peace in occupied Iraq. The promises the US made to the Iraqi people aren't there and the billions of dolllars bush ask for every 6 mos or so evaporates into nothing.
Pre-war. It was thought post war Iraq was going to require something on the scope of the Marshall Plan to rebuild. But 2 years after major combat ended we still haven't even begun to rebuild the country.
this all might seem anti-american but the fact is it's all very pro american. what we've done (and yes, all of us, but mainly washingtons policy makers) ourselves back decades for a truly pointless situation.
things like this red rocks thread will be going on for a long time. up here in the capital region Bushes cuts cut funding for bullet proof vest for cops as well as addition funding for police. Education and healthcare are also taking cuts. Bush said it himself. this is going to be a lean budget and we're all going to have to make some sacrifices.
you wanted safety, you have it. but like the patriot act it comes at a cost. enjoy.
|
|
|
|
|
countrycrux
Mar 8, 2005, 7:24 PM
Post #19 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 14, 2004
Posts: 5
|
ok pico23 that was some of the most ignorant/selfish crap ive ever heard.
first just for starters we have a military presense in many countries. my cousin is a marine and he is just about to be deployed to korea.
second no one can keep peace in a war. thats why its called WAR. you dont just go up to someone and say that they lose and they walk away peacefully. terrorist know that if they lose iraq. they lose everything. so there going to be thorwing everything they can at us. so while there are terrorist there wont be peace in iraq.
third to say it is pointless to free pople from tyrany and opression makes me sick. people deserve the freedom to prosper. i know that you like to have freedom. your freedom to create wealth and recieve an education and own property. these people didnt have that chance to the exstent that we as americans do. the deserve freedom just as much as we do.
fourth. we havent been thrown back decades. are economy is growing rapidly. the economic crisis in 2001 was a problem. but thanks to W and his tax cuts it saved us from another depression.
and cschnur you need to go study a little more. natural resoures are made to be used or are you all about living in tiki shacks. o yeah and your a big hypocrate because you prob have a car which uses gas. hmmm i think thats a natural resource. theres nothing to be offend by what you say because all you did was say f this and f that and didnt state any facts. real smart of you genius.
|
|
|
|
|
aimeerose
Mar 9, 2005, 4:51 AM
Post #20 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2003
Posts: 574
|
What pico23 wrote is just about the most intelligent, well written post I've read on rc.com. Countrycrux, however, is about the most ignorant. I can't believe you are a climber!!! Silly me, I thought that all climbers had some sort of general idea of the environment and the desire to take care of it. Maybe that's just out west here. And, I can't believe you actually buy into all the propaganda about "freedom". Did those people ask to be "freed"? We all know this war is just about oil and "they tried to kill my daddy." It's absurd and we really will be paying for it for decades. Let's all remember that Clinton had us in a surplus and there really is a huge difference between Democrats and Republicans. If you don't believe it, you need to study your politics more.
|
|
|
|
|
boardline22
Mar 9, 2005, 2:28 PM
Post #21 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 18, 2005
Posts: 652
|
countrycrux, I awardmyou with the Dumbass Award! Congradulations
My spelling sucks, I know that :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
jackhammer
Mar 9, 2005, 2:37 PM
Post #22 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2004
Posts: 255
|
This is a sad issue...what can I do...?
|
|
|
|
|
boardline22
Mar 9, 2005, 2:43 PM
Post #23 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 18, 2005
Posts: 652
|
There is nothing you can do, except when people vote vote for the right people that support your ideas, our you can run for a office, which you probabaly won't win
|
|
|
|
|
cschnur
Mar 9, 2005, 6:08 PM
Post #24 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 12, 2004
Posts: 63
|
Pico and aimeerose are absolutely right. Countrycrux, i'm sure that you voted for George W, and therefore must defend him. We are going to be paying for this war for decades or even longer. Explain this: WHY do we need a presence in other countries? If we wouldmind our own business and stop trying to stick our nose where it is not needed or wanted it would save us millions everyday. Spend the money cleaning up the environment, making industry look for cleaner alternatives, find alternate fuel sources, and give our children and grandchildren a country rich in natural beauty and resources. Why must we be a world power? To make ourselves feel powerful? Canadian world domination!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
countrycrux
Mar 9, 2005, 7:37 PM
Post #25 of 47
(9660 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 14, 2004
Posts: 5
|
im sorry yall i do study politics, econ, goverment, and history all the time and im down on capitol hill all the time talking to politicians and there staffers from both sides of the aisle. im experiencing it all first hand talking to the people that make stuff happen. you all probably just get all your information from dan rather, la times, ny times or something like that and we know about how reliable those sources are.
i do care about the enviorment alot but that doesnt mean i dont want to use our natural resourses. i love been outdoors in beautiful areas and i think its sad to see beautiful areas get dirtied up with trash.
cschnur you want "canadian world domination!!" that just tells me that your all for socializing everyting. so then we can all be miserable equally. right? i bet you couldnt name me on country that prospered with a socialized goverment.
WHY do we need a presence in other countries? Why must we be a world power? To make ourselves feel powerful? now theres a good question. we have a presense in south korea to protect them from north korea so communism doesnt spread into south korea. i believe that us being a world power we have an obligation to protect other countrys from oppression, totalitarianism, communism, etc. we have the resources and the ability. they deserve freedom and so do we and if i had the chance i would be over there helping the battle for freedom. instead of jus thinking about how we can just help ourselves we should be thinking about how we can help others.
aimeerose- "And, I can't believe you actually buy into all the propaganda about "freedom". Did those people ask to be "freed"?"
haha o man that makes me laugh. that is the dumbest thing ive ever heard. it looks like we are freeing them you said it yourself. im sorry those people were being opressed and if you dont know that then you must watch mr. rather. i do know the diferance between repuplican and democrats and i dont know why tim rohmer or zel miller or any of those guys would want to be apart of the democratic party. now do you know the differance between liberal or conservative, communist or libertarian, boy or girl. go study those and come back and try again. o yeah and clinton was living off the regan years. regan had supply-side economics that made the economy boom. go study supply-side economics so you will understand what im talking about. clinton raised taxes as soon as he got into office slowing the economy down making the economy slide slowly over time. bush got into office and the economy dropped. this was drop in the economy was being predicted even before bush was in office and due to his tax cuts its helpping the economy grow rapidly instead of another depression. and this war is not about oil if we need oil so bad we can go to alaska for it. the demorats didnt allow that last four year but know that we have a republican congess and house and president we could.
yeah and if i could vote i would have voted for bush. while hes not very conservative hes way more so than kerry. he know what he believes and does it. kerry on the other hand was always trying to please the public. therefore always changing what he "believed" in. thats why senators never make good presidents rupublican or democrat, liberal or conservative. there will always be someone that dosent like what happens. so as president or governor they must do what they beliveve to be right. kerry didnt have that ablity.In reply to: War is an ugly thing but no the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feelings which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man that has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." ~John Stewart Mill~ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
