Freepers happy about our National Parks crisis

They love it. They want the parks sold off. They are a sorry, heartless bunch.

"Good! I believe strongly that parks need to be in private hands not in the hands of the government, so any cut in federal funding of them is okay with me. I hope that the cuts will become so deep that eventually the feds have to sell these parks to individuals and businesses who could either use them for other things or, better yet, run them more efficiently than the government as profit-making parks.

Privatization of federal parks is a must.
2 posted on 03/19/2004 3:42:18 PM PST by MarcoPolo

It is about time, I can't stand all of the damn government regulations and government camp councilors.
4 posted on 03/19/2004 3:43:28 PM PST by Porterville (Did I spell something wrong? Does that make you mad? Poor baby.)"

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1101572/posts

planet? Who could possibly be against federal parks. They're fantastic! They're wonderful!

who believe Jesus is coming tomorrow, so why bother preserving nature, feeding the hungry, etc., etc.? The "old earth" is just going to "pass away."

That's the attitude that scares me the most. Many of these nutcases actually think that this world is "sinful" and therefore it's okay to trash it because after all, Jesus is coming any day now.

You can have any religious beliefs you want, but don't mess with my planet. It's the only one we've got.

more religions embraced the possibility of reincarnation?

Perhaps there'd be a bit more incentive to preserve the Earth?

I'm scratching my head trying to figure out how a "privatized park" would make a profit. And if it wouldn't make a profit, how could it be privatized? Unless there were a clause enabling a corporation to pave it over... Am I missing something?

the mountains would be renamed to sponsors - 3com mountain
Old faithful would now be brought to you by metamucil

Maybe you can pay for a bus tour of the palatial estates and scenic vistas until the locations become gated communities and the proles are completely barred from entry, but privatization means exactly that.

The National Parks System was originally designed to afford EVERYONE an opoortunity to view the wonderful natural settings in our country. I believe that Teddy Roosevelt stated something along the lines that it is the right of every American to do so.

About the time Reagan came along Yellowstone started charging exhorbitant entrance fees...20 dollars I believe. That is a signifigant chunk of change for a poor couple on tour with their kids in the back of the car. Grand Teton used to charge 25 bucks a night for the little cabins on the Jenny Lake....now they are between 150 to 300 bucks a night. Why? it keeps the prolls away. Privtized national parks will become the playgrounds of the rich and famous....the only way everyone else will get to see them is if they serve hamburgers there.

RC

Disgusting people, really. Truly and hatefully so.

woah...I agree

Onward Christian soldiers and the earth be damned is their motto.

even for them.

How anti-government can you be? Anyone who believes that national parks should be privatized so they can be run more efficiently is absolutely so brainwashed they cannot be saved. I wish more Republicans were like T Roosevelt who understood the limitations of capitalism.

Oh...and who will buy them? Who has that kinda coin?

Answer:

Timber, Mining, and oil industries to name a few.

It's real estate.

Meh- the extremists at Free Republic constantly prove that the Republican Party has a lock on teh asshole vote.

What, I wonder, is their ultimate vision for this country?

I guess national parks are part of the great liberal conspiracy.

I hate to be called anti-American for my views, but these freeps seem to be begging for the title.

"Put me in charge of the National Park Service, and you'll see a bare-bones operation that would fulfill Teddy Roosevelt's original vision for what these parks were supposed to be.

The first year's capital budget would be massive -- it would include the removal of 18,000 permanent structures, 8,000 miles (12,900 kilometers) of roads, 1,800 bridges and tunnels, 4,400 housing units, 700 water and wastewater systems, 400 dams, and 200 solid-waste operations from these parks.

If you want to see Old Faithful or the Grand Tetons, then you'd better have the right outdoor gear, a sturdy pair of hiking boots, and a lot of vacation time."

*****
That means no ATVs, no snowmobiles, no motorcycles, no cars, no trucks, no campers, no motorhomes, NOTHING that doesn't wear hiking boots or (horse)shoes.

I say AMEN, brother, however dotty or downright loathesome I might find your views on other subjects.

Some of our parks are in danger of being loved to death- too many people, too many cars, etc.

I would bet that some of those same people were the ones who objected to the restrictions on snowmobiles in Yellowstone...

camping is done in a tent, not a motorhome, and national parks should be about NATURE, and not dumbed down for the lazy

This guy's onto something. National parks should not be glitzy bastions of civilization; they should be places where you should expect to camp rustically, without amenities, for as long as you care to see the park.

from freeps or DUers! so only those who are physically capable of walking long distances can enjoy our wonders? what a generous attitude.

all you need is a reservation system to limit the numbers. you don't need oppressive fees or to tear up all road access. i'd rather there be restrictions against people making repeated visits that to lock out anyone who isn't up for a hike.

in 66, we were the poor family on a once in a lifetime tour of the parks. even then, the crowding was detrimental. we drove around a freaking parking lot for an hour looking for a place to leave the car and walk.

we had a lot of time to look at license tags and 80% were local. we actually talked to some locals who said they come every nice weekend.

a visit limit would have restricted their use but enabled people who drove thousands of miles for a once in a lifetime visit to have a worth wile experience.

So why worry in the meantime?

You found some very sick people there, rumguy. I don't have any explanation for it.

Some people can be cruel, calculating, and heartless - freepers are a fine example.

...they want to privatize everything.

Hard to think how a privatized national park would make any money.

More n likely the states would have to take over & run them as state parks.

Carve it up into 20 acre parcels for "executive homes". Sell the less habitable parts to some jerkwad who runs an ATV/snowmobile concession.

A few people could profit a great deal. Of course, it won't belong to us anymore. No more park... sigh...


Sing it with me:

"As I went rumbling that dusty highway
I saw a sign that said 'private property'
But on the other side it didn't say NOTHING.
THIS LAND WAS MADE FOR YOU AND ME!!!

This land is your land, this land is my land,
From California to the New York Island,
From the redwood forest to the gulfstream waters,
This land was made for you and me.

Nobody living can ever stop me
As I go walking my freedom highway
Nobody living can make me turn back
This land was made for you and me."

I make typos - dropped letters and so on.

Mr. Fuddled Freeper means to say "Counselor". To lurking freepers, here's a definition:

http://www.britannica.com/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=Counselor

As for Councilor:

http://www.britannica.com/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=Councilor

The freepers wouldn't care if the national forests were paved and turned into Wal-Marts as long as some asshole was making a buck. Those of you thinking about voting Nader should really pay attention to the HUGE differences between Republicans and Democrats on environmental issues. When you vote for Nader, you're putting these freeper lunatics in charge of our precious forests, rivers, lakes, deserts etc. And when they're gone, they're gone.

Some guy wants to make a buck off of it and the gummit's in the way. So, as Grover Norquist advocates, sell off most of the federal lands. Then the buyers can do what they want with 'em: tract housing, mining, landfill, whatever.

If the 'thuglicans stay in power much longer, people like us will have to band together to buy up that land. Better start saving.

I think this should be a bigger campaign issue: so many people visit the Parks and love them so much. They will be so disgusted to see what shrub-ass and his crony capitalists are doing to them.

if a new foreign owner carved his country's leader onto Mt. Rushmore.

we met many, many senior citizens who travel out west in their Winnebagos each winter. They told us they visit all the national parks, multiple times. They were full of suggestions on what to see and where to go. Of course, they had all the time in the world, and we were anxious to reach L.A. At any rate, there must be numerous Republicans in this age group who will experience the loss of services in the parks.

And Park Service employees are held up by management experts as a model of how to run an organization.

Can't back those statements up, but the first isn't hard to believe, and the second I just heard somewhere, so any lurking freepers will just have to disbelieve me on that.

People would kill to get paid to be a Park Ranger, and they get a lot of work from volunteers.

There's an NGO that exists to support and defend the parks from freeplicans and other forces of pure evil: The National Parks Conservation Association www.npca.org

they simply fail to see the value in something that does not directly benefit THEM. They are selfish, greedy bastards.

they're just members of a brainwashed extremist cult. "All nature BAD. All greed GOOD". If their neighbors sold their property to a toxic waste dump, would they bitch about it or dance a happy jig?

And yes, I viscerally HATE them both. And I DO mean HATE, in every sense of the word.

They love their money more than they love their country.

many a time I have said that most republicans put their party above their country and I find that unforgivable.

The last good thing about America. The wilderness. And they wanna muck that up too.

The reason we have National Parks is so these areas can remain wilderness.

Can you say Yosemite Wal-Mart Park? Six-Flags at Yellowstone?

The anarcho-capitalists surely want it all if it isn't obvious by now.

Oh wait....many Confederate apologists are also Repubs now.

since no one wants to backpack or look at anything through binoculars. Or take a chance that a red wolf won't be there on the one day you can snowmobile out to a high point.

Really, now, we need a good operator for Yellowstone, Gettysburg... all the parks, monuments, battlefields and whatever. Right now they just kind of sit there minding their own business with people just wandering around and looking. Often for free.

There's money to be made here, and much better use for all this wasted land that theme park operators would jump on.

and they (the Taliban, not the freepers, although its hard to tell them apart sometimes) blew up the Buddhist statues in Bamian, one of them told me that a Disneyish rebuild of the statues would be just the same for all practical purposes. How stupid can they be? Seems there is a new answer every day.

(edit repeated words)

...on how much money they are "wasting" making the parks "wheel chair accessible."

Egads....the things they like spending money on (needless war, death, destruction) and the things they don't (ecology, accessability, education) never fails to blow my mind.

get old and can't get around and then they will beg for wheelchair access, stupid idiots. :argh:

The National Parks are the only very few natural environments we have here in the U.S. These people want to destroy it. That's just sick.

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

Unbelievable.

They hate commmons in all their forms, primarily because they are unable to live in a society. There's still nothing better than the Seinfeld line to me:

Hey. We're trying to have a society here!!!!

Teddy Roosevelt, someone I think should be the champion for all 'conservatives' helped grow the National Parks, helped establish the Estate Tax, and to placate the bloodthirsty, he carried a 'big stick'.

TR loved the outdoors. These pale shut-ins need to get to a National Park a few times and then they might have a good idea of what TR loved. The current crop of 'conservatives' are not that at all. They are a bunch of fascist dopes who have no comprehension on why, with control of the executive and the two houses, the spending is up. They have no ideas at all.

These people, since they have no appreciation of the outdoors, since they cannot get outdoors because they are too busy staying in and watching Faux News, these people want to destroy our National Parks. These parks are America's treasure and that treasure is not to be squandered for some extra Nails, etc. or some Pawn shop style mall.

Dances with Wolves for me is a great movie for me, because of the amazing scenery. It was filmed almost today. I don't want to have to see such scenery with strictly Hollywood effects.

I've been to some great National Parks and I do not want them to be gone. These dumbass freeps talking about how good it is to privatize these lands reminds me a bit of a funny Chappelle show sketch: Chapelle is standing on an African coast in the 1800s or sooner as a tribesman and says "Woah! A boatful of white people! Y'all wait here, I'll see what they want"

These people have no god damned clue and have zero sense of history.

...I'm convinced these people never get outdoors much. If they could only experience the majesty of Mother Earth, they would change their tune in a heartbeat.

Unfortunately, they'll never give themselves the chance. There's only one green they care about.

And beware of Libertarians who buy property next to national parks. They have an agenda.

would actually be able to afford to pay to get into a park where the entrance fee was based upon the costs necessary to administer it. I'm sure NONE of them have EVER been to Yellowstone Park or the Grand Canyon. :eyes:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

We need government control of our national parks, national forests - not all our land...no one is saying that private property should not exist...

We'd like to retain control of OUR National Parks through OUR government. Handing them over to private business is a bad idea.

You must be one of them radical leftists!

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

No one wants that...if you read that freeper thread, they want it sold off to oil companies...