Doc Savage
01-21-2002, 01:34 PM
I saw this on the Moab Times-Independant website. These are some real interesting views on "Environmentalists" and thought I'd share them. (I snipped some of the Pay Raise Debate stuff).
Robert
Seems that we speak of voter apathy and non-citizen participation with little digging below the surface to see why. First it's the afternoon workshops the city and county have before scheduled meetings at a time when most folks can't attend. And just like the meeting they held to give themselves the raise and hold up a "good for Moab development," they did it without announcing what the meeting was for in The Times or anywhere else. Those attending were probably the MCA, Bill Love and a few other anti-growth phobites.
To stop Moab from growing we have given way to terms that are both vague and mysterious, such as riparian areas. I figure that?s anyplace a bush grows. View-sheds. That one I think means if I walk out my door and scope out my domain anything within my sight is mine, and it will not change if I like it the way it is. This theory is just a guess but it works. I spoke in a meeting about individual rights and I still believe that I and everyone else has the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, as vague as that is, and that when I or anyone is denied what we feel would make us happy we are being denied one of the fundamental liberties we have.
Developers are spoken of as being greedy, and that they are carpet-baggers, but then again that?s said of any business owner or one of the evil rich. My question is how many jobs are the poor supplying these days? And how are we going to gain year round work and benefits for employees without growth?
Are the aging social-change engineers (from what I can tell they are remnants of the Seattle grunge culture) going to employ us after they force us to turn away growth with the help of some of our elected officials? And if doing well is inherently evil as we are to believe, what do we tell little Johnny and Sue: "Don't do well kids or I'll have to dislike you and call you names?" Childish as that seems it's what?s being taught by the language that?s being used to describe what?s happening here when discussing growth.
Make me king of Utah and I'll make all places wilderness areas and won't allow a vehicle, cow, horse, or even prairie dog to use the land. Seriously, I think environmentalists are for the most part just people that didn't like to share when they were kids and grew up with that same temperament, and that they are hypocritical prima donna's that consume like the rest of us, use vehicles like the rest of us, but only dislike us using things. Kind of a "do as I say, not as I do" thing I guess.
I have attended meetings where half-dressed dirty people came into the council chambers and spoke not from their hearts but from crib notes being passed from someone in the audience. Is this true caring or just an activist- based job you can hitch-hike to and live off of the people in the town?
The way environmentalists talk they quit caring for others of their species years ago and now just care about the land and themselves. All I do know is they don't have all the answers. If we drain all the dams how do we get electricity? Coal or nuclear energy? If cattle don't graze what keeps the undergrowth down? Fire? If hunters don't hunt what thins out herds of animals? Disease? If we can't build in towns and cities and can't build outside of them where do people fit into environmentalist's plans? Nowhere? And if we don't forage for trees and can't produce electricity because of the harm it causes, how are activists going to spread their favorite tool, that being propaganda?
I had a few funny thoughts, one being I bet the pioneers are glad they didn't have any environmentalists with them or they wouldn't have even crossed the Mississippi. And what do you call a person with a bedroll and a backpack. Hmmm?a really, really small mobile home. That one's as lame as the remark I made in a meeting asking the city council where they were advertising for some of these tourists we get in town, at Grateful Dead concerts? Needless to say they didn't respond.
Well I hope this made sense and I didn't offend anyone, even though saying anything now usually does. If it did I'm sorry.
Take care,
Rocky Borreson
Moab
P.S. Since humans can't logically be environmentalists "because as humans we consume and pollute and do so till we die," we could call those who want to pamper the land we all use in one form or another land-nannies. That?s kind of a groovy hip name they could use. Good grief, I must be in Moab or we're mushrooms because were being fed lots of bull and being kept in the dark
Robert
Seems that we speak of voter apathy and non-citizen participation with little digging below the surface to see why. First it's the afternoon workshops the city and county have before scheduled meetings at a time when most folks can't attend. And just like the meeting they held to give themselves the raise and hold up a "good for Moab development," they did it without announcing what the meeting was for in The Times or anywhere else. Those attending were probably the MCA, Bill Love and a few other anti-growth phobites.
To stop Moab from growing we have given way to terms that are both vague and mysterious, such as riparian areas. I figure that?s anyplace a bush grows. View-sheds. That one I think means if I walk out my door and scope out my domain anything within my sight is mine, and it will not change if I like it the way it is. This theory is just a guess but it works. I spoke in a meeting about individual rights and I still believe that I and everyone else has the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, as vague as that is, and that when I or anyone is denied what we feel would make us happy we are being denied one of the fundamental liberties we have.
Developers are spoken of as being greedy, and that they are carpet-baggers, but then again that?s said of any business owner or one of the evil rich. My question is how many jobs are the poor supplying these days? And how are we going to gain year round work and benefits for employees without growth?
Are the aging social-change engineers (from what I can tell they are remnants of the Seattle grunge culture) going to employ us after they force us to turn away growth with the help of some of our elected officials? And if doing well is inherently evil as we are to believe, what do we tell little Johnny and Sue: "Don't do well kids or I'll have to dislike you and call you names?" Childish as that seems it's what?s being taught by the language that?s being used to describe what?s happening here when discussing growth.
Make me king of Utah and I'll make all places wilderness areas and won't allow a vehicle, cow, horse, or even prairie dog to use the land. Seriously, I think environmentalists are for the most part just people that didn't like to share when they were kids and grew up with that same temperament, and that they are hypocritical prima donna's that consume like the rest of us, use vehicles like the rest of us, but only dislike us using things. Kind of a "do as I say, not as I do" thing I guess.
I have attended meetings where half-dressed dirty people came into the council chambers and spoke not from their hearts but from crib notes being passed from someone in the audience. Is this true caring or just an activist- based job you can hitch-hike to and live off of the people in the town?
The way environmentalists talk they quit caring for others of their species years ago and now just care about the land and themselves. All I do know is they don't have all the answers. If we drain all the dams how do we get electricity? Coal or nuclear energy? If cattle don't graze what keeps the undergrowth down? Fire? If hunters don't hunt what thins out herds of animals? Disease? If we can't build in towns and cities and can't build outside of them where do people fit into environmentalist's plans? Nowhere? And if we don't forage for trees and can't produce electricity because of the harm it causes, how are activists going to spread their favorite tool, that being propaganda?
I had a few funny thoughts, one being I bet the pioneers are glad they didn't have any environmentalists with them or they wouldn't have even crossed the Mississippi. And what do you call a person with a bedroll and a backpack. Hmmm?a really, really small mobile home. That one's as lame as the remark I made in a meeting asking the city council where they were advertising for some of these tourists we get in town, at Grateful Dead concerts? Needless to say they didn't respond.
Well I hope this made sense and I didn't offend anyone, even though saying anything now usually does. If it did I'm sorry.
Take care,
Rocky Borreson
Moab
P.S. Since humans can't logically be environmentalists "because as humans we consume and pollute and do so till we die," we could call those who want to pamper the land we all use in one form or another land-nannies. That?s kind of a groovy hip name they could use. Good grief, I must be in Moab or we're mushrooms because were being fed lots of bull and being kept in the dark