Fun with politics and news! Covering Lol Politics and Lol News. Breaking news — lol-style.

 

« Previous | Next »


National Parks ROCK!

theodore roosevelt

National Parks ROCK! Thank you, Teddy!!

(Theodore Roosevelt)

Picture by: dunno source Caption by: redheaded1 via Our LOL Builder

» Recaption This!

» View All Captions

Incorrect source or offensive?
  • Share on Facebook
  • Copy & paste this:

» 468 comments

  1. keithybabes says:

    OMG I laughed so much I nearly died! The most sidesplittingly hilarious lol I think I have ever seen! Pass me the smelling salts!

  2. deadharvest says:

    Umm, yeah…Go Yellowstone?

  3. EWAdams says:

    The correct Republican attitude is that the nation’s land should be sold off cheap to developers to exploit however they see fit to line their own pockets.

    Fortunately, Teddy was a different kind of Republican.

  4. Mcface88 says:

    Uh no.
    this is not funny.

  5. I Like Peanut Butter says:

    So wait, we have a picture of arguably the BIGGEST BAD A$$ president we ever had (finished a speech with a bullet lodged in his rubcage, collapsing his lung) and we talk about National Parks, WTF? I mean I’m fine that this site went away from funny, BUT come on.

    Better Caption: If this man was in office, Iran would have no Nukes, Korea would not test fire missles, and Europe would be kissing our asses”

    Second Best Republican EVER (Lincoln is the first, Ike is the third)

    • the_original_shortright says:

      ILPB… i’m just saying this before 17 trolls say it. the republican party that lincoln belonged to would most likely be closer aligned with the democratic party of today.

      • Kinchyle says:

        Heck, Ike would be closer aligned with the Democratic party of today.

      • TheOne says:

        You wish!

        • I Like Peanut Butter says:

          Original: Lincoln would be more aligned with the Libertarian Party than any party out there. Lincoln believed in a stong federal government, but not a large federal government. He believed more in individual freedoms vice the democratic party does today.

          I actually think Lincoln would go up and sahke Palin’s hand as well as Pelosi’s hand but would find himself voting more with Ron Paul.

        • I Like Peanut Butter says:

          One more thing: The Republican Party today isn’t necesarily the part the Democrats portray it be. Just like the Democratic Party isn’t necesarily the way the Repubs say it is. In history the Repbulican Party has done more for Civil Rights (presidency wise) than the Democratic Party, though the Democratic Party takes the credit.

  6. Sharon B. says:

    National Parks do rock! And Teddy and Franklin both did great things for the system. If Teddy were president today, our foreign policy situation would definitely be more effective. For that matter, FDR just might have dealt better with the North Koreans and Iranians.

  7. foo says:

    Epic caption! Thanks, Teddy!

  8. Nedmark says:

    Don’t forget to thank John Muir too!

  9. meh says:

    meh… still not funny…
    true…
    but not funny….
    meh meh meh and more meh…

  10. KelRen says:

    *Ahem* Am I the only nerd who’s been watching the National Park series on PBS?

  11. Dhoti says:

    It’s not really a Teddy Roosevelt lol if you don’t use “bully”.

    • HelOnWheels says:

      Thank you! I was about to write the same thing.

    • No1askedme says:

      He never went to war with anyone, but yeah, Teddy was a bit of a bully to other nations. However, I think his exceptional domestic policies outweigh his questionable foreign policy. The man knew what needed to be done and he made it happen, I respect that greatly.

      • HelOnWheels says:

        That’s not what he meant by “bully”.

        • No1askedme says:

          Please to be explaining “bully”.

          • Dhoti says:

            By now it’s obvious you’re woefully, and willfully, undereducated. Maybe you should turn off the PC and read a book. (Or a hundred.)

            • Charlie Foxtrot (Floyd Extrodinaire) says:

              You used that line before, why don’t you E.S.A.D.

              • Dhoti says:

                We know that using STFU makes one a troll…I’m going to go out on a limb and argue that using ESAD does too.

                • Charlie Foxtrot (Floyd Extrodinaire) says:

                  Ah, from the master of the insulting comments — what’s a matter, you can dish them out but you can’t take them?

                  • froofrou the Barenaked Lady says:

                    I agree with Dhoti in this case, Charlie. No1, while doing his best to debate, has shown himself to either not be paying attention to important things (like the czar discussion or the one about healthcare), or he’s too young to really know what he’s talking about. He’s also used the excuse that he was “too busy” during the campaign to notice certain important things.

                    He’s got the potential to be good one day, but for right now, he’s coming off as an idiot who doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Especially when he keeps saying things that get knocked down and using the excuse that he hadn’t heard about it (when it’s been all over the news and internets) or that he’s been too busy to care.

                    Don’t make me get in between you and Dhoti, Charlie. I just took a shower and I don’t want to get sweaty :-)

                  • Dhoti says:

                    Um, what? ESAD is just lazy — why would I be offended? (Of course, if you’ve chosen “standing up for the proudly ignorant” as your cause of choice, I shouldn’t

                  • Dhoti says:

                    Um, what? ESAD is just lazy — why would I be offended? (Of course, if you’ve chosen “standing up for the proudly ignorant” as your cause of choice, I shouldn’t expect much in the way of rhetorical flourishes, should I?)

          • Roosevelt often used the word “bully” as an adjective meaning superb/wonderful.

            The search wasn’t really that difficult.. Rooselvelt+bully will give you the desired results.

            • viking gal says:

              Teddy Roosevelt may have had a different definition of the word ‘bully’ when he used it. That does not exclude the possibility of him having acted as a bully in real life. I have not personally studied his writings or history, so I can’t personally make a judgment for or against that epithet. He certainly did embrace the opportunities and privileges which came with his class, but I give him credit for being an educated and intellectually minded fellow.

  12. maddok says:

    I don’t care if it’s not particularly funny, but I’m not going to risk voting this down on pain of pain. Particularly, the pain caused by Theodore Roosevelt rising from the grave to kick the everloving tar out of me.

  13. ss says:

    irony, methinks, that there is so little disabled access in parks. Teddy’s wheelchair would never have taken him to the most of them…

  14. Keith Hackney for President says:

    This is not flaming, we’re merely having fun.

  15. Beckles says:

    I work with the NPS, and I passed this around the office today. Everyone loved it!

  16. TheOne says:

    If Teddy were around today, he’d give Obama a wedgie, slap Pelosi, kick Rahm’s nuts up between his ears and just stare at Biden (making Biden lose control of his bowels- again). I wish we had another like him today. Oh, and Shortright-STFU !(in advance)

  17. uber says:

    if teddy were around today he wouldn’t be sitting behind a desk promising they would hunt down bin laden he would be in tora bora searched that place from top to bottom kicking ass along the way

    • wicket says:

      You’re probably right. Only imagination can tell what a modern day Roosevelt Rough Riders unit would consist of today. I’m thinking a Harley Davidson calvary unit, armored and weaponized to the teeth, very crude and abrasive yet very effective in accomplishing their set goals. Yay for imaginations!

  18. Sharon B. says:

    I love the National Park Series! It is the best. But they have ignored my favorite National Park — Big Bend!

  19. op_sMama says:

    Nature_YES! Both Roosevelts- Yes!

  20. Funny, Ulysses S. Grant founded the first national park and Roosevelt was only responsible for three. Carter wins for most, but largely because of several in Alaska.

  21. Charlie Foxtrot (Floyd Extrodinaire) says:

    Interesting how “Godless Liberals” do the most to preserve God’s creations yet the “God-fearing” conservatives do the most to destroy them.

      • wicket says:

        United States Congress vote on the climate bill: find your own damn source. Conservatives vote NO when we start talking about climate regulation while liberals vote YES. It’s the basis of the whole argument. You need to cite your sources if you disagree with what i’ve just stated.

      • Rando the Floydist says:

        You’re a douche bag. Do I need to cite that? My cite is your mom. BTW, she shouldn’t speak with her mouthful.

      • Charlie Foxtrot (Floyd Extrodinaire) says:

        cite what? It’s an opinion on an opinion page, dumbass.

        • ROFL says:

          Ah- mso when you ask me to cite something I can answer “dumbass”? I agree with the other guy- there’s no civility among Liberals.

          • Mad Maxwell Silverhammer says:

            If you’ve been around here long enough you’d know TheOne hasn’t reached B in the dictionary yet, so he doesn’t know the meaning of civility.
            We’re civil to people who have a point. TheOne, is pointless.

            • viking gal says:

              My recommendation for dealing with ‘the one’: don’t feed pustulant trolls. Only feed those with a brain.

          • Charlie Foxtrot (Floyd Extrodinaire) says:

            Actually, I’ve never asked anyone to cite anything on this site since I know it is pointless.

    • mmm,mmm,mmm says:

      Except they created the National Parks System and liberals want to allow illegal Mexicans to pour over the border onto them littering them up. They bring over every kind of plastic container known to man and leave them out in the desert along with their dirty clothes and other sundries. But that’s ok, cause they might vote for a Democrat…

      • elephantsmakegreatentertainment says:

        That’s the way Pinky and the Brain planned it! Bwwaahaha! Spin and toil yourself into a stroke yet?

      • wicket says:

        I’m sick and tired of picking up all these god damn plastic containers!!! Must be the mexicans.

      • mmm,mmm,mmm says:

        Hmm, I can see none of you live in the Southwest…

        • bitter troll says:

          you cant find mexicans to pick up the litter in the south west? bitter troll is shocked! shocked bitter troll tells you…

          • mmm,mmm,mmm says:

            I’m sure someone could, maybe the federal government could do it!? So, lets see, we pay them to come over here and litter so they can pick it up again, sounds like GOOD use of taxpayer money to me….

        • elephantsmakegreatentertainment says:

          Nope, sorry. We don’t know anything about how to stereotype Southwesterners. Must be a regional thing.

          • mmm,mmm,mmm says:

            I own land out there near the border, so maybe you would listen to me? I drove my fair share of Mexicans to the bus stop who were wandering so don’t think I hate them. I’m just saying they litter and destroy pristine lands.

            • Rando the Floydist says:

              Pristine was my word. You stole my word!

            • I have seen plenty of destruction of the same land by Americans who have total disregard when the park service says, “No Open Fires!”?

            • Oh, and not necessarily limited to national parks, but how many people a day do you see flipping their f*cking cigarette butts out the window? Or leaving their McDonald’s, Burger King, or whatever fast food bag laying where they drop it? Or their baby’s dirty diaper?

              It’s fine that you have a problem with illegals, a lot of people do. But don’t blame the litter problem on them when lots of people who were born in the U.S. are just as bad if not worse.

              • mmm,mmm,mmm says:

                Nothing on this scale:
                About 50 volunteers helped Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and Coronado National Forest officials clean up trash near Madera Canyon on Saturday morning.
                The volunteers, from Green Valley and Nogales, picked up about 3,000 pounds of trash likely discarded by illegal immigrants, who frequently travel through the area near the foothills of the Santa Rita Mountains, said Mark Shaffer, a spokesman for the environmental department.
                Madera Canyon is about 13 miles southeast of Green Valley.
                It took the group about four hours to clean the site, Shaffer said…

                • No1askedme says:

                  It really does help when you substantiate your statements like this. If you had said this in the first place you may not have been flamed.

        • Actually, I was born and raised in New Mexico. What’s your point?

          • mmm,mmm,mmm says:

            I don’t know, maybe that I wasn’t talking to you in the first place?

            • mmm,mmm,mmm says:

              You weren’t involved in this discussion when I asked that Southwest question. I believe you owe me an apology.

              • I believe you can get stuffed. You may not realize it yet, but this is a PUBLIC FORUM, therefore all comments are open for replies/discussions.

              • mmm,mmm,mmm says:

                So, “paying your dues” means you can curse random people on the internet and call them names even though they never did anything to you? Sounds like bullying. If you had really wanted to know my point you could have read what I said the day before which illustrated my point. So, once again, my point: The wilderness areas around the borders are being trashed by illegal immigrants. I’m sorry if no one likes that I am saying that, it doesn’t make it less true. I have seen it first hand. They also have started several forest fires. It’s bad for the environment. That’s it. That’s my point. Please, no one else ask.

                • No1askedme says:

                  Hey, the first amendment gives every American citizen the right to curse anyone they damn well please! :P

                  • mmm,mmm,mmm says:

                    Hey No1, that’s how wars start you know. I thought you were a pacifist?

                    • No1askedme says:

                      Me, a pacifist? Hell no! I’m one of the most militant people I know actually. I have no problem with war, hell, I actually think we have too little war. My problem is with stupid wars. List of stupid wars: Vietnam, Iraq (no trolling please), Korean, Spanish American, etc. Countries fight over dumb things like political/economic ideology, and I hate it. Why doesn’t anyone start a good war, like one to stop genocide in Darfur or end anarchy in Somalia? Honestly, violence can solve problems if we’re willing to use it properly.

                    • No1askedme says:

                      P.S. The War of 1812 was dumb too. England was just being a sore loser! :P

                    • Rando the Floydist says:

                      You’ve confused No1 with VNV.

                    • No1askedme says:

                      VNV confounds me in many ways. He remains amusing though, so I generally leave him be.

                    • mmm,mmm,mmm says:

                      Wow, I would never have guessed that.

                    • No1askedme says:

                      Nor would I considering I can’t even bring myself to kill a spider in the shower. To be totally honest, I really don’t fully understand my views, but I’m always able to rationalize them more than any of the alternatives. That works for me.

                      P.S. Spiders are our friends, please, don’t kill them. It makes me have a sad. :(

                    • mmm,mmm,mmm says:

                      I don’t kill spiders either! I scoop them up and put them outside. I will kill roaches though, if I have too.

                    • No1askedme says:

                      Yay! You get +50 for being cool to spiders!

                    • mmm,mmm,mmm says:

                      I really think they are fascinating and love to watch them. Also, they kill other bugs that might get in the house.

                    • bad fairie says:

                      spiders – ick! i have an agreement with my spiders – they stay outside, they live (unless they are really big and try to web over the door to catch me), but if they come inside, they’re fair game. i don’t invade their space, they don’t get to take over mine. simple.
                      although if a little one was to move into my kitchen window and catch the gnats my pig of a roommate insists on feeding at night, i wouldn’t mind too much

                    • I know I’ve mentioned them before, but tell me you wouldn’t freak out just a little bit if you saw this hanging around your house: {http://www.westaust.net/wildlife/huntsman_spider.jpg}

                    • bad fairie says:

                      you ain’t tricking me to click that link, not again *insert heebie-jeebie shimmy and spasm with goosebumps here!*
                      if i had those in my yard, i’d be breaking open the 12 gauge and setting the choke to wide. of course then i’d probably be spending my days digging buckshot out of the house and patching holes, but dang if i’d let one of those beasties near me….

                      would an electrified chicken wire fence keep them out?

                      aaarrrrkkkk – flash backs of the most unpleasant kind

                    • Dang it, BF, you weren’t supposed to catch on so quick!

                    • mmm,mmm,mmm says:

                      Awww, it’s just a baby! ;)

                • Rando the Floydist says:

                  Oh and these words here: “Please, no one else ask.” were a bad idea. You might as well have said, “Please, harrass me about this on every post I write until the end of time.”

                • mmm,mmm,mmm says:

                  I wasn’t on his crappy lawn.

                • I don’t curse people willy nilly, but seriously, do you think your attempt to shut me down was justified? I didn’t call you anything until you got your back up. Maybe you should learn to accept some responsibility for the things (notice I didn’t curse) that are said to you. So if in your mind you want to be a victim, by all means, have at it.

                  *Jaysus, Mary, and Joseph*

      • No1askedme says:

        @ Mx9
        Every race litters as much as any other jackass! I’m sorry, but blaming “teh ebul ileegul alienz” for all our problems is UNACCEPTABLE. BTW, I live in southern California, and guess what? Most of the mexicans I meet are far nicer than plenty of other non-mexican people I’ve met, so CUT IT OUT! Besides, I thought you were against big government and wasteful spending? How is using tax dollars to go around picking up after morons productive? It only validates the behaviour! If you hate litter so much, do something about it. Organize a group pick-up day, help promote public awareness about the problems of littering; anything other than going and crying to the government to fix it! You’re going against your own principals here!

      • Charlie Foxtrot (Floyd Extrodinaire) says:

        I got news for you sweetheart, you’re an illegal alien.

      • Dhoti says:

        New Mexico – cleaner than regular Mexico

    • mmm,mmm,mmm says:

      Ok, what I want to know is how come CF can get away with obvious trolling comment like this but if any one else calls him on it we get ridiculed? Just seems a little bit strange to me. Couldn’t be any kind of double standard, could it? I mean really, ALL republicans are “God-fearing” and destrying Gods creations?

      • TheOne says:

        See my above question. There is a huge double standard here. “Trolls” are obviously anyone not a far left Liberal and name calling is the only game they have. So much for intelligent conversation. You’ll be called a Racist next…

        • mmm,mmm,mmm says:

          Oh, I don’t care, I know I’m not. You’re funny, I like your posts and so do a lot of other posters in here.

          • TheOne says:

            Thanks! I just get annoyed at the mentality here. It’s supposed to be about humor.

            • No1askedme says:

              People tend to get a little pissy whenever politics get involved, unfortunately. Especially recently.

            • You seem to be doing your fair share of the ‘unfunny’. My suggestion is you practice what you preach.

            • Charlie Foxtrot (Floyd Extrodinaire) says:

              So Mister “Citemaster”, put your money where your mouth is. Since you challenge my opinion on an opinion page, do your homework, since you stand on your so-called principles. Go back to the creation of the first National Park and run down every piece of legislation that both destroyed natural lands in the name of progress and that preserved natural lands in the name of protection and then lay out the principle individuals involved and demonstrate their liberal or conservative background. Prove my statement wrong. But you need multiple established sources. Please limit your argument to 10 pages, double spaced and post it on a web site that we can all read to verify your sources. and thesis statement.

              • stopurtrollin says:

                They see you trollin’, they hatin’

                • Charlie Foxtrot (Floyd Extrodinaire) says:

                  Sure, whatever you say mister I don’t have the guts to use the same name when I post. Troll = but is not limited to someone who uses a different name each time they post to try and sound like they are someone else, or who doesn’t have the cajones to run a track record — uh oh I used an illegal alien word.

                  • ROFL says:

                    Wow-what a troll you are. ( sprays Troll-Rid everywhere). Aren’t you Janes sock puppet? I’ve seen the two of you use the same address and picture. Or are you gonna claim ” I used someone elses computer”. Friggin’ Troll! ESAD as you would say.

                    • froofrou the Barenaked Lady says:

                      They are by no means socks of each other. If you’ve been around long enough to know that sometimes they screw up and use each other’s information, then you’ve been around here long enough to know the reason why.

                      • Mad Maxwell Silverhammer says:

                        It’s ok Froo, those of us who know about CF and Jane also know to just shake our heads and laugh.
                        But on a more serious note… what is it with these newbies poking their heads in and calling us regulars trolls?
                        Perhaps if the socks posted under the same name everytime we could stop calling them trolls.

                        • Dhoti says:

                          Two reasons spring to mind:
                          - A few regulars have no problem calling newbies they disagree with “socks” as a matter of course. Don’t be surprised when they return the favor.
                          - Mistakes are fine, but if Jane/CF aren’t following up immediately with a “sorry, this is me” post, then, while the intent may not be there, it certainly looks like socking to an outside observer. (And froo, I don’t think you’re suggesting this, but I can see how your statement would come off as “shut up, the regulars have different rules” to a newbie.)

                        • Actually, I have seen Jane do exactly that. I can only think of one instance when CF actually posted under Jane’s name and immediately corrected it.

                        • Mad Maxwell Silverhammer says:

                          Eh, I refrain from using the term socks, I prefer troll as its much more all inclusive. But some of these trolls make it more than apparent that they’re socks. Bringing up personal info that was shared a pages worth of lols back are obviously identity diving.
                          And I agree with Eddie, I think anyone who mistakes Jane for CF is mainly just skimming over, and not going back to reread when someone comments. Because they always retract and correct their identity.

                        • Rando the Floydist says:

                          Yes, Dhoti & Max are both right (there’s a sentence you don’t see that often). The word “sock” has been thrown around way too much lately. We need to save the word “sock” for when we truly believe a troll to be someone’s sock. Troll=/=sock. However, we have had trolls in the not-too-distant past that certainly seemed rather sock-ish.

                          As far as the newbies go, I think it’s all in the message. I think that if someone comes on here and acts like calling liberals or conservatives various insults is just common sense, then that person is definitely trolling even if they think they’re right. TheOne, I’m talking to you.
                          And that goes for both sides. I’ve seen liberal trolls that make my skin crawl, just like conservatrolls that do the same. Liberal trolls really leave a bad taste in my mouth because they make my side look bad.

                    • Wow, could you be anymore of a wankstain? Do us a favor and swallow a bit of your Troll-Rid, ok? We call that “Thinning the gene pool.”

                    • Charlie Foxtrot (Floyd Extrodinaire) says:

                      Hey, did you pick ROLF because of your idol in the movie the “sound of Music?”

        • I’m not a far left liberal and I don’t get called a troll. Your point is invalid.

      • wicket says:

        This feigned indignation thing is really working for you. Run with it. Maybe the liberal media will do a piece on you, and you can save the United States from Socialism…or Fascism…or whatever the right is calling the left nowadays. No one is denying your voice, they are just mocking it. It’s a humor site, stop whining about people who disagree with your political posts.

      • Not that I necessarily agree with CF’s blanket statement, but if you take for example Republicans wanting to open up Alaska for drilling while the Democrats are resisting the effort, you might start understanding what he meant. There are other cases as well, but I think you get the gist.

        • froofrou the Barenaked Lady says:

          There is a serious misconception that drilling for oil rapes the landscape and whatnot. With horizontal drilling techniques and all of the land-saving measures taken by oil companies nowadays, that’s just not true. I’d be willing to wager that if Alaska was opened up, all you’d be able to see is the pipe taking the oil from there to here.

          • mmm,mmm,mmm says:

            I think I read somewhere that the caribou actually like the pipeline, that it provides a little heat for them, but I don’t have any cites for that.

            • viking gal says:

              Oil drilling tends not to be too bad environmentally, although the support industry did a real job on the surrounding permafrost in Alaska. Not to mention some of the idiots transporting the oil on tankers.
              Natural gas mining on the other hand is earning itself a bad name. When an extraction industry poisons the groundwater and aquifers feeding the land over the drilling site, it is not a good thing.

            • FYI: {http://www.businessandmedia.org/news/2006/news20060419.asp} The article doesn’t say that caribou like the heat, but the pipeline hasn’t had the negative impact that the environmentalists predicted.

              • viking gal says:

                OK, I did a little research, and I see that they found ways to protect the tundra from the heavy trucks (I had read that it takes decades to recover from one truck driving over the tundra, once). They have been packing down snow in the winter to make ice roads to protect it. Unfortunately, it seems that global warming is not helping–ice roads do tend to melt. (link, 2007 article) A more recent article in Reuters (June 3, 2009) says that the early melt has played havoc with some drilling work.

                • froofrou the Barenaked Lady says:

                  Damn global warming, causing the coldest summers on record in some parts of the country!!

                  Oh wait, that wasn’t your point at all ;-)

                  I don’t have a problem making sure that the environment is protected in our quest to do bigger and better things. The thing I have a problem with is ratcheting down such regulations to the point that you can’t do ANYTHING.

                  • Charlie Foxtrot (Floyd Extrodinaire) says:

                    Ice roads can help, but they are very labor intensive to maintain and can be very dangerous, especially with heavily-laden vehicles.

          • I’m all in favor of opening up Alaska to drilling. However, since we’re talking thousands of miles of pipes, what do you think the end result would be should someone decide to destroy the pipes? Can you imagine the envronmental impact? Just take a look at what happens when a ship carrying oil has an accident.

            • Dhoti says:

              Well, the Trans-Alaska Pipeline hasn’t been attacked yet, and it hasn’t gotten any more vulnerable since it was built. (I’d argue that the risk of terrorist attack hasn’t really changed much; it’s just switched from primarily eco terrorism to Islamic terrorism.) Wikipedia suggests that, when the pipeline has failed, the environmental damage has been minimal — certainly less than the Exxon Valdez.

              And speaking of the Valdez, it was a single-hulled tanker, which may not even be allowed in Alaska any longer. In other words, I think technology’s improving all the time to both decrease the frequency of accidents and decrease their impact when they do happen.

              • Ok, fair enough. I hope I wasn’t trying to give the impression that I oppose the pipeline, because I don’t. I guess I’m playing Devil’s Advocate?

                • Dhoti says:

                  It’s a fair question either way — no matter what option we choose, or how tough we build it, northern Alaska is a brutal and inhospitable place, and sh!t’s gonna happen.

                • Charlie Foxtrot (Floyd Extrodinaire) says:

                  The pipeline is a great asset. However it requires constant maintenance and struggles against the impact of corrosion. as with all business, they have to balance the costs of wear and tear against the cost of replacement. Businesses track recorord , in general, favors immediate profit over long-term care. On tpo of that, the arctic environment is fragle, so the impact of a spill in the arctic is far greater than elsewhere. While the pipeline hasn’t yet been attacked, it is virtually impossible to safeguard and secure, so it is exccedingly vulnerable to a concerted enemy. Having said that, they have the means to shut it down, but only after the discharge of a large amount of oil into the fragile environment. Regarding ANWR, the proble is that opening up that venue is simply treating the symptom, not the cure.

                  • froofrou the Barenaked Lady says:

                    I don’t think we need to stop at ANWR though. That’s a small fix to a bigger problem. We have a LOT of oil (from reports I’ve heard) offshore, but we can’t drill for it due to the moratorium in place. But apparently it’s ok to send (I think) $2 billion down to Argentina to help THEM drill for oil……

                    We’ve got oil shale onshore, massive deposits offshore, and God knows what else out there that we’re not allowed to touch because some people are afraid that the habitat of the desert cricket will be endangered. I just wish people would look into the WAY this stuff is done before shooting off their mouths (Not you, Charlie) and realize that advancements are being made literally every day as far as keeping the environment safe while still getting what we need.

                    • Charlie Foxtrot (Floyd Extrodinaire) says:

                      I’ve got no problem with looking for more sources of oil — other than ANWR, provided we do so properly, however, oil is bad juju, we need to look forward not back. oil served well in it’s time, but we are smarter than that and need to commit to a sustainable future.

                      • froofrou the Barenaked Lady says:

                        I agree, BUT…….

                        (and I have a big butt right now, so bear with me)

                        You can’t force people do to things that aren’t profitable unless you’re living in a completely socialist or communist society, which we aren’t in and probably won’t be in for a long time, if ever.

                        Wind, solar, and other “green” sources of energy aren’t turning a profit right now because it’s extremely expensive to take a diffuse source and turn it into a concentrated form. The great thing about America and our innovations in the past is that we’ve somehow always been able to act quickly when something runs out. Once it becomes clear (which it really isn’t now) that oil is gone, there will be a mad dash to get something affordable on the market as a “cure”. I do have a lot of faith in the market in that way, because traditionally in the past when something has been forced upon people it hasn’t worked as well as when they’ve figured it out for themselves. R&D is an amazing thing when it happens due to the innovative minds of those who are after the money. (sick, I know, but true. If you make something worthwhile, people will do it)

                    • viking gal says:

                      I can’t support off-shore drilling until they get their acts together with international standards and enforcement for oil tanker design and training of tanker crews. Our fishing industry has take too many hits. The important spawning site have been damaged from fertilizer run-off, pollution, dams and development. In addition, the excessive off-shore fishing levels (some of them international, some of them using damaging dragger nets) have badly damaged the breeding stock of too many species. And I’ve heard that the fish farms may be introducing disease.
                      The fishing families in Massachusetts keep complaining that their problem is the restrictions on fishing catches, but some reading leads me to believe the situation is a total clusterfisk.
                      I like my tuna and flounder…and lobster, and don’t want to give them up!

                      • froofrou the Barenaked Lady says:

                        A lot of that stuff that is harmful has been grandfathered in, if I’m remembering correctly. New sites are remarkably clean and environmentally sound. You give Mother Nature enough time to hurricane the old rigs off the map, and you’ll have nothing but the newest, cleanest stuff available, lol.

                        And I’m sorry, I will always have a problem with the EPA and other organizations (akin to PETA) restricting human life and development on behalf of a minnow :-)

                        • Charlie Foxtrot (Floyd Extrodinaire) says:

                          PETA is a gathering of morons, however, “green” isn’t economically feasible because the cards are stacked against it. I don’t have as much faith in the market as you do, because the market is supported by the government, through laws and regulation. Corporate welfare is alive and kickin and as long as the multi-nationals keep exploiting national governments it will continue to do so.

                        • I can tell you that the Greens are alive and well in Australia. One of their leading representatives is the former lead singer from Midnight Oil, Peter Garrett. While I can respect some of the things he has on his agenda, it’s a shame that he is selling out to the Labour Party here.

                        • Charlie Foxtrot (Floyd Extrodinaire) says:

                          Man, I liked that band. Good thing someone is doing something about green. We knew about this in the 1970′s and did nothing about it. Why do you think gas was so cheap in the 80′s?

                        • viking gal says:

                          The EPA has done jacksh!t since Christine Todd Whitman quit. She had gonads, unlike those who have had that role since. The EPA is currently rather like OSHA and the food-inspection branch of the FDA. If you cut their budget, and threaten to cut more if they don’t ‘toe the line’, those bureaucrats all rolled over and kiss ass. At least I assume so, given the factory explosions and such that we have had in the past 5 years!
                          /rant
                          Sorry, I’ve got a cold, AND this hit a trigger point!
                          —-
                          Oh, and PETA are a bunch of idiots who wouldn’t know logic if it were a dog recently released from Mike Vitt’s property.
                          /rant again.
                          >>I think I had better take myself off for a bath!

  22. YoyoMomo says:

    You should all read ‘Dispossessing the Wilderness: Indian Removal and the Making of the National Parks’ It’ll change your mind, and life.

  23. Sqwirk says:

    Libertarians believe the national parks (and all publicly owned land) should be divided up and given away to property owners in proportion to how much property they currently possess.

    That way we all have more freedom. I mean obviously not the freedom to enjoy the natural world, but more economic freedom.

    • Dhoti says:

      I think you’re confusing the Libertarian Party with the Springfield Republican Party (you know, the one with the castle).See here — it’s not exactly a position statement, but if anything, they want to give the national parks to conservation-minded NGOs.

  24. Sharon B. says:

    Just for the record, there were poor people of many races displaced by the National Park system. Often times it was involuntary displacement. That being said, the National Parks truly represent one of the best things about America. They don’t always get the money and attention they deserve, and they aren’t always run as well as we might like, but they inspire, me at least, just by being the reserves of natural beauty and awe that they are.

  25. TheOne says:

    I forgot to mention, he’d also kick McCain’s walker out from under him and go hunting with Sarah Palin!

  26. Lexie Di says:

    Actually… Taft put aside more land for national parks than Teddy did.

    Just facts.

  27. Skoeder says:

    As i remember it… teddy was pres before FDR… and FDR did the parks due to the depression. So did i get my history wrong or what?

  28. Rian says:

    Uhm, thank John Muir.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Newsletter Sign-up