|
Post by epeanymous on Feb 28, 2025 15:52:39 GMT
What happened to the Republican Party? I could never imagine these things happening under Bush or Reagan. The truth of the matter is that Republicans despise this country and the American people. If they really did love it, they wouldn't be trying to destroy it. Fear. People are afraid of the changes they feel are being shoved down their throats. I don't know how Bush or Reagan would have handled the politics surrounding LGBTIA rights, especially those relating to transgender people, ESPECIALLY trans kids. The whole "you don't love your kids if you don't support them in everything" is very scary to many people, and it leads to seeking out people who disagree with that philosophy. Republicans don't hate our country. They don't despise their fellow Americans. I can't say that for DT, but the average Republican you've known your whole life is not suddenly your enemy. I don't know what the solution is, but entrenching in this we/they language won't help anything. This is unfortunately not true. The current cultural organizing principle of the Republican platform is “they” (Democrats, blue states, immigrants, trans people, feminists, Black people) are trying to destroy your way of life. It is fascist rhetoric and organizing, and it has to be named and called out as such. You can listen to any Trump speech talk about “them.”
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Feb 28, 2025 16:01:29 GMT
Fear. People are afraid of the changes they feel are being shoved down their throats. I don't know how Bush or Reagan would have handled the politics surrounding LGBTIA rights, especially those relating to transgender people, ESPECIALLY trans kids. The whole "you don't love your kids if you don't support them in everything" is very scary to many people, and it leads to seeking out people who disagree with that philosophy. Republicans don't hate our country. They don't despise their fellow Americans. I can't say that for DT, but the average Republican you've known your whole life is not suddenly your enemy. I don't know what the solution is, but entrenching in this we/they language won't help anything. This is unfortunately not true. The current cultural organizing principle of the Republican platform is “they” (Democrats, blue states, immigrants, trans people, feminists, Black people) are trying to destroy your way of life. It is fascist rhetoric and organizing, and it has to be named and called out as such. You can listen to any Trump speech talk about “them.” Yup. Here’s another example of the othering they use to turn Americans against certain people.  Illegal aliens cannot and do not receive social security. This is just grandstanding and another attempt to get people to think that poor immigrants are causing their problems instead of noticing that it’s the billionaire class that is the problem.
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Feb 28, 2025 16:09:20 GMT
Fear. People are afraid of the changes they feel are being shoved down their throats. I don't know how Bush or Reagan would have handled the politics surrounding LGBTIA rights, especially those relating to transgender people, ESPECIALLY trans kids. The whole "you don't love your kids if you don't support them in everything" is very scary to many people, and it leads to seeking out people who disagree with that philosophy. Republicans don't hate our country. They don't despise their fellow Americans. I can't say that for DT, but the average Republican you've known your whole life is not suddenly your enemy. I don't know what the solution is, but entrenching in this we/they language won't help anything. This is unfortunately not true. The current cultural organizing principle of the Republican platform is “they” (Democrats, blue states, immigrants, trans people, feminists, Black people) are trying to destroy your way of life. It is fascist rhetoric and organizing, and it has to be named and called out as such. You can listen to any Trump speech talk about “them.” 100 % this. I don’t know how you can claim Republicans don’t despise their fellow Americans. Trump’s entire platform is about sowing fear, hate, division and discord. And anyone who supports the Republican Party is at a minimum, complicit in the effort to takeaway the rights of Black people, minorities, LGBTQ, immigrants and women.
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Feb 28, 2025 17:53:38 GMT
I'm going to generalize HUGELY, here, but I think there's at least a grain of truth in what I say:
a lot of people (probably a large percentage-- that's a total guess?) will probably never visit one of our National Parks in their lifetime, or any historic site, or anything else like that. A lot of people, if asked, probably don't see any benefit to having and maintaining such places. Republicans included. I mean, if they get rid of support personnel in the federal agencies because they don't actually do any 'real work' then what good is paying to maintain a ginormous hole in the ground (Grand Canyon), some random desert, woods, etc., or some random old house (any historic site)??
A lot of people are so shortsighted they don't 'get' that these things ARE VALUABLE. For cultural identity, history, education, as WELL as tourist dollars. A lot of people probably would say 'who cares' if you told them a new genus and species of plant was found in Big Bend. People are SOOO disconnected from EVERYTHING that they don't see that we- ALL LIFE on the planet - are interconnected and it's all important. They think that whole 'butterfly flapping its wings influencing something halfway around the world' idea is a bunch of crap. They DON'T SEE that ruining the climate, paving over everything, etc. is bad for all of us in the long run. For them, there IS no 'long term' or 'big picture.'
They are out for themselves, and they don't care about everyone else. THAT is the Republican agenda nowadays. If they DID care about ANYTHING, they WOULD NOT HAVE VOTED AGAINST THEIR OWN BEST INTERESTS.
|
|
|
Post by ntsf on Feb 28, 2025 19:35:33 GMT
the massive economic benefit of parks and forests are lost on them.
as is the spending on the irs.. every buck spent returns huge amount of economic value
|
|
pudgygroundhog
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,652
Location: The Grand Canyon
Jun 25, 2014 20:18:39 GMT
|
Post by pudgygroundhog on Mar 2, 2025 21:01:13 GMT
As a lover of our National (and State) Parks I find it so sad that so many people will not have an opportunity to visit some of the most beautiful and awesome places in the US. And even more unfortunately those that do get in may have a subpar experience. Those will be the lasting memories that people have instead those of the beauty and grandeur of the nature and land. And then those opinions are going to spread, people will be telling and posting not to bother going. It is all the beginning of the end, or at least a decline in the caring of/for some of our most precious treasures. I hope that Pudgygroundhog’s husband/family (or anyone else here) are not affected along with everyone else who help to keep these beautiful places open and safe for all of us to visit and enjoy. I am not sure if some are with contractors or if it is all staffed by government positions? Good thoughts sent to anyone affected, as a visitor or employee. Thanks for thinking of us! My husband works for a concessionaire and so far has been fine (I doubt they will cancel the contracts). I read they fired ten people here at the South Rim, some of them worked the gate entrance. So far I haven't noticed a big impact, but we are just now starting to pick up for spring. The park is always crowded and busy during spring break with long lines - it is likely it will be worse this year. I also heard that some areas like the EMTs are understaffed - so some of the impacts might not be apparent right away, but will have an impact. We have had one of the driest winters on record and they are expecting a bad fire season - which will be even worse if they are understaffed for firefighters in the national forest. It makes me sick what they are doing to the parks. 
|
|
|
Post by iamkristinl16 on Mar 2, 2025 21:18:49 GMT
What happened to the Republican Party? I could never imagine these things happening under Bush or Reagan. The truth of the matter is that Republicans despise this country and the American people. If they really did love it, they wouldn't be trying to destroy it. Fear. People are afraid of the changes they feel are being shoved down their throats. I don't know how Bush or Reagan would have handled the politics surrounding LGBTIA rights, especially those relating to transgender people, ESPECIALLY trans kids. The whole "you don't love your kids if you don't support them in everything" is very scary to many people, and it leads to seeking out people who disagree with that philosophy. Republicans don't hate our country. They don't despise their fellow Americans. I can't say that for DT, but the average Republican you've known your whole life is not suddenly your enemy. I don't know what the solution is, but entrenching in this we/they language won't help anything. I hope you and they realize that creating fear and hate through culture wars has been their plan and method of gaining power for quite awhile. Nobody is "shoving things down peoples throats" by giving LGBQT people rights or including them in society for who they are. I don't see it as fear, but hate and judgement for people who are different than them. By constantly working against rights for others, they continue the culture war and that leads to the other side also digging in more. I also hope that you are telling your friends on the right that they should stop with the divisive language. Oh, wait. They elected the most divisive person on Earth who is a big part of the division in this country. They don't want to end the division, clearly. I think we tried to "tone down the divisiveness" in the past and it didn't work.
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 3, 2025 0:25:01 GMT
Tone down the divisiveness is MAGA code for don’t criticize Trump. Remember after the assassination attempt? Democrats actually dialed back the language, but that clearly didn’t help. It just gave MAGA license to amp up the rhetoric and division.
|
|
FuzzyMutt
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,644
Mar 17, 2017 13:55:57 GMT
|
Post by FuzzyMutt on Mar 3, 2025 1:02:51 GMT
I'm going to generalize HUGELY, here, but I think there's at least a grain of truth in what I say: a lot of people (probably a large percentage-- that's a total guess?) will probably never visit one of our National Parks in their lifetime, or any historic site, or anything else like that. A lot of people, if asked, probably don't see any benefit to having and maintaining such places. Republicans included. I mean, if they get rid of support personnel in the federal agencies because they don't actually do any 'real work' then what good is paying to maintain a ginormous hole in the ground (Grand Canyon), some random desert, woods, etc., or some random old house (any historic site)?? A lot of people are so shortsighted they don't 'get' that these things ARE VALUABLE. For cultural identity, history, education, as WELL as tourist dollars. A lot of people probably would say 'who cares' if you told them a new genus and species of plant was found in Big Bend. People are SOOO disconnected from EVERYTHING that they don't see that we- ALL LIFE on the planet - are interconnected and it's all important. They think that whole 'butterfly flapping its wings influencing something halfway around the world' idea is a bunch of crap. They DON'T SEE that ruining the climate, paving over everything, etc. is bad for all of us in the long run. For them, there IS no 'long term' or 'big picture.' They are out for themselves, and t hey don't care about everyone else. THAT is the Republican agenda nowadays. If they DID care about ANYTHING, they WOULD NOT HAVE VOTED AGAINST THEIR OWN BEST INTERESTS. epeanymous …. Is this the “they” type statement that you are referring to? In fact “if they DID care about ANYTHING, they WOULD NOT HAVE VOTED AGAINST THEIR OWN BEST INTERESTS” I’m actually quite confused about crimsoncat05 post, and am not smart enough to understand how we take the leap from a large number of people, apparently *including* Republicans, twist it harder than a twist tie on a 80’s loaf of bread, then frantically bolding and screaming that *they* voted against their own interests. I’m really not sure how we are (very actively and loudly) using “they” in this instance…. But… apparently that is a “Republican” thing? Could someone explain to me how this is different?
|
|
|
Post by epeanymous on Mar 3, 2025 1:23:16 GMT
I'm going to generalize HUGELY, here, but I think there's at least a grain of truth in what I say: a lot of people (probably a large percentage-- that's a total guess?) will probably never visit one of our National Parks in their lifetime, or any historic site, or anything else like that. A lot of people, if asked, probably don't see any benefit to having and maintaining such places. Republicans included. I mean, if they get rid of support personnel in the federal agencies because they don't actually do any 'real work' then what good is paying to maintain a ginormous hole in the ground (Grand Canyon), some random desert, woods, etc., or some random old house (any historic site)?? A lot of people are so shortsighted they don't 'get' that these things ARE VALUABLE. For cultural identity, history, education, as WELL as tourist dollars. A lot of people probably would say 'who cares' if you told them a new genus and species of plant was found in Big Bend. People are SOOO disconnected from EVERYTHING that they don't see that we- ALL LIFE on the planet - are interconnected and it's all important. They think that whole 'butterfly flapping its wings influencing something halfway around the world' idea is a bunch of crap. They DON'T SEE that ruining the climate, paving over everything, etc. is bad for all of us in the long run. For them, there IS no 'long term' or 'big picture.' They are out for themselves, and t hey don't care about everyone else. THAT is the Republican agenda nowadays. If they DID care about ANYTHING, they WOULD NOT HAVE VOTED AGAINST THEIR OWN BEST INTERESTS. epeanymous …. Is this the “they” type statement that you are referring to? In fact “if they DID care about ANYTHING, they WOULD NOT HAVE VOTED AGAINST THEIR OWN BEST INTERESTS” I’m actually quite confused about crimsoncat05 post, and am not smart enough to understand how we take the leap from a large number of people, apparently *including* Republicans, twist it harder than a twist tie on a 80’s loaf of bread, then frantically bolding and screaming that *they* voted against their own interests. I’m really not sure how we are (very actively and loudly) using “they” in this instance…. But… apparently that is a “Republican” thing? Could someone explain to me how this is different? (1) There is a difference between party leadership and a poster on a message board. (2) If you “they”, “they” will likely “they” in return. (3) I don’t see even message board posters suggesting “they” should be deported, incarcerated, or disenfranchised; that is literally what Republican leaders are doing.
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Mar 3, 2025 16:22:07 GMT
for anyone who didn't get it: in my post I used the pronoun 'THEY' to denote 'the group of people who voted for Dump' and who I feel are out for themselves at the expense of everyone else. And IMO, 'they' (again, those voters) are short sighted and actually voted against their (one more time-- the Dump voters) own best interests.
|
|
|
Post by airforcemomof1 on Mar 3, 2025 16:28:04 GMT
I haven’t read other posts so don’t know if the Great Smoky Mountains have been mentioned. It is the most visited and any cuts will be dramatically noticed. I live near the Smokies and there is a lot of maintenance required due to the number of visitors annually.
|
|
huskergal
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,086
Jun 25, 2014 20:22:13 GMT
|
Post by huskergal on Mar 4, 2025 13:45:25 GMT
I now plan on going to a National Park. I thought about it. More people should plan on going to keep them open and maybe get some people's jobs back.
I wish a Republican in power could explain how decimating our National Parks is helping anything. Give me the price tag on how much money it is saving since Parks make a profit. I don't want to hear from Ketamine addicted Musk.
|
|
|
Post by alsomsknit on Mar 4, 2025 13:56:59 GMT
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Mar 4, 2025 15:59:40 GMT
HOW does cutting down timber "protect our national and economic security,” ? ? ? HOW, HOW, HOW?!?!? I HATE THAT MAN AND EVERYONE WHO LICKS HIS BOOTS WITH THE HEAT OF A THOUSANDS SUNS!!!
|
|
quiltz
Drama Llama

Posts: 7,086
Location: CANADA
Jun 29, 2014 16:13:28 GMT
|
Post by quiltz on Mar 4, 2025 22:08:23 GMT
HOW does cutting down timber "protect our national and economic security,” ? ? ? HOW, HOW, HOW?!?!? I HATE THAT MAN AND EVERYONE WHO LICKS HIS BOOTS WITH THE HEAT OF A THOUSANDS SUNS!!! THEY THINK that it will save money on the new tariffs on softwood lumber from Canada that the USA won't have to pay for. HOWEVER, The lumber that would come from the National Forests isn't the correct type of lumber that is used for building homes. So, the lumber will be cut and then realised that it is the wrong kind and then, too bad, so sad.
|
|
|
Post by katiescarlett on Mar 18, 2025 22:57:10 GMT
We are in Utah now planning to visit Zion and Bryce Canyon next week. I saw on the news here that there were protesters at Zion and long lines to get in even though this is not prime season . So we will see how it goes. We were just at both last week with no issues nor lines to get in. Zion has more people but we were the only ones at many lookout spots in Bryce. It was our first time visiting both and Bryce was our favorite! By chance we saved the best for last. We skipped several of the first viewing spots and then did most on our way to the end. The the few we skipped at the middle and ended with the ones in the beginning which were the most spectacular. They are have a really great Visitors Center. Such an amazing park! We didn't get to hike in Bryce due to ice and being with older family members. We did do the easy paved hike in Zion that takes you to the Narrows. We definitely want to go back for some hiking and exploring! We have camping reservations in July for Yosemite. It can be an hour wait at the gate during a normal year, I'm afraid what it will be like this summer. We just returned from a 3 week trip and visited Zion, Bryce Canyon, Death Valley and the Grand Canyon. We loved them all but Bryce Canyon was our favorite followed closely by the Grand Canyon which was magical with a fresh snowfall at sunset. We didn't have any problems but it is early in the season. We plan to visit the National Parks in Washington, go on a cruise to Alaska out of Seattle, then visit Glacier and Yellowstone on our way home in August.
|
|
|
Post by missmiss on Mar 19, 2025 14:46:06 GMT
the massive economic benefit of parks and forests are lost on them. as is the spending on the irs.. every buck spent returns huge amount of economic value They know exactly what they are doing.... They just do not care about the environment and want all the oil and natural gas they can get. Google Search: which national parks and mounuments have the most oil and natural gas (Results) National parks and monuments in areas with active oil and gas fields, like Carlsbad Caverns National Park and those near the Permian Basin, are at risk due to potential impacts from nearby drilling, including air and water quality issues, and threats to unique ecosystems Here's a more detailed look: Carlsbad Caverns National Park (New Mexico): Situated near the Permian Basin, one of the most active oil and gas regions, Carlsbad Caverns faces risks from nearby drilling, including potential gas or fluid leaks into cave passages, and impacts on air quality. Chaco Culture National Historical Park (New Mexico): Located in an area with extensive oil and gas leasing, Chaco Culture faces threats to its air quality and wildlife due to nearby drilling. Mesa Verde National Park (Colorado): Surrounded by areas with proposed oil and gas development, Mesa Verde faces potential impacts on its cultural resources and ecosystems. Theodore Roosevelt National Park (North Dakota): The Little Missouri National Grassland, which surrounds the park, has a high percentage leased for oil and gas development, potentially impacting the park's air quality and wildlife. Other parks at risk: Canyonlands National Park (Utah) Grand Teton National Park (Wyoming) Rocky Mountain National Park (Colorado) Dinosaur National Monument (Colorado and Utah) Big Cypress National Preserve (Florida) Everglades National Park (Florida) Great Sand Dunes National Park & Preserve (Colorado) Hovenweep National Monument (Utah) Fort Laramie National Historic Site (Wyoming) Capitol Reef National Park (Utah) Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument (Utah) Alibates Flint Quarries National Monument (Texas) Aztec Ruins National Monument (New Mexico) Canyons of the Ancients National Monument (Colorado) Carrizo Plain National Monument (California) Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument (Montana)
|
|
The Birdhouse Lady
Prolific Pea
 
Moose. It's what's for dinner.
Posts: 7,589
Location: Alaska -The Last Frontier
Jun 30, 2014 17:15:19 GMT
|
Post by The Birdhouse Lady on Mar 19, 2025 18:16:19 GMT
National Parks is definitely something I WANT my taxpayer dollars supporting! Poor Teddy Roosevelt - probably rolling in his grave.  I said this exact thing to my husband yesterday when we were discussing this.
|
|
|
Post by cecilia on Mar 19, 2025 18:49:55 GMT
I live in one so does that count? Lol.
Other than that, probably not this year.
|
|