[LTD]

PB...I come in contact with plenty of Vets. My father isn't the only vet I know nor is he the only vet I talk to. I'll keep my opinion based on my information, you keep yours. Like I said...it's far from perfect, no doubt or vets deserve the very best and we are a long ways off. As for the "slash and burn"...cry if/when it happens, until then your enviro hysteria is just that.

[pbrstreetgang]

"slash and burn"...cry if/when it happens, until then your enviro hysteria is just that.

Funny how you take something real and flip it to hysteria - it's all about using an extreme to dismiss factual evidence. I get that most folks are star-spangled blind on this topic. It's easy to fall victim to the need to diminish national parks, scientific data, and natural resources for the sake of this country "advancing" - when in fact, once they are gone - they are gone for good. And the profit is narrow and short-term. You'll never see dime one of any of it, yet you support it because it has been partisanized and you'd rather toe a party line than anything else.
For someone who works as a guide, I'd think that the preservation of natural resources would be top of mind, and not something you'd prefer to worry about after it cannot be changed, or would take years to attempt to reverse. That equates to a lot of lost revenue for you in this short-lived economic boon. Best of luck to you in that regard - I do hope you are able to keep doing what you do. I'll stay vigilant so my kids can have what I have now (hopefully better) in regards to nature and the outdoors. Last I checked, we are here to hand off the world to the next generation in better shape than it was handed to us.

[austrotard]

I'm going to assume that everyone who has joined the armed services after 1973 knows exactly how, we'll say, absolutely shit poor, the va may be.

perhaps you thought it'd've been better for you as you are:

A) extremely lucky
A) extremely well-to-do (yeah. I'm looking at you 'thank you for your lip service' fat cunt...)
A) extremely fucking stupid or
F) extremely disadvantaged as this was the only job for you. like you couldn't spell 'job', 'bacon double cheese-burger' or 'community college' for example.
A) too extreme

discuss.

[austrotard]

fuck. even I learned a lil' sumpin supmin from bruce springsteen (circa '84).

A) dodge draft
A) sing about war
A) oppose all sepp wars (see: all. it's a few...)
G) keep shagging that e street ginger bird

everything you believe in, from your god to your fucking television is absolute horseshit.
and fuck you if you think otherwise.

cheers,
shawn

[LTD]

"slash and burn"...cry if/when it happens, until then your enviro hysteria is just that.

Funny how you take something real and flip it to hysteria - it's all about using an extreme to dismiss factual evidence. I get that most folks are star-spangled blind on this topic. It's easy to fall victim to the need to diminish national parks, scientific data, and natural resources for the sake of this country "advancing" - when in fact, once they are gone - they are gone for good. And the profit is narrow and short-term. You'll never see dime one of any of it, yet you support it because it has been partisanized and you'd rather toe a party line than anything else.
For someone who works as a guide, I'd think that the preservation of natural resources would be top of mind, and not something you'd prefer to worry about after it cannot be changed, or would take years to attempt to reverse. That equates to a lot of lost revenue for you in this short-lived economic boon. Best of luck to you in that regard - I do hope you are able to keep doing what you do. I'll stay vigilant so my kids can have what I have now (hopefully better) in regards to nature and the outdoors. Last I checked, we are here to hand off the world to the next generation in better shape than it was handed to us.

Don't fool yourself...I pay very close attention to whats going on and my support one way or the other has nothing to do with partisanship. The difference is unlike some who champion themselves as being some kind of protector of our public lands, I see value in utilizing them thru proper management, rather than closing them or placing so many restrictions on areas it's not viable. That flip you refer to works both ways. Shit, need an example, take a look at California.

[yard4sale]

Dude, your government basically dissolved this week. Not sure you should be throwing rocks....

[pbrstreetgang]

Don't fool yourself...I pay very close attention to whats going on and my support one way or the other has nothing to do with partisanship. The difference is unlike some who champion themselves as being some kind of protector of our public lands, I see value in utilizing them thru proper management, rather than closing them or placing so many restrictions on areas it's not viable. That flip you refer to works both ways. Shit, need an example, take a look at California.

I'm not fooled - therein lies the difference.
Show me how the current administration has properly managed public lands, and I'll listen. The only thing I've seen is attempts at selling them to highest private bidders and opening them up for removal of XYZ, and stripping away regulations for clean up after the extraction of XYZ. Or is that what is called "management?" And what exactly is viability in your eyes around public land management?

Good to know you are a local steward - genuinely.

[LTD]

Dude, your government basically dissolved this week. Not sure you should be throwing rocks....

Dissolved? Hardly. Our.

[LTD]

Don't fool yourself...I pay very close attention to whats going on and my support one way or the other has nothing to do with partisanship. The difference is unlike some who champion themselves as being some kind of protector of our public lands, I see value in utilizing them thru proper management, rather than closing them or placing so many restrictions on areas it's not viable. That flip you refer to works both ways. Shit, need an example, take a look at California.

I'm not fooled - therein lies the difference.
Show me how the current administration has properly managed public lands, and I'll listen. The only thing I've seen is attempts at selling them to highest private bidders and opening them up for removal of XYZ, and stripping away regulations for clean up after the extraction of XYZ. Or is that what is called "management?" And what exactly is viability in your eyes around public land management?

Good to know you are a local steward - genuinely.

Viability varies depending on the issues that surround specific areas. If this admin simply opens the possibility of greater use/utilization of public lands, I see that as an improvement and a positive step forward. Blanket polices regarding management don't work on either end of the spectrum, something I vehemently appose.

Ask yourself...How well has the closure of logging and undergrowth clearing served California? How well has the bullshit de regulation/non action regarding Big Sugar served Florida? And for the record....My partisanship has me voting and supporting democrats in Florida.

[yard4sale]

Dude, your government basically dissolved this week. Not sure you should be throwing rocks....

Dissolved? Hardly. Our.

I was speaking to the Austrian.

[LTD]

Dude, your government basically dissolved this week. Not sure you should be throwing rocks....

Dissolved? Hardly. Our.

I was speaking to the Austrian.

HA.....

[austrotard]

see? dumases.