Protecting the places we climb.....

You can thank the DNC for this. Nobody talks about their mistakes. It's all the red necks, racists and millionaires and dumbasses right?

usatoday.com/story/news/pol…

m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_…

Bill Kirby wrote: You can thank the DNC for this. Nobody talks about their mistakes. It's all the red necks, racists and millionaires and dumbasses right? usatoday.com/story/news/pol… m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_…

My recent thoughts exactly. The DNC pushed Billary down our throats BECAUSE they didnt want to be wrong AGAIN like they were with Obama vs Billary the first time around. I dont think Bernie would have been a memorable, or especially uniting president but he would have gotten quite a few voters to cross party lines and beat the orange comb-over man. They FUCKED up bad.

waldo wrote:Eli. I love your challenge to REI but what about Big Agnes, Outdoor Research, Black Diamond, and countless others.

I called out REI because they own MP and presumably will be looking at this thread. But yes, we should challenge all of the outdoor industry to stand up and fight for our public lands

T Roper wrote: My recent thoughts exactly. The DNC pushed Billary down our throats BECAUSE they didnt want to be wrong AGAIN like they were with Obama vs Billary the first time around. I dont think Bernie would have been a memorable, or especially uniting president but he would have gotten quite a few voters to cross party lines and beat the orange comb-over man. They FUCKED up bad.

None of this matters at this point. All it does is devolve the conversation into a bunch of infantile bickering over something that is over and done...the horse is out of the barn.

The task at hand, is to do everything we can to make sure that we, as a user group are heard, and to affect a favorable outcome.

So make sure we present a UNIFIED front to our government. Arguing politics undermines that goal.

Awesome Eli. I'll try to do the same.

I posted a link above to ease the process of who our rep in congress are. Lets start the letters.

Jon W wrote: None of this matters at this point. All it does is devolve the conversation into a bunch of infantile bickering over something that is over and done...the horse is out of the barn. The task at hand, is to do everything we can to make sure that we, as a user group are heard, and to affect a favorable outcome. So make sure we present a UNIFIED front to our government. Arguing politics undermines that goal. Awesome Eli. I'll try to do the same. I posted a link above to ease the process of who our rep in congress are. Lets start the letters.

^^^^ Yup

What sort of resistance can the Access Fund, or other environmental conservancy groups, affect in Natl parks if drilling did look imminent?

Jon W wrote:Perhaps. I know hunters, off-roaders etc that thought all of this was a good idea. They voted republican to protect their forms of recreation/rights etc.. ...irony....

True to an extent... But Jason Chaffetz just pulled HR 621 with would have sold off 621 partially because of hunters...

Article on HR 621: outdoorlife.com/house-bill-…

Chaffetz saying he's pulling it: instagram.com/p/BP_zOxEF0-Q/

For those who haven't done so already, now would be a pretty good time to join the access fund. They're also working very hard to fight this battle

accessfund.org/take-action/…

All the people angrily and blindly writing their reps over this needs to:

a) Come up with an alternative to meet this countries energy needs. Without this your complaints look childish and naive at best.

b) Barring the presentation of some solution to the issues presented in a), figure out how you are going to deal with the unrest from:
i) Our country having to get by on substantially less petrol energy.
Whatever happened to incrementalism, BTW? Was that just a cute campaign
slogan?
ii)Our country going to WWIII. Note that if you take this action, you will
cause a civil war, and you are neither veterans by and large, nor do you
support gun ownership in any kind of significant numbers. Whats more, the
rest of the country is painfully aware of this transparent bullshit. My
suggestion would be to watch your use of the word "deplorable".

JNE wrote:All the people angrily and blindly writing their reps over this needs to: a) Come up with an alternative to meet this countries energy needs. Without this your complaints look childish and naive at best. b) Barring the presentation of some solution to the issues presented in a), figure out how you are going to deal with the unrest from: i) Our country having to get by on substantially less petrol energy. Whatever happened to incrementalism, BTW? Was that just a cute campaign slogan? ii)Our country going to WWIII. Note that if you take this action, you will cause a civil war, and you are neither veterans by and large, nor do you support gun ownership in any kind of significant numbers. Whats more, the rest of the country is painfully aware of this transparent bullshit. My suggestion would be to watch your use of the word "deplorable".

I'm not sure how being against drilling in National Parks makes people look childish and naive. We could, for instance, invest heavily in renewable energy methods. We could keep regulations tight on antiquated forms of energy, like coal and oil driving ingenuity and entrepreneurs to develop ways to bring it to the masses at an affordable cost. We could, as a nation, say that this is not good enough. We demand better from our government. Instead we voted to restart hand outs to the coal and oil industry in the form of deregulation by voting in the biggest POS I have ever seen in the oval office. But what do we expect when our president is more worried about his shitty reality TV show ratings than actually doing something for this country? The fact that you think this is about anything more than money JNE, in fact, makes you look childish and naive.

mediocre wrote: I'm not sure how being against drilling in National Parks makes people look childish and naive. We could, for instance, invest heavily in renewable energy methods. We could keep regulations tight on antiquated forms of energy, like coal and oil driving ingenuity and entrepreneurs to develop ways to bring it to the masses at an affordable cost. We could, as a nation, say that this is not good enough. We demand better from our government.

Those are the kinds of solutions I am talking about. My point is that opening up at least some limited domestic drilling is a necessary first step for all of this unless we want to seriously enrich a bunch of chauvanists in the middle east by funding OPEC and any of their political projects (which we might not be very big fans of).

mediocre wrote:Instead we voted to restart hand outs to the coal and oil industry in the form of deregulation by voting in the biggest POS I have ever seen in the oval office. But what do we expect when our president is more worried about his shitty reality TV show ratings than actually doing something for this country? The fact that you think this is about anything more than money JNE, in fact, makes you look childish and naive.

But here you went way, way, way off the rails. What you fear will only happen if you take what I consider to be incorrect action, namely fighting the Trump administration tooth and nail.

Nonetheless, this is a good starting point. Thanks for partially contributing positively. Now continue to work on the ratio of truth and bullshit/solipsism in your thoughts and ideas and you will be headed down what is IMO a good path.

JNE wrote:But here you went way, way, way off the rails. Nonetheless, this is a good starting point. Thanks for partially contributing positively. Now continue to work on the ratio of truth and bullshit/solipsism in your thoughts and ideas and you will be headed down what is IMO a good path.

Instead we voted to restart hand outs to the coal and oil industry in the form of deregulation- Soon to be true. Trump himself has said that regulation kills jobs.

voting in the biggest POS I have ever seen in the oval office.
-Truth

But what do we expect when our president is more worried about his shitty reality TV show ratings than actually doing something for this country? -Truth. Trump has madce several remarks about Schwarzeneggers ratings on the Apprentice, including at the Prayer breakfast this morning.

The fact that you think this is about anything more than money JNE, in fact, makes you look childish and naive.- While I find it hard to see how this is about anything more than oil making more money, I will humbly withdraw my name calling that ironically makes me look childish and naive.

mediocre wrote: Instead we voted to restart hand outs to the coal and oil industry in the form of deregulation- Soon to be true. Trump himself has said that regulation kills jobs.

Ask yourself why we get so much of our oil from the Middle East, and why it is acceptable to fuck up the earth over there but not in America. I know, tough questions.

mediocre wrote:voting in the biggest POS I have ever seen in the oval office. -Truth

Opinion, but nice try. It is also worth adding that the comparison here was between Trump and Hillary, and Trump won the election, so while you might not like Trump you would be wrong to think America in any way whatsoever agrees with your opinion.

mediocre wrote:But what do we expect when our president is more worried about his shitty reality TV show ratings than actually doing something for this country? -Truth. Trump has madce several remarks about Schwarzeneggers ratings on the Apprentice, including at the Prayer breakfast this morning. The fact that you think this is about anything more than money JNE, in fact, makes you look childish and naive.,

You characterized myself as well as your President. This is the kind of solipsistic bullshit that both lost the democrats the election, and which will make your message on this particular issue fall rather flat. Good luck.

JNE, petroleum is sold on the international market, and it makes absolutely no difference where it is produced, or if the producer is hostile to the US (see Venezuela). There is also a surplus of oil on the market now, which is why petroleum based economies are struggling.

Actually Trump lost the popular vote. You are in fact incorrect in believing that most of America does like Trump.

Don't let your own opinion get in the way too much there chief.

JNE wrote: Ask yourself why we get so much of our oil from the Middle East, and why it is acceptable to fuck up the earth over there but not in America.

I don't think many liberals think that it's OK to fuck up the earth anywhere for the exploitation of fossil fuels. We would all much rather we be investing in renewable energy sources. It's certainly true that the transition won't happen overnight, but it would happen much, much quicker if the money that was being spent finding and exploiting new sources of fossil fuels were instead invested in renewable energy development. The current supply is more than adequate to fill the gap until renewable energy comes into its own, IF we made a concerted effort to pursue renewable energy development rather than voting in someone whose goal is very clearly to enhance the profits of the oil and gas industry with no regard whatsoever for environmental concerns.

JNE wrote: It is also worth adding that the comparison here was between Trump and Hillary, and Trump won the election, so while you might not like Trump you would be wrong to think America in any way whatsoever agrees with your opinion.

A pedantic point, perhaps, but you do realize that Hillary won the popular vote, right? (I see Tylerpratt beat me to it)

Tylerpratt wrote:Actually Trump lost the popular vote. You are in fact incorrect in believing that most of America does like Trump. Don't let your own opinion get in the way too much there chief.

No, Hillary won roughly 15% of registered voters, as in at most 15% of registered voters genuinely support her, blindly or otherwise. Hardly a "popular vote" win. The referent you cite does not exist.

the schmuck wrote:JNE, petroleum is sold on the international market, and it makes absolutely no difference where it is produced, or if the producer is hostile to the US (see Venezuela). There is also a surplus of oil on the market now, which is why petroleum based economies are struggling.

I guess we should let all our goods be produced elsewhere then, since it does not matter where they are produced. Lol.

I wrote to my congressman, that's my first step. This might end up being human barricades and civil disobedience - I'm up for that too.

Chris Owen wrote:I wrote to my congressman, that's my first step. This might end up being human barricades and civil disobedience - I'm up for that too.

If it comes to that, I'll see you there.

JNE wrote: No, Hillary won roughly 15% of registered voters, as in at most 15% of registered voters genuinely support her, blindly or otherwise. Hardly a "popular vote" win.

Well, yes, of course, I don't think there's ever been a presidential election in which anyone won an absolute majority of all registered voters. The point is that Trump won even fewer than Clinton. It's a slim margin, and no one is trying to say that Hillary is secretly the overwhelmingly more popular candidate. We're just disputing your assertion that the fact that Trump won the election is evidence that America is majority in favor of Trump's views, because he was, according to the actual election results, the slightly less popular candidate.