Posted on 12/20/2001 3:20:36 AM PST by brityank
These parcels of pompousity wouldn't even make a decent county out West, yet they keep sending up a dozen self-congratulatory senators (and hardly more congressmen) who think nothing of the federal hording of 60% of the land west of the Mississippi.
Once we're done grabbing 60% of the land from Connecticut to Maine, I vote we export enough California colonistas to increase the population on the remaining land there by 10% to 20%.
This article has put a vicious, vengeful grin on this Californian's face. If New England doesn't like it, then they can go clean their own house, so that we'll finally be able to clean ours.
Very insightful, Old Pro!
Nazi Elitist b!tch.
Stay well - stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown
The fact is the Liberals from CT, MA, RI, and VT are a scourage on this land. Yes, they control the politics here that does not mean everyone from New England wants to see the war on the West continue or to have been waged at all.
I suggest you calm down. i in some ways enjoy seeing many of those who have quietly gone along in Liberal Land getting gored by this ox.
Stay well - stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown
If we pick this one apart, we can see that there really is a problem lurking in here, which neither side really wants us to discuss.
First off, you can kind of see her point. It is a plain fact that suburban housing developments completely destroy wildlife habitat. Just about any development you care to name has the following characteristics: close-packed (and ugly) houses, fenced yards, plenty of concrete, and no space for wildlife. When one lives near such a development, it's common to see all sorts of unexpected wildlife in the yard -- or dead alongside the road -- as the animals are pushed out by construction. This represents a real loss to a community.
Digging deeper, one can find a couple of agendas at work here.
On the one hand, the anti-development crowd commonly resorts to this back-door method of finding an obscure little beast as a means of bringing the weight of the Federal government to bear on their behalf. This prevents an honest and necessary discussion for finding a balance between home-building and preservation of wildlife habitat -- both of which are needed and desirable.
On the other hand, the developers' interests are often at odds with the rest of the community. Mutually satisfactory outcomes are rare: it's almost impossible for members of the community to influence developers once they've got it in their minds to build. Unlike normal citizens, developers have virtually unlimited resources, and large staffs of lobbyists and lawyers who can devote all of their time, efforts -- and campaign contributions -- toward total victory. Eventually the normal citizens will miss a meeting, and then they're toast.
Just as with the environmentalists, the developers work hard to avoid necessary discussion on homes vs. wildlife. In addition, the developers work hard to mask the fact that their handiwork inevitably leads to real and significant monetary costs to the community, including additional traffic, roads, drainage, water supplies, and fire and police coverage -- not to mention the intangible losses such as added noise, pollution, crowding, and the fact that the developments seem to be designed to encourage a transient, non-neighborly lifestyle.
Which brings us to the real problem: people like us -- the ones in the middle -- end up paying the price imposed by both sides of this battle, and we really haven't got much choice other than to pick which group to which we'll surrender.
Here, here!!! hehehe.
That's a good point Brity...we westerners tend to think this is only happening in the west but some of the most important court cases have been in the eastern US.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.