Monument upgrade dropped

Thanks for visiting The Daily Sentinel

Subscribers and registered users, log in to continue reading for free*

Forgot your password?    

Register to read for free! Become a subscriber

* 7-day subscribers have unlimited access to online content.
Registered users may read 12 articles per month.


Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Stupid!  What can it hurt to become a national park?  Too many naysayers that get involved in areas that really don’t matter!  Waaaaaaaayyyyyyyy to conservative !

Secrecy Surrounds Sudden Ditching of Colorado National Monument Upgrade

PART 1. With my keen eye for manipulative hyperbolic detail, I couldn’t help noticing Terri Chappell’s statement to the effect that leaving Colorado National Monument a national monument instead of making it a national park “is not an option for anyone who sincerely cares about the future of the Grand Valley.” The self-evident and intellectually fraudulent implication of that statement is the outright propaganda lie that anyone who doesn’t want to turn CNM into a national park doesn’t “care” about the future of the Grand Valley. Bovine feces.
It may come as a huge and emotionally traumatic shock to Chappell and her politically cutesy ilk but there do actually exist other opinions than their own. To all the cutesy political manipulators, I say, “grow up!”
I was born in the Grand Valley in 1944 at the old St. Mary’s hospital at 11th Street and Colorado Avenue, so, yes, I care about “da fyoocha” of the Grand Valley at least as much as Chappell. When I was a kid, the population of Mesa County was in the neighborhood of 38,000 people. In 2014, it is around 147,000. That’s not all that far from a four-fold (387%) increase. The question is not whether or not everybody else “cares” as much as Chappell, the question is, “how big a population increase is enough?” I am in the “147,000 is enough” camp.
It is true from a “macro” point of view that the Earth has a finite amount of space which will only accommodate X number of people, given the state of technology at any particular point in time. So obviously, there do exist mathematical numbers representing quantities of people which the Earth would be incapable of sustaining. That fact alone logically legitimizes my “how many is enough?” question. But even that is not the main issue.
The main issue – (and one which Chappell et ilk will NEVER openly discuss) – is the immense night-and-day difference in pragmatic effects/consequences between the manipulate-government-power top-down “economic development” school of economic thought and produce-something-useful-to-humans bottom-up “economic development” school of thought. It’s an over-simplification, but that conflict is analogous to the Keynesian school of economic thought versus the Austrian school of economic thought. In the former, deception, manipulation and political rhetoric “skills” and creativeness at avoiding physical labor are at a premium and are rewarded. In the latter, honest labor, “invent-and-make-stuff” skills and a strong work ethic are at a premium and rewarded.
The former is self-evidently Unsustainable, while the latter is empirically sustainable, whether you are digging an irrigation ditch to water your peach trees or whether you are building a vehicle to travel through space at faster-than-light speeds.

PART 2. There are those among us who “skills” lie purely in the area of deception and manipulation against their fellow humans. Their main expertise is the grotesquely immoral fraud of “legal tender” and the manipulation of monetary numbers. That type of person lacks the skills necessary to make real things useful to humans which will find acceptance in a free marketplace of willing buyers and willing sellers. That type of person thinks it’s “wealth building” and/or “economic development”  if your house was “worth” $200,000 of monetary numbers five years ago and worth $300,000 of monetary numbers today. Conversely, that same type of person thinks it’s an “anti-economic-development” disaster if your house was “worth $300,000 of monetary numbers five years ago and worth $200,000 of monetary numbers today. We’re talking about the SAME house, folks. It is what it is, it took whatever labor and skill it took to build it,  and it does for your life what it does. “Wealth” is REAL things useful to humans, not monetary numbers. “Wealth building” is making REAL things useful to humans, not using the power of Good Old Boy government to manipulate monetary numbers to your benefit and your neighbor’s detriment.
The type of person I’m talking about is most commonly found in the financial, legal and government (aka “Big Banking”, “Big Law”, “Big Government”) sectors. They love call themselves “public servants” and refer to what they do as “public service”. But in reality, they no more “serve” the “public” than a bull elk “serves” a cow during mating season. Yet some 70% of duopoly GOP/DEM lemmings trust (and vote for) the herd’s dominant pecking-order manipulators anyway. It’s really quite an amazing phenomenon when you project it through the prism of your common sense.
The only logical explanation I can come up with for this suicidally destructive anti-self-ownership behavioral phenomenon is that too many so-called “Little Labor” (“Big Labor” = unions) individuals are just too ignorant and intellectually uncurious (aka lazy) to see through all the wannabe-clever deception/manipulation and figure out exactly how the Good Old Boy gang is stealing their labor/money.
From a political point of view, the anti-self-ownership deception and manipulation often start with such seemingly unimportant and harmless little things as Terri Chappell’s intellectually dishonest pretense that, merely by desiring to turn the Colorado National Monument into a national park, ipse dixit, she “cares” more about “the future of the Grand Valley” than people who disagree with her do.
So desperate are America’s cultural, political and economic problems that I am no longer willing to sit idly by and allow such embarrassing levels of ipse-dixitism (what I like to call “polemical misconduct”) go unridiculed. Sorry, Terri!

For a response to Anne Landman’s “Secrecy Surrounds Sudden Ditching of Colorado National Monument Upgrade” blog article, see my own blog article “Colorado National Monument v. “Colorado Canyons National Park”: Glade Park Access Fight, Round 2?” at Hopefully that might answer some of Anne’s “conspiracy of silence” questions.

Search More Jobs

734 S. Seventh St.
Grand Junction, CO 81501
Subscribe to print edition
Sign in to your account

© 2014 Grand Junction Media, Inc.
By using this site you agree to the Visitor Agreement and the Privacy Policy