Thankfully, there are just two weeks left to go in the 2016 general election. Which begs the question: Which nominee would be better for the National Park System and National Park Service?
While Democrat Hillary Clinton did put forth a statement outlining her intention to create a trust fund for the parks, not much has been heard from Republican Donald Trump on the parks specifically.
There have been reports that Mr. Trump would support the transfer of some federal lands in the West to states, a position the Republican Party adopted at its convention this past summer. And how would his proposal to build a wall along the U.S. - Mexico border impact border parks such as Big Bend National Park, Chamizal National Memorial, Coronado National Memorial, and Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument?
Which candidate do you think would be best for the park system and Park Service?
Story Categories:
A copy of National Parks Traveler's financial statements may be obtained by sending a stamped, self-addressed envelope to: National Parks Traveler, P.O. Box 980452, Park City, Utah 84098. National Parks Traveler was formed in the state of Utah for the purpose of informing and educating about national parks and protected areas.
Residents of the following states may obtain a copy of our financial and additional information as stated below:
- Florida: A COPY OF THE OFFICIAL REGISTRATION AND FINANCIAL INFORMATION FOR NATIONAL PARKS TRAVELER, (REGISTRATION NO. CH 51659), MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE DIVISION OF CONSUMER SERVICES BY CALLING 800-435-7352 OR VISITING THEIR WEBSITE. REGISTRATION DOES NOT IMPLY ENDORSEMENT, APPROVAL, OR RECOMMENDATION BY THE STATE.
- Georgia: A full and fair description of the programs and financial statement summary of National Parks Traveler is available upon request at the office and phone number indicated above.
- Maryland: Documents and information submitted under the Maryland Solicitations Act are also available, for the cost of postage and copies, from the Secretary of State, State House, Annapolis, MD 21401 (410-974-5534).
- North Carolina: Financial information about this organization and a copy of its license are available from the State Solicitation Licensing Branch at 888-830-4989 or 919-807-2214. The license is not an endorsement by the State.
- Pennsylvania: The official registration and financial information of National Parks Traveler may be obtained from the Pennsylvania Department of State by calling 800-732-0999. Registration does not imply endorsement.
- Virginia: Financial statements are available from the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 102 Governor Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
- Washington: National Parks Traveler is registered with Washington State’s Charities Program as required by law and additional information is available by calling 800-332-4483 or visiting www.sos.wa.gov/charities, or on file at Charities Division, Office of the Secretary of State, State of Washington, Olympia, WA 98504.
National parks and their natural resources belong to you. The National Parks Traveler works to ensure you know how these essential places are being cared for.
Sign Up For Our Weekly Newsletter
Unsubscribe at any time.
INN Member
The easiest way to explore RV-friendly National Park campgrounds.
Here’s the definitive guide to National Park System campgrounds where RVers can park their rigs.
Our app is packed with RVing- specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 national parks.
You’ll also find stories about RVing in the parks, tips helpful if you’ve just recently become an RVer, and useful planning suggestions.
Comments
Ohh well...life goes on. I don't like teabaggers. Never will, and never shall. They are the scourge of the american political system and need flushed out of the system.
TA - start with Snopes and get back to me with any source material that doesn't involve a path from or through Breitbart.
Eric - you haven't gotten back to me about that long moonlit walk, so don't talk to me about running away.
Didn't see a request or need to respond. Didn't run from anything. Unlike your challange to Trail who was accurate in every respect.
Be specific, Rick, please. What do you dispute? Hillary as Secratary of State signing off to the sale of 20% of US Uranium reserves to Russian interests via a Canadian Company that donated millions to the Clinton Foundation? Lots and lots of that sort of thing revolving around the central theme of corruption, serious corruption. To think of her as a possible "Environmental" President really stretches the mind but there is no end to the deceptive messaging out there after focus groups and data collecting to find a way to make a pile of merde smell like fillet. Specifics, Rick, please.
From the NY Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-a...
Snopes has found your argument as unfounded, and sourced from a Breitbart propaganda article.
The Uranium Deal, Rick? EC referenced the New York Times above.
Reaching back awhile I remember you said you acquired a conscience. I suspect (respectfully) that you and many others have lost the ability to think critically.
Snopes has found your argument as unfounded
No, they found it "unproven". But then they didn't delve anywhere near as deeply as the Times. Short of a written contract, it appears Snopes would consider the quid pro quo "unproven". The details laid out by the Times (not Breitbart) are pretty compelling. You pay the Clinton Foundation, Hillary happens to do a favor for you. An all too common set of events to be mere coincidence. But to you Trump is the candidate with the ethics problem because he did (corporately not personally) what a million or more people and businesses do every year - declare bankruptcy.
Well, that doesn't seem to have been proven, according to the Times.
Podesta emails may not contain any references, at the least the ones we have seen so far but the NYT was awfully convined in 2015 when the article I cited was written.
Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal
You think they wrote that headline because they thought there was no connection?
Trump also has admitted to sexually harassing women. Something, I find ironic on this comment thread, since some that post on here (and obviously are trump supporters) reguarly fire off accusations that the culture of the NPS is rampant with people like Trump. I guess it's ok to turn the blind eye if the leader you want for President does that. And, I do believe many of the women that have come forward recently by sayign that Trump harassed them. Trump has a history of harassing and bullying people, and even sued Miss PA for saying that his Miss America pageant was rigged. So, of course intimidation tactics is his modus operandi, and it makes sense that a female that was sexually harassed by someone like that, would fear intimidation or threats of a retaliatory lawsuit by the Orange clown.
I don't think anyone on here has labeled Hillary as squeaky clean, or even would make a great environmental president. I don't think she will. My hope doesn't lie with Hillary, but who she chooses in her cabinet. To me that is much more important.
Trumpty's shortlist for secretary of the DOI are Forrest Lucas, Butch Otter, or his son. Talk about horrific choices. I think anyone with a semi-critical mind that has a passion for National Parks would be horrified at those choices.
Interesting that you have such insight into his "shortlist" Perhaps you can share your source. This recent article has a much longer list of candidates but notes that these are only candidates identified by others not identified by the Trump organization.
http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060043126
Oh, and as the article notes, neoptism laws would forbid Trump from appointing his son so we already know you are at least 33% wrong about your shortlist.
Well, this is fun! You go away for a few hours and the roof comes off the house! So let's cut to the chase. This is an election, in Peggy Noonan's view, between Depression and Anxiety. If you want to be depressed for another four years, you will vote for Secretary Clinton. Liberals just love being depressed. However, if you are the anxious sort--and believe in taking risks--you will be voting for Donald Trump.
I have a slightly different take. This is an election between Smugness and Anger. Secretary Clinton is betting that all of her sins (and there are many) will in the end be overlooked. She will be the first woman in the White House; she will be the first Mom and Grandmother. Because she is on the right side of political correctness, how can anyone (indeed, how dare anyone) doubt her? She will be fighting for YOU!
This is to explain the anger. Trump's followers are so sick and tired of being told they are guilty of failing the country they will do anything to have a change. They sense that Secretary Clinton is not in this race to solve their problems, and after the election will revert to type. It's all my fault again for not supporting "diversity."
Harsh? Just so. The rhetoric of the politically correct has become unusally harsh. As Peggy Noonan again writes, "I don't know about you, but when people look down on me I want them to be distinguished or outstanding in some way--towering minds, people of equisite sensibility or learning. Not these grubby poseurs, these people who've never had a thought but only a sensation: Christians are backward, I saw it in a movie!" It's the big fact of American life now, isn't it? That we are patronized by our inferiors."
You didn't say diversity, Alfred, so nothing you say has any worth.
In short, let's stop kidding ourselves that this election is all about "deficit spending"--or in our case the national parks. It is rather all about a deep-seated anger that, whoever wins, is not about to go away.
EC, I must read a lot more than you because many articles have talked about those possible selections.
Well Gary, you need some better literature sources if they are touting an illegal candidate. Mere speculation in articles, such as the one I posted, is a far cry from someones "shortlist"
At this point the alt-right only has fantasies to live on for the next 8 years.
Rick, that was the case months ago when Trump became the candidate. He is a long ways from the "alt-right" But maybe that can be fixed in 4 years rather than 8. Hard to believe that we will go 2 elections in a row without better candidates than these.
With the rise of the white supremists of the alt-right embracing him, and he not denying them, he isn't too far. From what I see of his supporters online, the angry racist embodied in the 'alt right' is a large part of his base. Between most of America's repudiation of the alt-right racism and his serial sexual predator self proclmations, his loss has been coming for months. No doubt today, what to do with the Department of the Interior is the furthest thing from his mind.
=====
Edited to add - I sincerely hope for the good of the nation that your guys can get it together and put forward a more worthy candidate next time.
Just an FYI, the "600 million" immigrants is a statement from Newt Gringrich who got the idea from Breitbart based on their claim that Clinton meant allowing unfettered immigration when she talked of open borders. Gingrich, "saying her dream is an open border where 600 million people could come to America..."
Clinton never mentioned letting 600 million people migrate to the US and, considering that it is almost the entire population of the western hemisphere south of the US border (from which Brietbart got the number), quite unlikely to happen in reality if the US borders were open.
As for the Cabinet Position - Department of Interior - the most discussed are Forrest Lucas (oil ceo), Sarah Palin (reality tv), and Trump, Jr. or Eric Trump. (multiple sources, one of which is here: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/trump-sons-plot-cabinet-posts-theyll-t...)
In fact, this election is still neck and neck. (Rasmussen Reports)
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/electi...
Don't like the poll? Yes, you can find another, but Rasmussen was dead-on in 2012 and 2008.
Racism in the "alt-right" is solely in your imagination. Please name an "alt-right" leader that is a racists. And dont bother with Trump because he is neigher alt-right or a racist.
Dakota, I will say the same to you as to Gary. When your sources cite people that couldn't legally serve I have to question their credibility.
Wow Dahkota - thanks for the link to the article. First because it has a link to the actual interview. You should watch it. Then you would hear 1) He never said he would consider his sons to head the DOI. He said he would listen to their input. Your "source" is totally bogus. 2) You will hear in that interview that Trump has no interest in selling off the federal lands proving accusations earlier in this thread totally bogus.
You live with your head in the sand, EC. It's easy to scream about not seeing these people from a place like Breckenridge, but I see the bigotry and fanaticism quite a lot living in the south. Every day, i'm reminded of it when I see people driving in their vehicles while flying a confederate flag off the back and there is a big old trump bumper sticker. Too many confederate flag waving properties that also host trump signs. That is HIS BASE!
By the way, I realize you have minimal reading comprehension skills, as showcased many many times - but I have stated in my posts that they were "rumored". I never said they were absolute. You can go back and re-read the threads if you must, but i'd still expect you to misinterpret them since you've never shown adaquate reading comprehension skills at any time in the years i've watched you play on this forum.
No Gary, you did not say "rumored" Your exact words.
As to your racist claims, no doubt racist exist. Primarily coming out of the democratic party. But I will give you the same challange. Name an "alt-right" leader that is a racist and identify his racist acts. And no, waving a confederate flag isn't one of them.
Seriously, you have the internet by your side. All one has to do is youtube a trump rally to see it in action. You're a big boy, and im not your babysitter, nor am I here to guide you through life. I don't have to show you anything, but it's clear as day to those of us that are surrounded by the rhetoric. And yes, all those KKK rallies that happen in these parts, ALWAYS have thier confederate flags flying by their side. But, I guess, you must have never seen one of those either. Ignorance is bliss..
Wow.
You realize that by now the phrase "I am not a racist" has become classic oxymoron. You are saying that Trump, the alt-right, and - sorry, Eric. You too have YouTube, even on your TriumpTV channel. Your denial is so overwhelmingly incredible that you might as well just pack it in today. You are an otherwise intelligent man and I have to assume that you are simply lying in self service in this regard. Bye bye.
I think he overestimates his intelligence. He's a poster child for the Dunning-Kruger effect.
Forgive me for asking but where in the article did it ask who's supporters were more racist?
So Gary, once again you fail to identify any "alt-right" leaders that are racist. The only action I see at Trump rallies, who is neither alt-right nor racist is the fights instigated by the dems (see wiki leak emails).
Alright, i'm putting that clown on ignore. It's evident he's just hear to inflame, and his life is so pathetic that living on this site looking to flame up the threads is what he lives for. I'm over it. And i'm not going to fall for his cheap bait.
If Kurt want to better the comment section, I think it would serve a purpose to implement the facebook comment API into this site. This way, the users can have better control over the people they wish to engage with on this forum. A full on block can be done through the facebook API, and people like ECbuck would just be leveled into obscruity by most everyone that doesn't want to read him (which is probably most of the forum members). in the end he would just be talking to himself.
Kurt, please consider the facebook comment plugin.
Ok Gary, so you can't provide the name of an "alt-right" racist. You can't refute you claimed you had the "short list" when you didn't. But it is me that is here to inflame. Your answer? Block the guy that makes you look like a fool. Kind of the approach of the AGW folks - "hide the decline".
If Hillary Clinton is elected I think she will keep Sally Jewell as Secretary and Sally Jewell will appoint another Director like John Jarvis thus nothing will change. More of the same.
The alt-right is not your Barry Goldwater conservatism: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/09/09/alt-right-leaders-we-ar...
Well I will confess Rick, I have never heard of this guy nor his "alt-right" group. I had assumed your "alt-right" designation was your term for conservatives. Trump in not a member or endorser of this "alt-right" group, nor is any leader in the Republican party a member or endorser of this group. I certainly don't agree with this group.
"Blah blah blah blah blah... blah blah blah"...
http://www.vox.com/conversations/2016/10/27/13428612/donald-trump-david-...
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441319/donald-trump-alt-right-inte...
Gary, you need to take a course in Logic. The fact that some racist supports Trump does not mean that Trump endorses that racist's views.
Ok, bucky, I'll just close my eyes and click my heels three times and pretend that trump isn't a racist, nor has rhetoric that is demeaning towards practically everyone that isn't like him. One must obviously play like a blind, and deaf ingoramous in your little neck of the woods to be viewed as "logical".. .
You're a joke.. Once again, you're a poster child for the Dunning-Kruger effect.
Gary - you can call him a racist all you like. It would be nice if you could provide some actual evidence other than some racist is voting for him.
Sorry, bucky but I watch and read the news on a daily basis and Trump has said so many things that makes me know that he's a race baiting, womanizing bigot. I guess you must have seen where he referred to minority neightborhoods as "ghettos" this morning? Haha such a clown, that trump. Rhetoric like that surely makes America great again, in some bizarre way that I don't understand.
You obviously spend too much time here trying to bait people into your games. Now go away. Find someone else to troll.
Just the facts, ladies.
And... http://www.vox.com/2016/7/25/12270880/donald-trump-racism-history
Eric - you might want to jump ship before you not only apoligize for his well documented racism but also get tarred with his self-avowed sexual predator pattern.
It's that old "explain it to my grandchildren" thing.
Another article that totally misconstues his statements. I.E. " from his claim that Mexican immigrants are criminals" He didn't say all mexican immigrants are criminals and he didn't say mexican's were criminals. You need to learn the definition of "racist"
Peggy Noonan, a well respected conservative writer for the Wall Street Journal, has been cited here several times by some commenters who seem to be backing DJT. Ms. Noonan is one of my favorite columnists. She is one of a small number who seems able to see, recognize, and write coherently in a fair and truly balanced manner.
Here is a link to her most recent article: http://www.peggynoonan.com/
Its title is: Imagine a Sane Donald Trump ;; You Know He's a Nut, What if He Weren't?
I find myself in full agreement with everything she says in this article. I fervently wish there was a sane Donald Trump. But since there is not, and the Trump I see appears to be incredibly dangerous, I cannot vote for him. But I could certainly have done so if he were the sane Trump she describes here.
Please read it -- even if you think you've already made up your mind.
(And to keep this in the park mode -- check out Donald J. Trump State Park. It really does exist.)
Kurt - re quid pro quo
The whole list is damning but items 9,14,27,32,60 & 64 are of particularly interest when it comes to quid pro quos. Don't know how the Times could come to the conclusion the claims are unproven but perhaps item 33 might explain it.
Opps - forgot the link: http://www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com/
Good, Lee. You found it. That article is another reason I like Peggy Noonan. Indeed, what if Donald Trump were not a nut?
However, looking back at history, I am reminded of the danger here. He who keeps waving the bloody shirt had better hope the blood hasn't dried. In the election of 1884, the Democrats were labled the party of Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion. They were still being blamed for the Civil War. Grover Cleveland, accused of fathering an illegitimate child, was the party's nominee. Sound familiar? It should. The Democrats had not won since 1856--the longest losing streak in their political history. The Republicans counted on waving the bloody shirt to put their candidate James G. Blaine over the top. You can't trust those racist, immoral slaveholders, can you? Well, the nation did.
Can you trust Hillary Clinton? If so, to be doing what? Do you want Bill back roaming the corridors of the White House? Talk about a womanizer!
These are the images the public is wrestling with as we go to the polls. This time, it is the Democrats hoping the bloody shirt will stick. History is not so sure. If the nation didn't want to allow Richard Nixon to finish out his second term, why should it want to elect the Democrat's Richard Nixon--and she has even more to hide?
Certainly, while Gary and EC duke it out, there is much more reading both of them could do. We all could do. Watergate is still fresh in my mind. I personally don't want more of that.
Something refreshing to me about Trump is that he's exposed warts and all unlike Hillary which has been doing focus groups for two years to be able to project someone you might want. All deception all the time and it continues.
Something more on the possible "Environmental" candidate and the Uranium aspect:
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2016/01/27/the-clintons-is-the-oregon...
Good thing I do my part by recycling aluminum. I couldn't imagine the horror you would go through if you weren't able to make your hats.
Should I continue with Gary's theme in kind, Kurt? Until Kurt gets a chance to respond, Gary, could you present any evidence that any of what I presented is in error or are you just a common retired disconnected hack?
How about which candidate would be the best for the Country as a whole, including the Parks. All these divisions just empower the politicians and their donors and cronys. What a concept, no? Yah, I know, naive.
Pages