More humor about "bears" [Really they mean Grizzly bears] from your Federal Park Service

I started writing this while vacationing near Glacier National Park [I don't recognize the U.N. designation of Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park - what a park dedicated to keeping wilderness pristine i.e. survival of the fittest has to do with peace, I will never know.] in June 2011.

When Doris and I visited the park we received all the important information about how to stay alive [For Do-gooders - how not be eaten by Grizzly bears] in bear [Grizzly] country. You see this is the first thing you notice, the park service is out to convince the visiting public all the bears are the same. Maybe this is due to the guidelines for a peace park" requires social justice for bears. "In rare cases bears [Grizzlies] have attacked at night or after stalking people. These types of attacks are very serious [My emphasis - deadly] because it may [May? how about assuredly] means the bear is looking at you as prey [Liberal interpretation - the bear is going to maul you into unconsciousness and then eat you at his leisure]." Yes this sounds like the behavior of all bears! Anyway there are two types of bears - Black Bears which are not carnivorous and harm humans when humans get between a food source or offspring. The Park Service says at the end of all the warnings when "bear" is used, "If it's a black bear fight back. Defensive attacks by black bears are very rare. The Grizzly Bear is an out-an-out carnivore known to kill and eat humans unpredictably and without provocation. This is the bear which will stalk you and eat you at his leisure - they are man's predator. So this is the first humorous part - how does one know a Grizzly is stalking them? Is it like Yogi Bear when they skirt from one tree to tree, standing on their hind legs to hide behind the tree trunk? Then race to the next tree crashing through the underbrush? I assume they are very stealthy at hunting. But, another pamphlet says, "Don't Surprise Bears!" suggesting, "Bears usually move out of the way if they hear people approaching, so make noise." Another pamphlet piggy backing on this concept suggesting, "A loud shout every few minutes is more effective than wearing bear bells."  Do you see my problem? The worst case scenario is being stalked by Grizzly bears and most assuredly being severely injured or killed and the authors of all these helpful suggestions want me to announce my position by shouting every few minutes? Then you turn the page on the official paper - "Waterton Glacier Guide" - given to you at the entrance and the headline boldly claims "The Challenge of Preserving "Quiet"" Definitely if hikers are yelling to not scare the grizzlies every few minutes!

Then there is this jewel, "If you see recent bear activity be especially vigilant. Consider going back the way you came; it is better to cut your hike short than to risk an encounter with a bear." [Liberal interpretation: don't go hiking - stay on the roads; all back country is off limits because of Grizzlies.] So if the shortest route out of the back country is forward. This silly pamphlet says it is better to go all the way back the way you came than proceed forward.

Well my friend Florian sent via Facebook about a hiker killed by a grizzly in Yellowstone National Park.
Man killed by grizzly at Yellowstone National Park - Idaho Press-Tribune: State:


"Park spokesman Al Nash said the couple saw the bear twice on their hike. The first time, they continued hiking. The second time, the grizzly charged them and the man told his wife to run. She called 911 on her cell phone, and other hikers in the area responded to her cries for help."

I wonder, if they saw the bear twice, was it stalking them?

"A spokesman for the Wyoming state tourism agency doubted the attack would cause anybody to change their Yellowstone vacation plans.
"What has happened here hasn't happened for a quarter century," Chuck Coon said. "It is very sad, though, and I'm very sorry to hear of it.""

Yeah, how many attacks like this will spur Wyoming state tourism to promote a culling of grizzlies, or a call to insure tourists be protected to protect tourism dollars. The fight will be on over pristine wilderness and tourism dollars.

American Thinker, July 4, 2013, This Independence Day, Brownstein bemons a divided America.

From the article at this link came the response from Bri2301. I commented but did not post since login from Facebook, Google, or Yahoo required I share my contact list… I don’t think so!

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/07/this_independence_day_brownstein_bemoans_a_divided_america.html

Bri2301

"It's an excellent opportunity to consider how ominously our own "political bands" are fraying."
And they are.  Although I live in the South, I do not consider myself an "evangelical".  As a matter of definition, I'm a Conservative with strong Libertarian leanings, as I like to say, a "Republitarian".
I agree with Dave that RB is focusing on outcomes, not causes.  The fundamental differences between what can loosly be defined as "left" and "right" have more to do with the the nature of government, the responsibility of the individual and ethical/moral beliefs (which are often strongly tied to religious belief or non-belief).
My view is that we on the "right" will never bring the majority of states like Massachusetts, New Jersey or Maryland over to our views.  They've become comfortable in a statist society and like it.  Not only that, they believe that they have a mission to impose those views on we that dwell in the area known as "fly-over country", where we are bereft of culture, education and anything but the most simple sorts of sophisticated society.  That's the largest source of conflict at this time.  Obama personifies this with his intent to "remake America"......

My response specifically to “…we on the “right” will never bring the majority of states like Massachusetts, New Jersey or Maryland over to our views.  They've become comfortable in a statist society and like it.  Not only that, they believe that they have a mission to impose theose views on we that dwell in the area known as "fly-over country", where we are bereft of culture, education and anything but the most simple sorts of sophisticated society.” :

On the contrary, seeing the Census statistics and knowing the shifting demographics of our country; looking at pictures of the northeast in decay, seeing Detroit slowly de-evolve and the unwillingness for the governments in Detroit – especially, the Northeast and Midwest to come to grips over the loosing mathematical formula of tax more and spend more (The state arbitrator assigned to Detroit by the courts overseeing Detroit’s bankruptcy proposing bond holders and retirees receive ten cents on the dollar is not a winning formula for blue cities, and states.). Detroit is the “canary in the coal mine” of the continued decline of blue states and cities. Whence Detroit goes so goes most of the northeast and Midwest. How soon before even the government employees abandon these places scared for their retirements and afraid they will be the only ones left in the crumbling cities and states to pay the taxes to fund their benefits. The problems the liberals have is they think there is a difference between social policy and fiscal policy, but to a conservative the evidence is they are both about money and plainly visible in Detroit is the proof they are right, and might I say, the people who have left these places for better opportunities agree with the conservative. In reality we won’t have to “bring” anyone “over to our views” they themselves will do it through their own public policy.

So what does happen to a place like Detroit in desperate decline – this is going to be the great story of the 21^st century in America the rise of the South and West (Not the far West) and the great abandonment of 20^th century progressivism. Why and how? A clearer example, as outsiders looking in, in a place far ahead of America in decline is the EU – where are people migrating to? Duh, the northern parts of the EU and Great Britain where there is prosperity and stable fiscal policies. Well we are 50 states of the United States and at some point jealousy, desire, power and greed will motivate the blue states to drop their drawers and prostitute themselves to the markets and capitalism for some of the talent, brain trust and wealth being denied, or sucked away by the more prosperous states. Jerry Brown may ridicule Rick Perry, but the evidence of where prosperity and the demographics are headed does not bode well for old Moonbeam.

I postulate the train has left the station probably ten years ago and is at full steam and full speed; by the time the wreck happens most fiscally conscious people will have positioned themselves appropriately outside, in red states and likely red states with no state income tax or state sales tax and those who still believe will be the worst off as they loose everything. If Detroit is the “canary in the coal mine” of fiscally liberal cities, California is the “canary in the coal mine” of states. As liberal politicians tout the wealth and recovery of California, the biggest company in the world located in California plans to assemble it’s “I” products in America – in Texas – not good; the latest server farm for another major corporation in California is turned on in a place called at Luleå Sweeden at the Arctic Circle – not good; a major city (Stockton) is going through bankruptcy trying to preserve their obligations to retirees by denying bond holders and continuing full steam ahead to pay the cities promised payments into the State Employees Retirement System and guess what, they still don’t have enough cash – not good (What is not being reported about Stockton is the wholesale abandonment of private property left behind by citizens abandoning California and like Detroit it is just the observable tip of the iceberg.); the unfunded liability for all the guaranteed future retirement payments to state workers and teachers falls somewhere between 200 billion and 400 billion – not good; the amount of the fiscal deficit of the state of California closely matches the amount of taxes which would have been paid by the productive workers who now reside in other states – not good. 

So what does happen? What always happens, governmental decline, rise of hard workers and entrepreneurs, new younger crowd of politicians hungry to make a difference, reality and change of heart. So California politicians become competitive, feel insignificant, feel powerless and become greedy. They will promote drilling and fracking for the bonanza of oil and gas to get back in the game and throw the environmentalists under the bus, they will throw retirees under the bus with the excuse, “We were not around when these deals were made and we are not obligated to fund a loosing scheme.” They will throw cities under the bus telling them to get their own houses in order, tax policy will be upturned throwing dependent citizens under the bus to draw productive, educated and skilled workers and companies back. Oh and barking, snarling and pointing fingers at the other 97% of 300 million Americans who are not Gay that they have to accept, promote, embrace, accommodate and educate about Gays this will very soon also be thrown under the bus (Anything to beat Texas, be back on the front page, be taken seriously and gain some notoriety for the national political stage!). How soon before Detroit promotes public policy of giving land to corporations along with 10 year’s worth of property tax waivers to build on abandoned private property and promote employment for city residents. How soon before land is given away for organic farming, or new housing; how soon are property taxes and cost of services lowered to entice people to return and build. How soon before breweries, or distilleries, or high tech startups are enticed to build on free property and tax free land; how soon do businesses that need enormous amounts of water – not being used because of the decline of the population – move in and provide funds to fix the water infrastructure for a better deal to relocate in Detroit. What about companies needing electricity gaining a favorable financial standing to build in Detroit; using the surplus electricity now going unused in exchange for improving or fixing public lighting. How soon? As soon as politicians decide they want to be taken seriously; feel important and gain notoriety, or as I say get back in the game.

No I disagree; the circumstances of markets have a way of turning everyone into a conservative at one point just for preservation.