More Reasoned Rhetoric from the Alliance for the Wild Rockies: Nazis!

Shares

Often what people say speaks more about their values than what you say about them. Such is the case of Mike Garrity, executive director of the Alliance for the Wild Rockies. In the typically respectful and rhetorically effective style his organization is known for, he offered this nuanced critique of mainstream environmental organizations in Montana:

Unfortunately, a disturbing trend has appeared as big environmental groups such as the Montana Wilderness Association and the Wilderness Society increasingly take foundation money to “collaborate” with timber corporations. And much like the Vichy French helped the Nazis occupy France during World War II, these collaborators now have to face the harsh and shameful legacy of what they have done and continue to do.

In a piece replete with logical fallacies and specious arguments, the section noted above does an especially effective job of portraying just how far removed from reality the extreme environmental movement in Montana is. They damage the movement by attacking allies and perhaps most critically, by giving the false impression that to be an environmentalist requires adherence to an all-or-nothing mentality which leaves out the vast majority of Montanans, many of whom would be willing to work for a cleaner environment.

The “collaborators” Mr. Garrity talks about are the ones who got meaningful legislation passed to protect Montana’s wild spaces and the nation’s environmental quality.  Those mainstream organizations got the very laws passed that Mr. Garrity’s organization uses when it seeks to protect wild spaces and to even suggest a comparison to Nazi collaborators demonstrates a profound ignorance of history and disrespect for the efforts of those who fought to protect the environment.

It’s more than just shameful rhetoric for which Mr. Garrity should apologize.  It’s the kind of rhetoric that conservatives find terribly useful when they seek to demonize the entirety of the environmental movement.

If you appreciate our efforts to hold Montana Republicans accountable and the independent journalism here at The Montana Post, please consider supporting our work with a small pledge.

About the author

Don Pogreba

Don Pogreba is an eighteen-year teacher of English, former debate coach, and loyal, if often sad, fan of the San Diego Padres and Portland Timbers. He spends far too many hours of his life working at school and on his small business, Big Sky Debate.

His work has appeared in Politico and Rewire.

In the past few years, travel has become a priority, whether it's a road trip to some little town in Montana or a museum of culture in Ísafjörður, Iceland.

123
Leave a Reply

avatar
23 Comment threads
100 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
12 Comment authors
Matthew KoehlerPogieRob KaileyDon PogrebaMark Tokarski Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Mark Tokarski
Guest
Mark Tokarski

Not up on my logical fallacies. That’s Kaily’s fort. But I do understand specious. I was part of MWA at a time when they had far less money and far more effective fighters. Tester’s FJRA, which is what is at the base of your specicity, is nothing more than what Burns and Baucus tried, by every means available, to pass year in and out. Tester is Burns +150 pounds of meat on the hoof. AWR is effective. They win while MWA, flush with Pew money, sells out. You’re on the wrong side, Don. You’re fighting for politicians. They don’t matter.… Read more »

NamelessRange
Guest

I agree with Mr. Pogreba on this issue. Not only on his critique of the referenced letter, but of the failure that follows an “all of nothing mentality” when trying to persuade public policy. It’s simply not pragmatic. The Alliance For the Wild Rockies seems unable to recognize what motivates people to join a cause, or, is not interested in “those kinds of people” joining their cause. They have forgotten the ever repeating truth, in terms of what actually changes policy and law. Evidence trumps Ideology. In the long run, every time. Further, it is important to recognize that what… Read more »

NamelessRange
Guest

“all *or* nothing mentality” -cussed smart phones

Mark Tokarski
Guest
Mark Tokarski

Standing firm, fighting for those things you value, are in the eyes of today’s Democrats
not “pragmatic.” The people who will sell us out on anything tell us that standing for anything is to be unreasonable.

Good grief! Democrats! Think I’m gonna puke.

steve kelly
Guest
steve kelly

It is misleading to compare the organizations of 50 years ago who worked to pass the The Wilderness Act of 1964 to the Pew-funded, collaborators of today. No meaningful legislation has passed as a result of collaboration in recent years. Plenty of bad laws have, however, with the help of these same collaborators. This is not about history, it is about behavior today, and its consequences. If you can’t face the fact that things have changed there isn’t much one can do to unravel the myth that “environmental movement” should all goosestep to whatever the corporate funders and their puppets… Read more »

Rob Kailey
Guest

More misleading than comparing those organizations to the Vichy French? Doubtful, Steve. And you might want to check the definition of “collaborator”, historically even, before pushing your shallow morality on a word that doesn’t mean what you think it means. Finally, “demonizing the messenger”, or more appropriately written, demonizing disagreement appears vastly more prevalent on the part of idealistic zealots. Examples, Mr. Garrity and Mr. Tokarski right up there a few lines. It serves one purpose only, to shame those who may not agree -enough- into silence.

Mark Tokarski
Guest
Mark Tokarski

I prefer the use of the word “quisling” to the Vichy French comparison, as that word has entered the language and is in standard use. So let’s be straight here – MWA is comprised of quislings, and Tester’s “collaborative” bill, which is everything that Conrad Burns ever fought for, is a work of a larger group of quislings. Please don’t ever, ever tell us what our goals should be or how we should go about attaining them. You, Kailey, as a Democrat, have no useful advice to offer. We have eyes and brains and we see what you have wrought… Read more »

Rob Kailey
Guest

I don’t tell you anything, Mark. I don’t find you much worth conversing with.

Matthew Koehler
Guest
Matthew Koehler

Don: Senator Tester, leaders in the Montana timber industry and even some of the leaders at conservation groups have repeatedly called us “extremists” during their push to get Tester’s mandated logging bill through Congress. Have you forgotten Senator Tester’s “extremists are extremists and I don’t really care” comment? http://missoulian.com/news/state-and-regional/article_92008e86-17be-11e0-b1d0-001cc4c002e0.html We’ve been labeled “extremists” by these folks due to our substantive concerns with FJRA and due to the fact that we believe some of these timber sales haven’t followed the best science and law. Given the fact that AWR wins over 85% of their lawsuits against the Forest Service in the… Read more »

Matthew Koehler
Guest
Matthew Koehler

One other thing that conspicuously absent from Don’s article is this…. There’s not mention whatsoever of the very real fact that AWR’s guest column was in DIRECT RESPONSE to a $30,000 attack Ad campaign by the Montana timber industry. The truth of the matter is that last Wednesday the ‘collaborator’s’ ‘timber partners’ at RY Timber, Pyramid Mountain Lumber, Roseburg Forest Products and Sun Mountain Lumber took out a full-page advertisement in at least six Montana newspapers, including the Helena Independent Record, Missoulian, Kalispell Daily Interlake, Great Falls Tribune, Montana Standard and Bozeman Chronicle. According to Ad reps I spoke with,… Read more »

Moorcat
Guest

I know that this may be a blow to your utterly fragile ego, Matt, but you are an extremist. It is not an insult, it is a statement of fact that you revel in. You LOVE being a “rebel with a cause”. You thrive on your puritopian existance. Sadly, you do NOT represent the majority of Montanans. Tester does. This little fact is not important to you as you obviously desire to be the center of the Universe.

Matthew Koehler
Guest
Matthew Koehler

Thank you, Moorcat, for focusing on the substance of the public lands, wilderness and logging policy issues at play here.

Rob Kailey
Guest

Is that really what Garrity was focusing on when he Godwined the whole debate? No? Holding some to a standard you refuse to acknowledge in your “allies” is pretty tawdry, Kohler.

Moorcat
Guest

What you and Mark fail to get is that I was focusing on the “substance of the public lands, wilderness and logging policy issues at play”. Your extremism and the willingness for your ilk to sue the various decisions, organizations, agencies and people into bankruptcy to assert your radical “wilderness agenda” is very much what makes you an extremist. Moreover, as a poster below pointed out, you are only shooting yourself in the foot by doing so. Keep up the “good fight” moron. The next move appears to be turning over fire fighting to the Dept of Homeland Security because… Read more »

Mark Tokarski
Guest
Mark Tokarski

Hi Matt – thanks for your continuing and untiring efforts in this arena. Much appreciated. Just a note on the labels applied to you – it’s not just environmentalists, but anyone who tenaciously holds on to popular American values like public health care, a safety net, an end to the wars and slashing of the incredibly wasteful military. We are called “extremists,” “the far left”, the “fringe” and other epitaphs. Ridicule is a large part of thought control in our society – people adhere to groups, and those groups self-police. Any who deviate from group consensus are called these names,… Read more »

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Though there are some legitimate things to discuss in terms of acceptable thresholds in the environmental movement, Starting off with a nazi reference in an ever-fallacious reductio ad hitlerum destroys credibility. Look up Godwin’s law. To then make an insanely false generalization that Obama’s agenda=Bush’s agenda, for me, ends hope for rational discourse.

There are better ways to get a point across. Don is right in stating that this was a poor choice.

Nameless Range
Guest

Of course there are legitimate things to discuss in terms of motives and thresholds within the environmental movement. But to start off with the ever-fallacious reductio ad hitlerum argument was a poor choice. Look up Godwin’s Law. To then make the absurd overgeneralization that Obama ‘s Agenda = Bush’s Agenda, ends hope for rational discourse.

Mr. Pogreba was right in criticizing this letter and the effects it will have on the common goals of it’s readers

NamelessRange
Guest

Typed it. Thought I lost it. So I typed it again. Fat fingers and a smart phone. the duplicate posts are mine.

JC
Guest

“They damage the movement by attacking allies ” 1) who are you to define the “environmental movement?” 2) In what way are the collaborators “allies?” We choose our allies carefully. Usually by observing their behavior over the years. There is nothing in the FJRA or with its bevy of collaborators with which to “ally.” MWA is not my ally, or the ally of those that love wilderness. It is the enemy of the value that it once was established to protect: wilderness. 3) Jon Tester sold out much of his environmental base and alienated many of his supporters years ago.… Read more »

Rob Kailey
Guest

JC: “We choose our allies carefully.”

I think a great deal of the point that Pogie was making is this: So do “we”.

The Polish Wolf
Guest
The Polish Wolf

JC – So glad you came, because as soon as I read this I wanted to talk to you. You are the one who was mortally afraid of being called an extremist. You called it ‘dangerous rhetoric’. It was the sort of language that got people killed. Never mind that Tester used the word extremist correctly, as in, one who outside the norm in a political opinion. Never mind that you ought to just embrace the word, like Barry Goldwater. And never mind that it was addressed to moderates, the people least likely to use violence. It was dangerous! But… Read more »

Mark Tokarski
Guest
Mark Tokarski

Then your claim is that environmental policy under Democrats differs from that under Republicans? Please, elucidate!

REPLY

Rob Kailey
Guest

~sigh~ You miss all the nuance. Oh wait, it isn’t nuance; what you miss is rather obvious. A small group of people have set themselves up as the moral arbiters of what is best for ‘the commons’, completely neglecting the fact that what is common is shared by all, not protected against all save the chosen believers. That there is destructive use of the commons and non-destructive use of the commons, no one is arguing. I’m not going to touch JC’s will to self-importance here. You and Matthew, on the other hand, argue that the only way to prevent the… Read more »

Josh
Guest
Josh

“A small group of people have set themselves up as the moral arbiters of what is best for ‘the commons’…” Exactly the problem with Tester’s “collaborative” group. They aren’t making recommendations or writing proposed alternatives, they are a small group of people attempting to write public land policy via congressional rider. They set the terms of the debate, endorse the sagebrush rebel views about local control over federal land, close the door on public input over Wilderness acreage and logging amonts, and have no problem passing their bill without amenendments or an actual vote. What could go wrong with a… Read more »

Crazy Joe
Guest
Crazy Joe

Don, it looks like you struck a nerve with the tree hugger crowd. But you are right. These environmental extremists have gone too far, and their “success” is going to catch up with them. A couple of points. 1. The federal litigation gravy train is going to dry up. Judges are getting sick of having to second guess every Forest Service decision and become biologists themselves. Recent decisions out of the Ninth Circuit make it clear they are going to refrain from playing Monday morning quarterback on all these actions. The Congress will sooner or later amend the Equal Access… Read more »

Mark Tokarski
Guest
Mark Tokarski

Wow, a real deal developer. What a piece of work! You overstate both the cost and frequency of lawsuits. That has been the meme from the beginning, the same one used by the “tort reform” movement, to remove access to the courts from the list of rights that citizens have to resist corporate governance. The problem with lawsuits for your crowd is not frequencynor cost. It has been, from the beginning, that you lose. You break the law, the agencies are corrupted by your influence, so we bypass them and go to the courts, and you are stopped in your… Read more »

The Polish Wolf
Guest
The Polish Wolf

Undeveloped land is still an indefensible position, logically. When did that state exist? Human beings have been leaving their footprint on the landscape for centuries and millenia. The undeveloped state of the land included millions of human beings hunting, fishing, gathering, and engaging in agriculture. The current definition of wilderness precludes any of those activities to which the ecosystem is adapted. It is therefore not as simple as simply returning the land to an undeveloped state.

JC
Guest

“So glad you came, because as soon as I read this I wanted to talk to you.”

Ditto. But first you should go read the Wilderness Act and its implementing rules and regulations, because you don’t have a clue about what you are talking about.

“…hunting, fishing, gathering, and engaging in agriculture. The current definition of wilderness precludes any of those activities…”

All four of those activities are permitted in wilderness areas.

The Polish Wolf
Guest
The Polish Wolf

JC, I’ll never pretend to know more about wilderness areas than you. You are an expert on that. I’m just pointing out that the idea of restoring land to some previous condition without human influence is doomed to failure. The rest of it, I concede.

But what I really want to hear from you, JC, is how extremist is a more dangerous word than collaborator, Vichy, or quisling?

JC
Guest

It’s not the word. It’s the one who wields the word. A senator carries much more clout with his words than do individuals. One can incite people to violence (and I have been threatened with violence for my lawful actions in defense of wilderness), while the other does not. Jon Tester’s “Sister Souljah moment” has far more impact on the public’s perception on — and potential actions t0wards — radical environmental activists than anything Mike Garrity could ever say about mainstream hiking clubs and loggers. I just see nothing more than a bunch of misplaced indignity from those that would… Read more »

The Polish Wolf
Guest
The Polish Wolf

“It’s not the word. It’s the one who wields the word.”

In other words, violent words are fine as long as no one who disagrees with you uses them.

Mark Tokarski
Guest
Mark Tokarski

I should not have said “original state” regarding wilderness. It should be “undeveloped state.” “Original” is an almost religios concept … belief in something that cannot be defined.

Rob Kailey
Guest

It would be interesting if you could define “undeveloped state”. Undeveloped by what? Climate change? Boot prints? Hiking trails? High mountain stocked trout lakes? Species imbalance? Rock rats that haven’t been exposed to diesel except through acid rain?

I’ve been reading for days about the ‘traffic jams’ headed up Mount Everest, the most inhospitable mountain in the world. Undeveloped? Please do clarify.

Mark Tokarski
Guest
Mark Tokarski

Ah jeez, Kaileyness, reduce to minutia and bore me to death. Read the Wilderness Act of 64. that’s where, as best we are able, we defined it.

It’s sophistry and obfuscation to try to undermine the act by changing the definitions in that

Industry and motorbacks want to undo that act, by hook or crook. MWA went down, AWR still stands. Tester declared sides. Lines are drawn, Dems and Republicans have joined forces. We may lose, but it will be with swords drawn.

Rob Kailey
Guest

Really? How old were you in 1964, Mark? Were you in Congress? If not, your use of “we” is rather blatant sophistry. You didn’t define anything.

It’s also interesting that others in this conversation have been dismissed as ignorant of “policy”, and yet you show a rather alarming degree of ignorance yourself. The lands that current policy fights surround are not “wilderness”, but rather wilderness study areas. Those lands have been subject to a wide use since 1964. So, I ask again. Please define “undeveloped state”.

Mark Tokarski
Guest
Mark Tokarski

I remember in 1963 or so walking into the “Beartooth Primitive Area'” later to become the BT Wilderness. I could not help much at that age. I did my best for ten years in the 1990’s to help the cause. Most of the land is “roadless” and not “study area.” Two points here: Under the original act, if land had a road, it per se did not become wilderness. So you’ll see in the BT that roads go right up to the boundary, like the Goose Lake jeep trail, and then wilderness starts. That road was there prior to the… Read more »

Rob Kailey
Guest

Mark, you are confusing me with my brother. I’m not the one who’s been discussing lawsuits. I grew up hiking the Bitterroot/Selway. What’s your point? You’re still engaging in sophistry, claiming your part in a greater effort you really had no hand in forming; nor apparently protecting, since 2000, after which much of the policy concerning roadless areas has radically changed. But of course, Bush = Gore, right? As you yourself indicate, much of the area that was designated ‘roadless’ is in fact not roadless at all. A considerable amount of it was designated roadless in the mid 80s, even… Read more »

Matthew Koehler
Guest
Matthew Koehler

For those interested in a blog devoted to a lively discussion of policy issues related directly to the management of America’s National Forest, might I suggest this. Thanks.

A New Century of Forest Planning
http://ncfp.wordpress.com/

Matthew Koehler
Guest
Matthew Koehler

Hello: Lost in this very interesting debate has been the actual substance of what the $30,000 ad campaign from the “timber partners” called for. Specifically, the timber mills who took out the Ad claimed “We believe the Forest Service is being held hostage by a small group of professional obstructionists” and then they offered these solutions: “We see several options available to Congress to immediately rectify these abuses: 1) Amend the Equal Access to Justice Act by requiring a Cash Bond in these types of administrative appeals and lawsuits. Amend the Act further by implementing a Loser Pay System, where… Read more »

JC
Guest

Matty, these guys have no interest in nor understanding of environmental policy. All they care about is that they are good foot soldiers following the policy dictates of their senator (no matter its substance), and that anyone who doesn’t fall in line should get a good whipping.

Mark Tokarski
Guest
Mark Tokarski

Amen brother.

The Polish Wolf
Guest
The Polish Wolf

False, JC. The Kaileys may disagree with the tactics, and I can’t speak for their mastery of the environmental knowledge. As far as I’m concerned, if you’re winning most of your lawsuits, then either the law needs to be changed (if the populous is unhappy with the outcome), or the relevant parties need to stop breaking them. What I, and I presume Don, oppose, is comparing people who don’t share your passion for lawsuits to a group of people who assisted in the murder of thousands, especially when you already decried a moderate senator’s use of the word ‘extremist’ as… Read more »

larry kurtz
Guest

Clearly you meant, “populace,” Mr. Downhour.

The Polish Wolf
Guest
The Polish Wolf

Indeed I did. Thank you.

Mark Tokarski
Guest
Mark Tokarski

Nothing more need be said on your end there PW. We should also leave civil rights open to vote as well. Your appeal to the gallery here is beneath you. Either argue the values underlying the 1964 law, or back down. Public opinion, when 90% of the public is busy doing other stuff, is nothing more than a refuge from debate. As Dagline said, you’re beat. Stay down.

Mark Tokarski
Guest
Mark Tokarski

“Dragline,” Damned IPad.

Matthew Koehler
Guest
Matthew Koehler

Polish Wolf: Please register my vote for:

“The relevant parties need to stop breaking [the law].” Thank you.

It’s curious to me how everyone seems to express concerns with how the Forest Service manages our public lands, yet some people seem to have issues when certain groups successfully hold the Forest Service accountable through the judicial system.

Rob Kailey
Guest

Another ridiculous Ad Hominem, JC. Here’s a hint guiding you to examine your own internal contradictions. Agreement does not imply understanding, nor does disagreement imply disinterest or ignorance.

If there is something that others in this thread have no interest in, it’s the foolish belief that those not stridently in *your* camp are making deals with the fascist devil. That’s conspiracy twaddle worthy of Tokarski.

Mark Tokarski
Guest
Mark Tokarski

That is a wild leap on your part, part of the rhetoric of polarization. We have not changed over the years, our values are intact. But your side has accommodated to the degree that you are now aligned with the developers and corporations whose guiding ethic is to do whatever it takes to gain access to the commons. You’ve gone off the extreme end. On that end, by the way, are not demons or evil people, but rather a reflection of a common development due to the top-down structure of corporations: The people calling the shots demand only results, and… Read more »

Rob Kailey
Guest

You might want to reread my comment, Mark. My only comment about “devils” was “fascist devils”, the Nazis that Garrity and others accuse ‘us’ of collaborating with. Gerrity would be using the rhetoric of polarization that you fantasize coming from me. Your delusion is truly out of control. See, I don’t think you’re a demon. I think you’re an idiot.

larry kurtz
Guest

Enviros traded wilderness protection for endangered species protection in 2011. “Wilderness designation does not ensure sanctuary from political, social, economic and environmental events that threaten the ecological integrity of these areas. Even the ecosystems in these most protected of public lands are threatened. In addition to the Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, and National Park Service are charged with stewardship of these lands while providing for appropriate human use and enjoyment.” The Forest Service is broken: it should come out of the USDA and look more like the Bureau of Reclamation. The land it… Read more »

larry kurtz
Guest

The Forest Service is broken: it should come out of the USDA and look more like the Bureau of Reclamation. The land it manages is broken and should be divided among BIA, the Park Service, BLM, and the tribes. Enviros traded wilderness protection for endangered species protection in 2011. “Wilderness designation does not ensure sanctuary from political, social, economic and environmental events that threaten the ecological integrity of these areas. Even the ecosystems in these most protected of public lands are threatened. In addition to the Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, and National Park… Read more »

Moorcat
Guest

Larry, it might surprise you to know that I at least agree that the Forest Service is a hybrid organization that is in desparite need of restructuring. There is an amazing amount of duplication between various land management federal organizations that could be simplified by combining some some of them. Even the structure of the Forest Service is hybridized (their money comes from one agency and their administration comes from another). Where we part ways is in the idea that any ecosystem in the US can be “untouched” or “true wilderness”. That is silly think in my opinion. Nor do… Read more »

larry kurtz
Guest

I am far more radical than maybe even Matt when it comes to the West, Mr. Kailey, and consider myself an ‘eco-nut.’

Just posted this at a friend’s South Dakota blog.

Moorcat
Guest

This is not news to me and I am uncertain why you are pointing it out to me. Did my reply insinuate otherwise? I am very aware of your leanings (I think your use of the phrase “Earth Hater” to describe anyone that doesn’t share your views is kind of a give away) and Yes, my reply was directed at people like you and Matt.

larry kurtz
Guest
Moorcat
Guest

This article ties in with another story I am currently researching. As yet, I have not found any concrete beginnings to the story, but it appears that one option being considered to deal with firefighting is to move national firefighting crews under the Office of Homeland Security (you guys thought I was joking). This appears to be a real idea with people involved in three governmental offices. I first heard about it from three Forest Service employees and I have since had it confirmed from a BLM employee and a seasonal Fire Fighting Crew Chief. If the organizations involved in… Read more »

larry kurtz
Guest

Google pyroterrorism or weaponized wildfire, Mr. Kailey. The Forest Service is so far over its head with mega-fires that it threw up its hands over the budget last year:

http://www.markudall.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=1132

larry kurtz
Guest

More evidence. Listen for implications to national security at the end of the testimony.

http://www.energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/hearings-and-business-meetings?ID=2f81c9e7-35a3-4c20-b016-2e6924e6d2d5

Nameless Range
Guest

It’s amazing how our allegiances to an ideal can rob us of all reasonableness when that ideal comes under attack. Regardless of where your values lie on the continuum of enthusiasm and passion for the wilderness issue, the truth is this thread would be a hell of a lot shorter if just one person on the “wilderness-expert-defender” side of the debate would make a simple concession: The nazi comparison was an extreme dis analogy. This was the main thrust Mr. Pogreba’s post in the first place. It’s an interesting look at what politics can do to an individual’s rationality, regardless… Read more »

Nameless Range
Guest

Oops, wrong link. Here is the correct one.

http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Politics_is_the_Mind-Killer

Mark Tokarski
Guest
Mark Tokarski

If we were not branded as “extremists” by your Tester perhaps we’d be less sensitive. After all, we haven’t changed over the years. Your side went to the other camp. You’re not Nazis, but if you were with us once and were lured away by the power of money that dwells behind Democrats, you are quislings. If you were always on the other side, and now feign to be with us to entice us to collaborate with developer corporations, then you are merely agents provocateur. We have remained steady in our beliefs. Our goals our plainly apparent to all who… Read more »

The Polish Wolf
Guest
The Polish Wolf

“If we were not branded as “extremists” by your Tester perhaps we’d be less sensitive.”

Indeed. But you are now, supposedly, more sensitive to the power of inflammatory words, having been put on the receiving end of them by a Senator. Now, shouldn’t that greater sensitivity cause you to realize that calling people Nazis is disrespectful to any number of people, and counterproductive to boot?

Rob Kailey
Guest

Tokarski was never branded an “extremist”. He simply includes himself in the group to feel like one of the ‘cool kids’. Tester called Koehler an extremist, he called JC an extremist. Tokarski is an accountant.

The Polish Wolf
Guest
The Polish Wolf

That elicited a legitimate chuckle.

Rob Kailey
Guest

Walter Mitty perhaps?

Mark Tokarski
Guest
Mark Tokarski

I served my time, Kailey, and yes, I’d like to take LSD or meth or something after all these ears to get taxation and accounting out of my head. I was 14 when the original bill passed, didn’t know anything aboutit but did love hiking and camping the beartooth. I was a member of MWA and served on the executive committee for many years while you wee acing your philosophy courses and sleving your books. During all of that that time I never nice heard the name “Kailey.” Fortunately. PW and Rod, you both indicate that the public has moved… Read more »

Rob Kailey
Guest

Hmm, you fought the good fight and things got worse. Reads to me like you weren’t very good at it, were you? ‘Good thing you didn’t quit your day job.

Mark Tokarski
Guest
Mark Tokarski

I was but a small part of a larger effort.I met some of the smartest people, strategically speaking, that I have ever known. My contributions were small, to be sure, and their ability to see the big picture was my guiding force. I am not strategically gifted, but am a good judge of character. That’s probably why I don’t much care for you.

Rob Kailey
Guest

“I am not strategically gifted, but am a good judge of character. ”

I’ll just have to take your word for that.

~hehehe~

steve kelly
Guest
steve kelly

So, is anyone still confused about the ad nauseam media narrative that touts the “historic” collaboration that brought together longtime adversaries — the timber industry and their radient new partners at TU, TWS, NWF, MWA and Pew?

C’mon boys, we’re shooting for 100!

JC
Guest
Mark Tokarski
Guest
Mark Tokarski

Pogie even over there is dissembling, JC, talking only about the Vichy remark. Don, if you got something besides that, now would be a good time to bring it. Otherwise you might want to take a moment to self-reflect about the power of money and the nature of collaboration. Here’s a simple metaphor (Rod, leave the room): Imagine metal particles scattered about on a table, and that someone takes a powerful magnet and merely waves it over the table top. See how the particles, not ever aware of the magnet, align with it. That’s just how power works, back in… Read more »

Mark Tokarski
Guest
Mark Tokarski

One of us has to somehow make collaboration seem noble, feign some kind of dignity in such low behavior.

The other is typing this on an IPad, and once owned a desktop, and therefore has no voice in the destruction of wilderness by collaberators. I am supposed to be sending messages on onion skin using an Olilvetti to be true to the wilderness ethic.

Gotcha, Don. Keep chuggin’. As was said in the 60’s, you sold out. I say you bought in. Tomato tomahto? you tell me which it is.

larry kurtz
Guest

Both Udalls now in service have angered tribes and enviros to litigation with botched Forest Service directives: why do you choose to bash Tester with solutions, Toke?

larry kurtz
Guest

tester’s solutions, rather….

Mark Tokarski
Guest
Mark Tokarski

I suggest for you a blind taste test – take the actions of the Senators, Baucus, Burns and Tester without knowing their names, and distinguish one from the other. That’s what convinced coke to go with New Coke – they didn’t realize that their product was only distinguished by consumer perceptions. Tester is only distinguished by perceptions, and is no different than Burns. At least I get a sense here that people realize what a slug Baucus is, but are yet to realize that Tester is no different. (Those folks who will vote for Baucus next time around claim now… Read more »

The Polish Wolf
Guest
The Polish Wolf

“I suggest for you a blind taste test – take the actions of the Senators, Baucus, Burns and Tester without knowing their names” Better plan – let’s compare the two men we are actually choosing between, on something they both have proposed plans about. Candidate A would like to remove the gray wolf from the endangered species list entirely Candidate B would like to remove endangered species protection for gray wolves only in those regions that have shown they have a plan to deal with it. Which do you vote for? Sure, you may dislike both plans, but is one… Read more »

Mark Tokarski
Guest
Mark Tokarski

Lesser-evil politics. God what an undignified way to live! Buck up man! Flex your muscles! Breathe the air! Live, dammit! Live!

Matthew Koehler
Guest
Matthew Koehler

BTW:

Tricon Timber in St. Regis, one of the timber mills who took part in $30,000 in Ads attacking the Alliance for Wild Rockies and calling for an end to the public appeals process and exempting many Montana national forest timber sales from judicial review
has just announced that the could close if the Forest Service won’t let them out of a timber sale contract, which they’ve apparently had since 2003. And to think some people think we should have Congress mandating more logging on our national forests.

http://www.kpax.com/news/tricon-timber-could-close-without-contract-compromise/

Matthew Koehler
Guest
Matthew Koehler

BTW, Part II:

Judge: USFS failed to study how Colt Summit timber sale affects lynx habitat

http://ncfp.wordpress.com/2012/06/21/judge-usfs-failed-to-study-how-colt-summit-timber-sale-affects-lynx-habitat/

Question: What does this ruling saying about the type of “collaboration” taking place in Montana right now between the timber industry and a handful of well-funded conservation groups? Is the future of national forest management best served when industry gets together with well-funded special interest groups to push through illegal timber sales? Or is it best served when the Forest Service is required to follow the law and best science when managing our public lands?

Support Our Work!

Poll

What would be the most appropriate nickname for Matt Rosendale?

Follow Us on Twitter

Subscribe Via E-mail

0 /* ]]> */