Blue Ridge hotel defies Park Service shutdown

[Quantum Windbag]

Obama is called "no drama Obama" because he comes across as "low key" and relaxed.

When these white winger come up with saying he has "tantrums" and such, they are fucking delusional.

He is also called Obama Hitler. Personally, I think the no drama moniker is more of a stretch.

Yeah? But then, you think Sarah Palin is a viable choice to lead this nation. Therefore, what you think really cannot be taken seriously. Can it?

Off on one of your delusions again? I bet you can't find a single post where I ever said anything even remotely close to what you just claimed.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

How does that make it ok to us government intimidation to shut down private business?


I almost never tempted to use nazi comparisons, but if the rangers aren't acting like jack booted thugs.....

Not fair to blame the rangers. Obama is the thug trying to squeeze as many little people as possible. The rangers have to do what they're told, as long as they're not killing anyone or anything.

They don't have to follow illegal orders

If I was one of them and got an order to put up barrycades I would probably follow it. I would then stand there and let anyone who moved the barrycades to do so, and not arrest them. There are a few that essentially did just that.

 

[Pogo]

Funny, I read that article three times, it clearly states he owns the concession, and you claim it is misleading. Want to explain how?

Funny you didn't read the post of mine that you quoted, since it would have answered that question before you asked it. Now look where you are.

Maybe I should use smaller words, I just can't think of any that actually describe the situation. Legally, he does own the inn. He just doesn't own the access to it, or the land it is on.

If anything goes wrong as a direct result of a guest's stay at the inn the park service is not liable. If an employee has a complaint about the labor practices the park service is not liable. If the inn burns to the ground the park service is not liable. They are not liable because they do not own the inn.

You can spin all day long, and claim the article is misleading, but the only one trying to mislead anyone is you. The park service is deliberately causing grief to Carroll, his employees, and his guests, and you are passing the Kool Aid off as nectar.

I was afraid of this. You've caught Daveman Disease. It's contagious apparently.

Nothing in my post was about anybody's grief or any other ramifications. I simply pointed out that the Moonie Times wrote a misleading story. That's it. Sorry if you can't handle that but it's not my problem.

 

[Pogo]

I guess you believed them when they told you it was juice.

If it helps you get over your superiority delusion the park service has openly admitted they have ordered their employees to make life difficult for the public.

And if it helps you get over your internet message board delusions, the National Park Service is not the President of the United States.

Who knew.

Why the fuck would you say that? Are you Confusing the voices in your head with reality again?

Because the original question that took you 17 hours to think of a snappy comeback to was whether the OP seriously thought the POTUS is personally closing the Pisgah Inn. That's why.

Reading comprehension. Try doing it in the moment and you mightn't lose your place.

 

[Pogo]

Without having a copy of the lease in hand, we don't know. But it seems a reasonable case.

Hey maybe the Moonie Times knows. There's a reliable source.

You said the land was being leased and made the argument that that was the reason they should be shut down during this funding negotiation. So now you are thinking maybe that's not the best course of action?

You want consistency form a pro big government hack?

Don't know what that means. For me I already said it wasn't, but for the record neither did I say anybody "should" or "should not" be shut down. Talk about the voices in one's head...

 

[Pogo]

You said the land was being leased and made the argument that that was the reason they should be shut down during this funding negotiation. So now you are thinking maybe that's not the best course of action?

I didn't take a position on the best course of action. I don't know all the details (like the lease) and I make it a point not to comment based on assumption. It does sound kind of mindless on the surface, but again the surface is all I'm in a position to see.

I'm just pointing out that the Moonie Times, the source quoted in the OP, is deliberately slanting the story.

Should I point out the obvious fact that you are assuming that the government owns the inn?

Already done. Quoted from news reports. Real ones, not the Moonbats.

 

[Pogo]

In other words: he owns the business and leases the building. This is VERY common.

Of course it is. Nobody says it isn't "common".

I repeat:

Yeah? So? Around here, there are three companies that lease land from the Corps of Engineers to operate marinas...and they're remaining open.

Once again, as in the "textbook" malarkey, ascribing conclusions that were never drawn to a simple observation.

There is no "so what". The point wasn't on a "so what"; it was on the Moonie Times. Nice try attempting to bury that, but there it sits. Sorry to burst the conspiracy theorist bubble but sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

Hey, know what would be a cool idea? Let's just repost the last 100 posts where this was already beaten to death. Start without me.

Yeah. You ever going to get around to claiming the Times lied, or are you going to insist it's so because you SAY it's so?

You know -- your usual way of backing up your claims.

Again -- already done, linked and quoted. Yawn.

 

[Pogo]

Show me the lease. I don't have all night.

Upset that you got caught out on your fake claim of neutrality and never posting based on assumptions?

The difference between us is that I am assuming that the government is wrong because they have a pretty good track record of being wrong when it comes to government shutdowns, and they are shutting down a lot of places that never shut down in history, including places that are actually privately owned and have never been on on government property, while you are assuming that the government is right based on your pathetic need to defend the government.

In other words, I can provide multiple examples from the last few days that clearly show that the government is overstepping its authority, and all you can do is scream "Show me the lease."

Here is my response, if they are right to do this under the lease, show me and I will admit they are wrong. If you want proof the government is wrong, open your eyes and look at everything else they are doing. Only an idiot would argue that every single case where the government shut down things they had no business closing requires separate proof that each action was wrong.

No - actually the difference between us is you're the one projecting claims of value judgments that I haven't made. I'm not interested in your examples of whatever rhetorical wet spot.

In this instance (which was in no way addressed to you), the poster claimed there was a violation of the lease; I then asked him to show the part of the lease language that is being violated. He of course can't do that since he's pulling the idea out of his ass, a procedure with which I have no doubt you're intimately familiar.

Which wasn't your point anyway, damn control freak.

 

[Amelia]

How does that make it ok to us government intimidation to shut down private business?


I almost never tempted to use nazi comparisons, but if the rangers aren't acting like jack booted thugs.....

Not fair to blame the rangers. Obama is the thug trying to squeeze as many little people as possible. The rangers have to do what they're told, as long as they're not killing anyone or anything.

They don't have to follow illegal orders

Hard for them to know what is illegal, short of them being ordered to confiscate or physically harm.

 

[tyroneweaver]

Because it is on federal land, and the government cannot provide services for which it is liable?

liable for what. When's the last time someone sued the gov and won.

 

[Amelia]

The courts might decide Obama's heavy-handedness is legal.

That doesn't make it better.

The Obama admin is still taking extraordinary measures to upset as many people as possible, and gratuitously spending tax dollars to accomplish this interference.

 

[koshergrl]

"Just before the weekend, the National Park Service informed charter boat captains in Florida that the Florida Bay was "closed" due to the shutdown. Until government funding is restored, the fishing boats are prohibited from taking anglers into 1,100 square-miles of open ocean. Fishing is also prohibited at Biscayne National Park during the shutdown. "

"
The Park Service will also have rangers on duty to police the ban. Of access to an ocean. The government will probably use more personnel and spend more resources to attempt to close the ocean, than it would in its normal course of business.
This is governing by temper-tantrum. It is on par with the government's ham-fisted attempts to close the DC WWII Memorial, an open-air public monument that is normally accessible 24 hours a day. By accessible I mean, you walk up to it. When you have finished reflecting, you then walk away from it."

"
Apparently, according to an anonymous Park Service ranger, “We’ve been told to make life as difficult for people as we can. It’s disgusting.”
Centuries ago, King Canute famously failed to command the ocean tide to stop. His display was actually a means to educate his subjects on the limits of royal power. Today, however, our President actually believes he has the power to control the oceans. "






Feds Try to Close the OCEAN Because of Shutdown

 

[Quantum Windbag]

And if it helps you get over your internet message board delusions, the National Park Service is not the President of the United States.

Who knew.

Why the fuck would you say that? Are you Confusing the voices in your head with reality again?

Because the original question that took you 17 hours to think of a snappy comeback to was whether the OP seriously thought the POTUS is personally closing the Pisgah Inn. That's why.

Reading comprehension. Try doing it in the moment and you mightn't lose your place.

And you asked me because I didn't write the OP?

Stop paying attention to voices when you can't see the people.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Show me the lease. I don't have all night.

Upset that you got caught out on your fake claim of neutrality and never posting based on assumptions?

The difference between us is that I am assuming that the government is wrong because they have a pretty good track record of being wrong when it comes to government shutdowns, and they are shutting down a lot of places that never shut down in history, including places that are actually privately owned and have never been on on government property, while you are assuming that the government is right based on your pathetic need to defend the government.

In other words, I can provide multiple examples from the last few days that clearly show that the government is overstepping its authority, and all you can do is scream "Show me the lease."

Here is my response, if they are right to do this under the lease, show me and I will admit they are wrong. If you want proof the government is wrong, open your eyes and look at everything else they are doing. Only an idiot would argue that every single case where the government shut down things they had no business closing requires separate proof that each action was wrong.

No - actually the difference between us is you're the one projecting claims of value judgments that I haven't made. I'm not interested in your examples of whatever rhetorical wet spot.

In this instance (which was in no way addressed to you), the poster claimed there was a violation of the lease; I then asked him to show the part of the lease language that is being violated. He of course can't do that since he's pulling the idea out of his ass, a procedure with which I have no doubt you're intimately familiar.

Which wasn't your point anyway, damn control freak.

I am projecting?

You defended the government, and then demanded other people prove the government wrong.

 

[The T]

Even though the Blueridge Parkway remains open to traffic the park service ordered a private hotel to close.

"The Pisgah Inn, a private hotel that holds a concession on the Blue Ridge Parkway, has become a national sensation as it defies “intimidation” and a National Park Service order to close its doors."

This hotel receives no federal funds yet the dear leader is paying rangers to block the hotel entrance. The hotel actually pays the government a franchise fee based on its income. This means our little dictator wannabe is costing us money beyond the pay for the rangers to block the hotel. Plus they are putting 100 people out of work needlessly.


Blue Ridge hotel defies Park Service shutdown - Washington Times

Obama's fault?!?! It's the fault of anyone that thought it was a good idea to vote for a Republican.

Republicans had ZERO to do with this. NPS and Obama are out of line...and are called out for this shit, comrade.

 

[The T]

The courts might decide Obama's heavy-handedness is legal.

That doesn't make it better.

The Obama admin is still taking extraordinary measures to upset as many people as possible, and gratuitously spending tax dollars to accomplish this interference.

That's true. It IS the POTUS that calls the shots on what's closed, etc...but is sauce for the goose...as in WE see the damage he's doing on purpose to the people and this Republic. Obama had better be careful. He is going to drag the Progressives right down with him when the elections come next year.

BET on it. And WE won't let them forget scenarios like this. It will haunt them.

 

[Katzndogz]

When is obama barrycading and closing the interstate highways?

 

[The T]

When is obama barrycading and closing the interstate highways?

Any day now...Wait! Doesn't the States maintain them? Nevermind...

 

[Pogo]

Why the fuck would you say that? Are you Confusing the voices in your head with reality again?

Because the original question that took you 17 hours to think of a snappy comeback to was whether the OP seriously thought the POTUS is personally closing the Pisgah Inn. That's why.

Reading comprehension. Try doing it in the moment and you mightn't lose your place.

And you asked me because I didn't write the OP?

Stop paying attention to voices when you can't see the people.

"Asked" you??

I didn't ask you jack squat. I asked the OP, into which question you inserted yourself. Fantasize much?

Again, leave posters to answer for themselves and you'll eat less foot.

 

[Pogo]

Upset that you got caught out on your fake claim of neutrality and never posting based on assumptions?

The difference between us is that I am assuming that the government is wrong because they have a pretty good track record of being wrong when it comes to government shutdowns, and they are shutting down a lot of places that never shut down in history, including places that are actually privately owned and have never been on on government property, while you are assuming that the government is right based on your pathetic need to defend the government.

In other words, I can provide multiple examples from the last few days that clearly show that the government is overstepping its authority, and all you can do is scream "Show me the lease."

Here is my response, if they are right to do this under the lease, show me and I will admit they are wrong. If you want proof the government is wrong, open your eyes and look at everything else they are doing. Only an idiot would argue that every single case where the government shut down things they had no business closing requires separate proof that each action was wrong.

No - actually the difference between us is you're the one projecting claims of value judgments that I haven't made. I'm not interested in your examples of whatever rhetorical wet spot.

In this instance (which was in no way addressed to you), the poster claimed there was a violation of the lease; I then asked him to show the part of the lease language that is being violated. He of course can't do that since he's pulling the idea out of his ass, a procedure with which I have no doubt you're intimately familiar.

Which wasn't your point anyway, damn control freak.

I am projecting?

You defended the government, and then demanded other people prove the government wrong.

This invitation is still open from yesterday -- post where I've "defended the government". I'm getting used to the sound of crickets.

What is it with you people who think you can just make shit up?