Bob Campbell 
Member since Jul 11, 2014


Custom Lists

  • Zip.

Stats

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “Marijuana and Manitou

This whole debate baffles me. Please tell me why "recreational" (i.e. imbibed for personal pleasure and sociability) consumption of alcohol is okay, but not "recreational" use of marijuana. Alcohol is addictive and can cause severe health problems. Marijuana is not addictive, and although it can, indeed, contribute to lung damage (which is why I don't smoke it), it's nowhere near as bodily damaging as alcohol. Alcoholism is a far more pervasive and chronic problem than marijuana usage. My grandmother died in her late 30s of alcoholism. A commenter above evokes "mom and dad" smoking pot, but I'd bet my bottom dollar "mom and dad" routinely have a drink with dinner, a cold beer while relaxing after work and/or while watching the game or barbecuing in the back yard. And I'd bet said mom-and-dad's kids go out and buy alcohol illegally on occasion. Hell, I'd bet said commentator himself has indulged in "recreational" alcohol consumption on multiple occasions in the recent past. (Me, too.) And last I looked, the bars are full. Why, then, is the one okay, but not the other? Explain the rationale. Either neither should be legal, or both should be legal. Period. At one time, alcohol was illegal -- but then, abracadabra, it was legal again -- and, hence, apparently okay. Try making the argument that recreational alcohol use should be illegal -- watch the firestorm of angry denunciation it would provoke.

Either one -- BOTH legal or BOTH illegal -- is fine with me, but not an indefensible double standard.

10 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Bob Campbell on 08/07/2014 at 11:42 AM

Re: “De-treeing city parks, the Maketa saga, PERA, and more

Sorry, but I'm not barking up ANY tree, Clara McKenna. You can be soooo prissy, smug and snotty. Visit Sondermann personally and check out the south half of the park. You'll see a barren, ugly, stump-ridden expanse of weeds, woodchips and dirt where there used to be swaths of green, shade, birdsong and autumnal color (I go for runs on the park trails almost daily, year-round). THAT'S an improvement? Check out the lovely, lushly-wooded part of the park. A good 85-90% of it is also comprised of stately elms. Should they, too, be "banned" (as you so quaintly put it)? I applaud your declaration of faith in Forestry and its expertise (you're a very good girl), but you're the one barking up the wrong tree, Clara McKenna. No one is questioning Forestry's "expertise;" I'm protesting what’s being done to the parks – Sondermann in particular – by way of Forestry’s mission to rid them of non-native tree species (at a million bucks in taxpayer money).

Having just now perused your history of input on these pages and elsewhere in The Independent on this and other matters -- you would seem to be a frequent contributor -- I see that you chastise others for "bile" in their discourse. But an air of arch, smug, snotty put-down runs through your own pronouncements. You adopt a mantle of superior insight and acumen, flinging it stylishly over your shoulder as you ascend the lofty elevation from which you address the misguided and bestow correctives.

I'm puzzled by your pronouncement that you "know what can be done in landscaping with natives and those that mimic them." Bully. What, though, does that have to do with what happened to Sondermann or with the price of eggs in China? We ALL "know what can be done in landscaping." Me, too! And what "landscaping" are you alluding to -- the now de-treed, denuded half of Sondermann?

In your reply to this (which is certain, given precedent), please don't repeat the b.s. maneuver of charging my discourse with "bile." Yes, you piss me off. It's not because of your argument or your position, though. What rankles me -- what prompted this response -- is the unearned smugness, the coy, arch, dismissiveness, the presumption of superior acumen with which you contour and color your argument.

There's the rub.

3 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by Bob Campbell on 07/14/2014 at 5:50 PM

Re: “De-treeing city parks, the Maketa saga, PERA, and more

Sorry nature is so untidy and inconsiderate to you and your yard. We’re talking here about nature and nature PRESERVES, not manicured, tidy, Better Homes and Gardens centerfolds. My point and my question remains the same: 1) there are NO trees native to this immediate area (other than scrub oak and pines in the hills), and 2) why must park trees be native? Your lawn (not to mention the grassy expanses at Memorial Park, Bear Creek Park, etc.), your rose bushes, marigolds, and tomatoes are NOT native to this area. The huge, beautiful trees magnificently overarching the streets in my west side neighborhood are NOT native to the area. Forestry’s million dollar mission to rid the parks of non-native trees – what Forestry personnel have termed “trash trees” in conversations I’ve had with them – has transformed what used to be large swaths of green, summer shade, and autumn color into a barren expanse of weeds, stumps, and inch-deep wood chips. Don’t take my word for it – go there personally, look around, see for yourself and draw your own conclusion based on what you see. The entire south half of Sondermann is now an ugly, brown, weedy expanse. Unlike you, I DO have a problem with that. Unlike you, I would NOT be happy to see elms "banned" (is this an arboreal immigration problem?). And there has been no “replanting,” by the way – and even had there been, it would take a good decade or two for replanted trees to mature into anything remotely approximating their stately predecessors. But hey – at least now we don’t have those pesky, nuisance, non-native, “trashy” elms using up valuable air, sunshine, and soil. A million taxpayer dollars well spent? The park is now better off?

3 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by Bob Campbell on 07/11/2014 at 8:01 AM

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

All content © Copyright 2017, The Colorado Springs Independent

Website powered by Foundation