I was watching CNN this morning and they were doing an interview regarding those two girls who fell down a mine shaft while riding their ATV. The news caster was interviewing some guy who is a "Mine Safety Inspector" or some such from Arizona and one of her first questions was a leading question like "Is it true that Arizona does not receive any federal funds to close these abandoned mines?"

Now, this is the kindof crap that makes me want to watch Fox news. Seriously, the safety of open mine shafts is not an issue for the federal government to deal with! The implication of the question just irritates the hell out of me. Idiot newscasters....

Besides, isn't there some sort of responsibility that falls on the girls/parents for allowing some very young girls to offroad all over the countryside? I wonder how many kids die in ATV accidents vs. those that die falling down mine shafts. There's a question I'd like to see asked.

I always thought it was the states responsibilty to see to the abandoned mine shafts. Or if it's on private property it's up to the owners to close it off or whatnot.

When are ya goona learn.
Journalism has been taken over by Liberal Profs on most
University campus for years.Most University are chock full of
Bias driven Liberal tenured profs.Ward Churchill,being an extreme
example.
They have a simple,ulterior motive.Turn somewhat impressionable
college age kids into Flaming,media driven Liberals.
The first instinct being,to question the inherent Politics of
any situstion.That leaves a stain on good reporting and actual
human interest as integral part of mankind.
Virtually all stories can be truned into Political theatre.
That's why David Horowitz has spent mush time travelling
to those University who'll have him,explaining what higher education
should encompass.And what it should not.
His many Books,also pinpoint Liberal professorships as THE cause
for such Bias in Journalism.

......one of her first questions a leading question like "Is it true that Arizona does not receive any federal funds to close these abandoned mines?"

Now, this is the kind of crap that makes me want to watch Fox news..........The implication of the question just irritates the hell out of me. Idiot newscasters....

?!?!?

I cannot see what possible problem you or anyone else would have with such a question. It is a question. No government employee is being singled out for blame. No one individual is being excoriated or chastized.

The only inference, if any, would be that perhaps it might be a good idea to have federal oversight of the closing of --and the inherant safety issues involved with-- abandoned mines. What on earth do you find wrong with that?!?

Seriously, the safety of open mine shafts is not an issue for the federal government to deal with!

Huh??

Surely there is some sort of federal agency that oversees mine safety in the US...........isn't there?

Besides, isn't there some sort of responsibility that falls on the girls/parents for allowing some very young girls to offroad all over the countryside?

Absolutely.

Show me where any reporter in this country has suggested --""The parents are not to be blamed at all. The federal government, in its failure to secure the mine, is entirely at fault""..........

......and you will have made a valid point.

FT, you do know what "underlying concepts" are don't you? Just the sheer fact that the reporter was quick to point the finger at the current administration speaks volumes on how they feel about how much parents are to blame... if they thought parents were to blame, they would have said so.

Now, this is the kindof crap that makes me want to watch Fox news. There's a question I'd like to see asked.


THats it leper.... you must resist the dark side.....

I cannot see what possible problem you or anyone else would have with such a question. It is a question. No government employee is being singled out for blame. No one individual is being excoriated or chastized.

The only inference, if any, would be that perhaps it might be a good idea to have federal oversight of the closing of --and the inherant safety issues involved with-- abandoned mines. What on earth do you find wrong with that?!?


Because I hate the attitude that the federal government is the solution to every problem that comes in to being. That means more national taxes and bigger national government to handle an issue which affects a small locality. Federal government should only deal with issues that can only be dealt with by the national community. Having the national community deal with small, local issues is an extremely inefficient, wasteful, and ineffective way to deal with problems.



Surely there is some sort of federal agency that oversees mine safety in the US...........isn't there?


The fact that you have to ask this question demonstrates another problem of expansive federal government. Our government is designed to be answerable to the people to keep the government honest. When the people stop understanding what functions the government does and doesn't have, it stops being answerable to the people.

Leper has helped show the subtle biases that creep into what is supposed to be news reporting. By asking the question the reporter was attempting to place the blame on the Bush Whitehouse. Somehow the President and his administration bore ultimate responsibility for the death of the young girl.

It is sort of like a reporter discussing the death of a child during a Little League baseball game was to ask, "Isn't it true that the Federal Government provided no money for Little League safety?"

Leper has helped show the subtle biases that creep into what is supposed to be news reporting. By asking the question the reporter was attempting to place the blame on the Bush Whitehouse. Somehow the President and his administration bore ultimate responsibility for the death of the young girl.

It is sort of like a reporter discussing the death of a child during a Little League baseball game was to ask, "Isn't it true that the Federal Government provided no money for Little League safety?"

Under Reagan in the 80's came many good tings.
Truth in Lending,as mandated to be clearly displayed on ALL lending instruments.
It is now time to have Fairness in Reporting.
Like Brent Bozell has been studying,at his - Media Research -
offices,Today's media is overwhelmingly Liberal and very
Leftist leaning.

Now, this is the kindof crap that makes me want to watch Fox news. Seriously, the safety of open mine shafts is not an issue for the federal government to deal with! The implication of the question just irritates the hell out of me. Idiot newscasters....I watch FOX News as a pick-me-up when Comedy Central looks lame.

I watch FOX News as a pick-me-up when Comedy Central looks lame.

Lol, I usually watch it just to see what sort of reaction I get from my significant other.

federal[/I] government to deal with! Btw, it has been a federally funded issue until at least the last couple of years. I know Congress had been debating the matter some time since 2005, so it may actually be a relevant question.

Btw, it has been a federally funded issue until at least the last couple of years. I know Congress had been debating the matter some time since 2005, so it may actually be a relevant question.

Source?

Either way, it's not something the federal government should be involved in. Now, the federal government regulating mine companies to keep them from engaging in practices which are dangerous to the public, yes. But directly funding mine cleanup is another matter.

FT, you do know what "underlying concepts" are don't you? Just the sheer fact that the reporter was quick to point the finger at the current administration speaks volumes on how they feel about how much parents are to blame...


Slight problem with that analysis.

The reporter did not *point a finger* at anyone or any thing.

The reporter made no mention whatsoever of the *present administration*.

The reporter simply asked --""Is it true that Arizona does not receive any federal funds to close these abandoned mines?""

It is a yes/no question. It seems like a reasonable question to me, and one that would occur to virtually anyone when situations like this arise.

Quote: Freethinker---
Surely there is some sort of federal agency that oversees mine safety in the US...........isn't there?


The fact that you have to ask this question demonstrates another problem of expansive federal government. Our government is designed to be answerable to the people to keep the government honest. When the people stop understanding what functions the government does and doesn't have, it stops being answerable to the people.

?!?!?

I know the answer to the question, bub. I was being a bit facetious in asking.

The question was posed for the express purpose of causing you to answer it and to THEN perhaps think about how misguided your assinine --"Well why should the Government have anything to do with mine safety and with making sure that mine and mine shafts are properly closed when they are abandonded?- stance is.

I hate the attitude that the federal government is the solution to every problem that comes in to being........Federal government should only deal with issues that can only be dealt with by the national community. Having the national community deal with small, local issues is an extremely inefficient, wasteful, and ineffective way to deal with problems.


If you could show me where there are reporters or news casters in this country, in the context of mine safety in the U.S.-- making the implicit (or even oblique) suggestion; ""The Federal Government is the solution to every problem. Only the Federal government should deal with issues like mine safety and State or local governments should NEVER be the ones to enforce things like the safe closing of abandoned mine shafts""

.........you might have a valid point on this issue.

The one news caster who was interviewing a mine safety inspector --and who was guilty of the heinous offense of asking him a simple yes-or-no question about the sort of funding Arizona receives-- did not say that.

The one news caster who was interviewing a mine safety inspector --and who was guilty of the heinous offense of asking him a simple yes-or-no question-- did not suggest that.

It seems to me that you and a couple of other people here are reading WAAAAAAAAY too much into one simple question.

http://www.fs.fed.us/rm/pubs_int/int_gtr035.pdf

The last page of this FEDERAL PUBLICATION outlines how to close a mine and reclaim the land.

Can't understand what some people want... someone to come hold their hand?

I think Im missing something here.
Whats the connection between asking about federal funding and being liberal.

Source?
The area of federal responsibility may not extend beyond public lands. I'm having some difficulty finding particulars right off, and, sorry to say, it's not one of my areas of real interest/experience.

This is from the Chloride, AZ, ad page:

9. Mines! At one time we had over 72 mines operating here in Chloride and you can see the remains of a lot of them on the mountains. Some enjoy climbing around these old shafts, tunnels and tailings; but do so at your own risk. Some of these have had no maintenance in years. Most of these mines are private property and not open to actual "tours." People find metal detecting and rock hounding around these sites to be quite entertaining. The old Duval mine is still active in a new incarnation. It was recently purchased and new mining is taking place for the first time in years. This mine is located 4 miles south of Chloride on Mineral Park Road and they are after copper.

This is from the DoI/BLM site:
Abandoned Mine Lands (AML) Program

How BLM AML Projects Work
BLM addresses physical safety and environmental hazards using a risk-based approach. The type of remediation activities performed at an abandoned mine site determines which regulations guide site activities. In general, BLM follows NEPA procedures when conducting activities to address physical safety issues and for those sites where activities have historic, cultural, or wildlife impacts. BLM implements the CERCLA process for sites with a release or the threat of a release of a hazardous substance.

Types of BLM AML sites include:

Physical Safety Hazard Emergency Sites include accidents and deaths or the immediate potential for such tragedies on BLM-administered lands. Once BLM is notified of a physical safety hazard emergency the local authorities are contacted and appropriate emergency procedures are initiated.
Physical Safety Hazards Sites include open shafts and adits (some concealed by deterioration or vegetative growth); unstable rock and decayed support structures; deadly gases and lack of oxygen; explosives and toxic chemicals (including illicit drug labs); highwalls; and open pits. More subtle hazards include encounters with wild animals (e.g., rattlesnakes, bears, mountain lions); exposure to diseases from bat droppings, hantavirus, radon and radiation; and toxic soil, water, and air contaminated with cyanide, lead, arsenic, mercury, and other toxins which may be inhaled through dust and particles or through contact with impounded acidic water.
Water Quality Sites are those sites where a hazardous substance release has occurred, is suspected, or the threat of release exists. BLM generally uses CERCLA authority to address these sites, and can address physical safety hazards concurrently with the environmental remediation under CERCLA.
Physical Safety and Remediation Measures
BLM may take temporary measures to mitigate against physical safety hazards, such as by posting warning signs and fencing. Additional remedial measures include closure of adits and shafts, backfilling of highwalls, drainage of impoundments, removal of leftover equipment and debris, and revegetation to help offset erosion and improve stability.

If during the site characterization BLM determines that remedial activities may have historical, cultural, or wildlife impacts they must address these impacts in conjunction with the remedial activities. To mitigate impacts to bats, bat grates and cupolas are often installed.

Water Quality and Remediation Measures
Typical remedies for water quality sites include removing the source of the contamination, treating the contaminated water, and/or rerouting the flow of water. The cleanup activities performed at water quality sites are conducted under CERCLA authority and follow the CERCLA process.

Site Closure and Monitoring
When the remediation goals have been met the abandoned mine site is considered closed and BLM prepares a Closure Report. All sites will need to be monitored to ensure that the remedy remains in place as long as necessary and continues to achieve the desired result. Water quality sites will likely require at least periodic sample collection to determine if previously established water quality criteria have been and continue to be met.

"Is it true that Arizona does not receive any federal funds to close these abandoned mines?" what a moron. the real question should be...

"Is it true that the government doesn't hold the mining companies responsible for closing and maintaining old mineshafts?"

You see your problem is that your stick in this little fantasy world of 'Libs' vs 'Cons' when its all really those on top versus those on the bottom. Let me inform you now, you're on the bottom.

You see the news is always pro-corporate. Corporations make the news to make money and the courts have ruled that they can lie to do such. Theres no such thing as 'public responsibility'.

I really don't see how asking about federal government funds is liberal...please explain....

It's "liberal" because it looks to federal government to solve local problems; i.e. It supports big government. The question suggests that the federal government should be responsible for closing mine shafts.

Now, if you object that U.S. "conservatives" don't do any more to curb big government than liberals, then I would consider sustaining that objection.