Comments on: 64 Worst: Self important jackholes vs. Extended post fire closures in Griffith Park

By: nette

nette — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 17:45:48 +0000

‘Self-important jackhole’ is actually a pretty apt descriptor of someone who crosses poted boundaries into a devastated natural area that will require a lot of time and extensive rehabilitation to set right.

By: jodi

jodi — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 00:26:30 +0000

I agree that this is sort of a tough decision. A group of my co-workers and I are about to start hiking in the evenings again now that the days are longer and found that the area we like to use in the park is pretty much open. As someone else said above self-important jackholes have caused the Griffith Park situation, so that’s where I’m putting my vote.

By: waltarrrrr

waltarrrrr — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 21:54:08 +0000

Well that was an easy vote. Complete absence of Jackholes is definitely one the first things I noticed after moving from Hollywood to Highland Park. Highland Park: Jackhole-free since 1893.

By: Annika Barranti

Annika Barranti — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 21:52:38 +0000

My vote goes to the Griffith Park nonsense. If the self-important jackasses had specifically been limited to the dangerous drivers, they’d have won, hands-down. But the ones who think they deserve a table at a restaurant ahead of me make me laugh. I tip better.

By: Wil Wheaton

Wil Wheaton — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 21:42:04 +0000

This was originally tough for me, until I considered: there are self important jackholes everywhere, while only Los Angeles gets to have (or, in this case not have) Griffith Park.

By: faboomama

faboomama — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 21:22:58 +0000

I moved from Santa Monica to Hollywood to get away from self-important jackholes. 8 years later, I had to move from Hollywood to El Sereno to get away from an even worse type of self-important jackhole.

I vote jackhole. I don’t even think I’ve been near a fire closure area in Griffith Park and I’m over there at least every other week.

By: pcloadletter

pcloadletter — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 21:08:07 +0000

As someone who has worked for a number of self important jackholes, my vote’s a lock.

By: thunderboltfan

thunderboltfan — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 20:53:54 +0000

Oh gosh, Sophie’s choice. One begat the other here so to be uncharacteristically unselfish for a change, I’m going to vote for the jackholes.

I was one of the critical residents in this situation. While I’m glad the park is mostly reopened now, I must say it provided a front row seat to the antics of so called public officials as executed by the well meaning park rangers who were told little if nothing at all. A common refrain from them, usually delivered with a laugh, was, “Nobody tells us anything.”

I made dozens of phone calls, sent numerous emails, blogged, went to community meetings–all to little avail. So I did what several others I saw doing in the park during that period. I ignored the signs, crossed into the closed areas and enjoyed the park.

If anything, the entire affair diminished my faith in government, at least as it’s implemented by a certain sector of Los Angeles politicians and the self serving, paper pushing climbers they appoint to do their heavy lifting.

By: Jason Burns

Jason Burns — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 20:46:29 +0000

I’m actually torn on this, because one could be part of the other. I still can’t get the thought out of my head that CITY COUNCILMAN Tom LaBonge needed his own $25,000 website with a vanity domain. At least the city has the money to spare.

Oh, wait…