goemaw.com
General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: steve dave on April 10, 2015, 10:46:31 AM
-
So a bunch of people apparently just voted to do this or allow people to do this or something. Knowing nothing about it it sounds like a bad thing to do. Explain to me why it would be a good thing to do.
-
i know nothing about it either but agree that it's a bad thing.
-
Without more dets, leaning towards bad.
-
http://indefinitelywild.gizmodo.com/republican-senators-just-voted-to-sell-off-your-nationa-1696862450/+megneal
But how will Cliven Bundy make a dollar!!!
-
gE is buying one of these fellas. Which should buy?
-
I don't have the details. But have any of you visited a national forest? They're ok, I guess, but they really suck in comparison to national parks.
-
I don't have the details. But have any of you visited a national forest? They're ok, I guess, but they really suck in comparison to national parks.
Crap, I already put in a stalking horse bid.
-
Just e-mailed Jerry.
-
Can anybody cite me some details on this that don't come from a libtard blog? I'm not finding much, except the forest service's own website which says that the sale of national forest land has been going on for decades, and this latest proposal would sell the land to the states. That doesn't seem so bad.
I totally support the national parks, but the federal government also controls much larger (huge) swaths of land under more minor designations that it would seem to be best left to state control. The people of those states can decide what portions to allow for private development.
But I totally understand why the envirotards are going hysterical over this.
-
http://indefinitelywild.gizmodo.com/republican-senators-just-voted-to-sell-off-your-nationa-1696862450/+megneal
But how will Cliven Bundy make a dollar!!!
I like that the article leads with a silhouette of Yosemite, which is a national park - not a national forest. National forests can't carry the NP's jockstraps.
-
http://indefinitelywild.gizmodo.com/republican-senators-just-voted-to-sell-off-your-nationa-1696862450/+megneal
But how will Cliven Bundy make a dollar!!!
I like that the article leads with a silhouette of Yosemite, which is a national park - not a national forest. National forests can't carry the NP's jockstraps.
Something I wish I knew 15 minutes ago.
-
Time out. So it turns out the federal government already sells timber rights on national forests, so this bill really doesn't seem to do much at all except maybe sell more land currently managed by the federal government to the states.
Ok - resume envirotard hissyfit.
-
The text says they are selling or transferring to the state or local government some land that isn't within a national park, preserve, or monument. The states will probably be better stewards of this land than the feds.
-
Great job here sd
-
If we were to invest in a forest what would we name it?
-
nothing from my guy rush yet
-
maybe they should just make all land "our" land. oh wait, it's been tried. :facepalm:
-
Thneed making time !
-
this is more about industrial development than it is fiscal "responsibility". if you're a conservationist of any stripe you shouldn't be too excited
-
this is more about industrial development than it is fiscal "responsibility". if you're a conservationist of any stripe you shouldn't be too excited
I'm sure this is true in many respects, but some states have been unfairly annexed by the federal gov and have lost the ability to decide what should be done, and not done, on their land.
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fy9geigQ.jpg&hash=050ea4b17cd5710c07a574917e3157681bb23da1)
-
So it's a good thing?
-
I prefer that public lands be protected from mining and drilling. If the republicans were interested in that at all, or in garnering public support, they would include it in the bill.
-
I think they're interested in giving control of some federal land back to the states. Most of the land they're talking about is plain old desert. They call it forest but it's sage brush and cactus.
-
Sad display of power grabbage by the resident statists
-
I prefer that public lands be protected from mining and drilling.
Why? Take a look at the map. You really think all that land needs to be restricted from mineral rights? Actually, not even the federal government thinks that, which leases timber and mineral rights on lots of its land already.
-
Sometimes I am embarrassed to be associated with the knuckle-head tea butt Republickers in Congress. What a stupid moron never get a vote again idea. Is this a Cruz or Rand tea party blue-light special? We just as well go to every park in America a beat little birdies to death with hammers and blast the hell out of squirrels with shotguns. Selling resources on federal lands is okay, but don't sell the land. We don't need a bunch of capitalistic dirt rapers ravaging mother nature. We already did this once. Teddy Roosevelt stopped it, his bag was not full of tea.
-
Obama ain't taking this.advice too well. He is turning everything into a national monument. What part of Kansas can he divert? I nominate southern Reno County with Red Jaw breaks, deep red vullies and Lake Dirt. Or maybe Lawrence.