• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Bishop: Obama planning more national monuments in Utah

Catz Part Deux

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2009
Messages
28,721
Reaction score
6,738
Location
Redneck Riviera
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Bishop: Obama planning more national monuments in Utah - Salt Lake Tribune

Washington » Rep. Rob Bishop says he has unearthed plans by the Obama administration to wield its power to designate multiple new national monuments in the West, including two that would snatch up thousands of acres in Utah.

But the Interior Department says the document on which the Utah Republican is basing his allegation is simply a draft memo outlining lands that may, in the future, deserve protection.

Two swaths of Utah are mentioned in the document, marked "not for release" -- the San Rafael Swell in the south-central part of the state and Cedar Mesa in San Juan County; the exact size of the potential monuments isn't mentioned.

Apparently, the idea of protecting more wild places doesn't appeal to some conservatives. I have to wonder why.

p.s. These regions aren't really suitable for farming, agriculture, etc. but hold longterm potential for tourism.
 
So Utah is where he plans to erect the statue of himself?
 
Apparently, the idea of protecting more wild places doesn't appeal to some conservatives. I have to wonder why.

Because they believe in free market solutions and the free market is saying "drill baby drill."
 
Because they believe in free market solutions and the free market is saying "drill baby drill."

As far as I know, Utah isn't exactly known for its oil reserves, so I don't think this is what's going on.
 
I lived in Utah for 10 years, and I'm always happy to see land being set aside and protected. Utah doesn't have a great track record, and a hellalot of beautiful places that deserve protection.
 
That's what pisses me off about the Republicans. They lose a lot of votes because their reluctance to provide more protected, wild spaces.

Yep, because conservatives just can't resist riding around the country, chopping down trees, poisoning water supplies, defacing beautiful scenery, killing every animal that crosses our path......

Yep, you know us too well.
 
Yep, because conservatives just can't resist riding around the country, chopping down trees, poisoning water supplies, defacing beautiful scenery, killing every animal that crosses our path......

Yep, you know us too well.

I'm talking about political leaders, you know that. :doh

The Republican party is, in general, more beholden to developers and big business. They favor gated communities, not open spaces. It's happening all over rural America.
 
I'm talking about political leaders, you know that. :doh

The Republican party is, in general, more beholden to developers and big business. They favor gated communities, not open spaces. It's happening all over rural America.

Last I checked, rural America ain't gated.
 
Yep, because conservatives just can't resist riding around the country, chopping down trees, poisoning water supplies, defacing beautiful scenery, killing every animal that crosses our path......

Yep, you know us too well.

I lived in Utah for 10 years. I think I can say with some degree of certainty that I know where Rob Bishop, at the least, stands on environmental issues.

Not to mention what Utah's track record is...

This used to be a mountain:

350638239_6db37d6ff5.jpg


Utah used to have clean water:

http://ag.utah.gov/news/watershed/documents/uwr-feb00.pdf

Utah mining corporation indicted for water pollution | Circle of Blue | WaterNews

Utah has a long track record of allowing environmental destruction and pollution by business.

Thanks for your comments, which appear to lack any actual information on the topic.
 
Last I checked, rural America ain't gated.
Where I live gated communities are springing up right and left, and yes, it's rural.
 
Bishop: Obama planning more national monuments in Utah - Salt Lake Tribune



Apparently, the idea of protecting more wild places doesn't appeal to some conservatives. I have to wonder why.

p.s. These regions aren't really suitable for farming, agriculture, etc. but hold longterm potential for tourism.

At a minimum the territories belong to the state of Utah. Hence Utah should be the agency to decide how these lands are used.

The nation doesn't need new monuments.
 
Where I live gated communities are springing up right and left, and yes, it's rural.

Let me guess, all the people building those buildings are working for free, so the GOP's alleged support of "gated communities" doesn't create any jobs, right?
 
That's what pisses me off about the Republicans. They lose a lot of votes because their reluctance to provide more protected, wild spaces.

Because this is the attitude of many of them, and of a significant portion of their base.

When Reagan's Interior Secretary James G. Watt was asked about preserving wild lands before a congressional committee in 1981, this was his literal response:

"I don't know how many future generations we can count on until the Lord returns."

Basically, the GOP's base is largely divided between people that take that view towards environmental preservation, and those that take the "take it, rape it, it's yours" view toward's environmental protection.

Case in point, Bush's Secretary of the Interior, Gale Norton, was a Mining Industry Lobbyist. His Forest Service Chief was a timber industry lobbyist.

Those are the kind of people you get in terms of protecting our wildlands for future generations when you vote a Republican into the White House. Its sad, it really is. When you think about it, a president can scew up on foreign policy, but a future president can turn it around. A president can have disastrous economic policies, but given enough time, the economy will start growing again. A president can nominate horrible judges to the federal judiciary, but sooner or later they will eventually retire or die.

However, if a president allows our remaining wild lands to be developed, they will be marred forever. For example, coal mining companies literally blow the top half of mountains off in Appalachia to get to coal reserves. Even after the reclamation process, that land is still forever marred. You can log an old growth forest, and it will take anywhere from 300 to 800 years before it becomes an old growth forest again. You can develop a wilderness, and thats it, its gone.
 
Last edited:
I lived in Utah for 10 years. I think I can say with some degree of certainty that I know where Rob Bishop, at the least, stands on environmental issues.

Not to mention what Utah's track record is...

This used to be a mountain:

350638239_6db37d6ff5.jpg


Utah used to have clean water:

http://ag.utah.gov/news/watershed/documents/uwr-feb00.pdf

Utah mining corporation indicted for water pollution | Circle of Blue | WaterNews

Utah has a long track record of allowing environmental destruction and pollution by business.

Thanks for your comments, which appear to lack any actual information on the topic.
Sweet, we cut grooves into a mountain! lets have more!
 
Let me guess, all the people building those buildings are working for free, so the GOP's alleged support of "gated communities" doesn't create any jobs, right?

So, there are no ethics on how jobs are created? I disagree. I think that creating walled, elitist communities of McMansions is not in the best interest of the American public. I believe more holistic communities, with varied demographic groups, are healthier for society at large. I believe that gobbling up prime outdoor land to be used by only the well-heeled should be discouraged by the government through zoning laws, tax incentives, and the creation of more Federally and State designated shared open spaces.

Also, even though I didn't vote for Obama doesn't mean there might not be some things he does that I support. If he does enough positive things I might vote for him next time.
 
I think that creating walled, elitist communities of McMansions is not in the best interest of the American public.

And whose any damn business is it of yours? Good gosh. If I want to build a big house behind a fence, why should you be able to stop me? By the way, Obama's house from Rezko is in a gated community in Chicago.
 
And whose any damn business is it of yours? Good gosh. If I want to build a big house behind a fence, why should you be able to stop me? By the way, Obama's house from Rezko is in a gated community in Chicago.

You should be able to do with your private land what you choose to do with your private land so long as your actions do not negatively impact the property of others. Example, you can't dump your used oil into a stream because others will be impacted by that.

That is not relevant to the discussion at all though. The land in question is public BLM land. It's not privately owned, thus no land owners are impacted by more public land being designated a national monument.
 
And whose any damn business is it of yours? Good gosh. If I want to build a big house behind a fence, why should you be able to stop me? By the way, Obama's house from Rezko is in a gated community in Chicago.

Many counties are now requiring permits in order to build fences actually. The public does have an interest in how their communities are constructed and maintained. Anyone who has ever applied for a permit knows very well how limited we are in what we choose to do with our property.
 
Back
Top Bottom