• 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!

Obama's plan to buy more public land draws GOP fire

Marshabar

Marshabar

Active member
Joined
Mar 10, 2011
Messages
293
Reaction score
142
Location
United States
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
And he wants to make it easier for them to use parks and public lands, saying that too many Americans "can go days without stepping on a single blade of grass."

Toward that end, the president wants Congress to double spending — to $900 million next year — on a conservation fund that's used to buy more property for the federal government. Currently, the government owns 635 million acres, or roughly three out of every 10 acres, with the largest chunk in Alaska.
Click to expand...

Obama's plan to buy more public land draws GOP fire | McClatchy


Wow is that an obscene justification.

We have parks now that are being farmed out to private companies to manage because the federal government is incapable of doing the job. We have parks along the southern border that people can't visit because they are too dangerous. We have parks in the Northwest that are being used for big pot growing operations conducted by illegal immigrants. The Forest Service warned campers in Colorado last year to be careful of other campers who eat tortillas or drink Tecate beer because they might be dangerous pot growers.

Right. The federal government needs to TAKE more land.
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama's plan to buy more public land draws GOP fire Read more: http://www.mcclat

They can buy it if they want it regardless of the owners willingness to sell. There are wildlife corridors they are interested in enhancing that will take historic large ranches from people and this despite the fact that private people, along with government agencies and volunteer groups are working together successfully to provide those very corridors. The list of lands they want is hideous.

A secret administration memo has surfaced revealing plans for the federal government to seize more than 10 million acres from Montana to New Mexico, halting job- creating activities like ranching, forestry, mining and energy development. Worse, this land grab would dry up tax revenue that’s essential for funding schools, firehouses and community centers.
Click to expand...

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/02/white-house-land-grab/
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama's plan to buy more public land draws GOP fire Read more: http://www.mcclat

Obama is a phony and may just want new land he can make off limits to oil, gas , or coal exploration.

He might make some of it off to all humans to save it for future Generations to enjoy staying off of too.

That is Government thinking at work.

I don't trust anything Obama says, and he promises, the trust goes even farther down. He has a track record replete with lies.
 
Marshabar said:
Obama's plan to buy more public land draws GOP fire | McClatchy

Wow is that an obscene justification.

We have parks now that are being farmed out to private companies to manage because the federal government is incapable of doing the job. We have parks along the southern border that people can't visit because they are too dangerous. We have parks in the Northwest that are being used for big pot growing operations conducted by illegal immigrants. The Forest Service warned campers in Colorado last year to be careful of other campers who eat tortillas or drink Tecate beer because they might be dangerous pot growers.

Right. The federal government needs to TAKE more land.
Click to expand...

At a time when we are trying to spend less, increasing this particular fund by $450 million is a slap in the face. This is just another way to expand government. I had no idea the government owned 3 out of 10 acres. Kind of scarey actually. Wonder where he's gunna put those parks for those people who go days without setting foot on a blade of grass. Hey, maybe he can knock down some of our failing schools!
 
The Federal Government owns 84.5% of Nevada, and 45.4 % of California.

What should be happening is the selling of some of this land for development putting money in the Treasury creating a few jobs.
 
pretty sure the federal government has more land than it knows what to do with, or can effectively manage, as it is. More is not needed.

Why doesn't Obama take that money and spend it for those 70,000 children he's gonna kill by misdirecting the USAID funds?:ninja:
 
Whovian said:
pretty sure the federal government has more land than it knows what to do with, or can effectively manage, as it is. More is not needed.

Why doesn't Obama take that money and spend it for those 70,000 children he's gonna kill by misdirecting the USAID funds?:ninja:
Click to expand...

Mostly because there is no 70,000 children in jeopardy. That is just another load of Liberal Bovine Scatology.

I heard a former Clinton adviser say so earlier today.
 
This is wholly extravagant and unnecessary.
 
And over here we have a idiotic Government attempting to do the opposite.

Jealous? Yes ...
 
In what universe is environmental preservation "obscene?"

Whovian said:
pretty sure the federal government has more land than it knows what to do with, or can effectively manage, as it is. More is not needed.

Why doesn't Obama take that money and spend it for those 70,000 children he's gonna kill by misdirecting the USAID funds?:ninja:
Click to expand...

Oh please your ****in party wants to gut USAID.
 
MaggieD said:
At a time when we are trying to spend less, increasing this particular fund by $450 million is a slap in the face. This is just another way to expand government. I had no idea the government owned 3 out of 10 acres. Kind of scarey actually. Wonder where he's gunna put those parks for those people who go days without setting foot on a blade of grass. Hey, maybe he can knock down some of our failing schools!
Click to expand...

Keep in mind the majority of that land is going to be wasteland that no one wants to begin with. Take Colorado for example. A lot of the land the government owns is above timberline. I would say a]the bulk of that land comes from various wilderness areas in the west and then the massive uninhabited regions of Alaska.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom