Disgusted

#16
You are not a conservation-minded conservative. Let's get that straight right away. No conservation-minded person would for a second consider that this project is a good idea, but you do. There are times, and places, for development. This is, beyond argument, not that place.
He didn't say he would consider this project as a good idea
 
#23
Jamie, don't be an apologist for those who would strip mine the entire land. Those people always start out by saying, "but you have to compromise, and for the sake of development, allow us half of the land." Then when that's destroyed, they'll come back and say, "You have to compromise and allow us half of what's left." That's a sucker's play. Look at what's left of our forests. Look at the long-term damage it's caused to our rivers caused by overharvesting. That's what the end game is. This "development" doesn't help you or me, it helps those who already have all the money in the world get more.

Time to say "Enough, no more."
 

dekartes

Active Member
#25
Lot's of nutty stuff going on. These organizations should be impartial and should have an ethos and written philosophy that does not change dramatically, and is aligned with what they were created for. BLM should manage lands. EPA should make sure stupid things are not done. Department of the Interior should have the publics interest at heart. These standards, philosophies and working documents should not change dramatically from administration to administration. It makes sense to have the certain offices attached to the Executive branch - others not so much. How to fix? Attach to the Judicial branch instead?? Who knows.
 
#26

quilbilly

Big Time Hater
#27
People that are serious about 'overpopulation'
can take things into their own hands to 'make a difference', and actually lessen the problem.

Step up or shut up.....

'Overpopulation' is a joke, hard to take anyone seriously who points the finger at that as a 'big problem'.

:(
 

Latest posts