Ted Cruz - Selling of Federal Land(s)

[Straight Arrow]

Do you disagree?

Yes.

The record shows the rhetoric from the democrats and you the republican have been contrary to what he said.[/QUOTE No bic ... means what?!!

 

[BuzzH]

Odin,

Answer the question, the politicians that are pushing the idea of transferring/selling Federal lands, what party are they ALL affiliated with?

Yeah, I know, that will be a painful answer too.

 

[bobbydean]

I am opposed to the transfer of Federal Lands.

I am amazed of Buzz's knowledge on this subject.

I do not think the Republicans or the Democrats have a viable candidate at this point. I am looking for the unknown Republican candidate.

I am a Republican and cannot vote for Trump!

 

[Odin]

Odin,

Answer the question, the politicians that are pushing the idea of transferring/selling Federal lands, what party are they ALL affiliated with?

Yeah, I know, that will be a painful answer too.

Buzz,

They are Republicans from a few States.

When did Boehner say he was going to sell or transfer land?

 

[Odin]

Yes.

Why do you think the Federal Government can not buy land?

 

[tjones]

Question Odin, did you use to go by the screen name BigRack?

Well?

 

[BuzzH]

Buzz,

They are Republicans from a few States.

When did Boehner say he was going to sell or transfer land?

A "few" states?

Laffin'...

 

[Odin]

A "few" states?

Laffin'...

Ok, How many States?

Please list them while you are at it.

 

[BuzzH]

Odin,

How about 51 senators...out of 100?

More than a "few"...don't you think?

U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski’s (R-AK) amendment, which passed by a vote of 51 to 49, is now part of the Senate’s nonbinding budget resolution. The proposal would support and fund state efforts — which many argue are unconstitutional — to seize and sell America’s public lands. These include all national forests, wildlife refuges, wilderness areas, historic sites, and national monuments.

 

[Odin]

Odin,

How about 51 senators...out of 100?

More than a "few"...don't you think?

U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski’s (R-AK) amendment, which passed by a vote of 51 to 49, is now part of the Senate’s nonbinding budget resolution. The proposal would support and fund state efforts — which many argue are unconstitutional — to seize and sell America’s public lands. These include all national forests, wildlife refuges, wilderness areas, historic sites, and national monuments.

That bill did nothing. What lands did that bill transfer or sell?

 

[Odin]

Buzz,

Did that pass the House?

 

[Odin]

What does non-binding mean?

Sounds like it doesn't mean a thing.

 

[JWP58]

I'm sorry but as much as I love hunting, there are much bigger issues at stake. That's a reality that most here won't acknowledge.

If I had to choose between a land sell off or unadulterated socialism (carbon taxes, wealth redistribution, increasing people's dependency on government handouts)....guess I'll be looking for a lease.

It sucks, but sacrifices will have to made to save this country...from 18 trillion dollars worth of debt.

 

[BuzzH]

Odin,

Here are the votes:

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/L...ote_cfm.cfm?congress=114&session=1&vote=00106

Were you lying or simply pulling more "facts" from your arse, that only a "few" R's, from a "few" states are pushing the transfer/peddling of public lands?

Notice not a single D, or I, voted for that chit...amazing.

BTW, keep on track, the question was, "those that are pushing the transfer idea are from what political party"...not whether the bill passed, not whether the bill was killed in the house, etc.

 

[Odin]

Odin,

Here are the votes:

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/L...ote_cfm.cfm?congress=114&session=1&vote=00106

Were you lying or simply pulling more "facts" from your arse, that only a "few" R's, from a "few" states are pushing the transfer/peddling of public lands?

Notice not a single D voted for that chit...amazing.

Are you getting worked up about a non-binding resolution?

Remember when Obama lied?

This is why I am saying you are a political hack on here.

And you keep proving me right.

 

[Odin]

How many Republicans don't post on this website because of the way you treat them?

 

[BuzzH]

How many Republicans don't post on this website because of the way you treat them?

Jimmy crack corn...

BTW, like I said in a previous post, the R's are doing this to themselves. The way a Senator or Representative votes on these issues come with consequences. Ignoring the desires of your sportsmen/constituents that want to keep federal lands intact for future generations is going to bring harsh criticism, maybe even a trip to the unemployment line.

I've seen many Republicans losing faith in the R's over this land transfer issue...I don't blame them.

 

[RobG]

I'm sorry but as much as I love hunting, there are much bigger issues at stake. That's a reality that most here won't acknowledge.

If I had to choose between a land sell off or unadulterated socialism (carbon taxes, wealth redistribution, increasing people's dependency on government handouts)....guess I'll be looking for a lease.

It sucks, but sacrifices will have to made to save this country...from 18 trillion dollars worth of debt.

I'll acknowledge it . The problem with your logic is that the Rs spend just as much as the Ds. At least the Ds raise taxes to offset the spending...

 

[bigskyblueman]

It's either Big Rack , or his evil twin.

 

[JWP58]

I'll acknowledge it . The problem with your logic is that the Rs spend just as much as the Ds. At least the Ds raise taxes to offset the spending...

No doubt, but communism is not the answer. Look I'm well aware that any snake that makes it to D.C. is so corrupt they would sell their mom to make a buck..no matter what letter follows their name. I just can't endorse anyone that openly runs on a platform that is socialistic or bordering out right commie.

But hey welcome to amerika