If either of the two guys now leading the race for the republican nod get elected, how much does it matter to you that you'll have to spend the next at least 4 years fighting them back just to keep our public lands legacy and western hunting heritage real? It seems like hunting for those two is just the 2nd amendment, I dont think they see any connection between privatizing our national treasures and hunting . . . Is it enough that they support the 2nd? Isn't that a no brainer? Romney's the same guy, without a doubt who would sell the last mule deer buck to the guy with the most money cuz it would be what a businessman would do . . . Am I wrong? Who do I support?
Out West Who's our Candidate for Pres?
- Thread starter Finalshot
- Start date
DRAFTSTUD
Well-known member
Yes, I think you are wrong. Tell your Senators, Congressmen and the Canidates what you think about their and your stand on your Public Lands. Do you really think 4 years ago on the campain trail that Obama had a clue as to what Public Lands were? John
noharleyyet
Well-known member
That might be one of the scariest things I've read in a long time.
shoots-straight
Well-known member
Good point! I'm not sure any of them care.
I like the idea of telling the candidates how we feel about this issue. The difference between Obama and your example is that 4 years ago Obama's platform was not in your face rhetoric about selling off our public domain . . . These guys are running on this platform . . . choose a better example please . . .
DRAFTSTUD
Well-known member
Would you rather know what you are against or not know what needs to be done to maintain what you want to protect? John
DRAFTSTUD
Well-known member
OK, Now you know where they stand, you can do something about it. What did you know of Obama's platform about Public Lands? What would you rather have, a fact to work with or a hope and prayer he leaves everything alone until it's too late? John
monthunter
New member
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2010
- Messages
- 6
Typical republican response, always some sort of conspiracy theory. Let's turn this situation around. What if the democratic candidates came right out and said they want to take away your hunting guns. Would the republicans say we should vote for the democrats because all we would have to do is send them letters and tell them that we don't them to do that and they won't do it and we can't trust the republicans because they haven't said what they want to do with your guns. Of course not but that is exactly what draftstud wants you to believe. Democrats have always wanted to preserve out public lands, often to the chagrin of most republicans. If you think the national republicans will care about what a few hunters in the west want, well you better think again. This is the party that wants to drill baby drill and dig up every ounce of coal with little regard to the environment.
I look at it this way. I would rather fight with all the greenie organizations to protect public lands than fight against them to protect gun rights. How many organizations would fight to protect public lands from Romney but fight against gun rights with Obama. I can think of a few big ones.
DRAFTSTUD
Well-known member
Monthunter, I think what I said was get invovled in the process of assuring you Lands, Guns, ect.are protected. But, If the best arguement you can come up with is to vote Democrat, well that is as lame as they come. John
Finalshot - I think you were asking the right question. Who do I support?
That is tough. I think most of us who hunt public lands are worried as hell about the platforms the current people are running on. And not just what they are saying, but who they are getting their advice from.
Those advisors are always the ones who get the jobs at Secretary of Interior, Forest Service Chief, etc. What happens to those agencies when they are headed by people who are promoting the platforms we are currently hearing from these candidates? They get run into the ground and our interests are pawned off in the name of progress.
To your question, how much does it matter to me? A ton. It is my passion. It is something that hunters before my time fought like hell to create and preserve. It is not something I will let be used as the political barter system, without a fight.
Yet, I am a life member of the NRA. I own enough firearms that I could shoot a different one every day of the month. And with that, the NRA does not speak for me on hunting issues. 2nd Amendment issues, Yes, but not hunting issues.
I am glad to have guys raising the questions you have. Just falling into the party replies does no good for anyone. It politicizes what has always been an apolitical topic - conservation.
100 years ago, the same fights were happening as Theodore Roosevelt was fighting his own party to set aside vast tracts of public land. TR was a hunter more than he was a politician. Thank God for that.
Now, the same interests are back, greasing the political wheels. All the while, many of us on the right refuse to challenge them. We don't want to brake rank and violate what Ronald Reagan called the 11th Commandment - Thou Shall Not Speak Poorly of a Fellow Republican.
As much as I voted for Reagan and liked much of his presidency, I am a common violator of his 11th Commandment. I hope more Republicans will speak out agains the insanity of these positions.
The only hope to change those positions is if we whose vote they take for granted speak up and challenge these stupid ideaologies.
That is tough. I think most of us who hunt public lands are worried as hell about the platforms the current people are running on. And not just what they are saying, but who they are getting their advice from.
Those advisors are always the ones who get the jobs at Secretary of Interior, Forest Service Chief, etc. What happens to those agencies when they are headed by people who are promoting the platforms we are currently hearing from these candidates? They get run into the ground and our interests are pawned off in the name of progress.
To your question, how much does it matter to me? A ton. It is my passion. It is something that hunters before my time fought like hell to create and preserve. It is not something I will let be used as the political barter system, without a fight.
Yet, I am a life member of the NRA. I own enough firearms that I could shoot a different one every day of the month. And with that, the NRA does not speak for me on hunting issues. 2nd Amendment issues, Yes, but not hunting issues.
I am glad to have guys raising the questions you have. Just falling into the party replies does no good for anyone. It politicizes what has always been an apolitical topic - conservation.
100 years ago, the same fights were happening as Theodore Roosevelt was fighting his own party to set aside vast tracts of public land. TR was a hunter more than he was a politician. Thank God for that.
Now, the same interests are back, greasing the political wheels. All the while, many of us on the right refuse to challenge them. We don't want to brake rank and violate what Ronald Reagan called the 11th Commandment - Thou Shall Not Speak Poorly of a Fellow Republican.
As much as I voted for Reagan and liked much of his presidency, I am a common violator of his 11th Commandment. I hope more Republicans will speak out agains the insanity of these positions.
The only hope to change those positions is if we whose vote they take for granted speak up and challenge these stupid ideaologies.
For anyone that thinks for a second that this is not about our hunting heritage and the future of the north american hunting model, here it is in black and white, from Santorum today:
"If you are talking about if we are going to take federal lands in the extent we can and turn them over to private sector or turn them over to the state the answer is yes. I think this is an opportunity for us. We have way too much federal land . . ." Rick Santorum - Interview with USSA
I wonder if any of that federal land is connected to, or includes your honey hole?
Again from Santorm this time on CRP:
". . . I am not a fan of is CRP. I know a lot of CRP land is used for habitat but we shouldn’t be paying farmers not to farm. I mean if you want to use that money to pay farmers to keep habitat for pheasant, turkey, whatever…great, but I don’t think we should be using money that encourages farmers not to farm their land for environmental purposes. It’s not (CRP) as you know, it’s not intended for wildlife habitat. It was intended for runoff and all sorts of other things to preserve the ecology. I understand a lot of hunters and sportsmen actually feel very passionate about the CRP program. I don’t. Just being very up front with you. If you want to use the knowledge for that, that’s one thing but we shouldn’t use **ag (agriculture) dollars for that."
I wonder how Cablea's feels about this? Who shops at the "Walmart" for hunting and outdoor gear - JOE SIXPACK, the same guys who are public lands hunters - YOU and ME!
Here's the entire interview: http://www.ussportsmen.org/page.aspx?pid=3010
Just sayn . . .
"If you are talking about if we are going to take federal lands in the extent we can and turn them over to private sector or turn them over to the state the answer is yes. I think this is an opportunity for us. We have way too much federal land . . ." Rick Santorum - Interview with USSA
I wonder if any of that federal land is connected to, or includes your honey hole?
Again from Santorm this time on CRP:
". . . I am not a fan of is CRP. I know a lot of CRP land is used for habitat but we shouldn’t be paying farmers not to farm. I mean if you want to use that money to pay farmers to keep habitat for pheasant, turkey, whatever…great, but I don’t think we should be using money that encourages farmers not to farm their land for environmental purposes. It’s not (CRP) as you know, it’s not intended for wildlife habitat. It was intended for runoff and all sorts of other things to preserve the ecology. I understand a lot of hunters and sportsmen actually feel very passionate about the CRP program. I don’t. Just being very up front with you. If you want to use the knowledge for that, that’s one thing but we shouldn’t use **ag (agriculture) dollars for that."
I wonder how Cablea's feels about this? Who shops at the "Walmart" for hunting and outdoor gear - JOE SIXPACK, the same guys who are public lands hunters - YOU and ME!
Here's the entire interview: http://www.ussportsmen.org/page.aspx?pid=3010
Just sayn . . .
Jon Boy
Member
Santorums said that before. He wont get my vote. Having said that he probably wont get the nomination any ways, romney will. And if he were to get the nomination he would not get elected. The media would tear him to shreds and portray him as a religious nut, I halfheartedly agree with that.
So what is romneys position on public lands and hunting? Havnt heard much about that.
So what is romneys position on public lands and hunting? Havnt heard much about that.
BuzzH
Well-known member
He (Romney) "hunts" with Don Peay...enough said.
putm2sleep
New member
I hate politics. I do not see there being much hope, only more bad change.........., but if I were to have hope, or there was an 'only hope' of mine, it's this : that we all get our heads out of our collective a$$'s and find the next Theodore R - and quick!!!!
It would be real nice to support a fantastic leader. Vote for nice, clean, happy bills, positive and appropriate laws, land saving/ conservation minded acts. There are none. NONE!
It would be real nice to support a fantastic leader. Vote for nice, clean, happy bills, positive and appropriate laws, land saving/ conservation minded acts. There are none. NONE!
belly-deep
Active member
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2009
- Messages
- 3,459
We can do a lot of worrying over platforms, but what is really implemented and what is ran on as a platform are two different things.
For example, Obama ran on platforms such as:
Closing Gitmo
Anti-war
Securing nuclear weapons from rogue states
Constitutional protections for civil liberties
Transparency in government
He also criticized Bush for extending the debt ceiling when he was a senator
And yet, today:
Gitmo is still open
We're still fighting in Afghanistan and we entered into conflict in Libya
Iran is going nuclear
The Patriot Act and similar infringements on civil liberties have not only been upheld, but they have been expanded
The Justice Dept. has not been forthcoming on issues such as sending assault rifles to Mexico
Obama is continually pushing for extending the debt ceiling.
Point being, candidates usually don't live up to their claims (thankfully in most cases). Also, the government's structure does not allow for very much unilateral action.
But both parties love to prey on people's fears about what may happen if candidate XYZ is elected. IMO, choices in politics are often based on which irrational fear scares a particular voter the most.
Last edited:
"If you think the national republicans will care about what a few hunters in the west want, well you better think again. This is the party that wants to drill baby drill and dig up every ounce of coal with little regard to the environment."
so according to you, we should vote for someone, or not vote for someone, because of ONE issue? and why should we "drill baby drill" when we could all be paying $5 or more for gas/fuel? as far as coal mining. the coal companies do more for the environment with reclamation projects after they get done than any governemnt agency. that is based on what they do here. and have to say, all those wind turbines popping up all over the place are so attractive. and they take up so little space. and do not disturb any wildlife areas.
sorry, before I cast a ballot, will know what I can about ALL the issues, or as many as I can find out about, before voting. I do not, and will not, vote for someone who wants to FORCE the american citizens to buy something while giving it away for free to illegals.
so according to you, we should vote for someone, or not vote for someone, because of ONE issue? and why should we "drill baby drill" when we could all be paying $5 or more for gas/fuel? as far as coal mining. the coal companies do more for the environment with reclamation projects after they get done than any governemnt agency. that is based on what they do here. and have to say, all those wind turbines popping up all over the place are so attractive. and they take up so little space. and do not disturb any wildlife areas.
sorry, before I cast a ballot, will know what I can about ALL the issues, or as many as I can find out about, before voting. I do not, and will not, vote for someone who wants to FORCE the american citizens to buy something while giving it away for free to illegals.
MNHunter
Well-known member
I didn't vote for Obama the first time but against Romney or Santorum, Barry gets my vote (not that he'll need it against those two).
Without public lands, hunting as we know it will cease. To me public lands are as important as the 2nd.
Without public lands, hunting as we know it will cease. To me public lands are as important as the 2nd.
Jon Boy
Member
Well that was a "buzz" kill. I have no idea what im going to do come election day. I cant feel right about voting for either one if that is the case.
Do we have a candidate in this race or not?
1. who is running that understands our needs and will carry our ball?
I'm willing to help educate them if they will listen and if they care. Any chance that anyone has access to Santorum or Romney's people? I'd like to hear the candidates discuss the North American Land and Wildlife model. I want to know that they understand me before I give them my support. It is not enough for me to hear that they support the second amendment, that to me is a no brainer. I need to know they understand what's at risk for the future of our country when it comes to our public lands, public wildlife and hunting heritage . . . If their answers are, "sell off the public domain to pay our debt," I dont think I can support that position . . .
Where does that leave me? Where does that leave us? Do we have a candidate in this race or not?
1. who is running that understands our needs and will carry our ball?
I'm willing to help educate them if they will listen and if they care. Any chance that anyone has access to Santorum or Romney's people? I'd like to hear the candidates discuss the North American Land and Wildlife model. I want to know that they understand me before I give them my support. It is not enough for me to hear that they support the second amendment, that to me is a no brainer. I need to know they understand what's at risk for the future of our country when it comes to our public lands, public wildlife and hunting heritage . . . If their answers are, "sell off the public domain to pay our debt," I dont think I can support that position . . .
Where does that leave me? Where does that leave us? Do we have a candidate in this race or not?
