Who in the Senate do you trust on public land issues? "Bipartisan Caucus."

I like a lot of Zinke's talking points, but then he goes off on "access", which is code for more roads. I get it, but also, if we make it so you can drive to every square inch of public land, there will be a lot fewer places for animals to live (plenty of studies showing how elk generally avoid trails, much less roads, nevermind sheep and goats, and never ever mind those of us that like a little peace and quiet once in a while). Everyone who wants roads where there currently aren't roads doesn't seem to understand that once there are roads everywhere, the entire public domain will be trashed.
rhetorical question -> Why do they covet the roadless areas?
 
Mark Kelly. Simply because he’s the only one who seems to be objective and honest when I see him speak. I believe he is one of the few who acts in good faith and honestly wants the best for all Americans.
It hurt my heart when he caved to the Marxist/leftists in his own party and apologized for quoting Winston Churchill.

If I’m a fighter pilot turned astronaut turned Senator why should I bend the knee to some overeducated barista turned social justice organizer/“abolitionist”.
 
It hurt my heart when he caved to the Marxist/leftists in his own party and apologized for quoting Winston Churchill.

If I’m a fighter pilot turned astronaut turned Senator why should I bend the knee to some overeducated barista turned social justice organizer/“abolitionist”.
Any worse than almost every R running around with permanent orange lips and worn out knee pads?
 
Any worse than almost every R running around with permanent orange lips and worn out knee pads?
As a general rule, powerful officials publicly groveling is a pretty gross look. I guess that is my point, I thought Kelly to be above the typical spineless DC political creature and wouldn’t be bullied by the woke mob. However, these two examples aren’t necessarily the same. One is a two-term sitting President with significant political power and the other a collection of gender/ethnic studies majors and political consultants who took a $1 billion campaign war chest and turned it into one of the greatest electoral disasters in DNC history.

I have likely taken this thread too far from the OP, an important topic, public lands advocacy.
 
I like a lot of Zinke's talking points, but then he goes off on "access", which is code for more roads. I get it, but also, if we make it so you can drive to every square inch of public land, there will be a lot fewer places for animals to live (plenty of studies showing how elk generally avoid trails, much less roads, nevermind sheep and goats, and never ever mind those of us that like a little peace and quiet once in a while). Everyone who wants roads where there currently aren't roads doesn't seem to understand that once there are roads everywhere, the entire public domain will be trashed.
rhetorical question -> Why do they covet the roadless areas?

Yep. Zinke on the somewhat recent meateater podcast was hard for me to listen to. Starts strong on his very firm line with public lands advocacy. Spirals quickly when he really pushes some fanciful spins and slippery slopes on Wilderness management and roadless rules.
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
117,379
Messages
2,155,294
Members
38,201
Latest member
3wcoupe
Back
Top