Land Sale bills introduced by Utah Legislators

Mike7

WKR
Joined
Feb 28, 2012
Messages
1,305
Location
Northern Idaho
I really like the cut of your jib 5MilesBack as Dennis Miller would say, but I think you do a disservice to progressives when referring to them as liberals. The vast majority are not for liberty in any way, but rather for segregation, religious intolerance, and special rights & political correctness to the detriment of others...and for a general progressive march toward socialism. When they don't have the facts or a good argument on their side, then you are an unreasonable, non-compromising, racist, homophobic, gun-toting dummy.

The media has trained many in the current generation and my generation before them, with their constant spin on things, that most conservatives are intolerant. I can't speak for everyone else, but I find that couldn't be further from the truth for me and the people I am friends with. I can simultaneously show compassion and take care of an illegal immigrant (for which I have done many times and while working for free in doing this), but I still want the border completely shut down with a double fence, guards with shoot to kill orders if commands are not obeyed after the first fence is crossed, etc. This is my view because I feel that I understand the bigger picture which includes the necessity for immigration control, border security (drugs, terrorists, etc), the social & cultural issues assoc with destitute people who come across the border with no plans to ever become "Americans", etc. In my plan only drug smugglers would ever attempt to get across the border and would be shot. Anybody else would come through border crossings and meet certain criteria and be monitored. In this way, good Mexican families/workers would not die getting smuggled across the desert by coyotes, get sold into slavery, have non-English speaking kids left at home who become gang members here in the U.S., end up getting mixed in with violent criminals who come to U.S sanctuary cities and rape and kill people while being protected by out gov't, etc.

As a conservative, I can be for preventing people who have been involutarily comitted to a mental unit from getting weapons by placing them on the Instant Background Check System (something historically fought by "liberals" by the way while on the other hand they had no problem assuming virtually every returning service member was insane because many had some expected traumatic stress reaction), and still not be for gun registration and confiscation. By the way, I was in the military taking care of service members and saw how this one came down, so I can't be BS'd on this one. Sometimes the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and sometime a progressive or gov't bureaucrat just tries in an intentional fashion to take away rights because that is their ideology.

As a conservative, I can be for many people being able to legally carry a weapon on campuses, since anyone can carry a weapon illegally at virtually any time on campus. The security if present at all at most schools is a joke, yet progressives cling to gun free zones which don't work...well not unless everyone has to go through a check point and be searched.

As a conservative, I can be for gay people doing whatever they want (I don't treat them any different than anyone else). But I also don't think that gay activists should be able to make a religious couple make cakes that have two men on top or make them attend/promote their wedding if that couple doesn't want to. If a gay couple wants to come into the religious couple's store and buy a cake with the usual man and woman on top, then great.

The list goes on and on, but I think you see what I am getting at. Be consistent, promote liberty, be an American. There are plenty of progressive countries around the world that a person could otherwise visit for prolonged stays if they want to. Lol.
 

Mike7

WKR
Joined
Feb 28, 2012
Messages
1,305
Location
Northern Idaho
NV. 2,062,000 126,200 6%

I would hardly call 2 million acres a small amount of PUBLIC LAND.

Thank god the Feds own the rest or Nevada would look like an eastern state.

There is not a single example I can think of that land transfer to the state would benefit wildlife much less hunters.
States have much smaller budgets and have much less experience managing for multiple use.

I think that I have read more about land exchanges as opposed to transfers potentially helping wildlife (see Southern Nevada Coalition for Wildlife). I am not saying that the state would keep the land public, and so this is an area of concern when considering any of these proposals, but it is also relavent I would think, to take a look at the history of transfers. Is there not the potential for some land transfers that will have little impact on wildlife? Also, would Nevada have been developed at all, if not for the railroad using land?...the state can't certainly develop railroads, mines, and casinos.
 

woods89

WKR
Joined
Sep 3, 2014
Messages
1,820
Location
Southern MO Ozarks
Uhhhhh.......no, that would be the opposite of the "gay propagandist".
Yup.

I actually have pretty conservative values on those kind of issues. I'd love to see a traditional family unit for every kid in the world. But that doesn't mean I like it when people lack basic respect. It also doesn't mean that I don't appreciate it when someone can work across a wide range of people to change things for the better.

I'm done here in this thread. This discussion is getting a little off track and I apologize to the OP where my comments have contributed. A great Sunday afternoon to all.
 

2ski

WKR
Joined
Jul 17, 2012
Messages
1,777
Location
Bozeman
I really like the cut of your jib 5MilesBack as Dennis Miller would say, but I think you do a disservice to progressives when referring to them as liberals. The vast majority are not for liberty in any way, but rather for segregation, religious intolerance, and special rights & political correctness to the detriment of others...and for a general progressive march toward socialism. When they don't have the facts or a good argument on their side, then you are an unreasonable, non-compromising, racist, homophobic, gun-toting dummy.

The media has trained many in the current generation and my generation before them, with their constant spin on things, that most conservatives are intolerant. I can't speak for everyone else, but I find that couldn't be further from the truth for me and the people I am friends with. I can simultaneously show compassion and take care of an illegal immigrant (for which I have done many times and while working for free in doing this), but I still want the border completely shut down with a double fence, guards with shoot to kill orders if commands are not obeyed after the first fence is crossed, etc. This is my view because I feel that I understand the bigger picture which includes the necessity for immigration control, border security (drugs, terrorists, etc), the social & cultural issues assoc with destitute people who come across the border with no plans to ever become "Americans", etc. In my plan only drug smugglers would ever attempt to get across the border and would be shot. Anybody else would come through border crossings and meet certain criteria and be monitored. In this way, good Mexican families/workers would not die getting smuggled across the desert by coyotes, get sold into slavery, have non-English speaking kids left at home who become gang members here in the U.S., end up getting mixed in with violent criminals who come to U.S sanctuary cities and rape and kill people while being protected by out gov't, etc.

As a conservative, I can be for preventing people who have been involutarily comitted to a mental unit from getting weapons by placing them on the Instant Background Check System (something historically fought by "liberals" by the way while on the other hand they had no problem assuming virtually every returning service member was insane because many had some expected traumatic stress reaction), and still not be for gun registration and confiscation. By the way, I was in the military taking care of service members and saw how this one came down, so I can't be BS'd on this one. Sometimes the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and sometime a progressive or gov't bureaucrat just tries in an intentional fashion to take away rights because that is their ideology.

As a conservative, I can be for many people being able to legally carry a weapon on campuses, since anyone can carry a weapon illegally at virtually any time on campus. The security if present at all at most schools is a joke, yet progressives cling to gun free zones which don't work...well not unless everyone has to go through a check point and be searched.

As a conservative, I can be for gay people doing whatever they want (I don't treat them any different than anyone else). But I also don't think that gay activists should be able to make a religious couple make cakes that have two men on top or make them attend/promote their wedding if that couple doesn't want to. If a gay couple wants to come into the religious couple's store and buy a cake with the usual man and woman on top, then great.

The list goes on and on, but I think you see what I am getting at. Be consistent, promote liberty, be an American. There are plenty of progressive countries around the world that a person could otherwise visit for prolonged stays if they want to. Lol.

Your last line can be interpreted as, "if you don't like my way of thinking, you should move to another country because my way is the right way". Am I getting that right? If I'm not tell me what you mean.

And the rest of your post paint some really broad strokes as far as defining what the "vast majority" of progressives believe. When a person does that, they immediately put the person they are debating on a defensive tilt, making constructive discourse harder to maintain.
 
Joined
Apr 6, 2015
Messages
514
I think the most important issue of our time is the school lunch program. I am not voting for anyone that doesn't vow to remove the burdensome requirements of Michelle's school lunch program. What is Bernie's stance on the school lunch program? Obviously....free lunch for everyone but are we talking hummus or pizza?
 
Joined
Apr 14, 2014
Messages
1,067
Location
Helena, MT
I think the most important issue of our time is the school lunch program. I am not voting for anyone that doesn't vow to remove the burdensome requirements of Michelle's school lunch program. What is Bernie's stance on the school lunch program? Obviously....free lunch for everyone but are we talking hummus or pizza?

Why not hummus pizza?

Pretty sure free school lunch for low income families is socialism. Those kids should just quit school and get a job but FDR's child labor laws are impeding progress.
 
Joined
Apr 6, 2015
Messages
514
Why not hummus pizza?

Pretty sure free school lunch for low income families is socialism. Those kids should just quit school and get a job but FDR's child labor laws are impeding progress.

Actually I am more concerned about the menu. Mooch has all the kids eating cardboard and grass. If you don't comply....you lose funding.

I was hoping that Bernie would come in and actually put some tasty food on the menu. I just mentioned the fact it would be free for everyone but in reality it was like saying the sky is blue. Heck it is already free to everyone who lives in a low income areas...even during the summer. It doesn't matter if you make $250,000K a year, if you live in a low income area your kids eat for free and you can't pay for it if you want.
 
Joined
Jul 30, 2013
Messages
3,428
Actually I am more concerned about the menu. Mooch has all the kids eating cardboard and grass. If you don't comply....you lose funding.

I was hoping that Bernie would come in and actually put some tasty food on the menu. I just mentioned the fact it would be free for everyone but in reality it was like saying the sky is blue. Heck it is already free to everyone who lives in a low income areas...even during the summer. It doesn't matter if you make $250,000K a year, if you live in a low income area your kids eat for free and you can't pay for it if you want.

You can bring your own lunch....
And I'm pretty sure people making 250k are not going to live in a low income area.
 

5MilesBack

"DADDY"
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
16,146
Location
Colorado Springs
If you actually had anything to add to the discussion of land sales then maybe I might feel different, but all I see is you deflecting the topic and spring boarding it into other talking points.

So I was right......you just pick and choose who to attack, and give everyone else a free pass that brings up subjects like the 2A, and perceived hatred. But when "I" respond to those subjects.....you pounce. No problem, I get it. I was just making sure you got it.
 

5MilesBack

"DADDY"
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
16,146
Location
Colorado Springs
You can bring your own lunch....
And I'm pretty sure people making 250k are not going to live in a low income area.

Do you think I should respond to this "off-topic" response??????;) Hypocrisy hurts. As much as I love to watch a derailment, probably time to shut this train wreck down.
 
Joined
Apr 6, 2015
Messages
514
You can bring your own lunch....
And I'm pretty sure people making 250k are not going to live in a low income area.

My kids take their lunch.

They go to school with children who's parents are doctors, lawyers and businessmen with plenty of money. They can't pay for their lunch either. It is based on the school and almost every school in our county is free lunch. The whole school. They don't have books but everyone gets free lunch. :)

I won't redirect this thread anymore.
 

Trial153

WKR
Joined
Oct 28, 2014
Messages
8,225
Location
NY
My delusional what?

I do find it slightly amusing though that when reality is presented to the masses, that the responses are always the same. Very similar to Donald's "Liar, liar, pants on fire". It's hard to argue against truth and reality.


Your delusional thinking one side has a monopoly on solutions, and even more so solutions are always rooted in a person's ideology.
 

5MilesBack

"DADDY"
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
16,146
Location
Colorado Springs
Your delusional thinking one side has a monopoly on solutions, and even more so solutions are always rooted in a person's ideology.

Solutions "should" be rooted in reason and logic. That's why so many solutions fail the test. Too many people being sold a bill of goods that fails. But they can't see past the "sell". Just follow the logic.......follow the logic. Logic is never delusional except to the illogical. There are only two sides.....logical and illogical. You pick, but ignore the propaganda and "choose wisely".

And by the way.......it would never be logical to attach one's self to only one issue, and ignore anything and everything else.
 
Last edited:
OP
Matt Cashell

Matt Cashell

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
4,570
Location
Western MT
Well, I take my earlier post post. This has subsequently devolved into partisan bickering and name calling.

This thread started with actual bills filed to sell off federal lands. Later I supplemented it with actual legislation to "transfer" federal land to a state. I did this to show actions that will directly affect western hunters regardless of their politics, hoping to illustrate the common ground among us.

Instead of putting differences aside and uniting against this terrible pursuit, posters have repeatedly deflected the conversation to other topics:

1. 2nd amendment infringements.
2. Birkenstocks.
3. Liberals hate freedom.
4. Gun grab!
5. Personal attacks.
6. Baking and number of grooms on cake.
7. Michael Bloomberg?
8. FDR.
9. Ambiguous hints towards New World Order conspiracy.
10. The word "liberal" sounds too much like "liberty."
11. Conservatives are intolerant.
12. School lunches !!!!????

WTH?

We have common ground here as hunters. Let's make use of it.

I have found myself aligned on this issue with people that I fervently disagree with on other issues. Perhaps I am naive, but I see that as a good thing.

Speak up in opposition to land sales and transfer.
 

5MilesBack

"DADDY"
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
16,146
Location
Colorado Springs
Speak up in opposition to land sales and transfer.

Ok, I could be "against" them.........or I could be "for" them depending on the circumstances. I won't ever make a blanket statement about them however, as that wouldn't be prudent without doing all the due diligence specific to each one. But most of all, see my last sentence in my post above.......#154.
 
OP
Matt Cashell

Matt Cashell

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
4,570
Location
Western MT
But most of all, see my last sentence in my post above.......#154.

I am not asking you to do that, 5MB. I am asking you to speak up in opposition to specific legislation that I have linked to in this thread, and others like it. Speaking up on those would not require you compromise your values, or give in to the left. I have said that this issue is the most important to me in this election cycle, but that is a far cry from saying it is the only issue I will consider.

Mike7 has said he would not oppose some small transfers in some situations. I am not going to oppose that with a blanket statement either. However, I have not seen any legislation proposed remotely like that. The proposed legislation is like those I have linked, and certainly puts our public lands in danger.
 
Joined
Jul 30, 2013
Messages
3,428
So I was right......you just pick and choose who to attack, and give everyone else a free pass that brings up subjects like the 2A, and perceived hatred. But when "I" respond to those subjects.....you pounce. No problem, I get it. I was just making sure you got it.

I think we all got it at this point. I don't give everyone else a free pass, most other comments are not as ridiculous and hypocritical as yours have been. Your either being obtuse for the sake of being, or just blissfully ignorant, I'm not sure which.

You better not vote for any candidate, because that would be a "compromise" from your point of view. And remember "true" conservatives never compromise.

It should be an important issue to all outdoorsman, if not you may enjoy all your guns and "freedoms" from inside your home, because there may be nowhere else to go..
 

dotman

WKR
Joined
Feb 24, 2012
Messages
8,200
Well, I take my earlier post post. This has subsequently devolved into partisan bickering and name calling.

This thread started with actual bills filed to sell off federal lands. Later I supplemented it with actual legislation to "transfer" federal land to a state. I did this to show actions that will directly affect western hunters regardless of their politics, hoping to illustrate the common ground among us.

Instead of putting differences aside and uniting against this terrible pursuit, posters have repeatedly deflected the conversation to other topics:

1. 2nd amendment infringements.
2. Birkenstocks.
3. Liberals hate freedom.
4. Gun grab!
5. Personal attacks.
6. Baking and number of grooms on cake.
7. Michael Bloomberg?
8. FDR.
9. Ambiguous hints towards New World Order conspiracy.
10. The word "liberal" sounds too much like "liberty."
11. Conservatives are intolerant.
12. School lunches !!!!????

WTH?

We have common ground here as hunters. Let's make use of it.

I have found myself aligned on this issue with people that I fervently disagree with on other issues. Perhaps I am naive, but I see that as a good thing.

Speak up in opposition to land sales and transfer.

Haha, ah this cracked me up.
 

dotman

WKR
Joined
Feb 24, 2012
Messages
8,200
Ok, I could be "against" them.........or I could be "for" them depending on the circumstances. I won't ever make a blanket statement about them however, as that wouldn't be prudent without doing all the due diligence specific to each one. But most of all, see my last sentence in my post above.......#154.

Problem is, with our government you don't have that option to pick and choose, it is all lumped into an all or nothing rider on a bill.
 
Top