[Enchante]

"The solution is NOT to say someone can’t do something with their land, that includes the transfer of it."

Agreed, but that has nothing to do with anything I've said. I have never questioned the right of the owner to dispose of her property as she sees fit. If she wants to lobby the govt to take it, that's her right. I have been questioning the wisdom of Obama to create a National Monument under these circumstances.

[fruser1]

I hear you, but complaining about a president doing what they have authority to do is like complaining the sun comes up in the east. The property owners could “bypass” the good people of Maine because of the existing federal authority.

As long as he actually has the authority to do it, he can. To declare a “monument” does not require congressional action. As with all gov power, it eventually gets abused. In this case, the only abuse is that not enough people, apparently, believe the property should be a monument.

I don’t think anything O does is wise. I look at this situation, shrug and say “this is what happens when you allow the gov to declare parks/monuments.”

I began posting on this because it looked like folks were complaining as much about the exercise of property rights as about the feds. I stepped up to defend property rights.