Posted on 02/07/2016 5:40:33 AM PST by rktman
If you enjoyed paying $1.59 a gallon for gas this past weekend, understand a few things. To the extent domestic production affects this, the oil industry is mostly gettings its resources on private lands. That's because Obama, while he's happy to take credit for the increased productivity and lower prices, is fighting new leases on federal lands wherever he can. That's how he can reassure his left-wing base he's an enemy of the oil industry while also taking credit for the low prices.
But there is some oil being extracted on federal lands, and if that stopped all at once, it would definitely have a significant and negative impact on prices. And according to Hillary Clinton, that's exactly what she would do if she became president:
blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
BREAKING: @HillaryClinton would impose a moratorium on fossil fuel extraction on federal lands #fitn pic.twitter.com/Tk3pCrnNeI
- 350 Action (@350action) February 5, 2016
(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...
“Course, very few States want to ‘rock the boat’, that might cut off the gravy train of $$ when the Fed gives ‘em the evil eye.”
Name me one state that has successfully had more than a few acres (out of millions of acres) returned to their control. So nothing has changed.
If nothing changes there is no solution. No answer.
If (big if) I remember correctly, the federal lands held in NV were part of the agreement for entry into statehood. I am sure I’ll be corrected if my recollection is wrong.
Cutting off supply helps our best friends in the whole world - the Saudis.
There is an answer that will work.
You are correct. However, Nevada voters should tell the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House to end the discrimination against Nevada and release the “unappropriated territory†to the management and ownership of their own state government. Other Western states should do the same. A Republican President with the House and the Senate should do it. [I don’t live there, BTW.]
If the commie b*tch is going to play this game, we need to get all “wind farms” and “solar farms” off of “public” land too. These hippy ideas are causing the death of too much wildlife and are horrible “eyesores”. They destroy the beauty of America.
Federal lands. The people's lands. In other words, OUR lands! Is it 1776 yet?
1776.
I seem to remember the issue with turning the land back over to the state to control, is that it costs money (?) to control these lands. Uh, how much does it cost to watch sage brush grow anyway? :>)
I wish that some of these candidates would propose just that! The land belongs to the States, not the government.
Are you suggesting any State HAS sued? Let alone on Constitutional grounds? I’m always willing to be educated, if so.
Point being they DON’T/WON’T.
Just as much as NO candidate talks up the Constitution (aside from lip service). They know, KNOW, if the People started *thinking* along those lines, the WHOLE house-of-cards some tumbling down.
No. I am not suggesting anything.
Me thinks you are not reading what I write. Sometimes happens with speed readers.
NO, I am not suggesting you are a speed reader. Simply a comment.
Complete tangent Rant begins:
No offense, but you point out exactly WHY I *loathe* the term ‘conservative’.
You bring up ‘free market conservatives’. Just how many camps does ‘conservative’ fall into? Doesn’t ‘conservative’ encompass ‘free market’s already?
If so, why the clarification?
If not, what DOES it encompass?
Can we NOT sound like the MSM, parsing every phrase and innuendo, looking for holes and ‘gotchas’? Compartmentalizing every person into tiny boxes that shift from speech to vote to ....
Just leave it as ‘Constitutionalist’ and be DONE! Adhere and follow, make it the basis of EVERY discussion/debate and use to return govt to its rightful size and purpose.
There is no wiggle room, no adjectives required. If it’s not being followed, one is not a “strict” Constitutionalist to begin.
Whom to vote would be a MUCH simpler endeavor, IMO.
/rant
***
Thanks. I’d rather start seeing REAL questions answered by the candidates. My #1:
How much of *ME* is owned to another? What %? How do you juxtapose that % is NOT ‘slavery’ (Def: Working for the benefit of another)?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.