Skip to comments.
Obama Seeks to Name Potentially Oil-Rich Part of Alaska Protected 'Wilderness'
CNSNews ^
| January 25, 2015
| AP
Posted on 01/25/2015 11:20:14 AM PST by jazusamo
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-37 last
To: jazusamo
United Nations’ agent King Zero brings ‘Agenda 21’ a couple more steps FORWARD.
To: Kathy in Alaska
Obama Seeks to Name Potentially Oil-Rich Part of Alaska Protected ‘Wilderness’ -— PING!
22
posted on
01/25/2015 12:03:59 PM PST
by
SandRat
(Duty - Honor - Country! What else need s said?)
To: jazusamo
there needs to be a law that the government can not own more then 25% of a state. the government controls far to much of Alaska.
23
posted on
01/25/2015 12:10:11 PM PST
by
PCPOET7
(onated)
To: jazusamo
Won’t happen, His days of land grabs are over.
To: DesertRhino
“So the next president undoes the designation.”
Don’t count on it. The next president will be from a
choice of two candidates that were chosen for us.
There are only liberals and conservatives and right now
the liberals have a majority in both parties.
25
posted on
01/25/2015 12:16:11 PM PST
by
Slambat
To: PCPOET7
26
posted on
01/25/2015 12:26:34 PM PST
by
cableguymn
(We need a redneck in the white house....)
To: jazusamo
this country is being run by idiots
27
posted on
01/25/2015 12:31:26 PM PST
by
Mr. K
(Palin/Cruz 2016 (for 16 years of conservative bliss))
To: jazusamo
Obama will never stop trying to screw America while he is in office.........
28
posted on
01/25/2015 12:45:49 PM PST
by
SECURE AMERICA
(I am an American Not a Republican or a Democrat.)
To: jazusamo
Kenya’s destruction of the United States of America continues.
29
posted on
01/25/2015 12:56:12 PM PST
by
FlingWingFlyer
(When the hell do I get MY white privilege? I'm tired of busting my @$$ for a living.)
To: jazusamo
... designate more than 12 million acres as a wilderness area, including its potentially oil-rich Coastal Plain. I believe that the ultimate goal is not to protect the environment or produce "green" energy. The Libs want to control us. Most of America drives vehicles to get to where they need to go. The control freaks want to throttle that freedom.
30
posted on
01/25/2015 1:19:20 PM PST
by
VRW Conspirator
(American Jobs for American Workers)
To: jazusamo
"Obama Seeks to Name Potentially Oil-Rich Part of Alaska Protected 'Wilderness'"
Interesting suggestion. Extract the oil first, then if demRATs still want to turn the area into a protected wilderness, than it might be reconsidered. But they probably couldn't care less then.
To: jazusamo
He needs to raise gas prices. These cheap prices are his worst nightmare.
Pray America is waking
32
posted on
01/25/2015 1:35:15 PM PST
by
bray
(Palin/Cruz to the WH)
To: DesertRhino
As with the ANWR issue in Congress when Nancy Pelosi was the House Speaker, this is all just a con game that is being played out against the environmentalist lobby by the Obama administration.
The Federal government will declare some part of Alaska off-limits to oil/gas exploration.
Meanwhile, every energy giant in the world is investing tens of billions of dollars in offshore exploration in the Beaufort Sea and Arctic Ocean that is going to make the energy resources in ANWR completely irrelevant.
Obama will dislocate his shoulder while patting himself on the back.
The environmentalists will think they've won a great victory in Washington, and they won't know any better because 99% of them have probably never been within a thousand miles of ANWR anyway.
The energy sector drills like there's no tomorrow.
33
posted on
01/25/2015 1:38:20 PM PST
by
Alberta's Child
("It doesn't work for me. I gotta have more cowbell!")
To: jazusamo
I wonder if all of this blocking off land is being used as collateral for all of the debt we are issuing and they are just saying it is to protect the environment.
To: max americana
Perchance a strong wind would blow the dumbo eared boy king out to sea.
35
posted on
01/25/2015 3:35:26 PM PST
by
Big Red Badger
( - William Diamonds Drum - can You Hear it G man?)
To: cableguymn
I tend to agree with you. my mistake in being liberal with the land percentage on a conservative site. my personal feeling is to limit land ownership to military bases government buildings like Quart houses and legislative governing buildings. Unless federal land is being used it should be in state control. I look at federal control of land as a cancer on economic development.
36
posted on
01/25/2015 4:00:33 PM PST
by
PCPOET7
(onated)
To: jazusamo
37
posted on
01/25/2015 5:00:05 PM PST
by
Salvation
("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-37 last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson