Wind farms provide tax incentives and blight.
Posted on 02/22/2016 10:25:45 AM PST by magellan
Real estate mogul Donald Trump would not let states take control of federal lands, the Republican presidential candidate said in a recent interview.
"I don't like the idea because I want to keep the lands great, and you don't know what the state is going to do," Trump said during a talk with Field & Stream magazine earlier this week.
The trade publication, sitting down with Trump at Las Vegas' Shooting, Hunting, and Outdoor Trade Show, had asked about the issue of turning over federally controlled lands to individual states -- an idea previously floated by rival 2016 contender and Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul and supported by staunch states-rights activists.
The proposal has also received more attention in light of recent actions by radical conservatives like Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy and his son Ammon Bundy, who led an armed group earlier this month in occupying a national wildlife refuge in Oregon to protest federal land use policies.
Trump cautioned, however, that states would be unpredictable in maintaining the designated lands.
"I mean, are they going to sell if they get into a little bit of trouble?" Trump asked. "I don't think it's something that should be sold."
He added: "We have to be great stewards of this land. This is magnificent land. And we have to be great stewards of this land."
The billionaire businessman suggested later in the interview that while he was a fan of oil and gas companies drilling and fracking on federal lands, protecting the earth should still be a top priority.
"I'm very much into energy, and I'm very much into fracking and drilling, and we never want to be hostage again to OPEC and go back to where we were. And right now, we're at a very interesting point because right now there's so much energy," Trump said. "And maybe that's an advantage and maybe--actually, it's more of an advantage in terms of your question because we don't have to do the kind of drilling that we did."
"I am for energy exploration, as long as we don't do anything to damage the land. And right now we don't need too much -- there's a lot of energy," he said.
The system is designed to prevent one man from being able to exercise the power to do everything Trump promises. In order for Trump to succeed, the system will have to be compromised.
That's impossible...
The constitution, or political philosophy of any kind in not in the Donald's wheel house.
You simply have to believe that he will do it better than anyone....lol
Exactly correct! The current state of damage under our current Dear Leader would have to be exploited even further.
There is no question about it.
Thank you,
My DH and I were doing some searching and now I see you have already posted information.
There is a huge problem with States (mostly Dem ones) Trying to take over peoples property. WE had that happening to us a few years ago. county tried to take are RIGHT TO BUILD on an acre of land with bogus reasons. THANK the community uprising that stopped that garbage.
But we are now seeing the State cutting forests and planing GRASS for CATTLE, who cares about the Elk and Deer!
SOOOO People like HARRY REID who try to TAKE our personal land from us. are our enemies.
Now we have been looking at what is going on with OUR parks and a DEM president CLINTON...
Sooo who is good? Feds? States?
WE ARE! THE PEOPLE!
On that, I can agree with you.
The reason: We have lost TOTAL FAITH with the rest of the options. I would vote for Cruz, but the guy has absolutely ZERO in accomplishments, and no proven ability to get anything done at an executive level, let alone negotiate trade deals.
So, in other words, we need Trump to protect us from people like Trump?
It is not what the see in him so much, as it is what they have seen in the others.
In total disagreement with Trump on this, except for this...
China buying the Chicago Stock Exchange...http://money.cnn.com/2016/02/05/investing/china-buys-chicago-stock-exchange/index.html
Chinese buying up farm land all over the US...http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/06/18/missouri-smithfield-china/2434847/
Chinese buying up energy companies
http://www.dallasnews.com/business/energy/20151026-chinese-investment-company-to-buy-west-texas-oil-fields-for-1.3b.ece
How about the Chinese buying up Idaho
http://www.examiner.com/article/idaho-is-for-sale-and-china-is-buying
Someone I know does sales and marketing for online/print media that caters to the folks that can afford to buy the huge ranches and farms out west. Stuff that goes for 10-20 million or more. Talks to brokers out west all day, everyday trying to get them to advertise on websites and in magazines. One of the guys, has kind of cornered the market in that, all he sells to are Chinese folks and corporations.
Apparently all the stuff with the Bundy’s and the people in Oregon has more to do with the minerals in the ground than cows eating grass. If so, unfortunately we’re all victims of a corrupt president and former SecState that had no problem selling off that stuff to the Russians.
I doubt Trump would be allowing the sale of anything, to any foreign government or company. Just me thinking here.
So, maybe he’s a step ahead of the game compared to everyone else....again. Just a thought.
Well, yeah. Nobody else is.
The democrats could never find a judge that would do that. </s>
I completely disagree. Trump quickly understood after some remedial instruction that the 14th Amendment in way confers citizenship at birth if the parents are aliens in the country illegally. How many political “lifers” know that? Rubio doesn’t WANT TO KNOW.
You might consider that they likely have different agendas but it is easier to slam the guy by saying they are exactly alike.
Why would they buy something that is already free?
If you think that either Cruz or Rubio would have any informed concept of what’s involved here, I’ll bet you’d lose.
Having been a USDA employee in my younger days, I can say that there are small, disjunct parcels that have been acquired over time that would be better off sold or transferred.
As far as the massive amount being majorly MIS-managed by the various agencies of Big government, were there to be a stipulation that the land remain as is or a certain percentage, not built on, I can’t think of too many that couldn’t do a better job.
Actually not. But save this issue for later.
Hate mail?
We removed your post because it’s an internet hoax that’s been spread via email, various comments sections and blogs beginning sometime last year:
http://www.snopes.com/bill-bennett-donald-trump-quote/
Wind farms provide tax incentives and blight.
Hardly. But FR used to be a place that had a line below the "Post" button that said,
"Please: NO profanity, NO personal attacks, NO racism or violence in posts."
Hmmm.... It still does!
And, your #160 comes perilously close to violating both.
You're no noob; you should know how to behave better than that.
A state can play just as many games with grazing, water and extraction rights as the feds do.
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.