Conservatives Angered by Environmental Provision [Bush pulls another Al Gore]

The Washington Times ^ | June 18, 2002 | Audrey Hudson and Amy Fagan

[callisto]

It was my plesaure!

But I'm still waiting for DoughtyOne to explain the "offsetting issues that substantially nullify" the items on my list. If it wasn't for his "member since" date I might believe that maybe he isn't a conservative.

[DoughtyOne]

I don't care what you think of my posts. I'm telling you what my opinion is of Bush. If you don't like what I say or how I say it, tough. I responded in a reasonable manner. I had begun to develop a response to you and decided it was a waste of time. You guys don't care about anything other than defending the indefensible. If I would have given you an extensive post you'd have dismissed it as easily as you did the comments I did make. The bottom line is that on this issue, the one of providing 50% taxe breaks to conservancy groups, Bush screwed up. Yep, big-time. Now, if you want to go spam all the threads on the topics you posted in your "wonder of wonders" list, go for it. This thread wasn't about those subjects.

[DoughtyOne]

Unfortunately, you won't have to imagine. He's going to show it to you in living color.

[Stultis]

Historically, when "green" groups purchase private land, they sell it to state or federal governments, which takes the property off tax rolls and hurts local economies, as well as costing the government money to sustain the property, Mr. Hardiman said.

Which drives up property taxes of homeowners, and of property owners, which drives up rents and leases of both apartments and commercial sites, which drives up prices, which drives up the cost of living. These effects of more and more land passing to the gubermint is what needs to be stressed to the sheeple.

[farmfriend]

Most of you were probably already pinged from other lists. This is just so no one gets missed.

[farmfriend]

No one is forcing anyone to sell their property to an environmental group, it is completely voluntary.

You are in serious need of some reading material if that is what you believe.

[sauropod]

re: post #111. Now, my friend, you see the battle some of us dinosaurs on FR have been waging for some time. Trying to mobilize conservatives to be more of a force for protecting land rights.

For it is from property rights do all others flow. 'Pod

[blackie]

Cool !!

Freedom Is Worth Fighting For !!

Molon Labe !!

[ravingnutter]

Oh please...that's as bad as Doughty who tried to compare Klamath to this case, which is so far off base I did not bother to answer him. Yes, there have been some federal land grabs made that were unethical, but to say that giving tax credits to a property owner IF they CHOOSE to sell their property to a environmentalist is a land grab is ludicrous.

Well folks, I gotta go for the day, will catch up with y'all tommorrow. In the meantime, maybe someone can point out to me where this particular proposal is a land grab, I just don't see it that way.

[DoughtyOne]

That's why I am against the environmentalists, the Heritage River's act, the United Nations Biospheres Preserves, natures conservancies and many other PC puke programs and initiatives. Land rights are the most important rights. I too believe that all other rights flow from them, or are ultimately contingent on them.

[DoughtyOne]

I just wanted to express how crushed I am that ravinglunatic didn't like my comments. < /sarcasm > Some of these idiots couldn't find their a with both hands.

[be-baw]

screw Bush--

screw the Republican Party

I'm taking my support elsewhere...

[Washington_minuteman]

Oh boy. Thanks for the ping on this (I think).

"Historically, when "green" groups purchase private land, they sell it to state or federal governments, which takes the property off tax rolls and hurts local economies, as well as costing the government money to sustain the property, Mr. Hardiman said."

They are "floating" this in N. Idaho now, concerning the Rathdurm Prairie, near Post Falls.

A great way to drive people out of the rural communities and into the cities, and people are falling for it, hook, line and sinker.

[farmfriend]

Some of these idiots couldn't find their a with both hands.

Too busy hugging those trees don't you know.

[DoughtyOne]

Exactly right. These are basicly fascist groups. Once the people are off that land, they'll never be allowed back on it. Yes there was no movement at the point of a gun, but if these people didn't sell out in time, I believe that would come.

[Jhoffa_]

Damn, I guess we are not just going to buy the Senate..

I guess we are going to gild it too!

[DoughtyOne]

Sometimes I think they're in the basement of the White House hugging each other. Oh well. You take care.

[Jhoffa_]

Sometimes I think they're in the basement of the White House hugging each other.

I sometimes wonder if both sides got together and decided what Conservative issues not to make progress on!

[Black Agnes]

Alternatively, there is much mutual agreement on a few issues whether for extreme capitalistic gain, or final implementation of socialistic ideals. They do the same things but for different reasons. Ultimately the little peasants are screwed.

[Jhoffa_]

Exactly.. IE: China Trade and Immigration are perfect examples of this.

If those were important issues to you last election.. then you were effectively screwed because they weren't even on the table.