kiss it bye bye

[lunkerslayer]

Thank you fritz much appreciated

 

[camper]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...S&cvid=1ce3ab1c93184070a686e58542e65ebe&ei=50

Interior Secretary Burgum answering questions.

He’s become an even bigger idiot. Shocking.

 

[double account removed]

i was worried at first when he said he aint gonna sell national parks glad he took that back at the end n put em back on the for sale list

 

[double account removed]

3 million acres of barren land all right next to highways in expanding cities is hard 2 believe but they wouldnt fib nope

 

[lunkerslayer]

^^^^So you are going to cower instead of answering a really simple question. That only figures as much because libatards don't like to choose something that doesn't fit their narrative.

 

[double account removed]

u said dont answer lunkerslayer have u been drinking

 

[lunkerslayer]

Nope didnt say that

 

[double account removed]

Ah now you get it, post #21 before you fade back to your basement, and dont answer

hmmm u been drinkin

 

[lunkerslayer]

hmmm u been drinkin

Read it again says you will cower to the basement and not answer

 

[double account removed]

hmmm well i get it punctuation is hard fer me too my answer if i were a nasty lib is your example dont make a lick of sense since yer comparin city zones n established infrastructure to wilderness but i dont expect you to comprehend that you got yer heels dug in and dont care if yer wrong hats off to ya brother

 

[Lycanthrope]

should the govt own huge tracts of land in the US? Im kinda thinking not, from a principled, small govt perspective.

 

[double account removed]

a lib might say that open spaces fer every red blooded yank to hunt fish camp hike shoot is more american than the europe system we broke away from where only risocrat landowners get to do those things but i wont say that cuz bill gates needs more land

 

[lunkerslayer]

hmmm well i get it punctuation is hard fer me too my answer if i were a nasty lib is your example dont make a lick of sense since yer comparin city zones n established infrastructure to wilderness but i dont expect you to comprehend that you got yer heels dug in and dont care if yer wrong hats off to ya brother

You are just small minded libatard cant grasp what is being discussed here, eminent domain has to do with any private land that the government needs to build public infrastructure. I never did expected anything else, you have proven my point that you are just a talking head infected with tobyism. Good day no need to respond because I won't see it.

 

[bigsky2]

This is a good listen if you want to be educated on what's being proposed.

 

[double account removed]

You are just small minded libatard cant grasp what is being discussed here, eminent domain has to do with any private land that the government needs to build public infrastructure. I never did expected anything else, you have proven my point that you are just a talking head infected with tobyism. Good day no need to respond because I won't see it.

i guess they must need to build a lot of critical infastructure all over the west n alaska must be some new cities poppin up in the wilderness soon that none of us plebes know about

 

[deleted user]

The idea of wanting to live in a place where you need to know someone who will give you permission or pay to enjoy the outdoors is so fucking weird.

 

[Ruttin]

https://cowboystatedaily.com/2025/0...-swaths-of-wyoming-public-lands-wont-be-sold/

 

[lunkerslayer]

Instead of buying land that's isnt already built for infrastructure, why doesn't the government revitalize our shrinking town? I know the answer and its part of the nwo to get our population out of these small towns, so they are easier to control.

 

[Allen]

If you listen to Dougy, he would like one to believe he's only interested in getting rid of parcels of land similar to this piece of ND State Trust Lands:

To be sure, this is a publicly owned piece of land that was targeted not so long ago by developers, but if I remember correctly...the "BISMARCK" trees have a while to go on a 99 year (?) easement. The easement is a major obstacle, if the news reports were true, to whoever wanted to develop the land.

In my opinion, this is an opportunity for economic development that could be done with benefits for all. 1. This section could be sold at an appropriate amount as commercial/residential development with perhaps a few acres held back for a park or ?? associated with the trees. 2. The proceeds from that sale MUST be used to purchase an equivalent number of acres elsewhere in the county that would be brought into the public domain (preferably as State Trust Lands). 3. Any remaining monies would be deposited into the appropriate State Trust Lands account(s).

Win/Win for everyone.


That being said, there is no way I believe Doug in that there are the number of acres in this proposal in a similar position associated with major communities across those 4 states.

 

[Ruttin]

I could go along with something like this. However there are no restrictions in the current bill therefore i am 100% against selling public land. To many unintended consequences.