# Utahs chance to really fight the public lands transfer.



## Hoopermat (Dec 17, 2010)

http://www.ksl.com/?sid=43923640&nid=757

We need to elect a candidate that understands what public lands really are and mean to sportsman. It a great opportunity to get us a real voice.


----------



## rjefre (Sep 8, 2007)

I agree, it may be an opportunity for a chance for change...it may be a snowball's chance, but hey, it's a chance.
R


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

Hoopermat said:


> http://www.ksl.com/?sid=43923640&nid=757
> 
> We need to elect a candidate that understands what public lands really are and mean to sportsman. It a great opportunity to get us a real voice.


Too bad my rep(Bishop) hasn't had a similar awakening. Chaffetz and Bishop have been horrendous regarding their stance on Federal public land management. (Also, Stewart, Hatch, et al.)

It would be great to have someone who is a vocal proponent of public lands take the seat here. Seems like the democratic candidate is competent and reasonable. Will be interesting to see how the race unfolds.


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

rjefre said:


> I agree, it may be an opportunity for a chance for change...it may be a snowball's chance, but hey, it's a chance.
> R


Things are only impossible if you think they are. On May 31, 1904, Winston Churchill walked into the House of Commons and took a seat on the Liberal side, thereby switching sides because the Liberal policies more closely adhered to his beliefs than those of the Tories. Everyone should have the courage to act on his convictions.

Chaffetz is such an offensive tool that his not running will be better for Republicans. Dr. Allen was in my residency program in the early 80's. I'll support her over any Republican because she'll represent my beliefs.

Oh, and O'Reilly's out at Fox. Who'd a thunk? Anything can happen.


----------



## ZEKESMAN (Sep 14, 2007)

The chance of someone with a D by their name, getting voted into Chaffetz empty seat is about the same as me finding Big Foot. The chance of a Republican not wanting he land grab, even less. Vic


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

ZEKESMAN said:


> The chance of someone with a D by their name, getting voted into Chaffetz empty seat is about the same as me finding Big Foot. The chance of a Republican not wanting he land grab, even less. Vic


Ever the optimist, eh Vic?;-)


----------



## Hoopermat (Dec 17, 2010)

I see it as an opportunity. If we make it a major issue during the campaigns we could open the eyes of the blind voters. Now is the time to press the issue in ways that haven't been done. If a candidate make public lands a major issue in thier campaign we might have a chance. I don't care what party they are public lands must remain public.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

What I hope for? Either a reasonable republican who doesn't support transferring or selling our public lands, or a reasonable democrat that doesn't hold to some of the policies that are simply ridiculous outside of public lands. Either way, this is a good opportunity to vote someone more public land friendly into his spot. It would be nice to see a little more balance in Utah because the anti-public land politicians is getting old. I agree with Hooper, open peoples eyes to this issue, make it a bigger part of the campaign for election, and scare politicians away from the transfer idea. I'm with Randy Newberg, it's time to make the idea of transferring or selling public land as toxic to a politician as gun control. You have to start somewhere. I could care less if someone with a D or and R fills his shoes, I care they don't support the transfer or sale of public land.


----------



## ZEKESMAN (Sep 14, 2007)

paddler said:


> Ever the optimist, eh Vic?;-)


Ever the realist. Look at who Utah voted for President. Look a our Governor, Look at our own Mike Lee and Jason Chaffets. The only place a Dem can win is SLC. I don't vote it is a waste of my time and energy. Vic


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

Due to reasons both related and unrelated to what we talk about here, I am as happy as anyone that Chaffetz is leaving. My bet is that we haven't seen the last of him and that he will run for Governor in 2020. It will be an interesting campaign as the potential "R" candidates are coming out as well with the news. It does seem like a longshot for Dr. Allen to win, but it has happened before. Remember Bill Orton? (or was it Bob?.. no Bob was the professional wrestler ) I suppose from what I've read so far, Dr. Allen would have my support at this point.



paddler said:


> Dr. Allen was in my residency program in the early 80's. I'll support her over any Republican because she'll represent my beliefs.


OK Paddler, here is your chance. You know the candidate personally, I don't. Tell us about her, especially what she is like beyond the usual spin all candidates will put out about themselves.


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

Catherder said:


> Due to reasons both related and unrelated to what we talk about here, I am as happy as anyone that Chaffetz is leaving. My bet is that we haven't seen the last of him and that he will run for Governor in 2020. It will be an interesting campaign as the potential "R" candidates are coming out as well with the news. It does seem like a longshot for Dr. Allen to win, but it has happened before. Remember Bill Orton? (or was it Bob?.. no Bob was the professional wrestler ) I suppose from what I've read so far, Dr. Allen would have my support at this point.
> 
> OK Paddler, here is your chance. You know the candidate personally, I don't. Tell us about her, especially what she is like beyond the usual spin all candidates will put out about themselves.


As I recall, she joined our program when I was a third year resident. I had little contact with her and don't know her well. Brian Shiozawa, now a Republican state senator from Cottonwood Heights was a year ahead of me in the FP program at the U. He's a very reasonable guy. Kathryn was fairly quiet but seemed solid. She would be a breath of fresh air, IMO. Of course, Chaffetz set the bar at a subterranean level, so any reasonable, rational non red meat person who demonstrated a shred of humility would be a major improvement. They didn't develop the Chaffetz rule at BYU for nothing. Good riddance.


----------



## fobit (Mar 1, 2017)

So- If you want to go mountain biking and smoke M. J. in public land, you vote Dem. If you want to be able to hunt and live in a decent country, you vote Rep. If you want to live in a free country you vote Libertarian.


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

fobit said:


> So- If you want to go mountain biking and smoke M. J. in public land, you vote Dem. If you want to be able to hunt and live in a decent country, you vote Rep. If you want to live in a free country you vote Libertarian.




Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

fobit said:


> So- If you want to go mountain biking and smoke M. J. in public land, you vote Dem. If you want to only be able to dream of hunting like your dad did and live near country blocked by no trespassing signs, you vote Rep. If you want to live in a free country you vote Libertarian.


Fixed it for you.


----------



## Hoopermat (Dec 17, 2010)

fobit said:


> So- If you want to go mountain biking and smoke M. J. in public land, you vote Dem. If you want to be able to hunt and live in a decent country, you vote Rep. If you want to live in a free country you vote Libertarian.


Says a teenager to an adult.


----------



## High Desert Elk (Aug 21, 2012)

Tread lightly - what you gain in a candidate, and perhaps elected representative, will require you give something else up. All of mine fight the federal transfer of lands, but we get sucker punched elsewhere - mostly economically.

Tit *for* tat is the crux to politics...


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

High Desert Elk said:


> Tread lightly - what you gain in a candidate, and perhaps elected representative, will require you give something else up. All of mine fight the federal transfer of lands, but we get sucker punched elsewhere - mostly economically.
> 
> Tit of tat is the crux to politics...


That's a curious statement. Can you explain it?


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

fobit said:


> So- If you want to go mountain biking and smoke M. J. in public land, you vote Dem. If you want to be able to hunt and live in a decent country, you vote Rep. If you want to live in a free country you vote Libertarian.


Two posts, one nonsensical. Not a great start.


----------



## High Desert Elk (Aug 21, 2012)

paddler said:


> That's a curious statement. Can you explain it?


Normally the politicians in favor of federal control of land are Democrats, not Republicans as we have all seen throughout this entire debacle.

So, if you elect the one in favor of federal control of land - let's say a Democrat - what will you have to give the Democrat party in return...?


----------



## Hoopermat (Dec 17, 2010)

High Desert Elk said:


> Normally the politicians in favor of federal control of land are Democrats, not Republicans as we have all seen throughout this entire debacle.
> 
> So, if you elect the one in favor of federal control of land - let's say a Democrat - what will you have to give the Democrat party in return...?


I see what your saying so here you go. 
If you elect a dem you will feel like you are securing your public lands but you are also at the same time giving into the ideas of
Gun control
Increased welfare expansion 
Increased taxation 
Forward push into socialism 
Increased regulation on all federal programs 
Increased government spending
Increased fed deficit 
Poor military policy's 
Increased immigration leading into lower wages to increased poverty which leads to increased unemployment which leads to increased welfare and on and on and on
Just a few issues I have with straight line dem

I am in the center as it gets. And have a hard time supporting anyone that is far right or left.


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

fobit said:


> So- If you want to go mountain biking and smoke M. J. in public land, you vote Dem. If you want to be able to hunt and live in a decent country, you vote Rep. If you want to live in a free country you vote Libertarian.


Not only is this just a bad oversimplification of this, it is absolutely wrong. There are republicans who have come around to understand public lands and there are democrats who are not bad on guns. The problem is both parties throw out candidates that fit their party platform most closely. Both parties give you two evils and let you pick the lesser of them hoping it is their candidate wins. Both are way off base on different issues. I want a decent candidate (preferably republican so they can win in this state) who is willing to stand up and buck the party platform and NOT support the transfer of public lands. That's all I want from our states representatives. This state has some of the most amazing parks, BLM, and national Forests in the nation. They need to remain public. I don't care who keeps them public, or what party they belong to, I care they remain public and good wildlife habitat.


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

High Desert Elk said:


> Normally the politicians in favor of federal control of land are Democrats, not Republicans as we have all seen throughout this entire debacle.
> 
> So, if you elect the one in favor of federal control of land - let's say a Democrat - what will you have to give the Democrat party in return...?


Well, let's see. You wouldn't be taking health insurance from 24,000,000 people to give tax breaks for the wealthy, you wouldn't voucherize Medicare, you'd support equal rights and voting rights, you wouldn't build a wall, you'd fully investigate Trump's conflicts of interest and the Russian interference with our election both in 2016 and the future, you'll look for collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, you wouldn't be paying outrageous amounts of money for him to play golf in Mar-a-Lago, you wouldn't see the Secret Service paying Trump's resort $35,000 in golf cart rental fees to protect him while he plays golf, you wouldn't lift sanctions so that Exxon can work with Rosneft, you wouldn't have the guy who sued the EPA a dozen on behalf of the Koch brothers running the EPA, you wouldn't have a Friend of Russia as our Secretary of State, you wouldn't see Bears Ears rescinded or reduced, and you wouldn't have a narcissistic pathological liar with a 19 word vocabulary and the attention span of a newt as the leader of the free world. Enough? Wait till I get going....


----------



## Kwalk3 (Jun 21, 2012)

Or we can just focus on public lands so this doesn't get shut down.....

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Let's just stick to public lands.


----------



## Hoopermat (Dec 17, 2010)

So are we seeing a continuing trend. Talks of Herbert not running and bishop refusing to meet people and not showing up for debates and town halls. 

This is what we want. We want the idea of transfer of public lands to be a toxic stance to a politician.


----------



## paddler (Jul 17, 2009)

Dang it. I thought the part about a 19 word vocabulary and the attention span of a newt was entertaining. 

I agree, though. I really think Chaffetz felt the heat for all the malarky he's pulled over the years. Politicians should pay a price for cronyism and trying to steal our public lands for their own benefit. We need moderates in office who represent mainstream views. Preserving public lands, conservation, clean air and water, etc, all all very mainstream. Special interests need not apply.


----------



## ZEKESMAN (Sep 14, 2007)

This is what I see in this Republican State, We have one of the highest state tax levels in the US. We have one of the lowest per pupil spending rates in the US, our welfare and social programs are terrible, our roads are terrible, we waste money on lawsuits that our own attorney general says we can't win. Where is the fiscal responsibility? Where does our money go? Vic


----------



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

ZEKESMAN said:


> This is what I see in this Republican State, We have one of the highest state tax levels in the US. We have one of the lowest per pupil spending rates in the US, our welfare and social programs are terrible, our roads are terrible, we waste money on lawsuits that our own attorney general says we can't win. Where is the fiscal responsibility? Where does our money go? Vic


Zeeke I love you and paddler are passionate about public lands, let's keep the conversation steered towards public lands here. I'd rather discuss it here and not see the post get locked by the mods or you guys banned.


----------

