President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

Sounds like an awful profession. I'd get out of that racket if I were you.

 

Don't besmirch Reagan by comparing that traveshamockery currently in the Oval Office to him.

 

Doesn't overgrowth lead to more devastating forest fires?

I know they do controlled burns from time to time to thin it out -- and those sometimes end up getting out of control.

Couldn't some logging achieve the same thing?

 

It worked during the election, so why not keep riding that strategy?

 

No kidding. This guy sounds like he was fun in college:

 

Sorry.

"The guy who purports to lead the alt-right and denounces white supremacists, yet allows them to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with him and co-opt his movement."

Better?

 

Like I indicated above, when I hear "logging" I don't think the person is referring to small-scale, preventative measures.

 

Thought crime!!!

 

@doctorquant , this is the kind of College Republican I'm familiar with. As to the women ... I've come to attribute it to the precise time period (1989-93) that I was in college. The 20 years before that were a wild time. The 20+ years after it have been wild from what I understand. In those four years, though, it was the height of the AIDS scare and when the fundamentalists really had taken center stage (not an incidental concern in Missouri). So that's where your average Republican was coming from.

 

He doesn't have to pay nothin to nobody, now.

 

To be fair, selective logging does help prevent wildfires. Of course, given the Federal hiring freeze the Forest Service and BLM can't hire any seasonal fire crews anyway. But then Spicer veered off into talking about energy policy, which made no sense unless Trump is going to mandate everybody start burning Federal land trees in their fireplaces to keep warm.

That bit about where they're talking about "returning public land to the people" is beyond stupid. The people already get to use that land. We hunt, fish, hike, climb, mountain bike, snowmobile and 4-wheel all over it. So are they talking about giving it back to the states - like the Bundy clan want - or do they want to sell it to the highest bidder? If you try to give it to the states, well, they can't afford to manage them. If you sell it, then there goes the public's right to use that land. You'll wind up in a situation like you see in Texas - where there are only about 1.5 million acres of public hunting land in a state that covers 171 million acres. Texas has less public hunting land than Virginia, Tennessee, Missouri, Arkansas, New York and Florida - along with 19 other states.

Luckily, a wide swath of outdoorsmen have been joining together to keep public lands public. You're seeing tree-huggers and hunters coming together to lobby for a shared interest. The CEO of Orvis spoke at the Montana state capital the other day in front of a thousand or so protesters. Luckily, Obama signed the REC Act which adds outdoor recreation to the GDP. Industry estimates say there's about $640 million in consumer spending and 6 million US jobs thanks to it. If Trump or the GOP start trying to lop off big chunks of Federal land, they're going to face opposition from some well-funded lobbyists.

 

The Fuck You President, turning the whole world into America's Fuck Club.