Lollipops and unicorns. Always fascinating to see how naive people can be, and
to observe the bubble and the fog of hypocrisy that the natural recourse
worshipers live in. I'm guessing darren is using daddy's money, earned
from a job that depends on the use and trade of many natural resources, (or
uncle sams money - gained from the sale and trade of natural resources) to go to
school and to jet off to the nations capital to support his resource worship
ideas. I could be wrong, maybe he is hiking all the way to DC, lodging with the
indigenous people, and living on the nuts and berries he scavenges along the
way. Thereby not using precious resources to get there, or to manufacture and
deliver the goods and services he will need along the way. As he goes, he can
access all these wilderness areas and ponder the great envy we are of all the
world wide indigenous persons who are so jealous of us. Like they really give a
Prometheus, Thanks for stepping up. The demonstrably false legal
arguments you're confronting have been refuted ad nauseum on these pages by
people who actually practice and understand the law. Those who insist on
perpetuating ignorance as correct principles won't change their minds, but
at least we can correct them openly and help others to understand why
they're wrong.Ultimately everything we have in this country is
tied to the food we eat, the water we drink, and the air we breathe. We have a
responsibility to conserve our natural resources for us and for future
generations. Not everything is meant for short-term exploitation.
Mr Richards, Who gave the State ownership? If you want to play that game then
show me Utah's legal claim?
Mike Richards, your interpretation of the constitution is incorrect again, and
repeating it over and over, even though you have been proven incorrect is
strange.ARTICLE IIIORDINANCEThe following ordinance
shall be "irrevocable" without the consent of the United States and
thepeople of this State:Second:--The people inhabiting this State do
affirm and declare that they forever disclaim all right and title to the
unappropriated public lands lying within the boundaries hereof, and to all lands
lying within said limits....definition of irrevocable: not able to
be changed, reversed, or recovered; final.That's the Utah State
Constitution, which came after the constitution and has been upheld as legal,
right? I also did not see anything about "paying Utah" for it's
federal lands, did you?Article IV, § 3, Clause 2 — the
Property Clause — gives Congress authority over federal property
generally, and the Supreme Court has described Congress’s power to
legislate under this Clause as “without limitation.”The
Supreme Court has been very clear and consistent on the issue.Again,
they know the constitution better than angry right wing radio fans.
Thank you Darren Bingham. I fear your good deed fell on deaf ears.
ugottabkidn,Please show us the payment made by the Federal
Government with the approval of the Utah STATE Legislature where that
legislative body sold 66% of the State of Utah to the Federal Government for
forts, magazines or other military purposes. Any other use is illegal under the
Constitution. When citizens tell us that they are tired of being
reminded that the Constitution trumps their personal opinion, they are only
telling us that they reject law unless they see a personal advantage in obeying
law.The Federal Government is forbidden from owning 66% of Utah.
You know it. I know it. Anyone who has read the Constitution knows it.
We are fortunate and I'm glad you are going to DC to speak on behalf of the
many, many Utahan's who love our public lands and want to keep them
public.It's both sad, and reprehensible that some believe that
our heritage belongs to the highest bidder and that all know energy resources be
exploited as quickly as possible for the benefit of a few corporations.The worship of money has become a conservative value according to some of the
comments, and only those who posses it are of value. Common property is taking
away from those who want private property.
@John Charity Spring: I'm really curious to find out where your fixation
with Kaiser Wilhelm comes from. He was a monarch and behaved the way that
monarchs often do. He was not uniquely depraved, as you often imply. I'm
no fan of monarchy and certainly not of Kaiser Wilhelm, I'm just curious
why you single him out.
Mr Richards, please source for us your insinuation that the Feds
"confiscated" land without agreement. The State's only claim is
that is within our borders. Your disdain for anything national is getting
Oh boy Kaiser Wilhelm is back!Care to tell us where the
founders.." established this Country on the principle that the natural
resources must be used for the benefit of the people."While
you're at it tells how a lands natural beauty and majesty does not benefit
Could anyone twist the Constituiton more? Every American does not "own"
two acres of "public land". To own something is to have paid for it by
purchasing it from its legal owner. The Federal Government "owns" no
public lands. Public lands do no exist under the Constitution. Article I,
Section 8 limits the Federal Government's "ownership" of land to a
tract ten-miles square. All other land "owned" by the Federal
Government must be purchased from the States which "own" that land. All
other land purchased by the Federal Government must have military needs (forts,
magazines) or be the sites of Federal Buildings.Misunderstanding the
Constitution and the limits that the people put on the Federal Government is no
excuse. We are a literate nation, but too many pretend that because they
don't want to see something that is printed clearly in the Constitution,
that that item does not exist.We cannot maintain correct principles
by pretending that those correct principles don't exist.
Our Great Nation truly has a Great Heritage. But it is not what this letter
infers.The Founding Fathers established this Country on the
principle that the natural resources must be used for the benefit of the people.
Sadly, the left-wing environmental extremists would lock up every vacant field
and stream from the use of man.One of the great evils of the last
century was the effort of Kaiser Wilhelm II to dictate the use of the land, to
the exclusion of the will of the people. We cannot allow that nonsense here.
Utah is indeed fortunate. Sadly, local politicians and lobbyists want Utah to
look like parts of the East, where lands are forever destroyed and "No
Trespassing" signs are ubiquitous. Some here don't realize how blessed
Good for you Darren. However:"By respecting our shared history and
birthright, Americans are ensuring a future that we all can be proud of."Our local GOP politicians keep trying to sell our birthright to their
extraction industry donors. Vote differently.