Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-14-2012, 02:15 PM
 
5,391 posts, read 7,233,607 times
Reputation: 2857

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by rikoshaprl View Post
If Obama is responsible for that agency then how does he get credit for the Navy Seals killing Obama? The buck stops with him. Do you think he didn't have input over this matter in an election year. Yeah right.
Because Obama is Commander in Chief of the US military, and the "go-ahead" for the mission was his decision to make.

On the other hand, Obama is not AFAIK directly involved in US Fish and Wildlife Service decisions.

How about this: USDA Announces Decision to Fully Deregulate Roundup Ready Alfalfa | USDA

Shall we blame/credit Obama for this?

Quote:
It is very clear that Obama is making an exception to hill Bald Eagles. I posted the link that proves it.
No, that link did not prove that Obama made the exception.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-14-2012, 02:20 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,554 posts, read 87,022,277 times
Reputation: 36644
It's always legal to kill all animals, under certain circumstances, and a wildlife protective agency has wide latitude to authorize a kill.

I have bats living in the attic of my apartment building, and they came around to spray something in there to drive them away (molesting is the same as killing, in terms of wildlife protection). I phoned wildlife officers, they said they are not protected if they are determined by the proper authorities to constitute a health hazard..

Bald eagles are not any more or less protected than bats or bluejays, since they are no longer on the endangered species list. Their Conservation Status is "Least Concern", which affords them the lowest level of protection.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2012, 02:21 PM
 
14,292 posts, read 9,685,403 times
Reputation: 4254
Quote:
Originally Posted by rikoshaprl View Post
I guess anything that Americans hold dear is no good to Obama. He needs to go!
Permit to Kill Bald Eagles Granted by Obama Administration | Conservative Byte
It's all in keeping with his culture of death.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2012, 02:24 PM
 
5,391 posts, read 7,233,607 times
Reputation: 2857
Quote:
Originally Posted by OICU812 View Post
It's all in keeping with his culture of death.
*Not intended as a factual statement.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2012, 02:27 PM
 
Location: The Cascade Foothills
10,942 posts, read 10,260,562 times
Reputation: 6476
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
It's always legal to kill all animals, under certain circumstances, and a wildlife protective agency has wide latitude to authorize a kill.

I have bats living in the attic of my apartment building, and they came around to spray something in there to drive them away (molesting is the same as killing, in terms of wildlife protection). I phoned wildlife officers, they said they are not protected if they are determined by the proper authorities to constitute a health hazard.

Bald eagles are not any more or less protected than bats or robins, since they are no longer on the endangered species list. Their Conservation Status is "Least Concern", which affords them the lowest level of protection.
Yes, as far as I know, I would be entirely within my rights to shoot one if I saw it carrying off one of my chickens or ducks or cats or baby goats.

I think they're more interested in what they can pull out of the local rivers than they are in my animals, though. I've never seen any indication they're any threat to me or mine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2012, 02:30 PM
 
Location: London UK & Florida USA
7,923 posts, read 8,850,084 times
Reputation: 2059
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cinebar View Post
I'm pretty sure the OP started this thread thinking he/she was going to get all sorts of support and backslapping kudos for starting it from all the other Obama haters, and except for one or two, it totally backfired.

It not only didn't devolve into a bunch of nasty name-calling about President Obama - and maybe Mrs. Obama - it ended up with a bunch of us getting a good laugh at the OP's expense.
Exactly!
It shows the complete hypocricy ruling America at the moment.
I love the staunch 'pro-lifers" who go out hunting moose etc or wanting to wage war on other countries...............
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2012, 02:30 PM
 
Location: Hoboken
19,890 posts, read 18,762,921 times
Reputation: 3146
Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post
Can you tell us where the treaties prohibit these tribes from practicing their native religion?

Here ya go.

Employment Division v. Smith
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2012, 02:35 PM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,330 posts, read 54,428,613 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby View Post
FAIL!

Treaties are Federal, this is a SCOTUS decison over a state's actions
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2012, 02:35 PM
 
Location: Hoboken
19,890 posts, read 18,762,921 times
Reputation: 3146
Here is some irony for you.

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/02/2...entral-valley/

"Once a breadbasket for the nation, the cutoff of irrigation water to the Central Valley has destroyed agriculture and tens of thousands of jobs as a tradeoff for the endangered fish. Now, however, voices of sanity in Congress have begun to speak on the man-made economic and agricultural disaster, as Rep. Devin Nunes builds support for his Sacramento-San Joaquin Water Reliability Act:"

Guess who has promised to veto it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2012, 02:37 PM
 
Location: Hoboken
19,890 posts, read 18,762,921 times
Reputation: 3146
Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post
FAIL!

Treaties are Federal, this is a SCOTUS decison over a state's actions

Huh, are you suggesting the SCOTUS decision isn't binding on a Federal level?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:26 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top