Breaking: Trump Picks New Cabinet Member

In breaking news, President Trump has made his pick for the new head of the Interior Department, by nominating David Bernhardt.  A conservative darling, Bernhard would be replacing former Interior Secretary, Ryan Zinke.

Announcing the pick on twitter, President Trump said the following.

I am pleased to announce that David Bernhardt, Acting Secretary of the Interior, will be nominated as Secretary of the Interior. David has done a fantastic job from the day he arrived, and we look forward to having his nomination officially confirmed!

More Below

As part of his duties, as head of the Interior Department, Bernhart would be responsible for overseeing a major victory for oil and gas exploration, with the opening of ANWR.

From the Daily Caller

Bernhardt would also oversee the opening of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge’s (ANWR) coastal plain to oil and gas exploration. It was a win for Alaskans who favor drilling, but progress on finalizing leasing plans could be delayed because of the government shutdown.

When you sign up to comment you'll also receive our regular newsletter. You can find more about how we use your information here.

30 thoughts on “Breaking: Trump Picks New Cabinet Member”

  1. I am a conservative but am 100% AGAINST drilling in the Wildlife preserve. A recipe for disaster. Why can’t we have a few places on earth where their is pristine nature and not oil wells? We are #1 now . I think it goes against anyone who appreciates nature and loves animals/Wildlife

    1. Just asking why can’t we have pristine nature and oil ??? They can work together !!! Have you been to Dallas/Ft. Worth have you seen how they do oil and gas wells in town, safe secure clean, it can be done and we can have more energy, more energy means better prices for every one just plain economics.

    2. Deborah,
      There are actually many, very large places for animals to rome. Do you realize the size of Alaska and this province? I love the animals too. And watch plenty of nature shows/documentaries. Yours is an unrealistic concern based upon tree-hugger propaganda.

    3. Why? If it is safe drilling? Drilling in the Gulf of Mexico has actually increase seafood production because the rigs attract fish etc like an artificial reef. Yes we must be very careful in the drilling but most of the drilling is 100% safe and the damage to the environment is not very high if any.

    4. I’m up there on a regular basis, the animals could care less, they aren’t scared, they aren’t loosing habitat they aren’t threatened. Stop letting fake everything influence good policy. Let common sense become common again.

    5. Oil drilling-rigs do NOT require huge foot-prints in land area. Besides, animals in the wild could learn to co-exist with harmless humaans, Deborah. Marine-life, for instance, have adopted pretty well with oil-rig-installations . . . so, why can’t polar bears, brown/black bears, big cats [if there are Siberian-tigers at the ANWAR are] and other creatures adopt to humanized-environments???

      You’re gonna have yuuuge doubts, of course… Just remember, however, that our domesticated-dogs nd cats and horses. . .chickens, pigs, et cetera, were once wild beasts that ate perhaps even humans. Our human-touches, however, ensured their non-extinctions – whether you accept that conclusion, or not.

    6. the animals don’t care about oil wells, they don’t drive cars or fly in planes, although some do ride on the railroads. so get a life, nature is not going to be hurt just because of a few small holes in the ground.

  2. Crude Oil is already in ANWAR., in vast quantities. Drilling in a wilderness, and removing the crude oil will not damage the earth, or the region. It will however help America’s economy, by lowering gas prices and helping to end our dependence on oil from hostile foreign nations, Which in turn will weaken their support for terrorism and make the world a safer place. As for a pipeline, If polar bears, and other arctic animals could talk, I’m sure they would be for it, they will be able to nest and burrow near it to keep warm. Not using the oil in ANWAR would be the height of foolishness, in the name of the phony “science” of environmentalism. The wilderness will NOT be ruined by drilling and removing oil. The wilderness is massive..the oil operations will be like taking one drop of water from an ocean.

      1. Dr. Engr. Marc, whaddya do? How do you envision the proposed Trumpian-BorderWall to become net-profitable even in the short-term. . ,even without counting our Nation’s savings from welfare-benefits given free to parasitical illegaliens???

  3. This a terrible idea. Let’s leave one place where wildlife can roam and people can visit their natural habitats. We need to aggressively develop alternative fuels sap we don’t have to develop this area. It’s good for America, Americans and the planet. Win win win!!

    1. Wouldn’t it be a good idea to develop alternative fuels that really work before we shut down the fuels we now use. Much of the global warming information is based on false studies, using manufactured information. The fact that the pro global warming people don’t want the issue debated as to the facts prove the danger of their claims. The big wind turbine kill many birds. The numbers of which are not discussed for a reason.

  4. Dallas/ftworth is a terrible example. Really, Ed, it’s a concrete jungle and heat island. What does that have to do with wildlife habitat?

  5. You could freeze to death if you depend on solar power during the winters in the Northern states. And probably more condors, eagles and other birds are killed with wind power, than animals killed by drilling oil. We cannot depend solely on those types of energy.

  6. Drill baby drill! Who in their right mind wants a giant windmill near your home? Their existence has ruined the beauty of much of America. Those monstrosities are incredibly inefficient, and they are deadly to the bird population. Solar has some promise, but it too is very limited. Fossil fuel, natural gas, and nuclear are our best sources of energy.

    1. I concur a million-percent with your statement, Wendell Fountain… All over Alaska, there’s near-zero possibility to recoup any investement in solar-energy generation – that’s a fact of physical science!!!

    2. Who in there right mind wants oil derricks by your house? This country needs to transition to renewables plain and simple. It’s happening, you can get on the train or???

    3. One of the best ways to make solar more practical is to allow individuals to buy their own systems and allow them to depreciate them as a business expense. That and the savings would help offset the cost of building the individual solar systems and make it much more cost effective.

  7. How many animals,domestic and wild, perished in California due to poor forrest management pushed by environmentalists?How many acres were destroyed where wildlife once lived compared the the area used for oil drilling? Well?

    1. True too, Richard Hosenflow… Hippyish and Deborah aren’t fully using their brain-cells; and are likely relying from al Gore’s stupidities.

      1. Solar energy and putting panels on roofs would work.. even in Alaska, as a supplement to other power sources. That’s a scientific fact.

    2. Many of the fires started/occurred in brush lands and urban areas that have very little to do with forest management. Forest management btw is not controlled by “environmentalists.” Everyone wants sustainable, fire resistant Forests to enjoy. Climate change is causing many fires to get bigger with a longer fire season. It’s true look up!

Comments are closed.