Bundy Caught Lying about "Ancestral Rights"

[Barb]

Either way you look at it the majority did not want this bill for different reasons.
You are using that as an excuse.
If you want to expand Medicare for all, that is against the New Health Care Bill.

You know what? Start a thread. I'd be happy to go into how, why, and by who's behest ACA turned into such a clusterfuck, from way back when Hillary tried it to the present. I'll even admit up front and center that the compromises to the insurance industry that were allowed to infect this legislation turned it into a cold bucket of piss.

Which is exactly what we said would happen.

Maybe next time you'll listen..

Whoops..okay, well maybe NEXT time you'll lis...

Oh never mind.

Start a thread and stop trying to derail one that isn't going so well for you.

 

[koshergrl]

This thread has gone fine for me, and very poorly indeed for the anti-American pieces of shit who think the feds should fire on ranchers. In the first few posts, we proved that the thread title is dishonest, that Bundy did not lie...and we also established that progressive statist pigs don't know what the words "forefathers" and other phrases that are in the forefront of this discussion, mean.

 

[martybegan]

I can shorten that for you: if enough states decide to call for a constitutional convention, I am actually for it, but until said time, the Constutition in this form in the law of our land.

You do understand that simple concept, right?

it is the law of the land, until such time as changed by the methods listed in the constitution, or rendered invalid by a revolution.

So you are saying the government could do basically anything, go against the constitution, and you would just accept it, or call out for a constitutional convention? If it gets that bad the only thing a convention would do is make it easier to round you up.

Nope, that is not what I said.

Pay attention and learn for once.

I pointed out that the Constitution clearly gives power for the US military to quell rebellions. It is in the Constitution.

THAT is what I said.

Anything else you try to make out of it is nothing more than RWNJ wet dreams that make no sense, anyway. Kind of like Clint Eastwood's chair.

Yes it gives it the power, it does not however give it an automatic win. Quite frankly any dissent that reaches the level where the military has to be called in will spell the doom of our way of governance anyway. It will either be crushed and we will convert to rule by force, or it will be successful and we will have a change of government.

 

[Barb]

Yeah and electricity can start fires. Should we go back to the stone age? And more particularly, in this case back to an age before man domesticated animals? ROFL

Which is why we have regulations stipulating that electricians must be licensed.

I'm interested in what you suppose the timeline consists of there.

Beyond that, you should understand (and I suspect you reject) that dominion brings responsibility.

You think civil engineers for public works projects like pipelines are not licensed?

What timeline are you talking about the deflection to pipelines or the rape of the ranchers livelihood?

What makes you think I don't understand dominion/tyranny or the complete lack of responsibility shown by these tyrants?

Have you lost your fucking mind?

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0[/ame]

 

[martybegan]

No. You're simply wrong. It is actually buying people out.

Were these condemnations contested? Typically the government only threatens eminent domain, because people can keep them in court for years. they CALL it eminent domain, but only when force is used is it ACTUALLY eminent domain. And then the people are paid off. They government tries to just buy people out usually first.

What does that have to do with you being wrong about establishing a turtle sanctuary via eminent domain? You love to deflect instead of just saying "damn I was wrong". Try it out. You dont have to admit it to me because I know you are wrong already but dont lie to yourself.

Can you give me an example of eminent domain being used for a turtle sanctuary? i recent time?

 

[martybegan]

Only by amending the Constitution.

Or are you arguing for an expanded organic interpretation of the document?

The constitution protect citizens, and visitors we extend such protections to via treaty with their country. The people at Guantanamo are closer to prisoners of war than guests of our country, and thus do not get certain protections, such as trial by jury. In fact a real prisoner of war would be insulted by the insinuation of needing a trial in the first place, or of our courts ability to try them. The hard part is they are part of an undeclared war, and thus we have felt the need to try them. But even then they do not get the full protections Citizens and guests get, because we choose NOT to extend them to them.

Take another look and share with the class how many time citizens are specified in the document rather than persons.

I'll do that the same time you show me where abortion and gay marriage are mentioned in the document.

 

[bodecea]

This thread has gone fine for me, and very poorly indeed for the anti-American pieces of shit who think the feds should fire on ranchers.

The feds weren't the ones setting up sniper positions.

 

[Barb]

This thread has gone fine for me, and very poorly indeed for the anti-American pieces of shit who think the feds should fire on ranchers.

No, little bitch, it's gone badly for the anti American pieces of detritus who HOPE the feds would fire on ranchers - or better yet - the women and children they hope to push out front for dramatic effect.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvN3luheEe8&feature=player_embedded"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvN3luheEe8&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

Published on Apr 15, 2014
A former Arizona sheriff who has taken the side of cattle ranchers in Nevada said this week that he would have allowed his own wife and daughters to be shot as human shields because it would look bad for the federal government on television. In a statement to Fox News on Monday that was first flagged by Glenn Beck's The Blaze, former Sheriff Richard Mack talked about his strategy to put women on the front lines if a gunfight broke out between "rogue federal agents" and rancher Cliven Bundy, who reportedly owes the taxpayers more than $1 million for allowing his cattle to graze on government land.

 

[Barb]

The constitution protect citizens, and visitors we extend such protections to via treaty with their country. The people at Guantanamo are closer to prisoners of war than guests of our country, and thus do not get certain protections, such as trial by jury. In fact a real prisoner of war would be insulted by the insinuation of needing a trial in the first place, or of our courts ability to try them. The hard part is they are part of an undeclared war, and thus we have felt the need to try them. But even then they do not get the full protections Citizens and guests get, because we choose NOT to extend them to them.

Take another look and share with the class how many time citizens are specified in the document rather than persons.

I'll do that the same time you show me where abortion and gay marriage are mentioned in the document.

Quite telling, the deflection, but see privacy and equal protection.

 

[Wry Catcher]

You know what? Start a thread. I'd be happy to go into how, why, and by who's behest ACA turned into such a clusterfuck, from way back when Hillary tried it to the present. I'll even admit up front and center that the compromises to the insurance industry that were allowed to infect this legislation turned it into a cold bucket of piss.

Which is exactly what we said would happen.

Maybe next time you'll listen..

Whoops..okay, well maybe NEXT time you'll lis...

Oh never mind.

And they were so excited when it was a warm bucket of piss.

I would have sent you (RKMBrown) a PM in response to you calling me a liar, but you don't have the self esteem to handle the messages others would leave.

As you know you called me a liar for posting a comment on militia's and how they do not comport to Sec. 8, clause 15 and 16, and how conservatives support original intent yet ignore that fact when it came to the current event in Southern Nevada.

Your response to my post was this: "Liar"

I asked you to prove I lied, and you ignored that request.

Then, since I could not sent you a PM, I gave you a negative rep and called you an asshole. I also said I would apologize if you provided evidence I lied.

Your response was to give me a negative rep and call me names.

You are worse than a simple asshole, you're a disgusting cowardly piece of shit. I suspect you don't care, and on some level know that assessment of you is spot on. I really don't care but others need to know what you are and that my characterization of you isn't sufficient to describe how worthless a human being you are.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

This thread has gone fine for me, and very poorly indeed for the anti-American pieces of shit who think the feds should fire on ranchers.

The feds weren't the ones setting up sniper positions.

The Feds did bring in snipers however.

 

[Barb]

Were these condemnations contested? Typically the government only threatens eminent domain, because people can keep them in court for years. they CALL it eminent domain, but only when force is used is it ACTUALLY eminent domain. And then the people are paid off. They government tries to just buy people out usually first.

What does that have to do with you being wrong about establishing a turtle sanctuary via eminent domain? You love to deflect instead of just saying "damn I was wrong". Try it out. You dont have to admit it to me because I know you are wrong already but dont lie to yourself.

Can you give me an example of eminent domain being used for a turtle sanctuary? i recent time?

Endangered species act ring any bells?

Endangered Species | Laws & Policies | Endangered Species Act

In 1972, President Nixon declared that conservation efforts in the United States aimed toward preventing the extinction of species were inadequate and called on the 93rd Congress to develop comprehensive endangered species legislation. Congress responded, and on December 28th, the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 was signed into law.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6wJpGO8j4Q&feature=player_embedded"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6wJpGO8j4Q&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

 

[koshergrl]

So show us where Bundy lied about his forefathers?

 

[IlarMeilyr]

So show us where Bundy lied about his forefathers?

To which the lolberal reply is expected to be sumpin' like: "but but but .. even if he didn't SAY 'on my pappy's side,' clearly that's what he must have MEANT!"

 

[martybegan]

What does that have to do with you being wrong about establishing a turtle sanctuary via eminent domain? You love to deflect instead of just saying "damn I was wrong". Try it out. You dont have to admit it to me because I know you are wrong already but dont lie to yourself.

Can you give me an example of eminent domain being used for a turtle sanctuary? i recent time?

Endangered species act ring any bells?

Endangered Species | Laws & Policies | Endangered Species Act

In 1972, President Nixon declared that conservation efforts in the United States aimed toward preventing the extinction of species were inadequate and called on the 93rd Congress to develop comprehensive endangered species legislation. Congress responded, and on December 28th, the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 was signed into law.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6wJpGO8j4Q&feature=player_embedded"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6wJpGO8j4Q&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

So where has property been condemned via eminent domain based on the Endangered Species act?

 

[JimH52]

This thread has gone fine for me, and very poorly indeed for the anti-American pieces of shit who think the feds should fire on ranchers.

The feds weren't the ones setting up sniper positions.

Very True! It is all about intimidation. It is an old, and very effective Republican Ploy. Just vigilantes that got a lot more press than they deserved. Bundy is still a criminal and he will be brought to justice. The Feds are waiting for the right time to do it.

STAY TUNED!

 

[Barb]

Can you give me an example of eminent domain being used for a turtle sanctuary? i recent time?

Endangered species act ring any bells?

Endangered Species | Laws & Policies | Endangered Species Act

In 1972, President Nixon declared that conservation efforts in the United States aimed toward preventing the extinction of species were inadequate and called on the 93rd Congress to develop comprehensive endangered species legislation. Congress responded, and on December 28th, the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 was signed into law.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6wJpGO8j4Q&feature=player_embedded"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6wJpGO8j4Q&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

So where has property been condemned via eminent domain based on the Endangered Species act?

Where has property been "condemned" on this thread? BLM sought to make the Bundy's pay their bills for the use of a commons - the Bundy's tried to flood that commons with WAY more than the original arrangement stipulated, lost multiple legal challenges to those stipulations, are scofflaws to the bills that are due and payable for use of that commons, and are currently making the lot of you show your asses in support of countless illegal acts.

Keep your chins up - even Glen Beck and Fawx news may have abandoned you, but you'll always have KG and the insanity that wants to see women and children gunned down...for effect.

 

[Barb]

So show us where Bundy lied about his forefathers?

Unless you're trying to establish a biblical connection (the bible is my real estate agent/ dad left it to me in his will) you're ridiculous. OH! Hey, that's pretty stupid too!

Every and anything you've posted thus far regarding that line of attack has been ably addressed already.

 

[Barb]

So show us where Bundy lied about his forefathers?

To which the lolberal reply is expected to be sumpin' like: "but but but .. even if he didn't SAY 'on my pappy's side,' clearly that's what he must have MEANT!"

Goes without saying in the WAY BACK MACHINE your friends are using - WOMEN couldn't OWN property back that far.

 

[RKMBrown]

which is exactly what we said would happen.

Maybe next time you'll listen..

Whoops..okay, well maybe next time you'll lis...

Oh never mind.

and they were so excited when it was a warm bucket of piss.

i would have sent you (rkmbrown) a pm in response to you calling me a liar, but you don't have the self esteem to handle the messages others would leave.

As you know you called me a liar for posting a comment on militia's and how they do not comport to sec. 8, clause 15 and 16, and how conservatives support original intent yet ignore that fact when it came to the current event in southern nevada.

Your response to my post was this: "liar"

i asked you to prove i lied, and you ignored that request.

Then, since i could not sent you a pm, i gave you a negative rep and called you an asshole. I also said i would apologize if you provided evidence i lied.

Your response was to give me a negative rep and call me names.

You are worse than a simple asshole, you're a disgusting cowardly piece of shit. I suspect you don't care, and on some level know that assessment of you is spot on. I really don't care but others need to know what you are and that my characterization of you isn't sufficient to describe how worthless a human being you are.

lair! That is not even REMOTELY what you said, or what I PMd in response. You are a LAIR@!!!!!!