Bundy is the Real Endangered Species

[boedicca]

This is why we are all fucked. This guy breaks the law and Boe says his law breaking was valuable service.

Boe sounds like the local drug dealer who sees it as not breaking the law but providing a product that is in high demand.

And Boe believes if he talks enough, gives enough excuses, renames law breaking then it will fool everyone into believing his bullshit

Wrong as usual.

We are FUCKED because Big Government has enacted so many laws and regulations that We Are All Criminals. But is the law fairly and equally enforced? No.

Instead, the law is used against what used to be law-abiding citizens (until bureaucrats made innocuous behavior illegal) to keep them silent and compliant while real criminals get away with violent felonies.

That is why we are FUCKED.

I'm not I dont have cattle and I dam sure didnt get two chances to stop breaking the law and ignored it. So yeah, he lost in court and he kept on doing the thing that was ruled illegal twice and his reasoning goes like this: "Because I want to and I think I should be able to"

That dont fly with him or the local drug dealer

You sad, gullible little booby.

The laws and regulations are so complicated now that Everyone unknowingly or not breaks the law. It's a design feature for totalitarians...and you enable it.

 

[martybegan]

It is our land and we entrust the BLM to collect fees for using our land

Do we entrust the BLM to de facto ban ranching by setting ridiculously low grazing allowances because of some asshole environmentalists?

Maybe Bundy should go to court?

Oh wait....he already did and lost

Bundy does not get to decide our environmental laws at the end of a gun

Yes, federal laws, federal courts, backing up federal agencies. And you dodged my question as usual.

 

[bendog]

bendog is obviously unaware of the fact that the FEDS killed a bunch of tortoises on purpose in order to clear land for the solar panel project.

Hopenchange!

All tortoises are equal, but some tortoises are more equal than others.

Oh THAT was your point in pointing out that tortoises aren't turtles! Sorry, that connection sort of went past me .... three feet outside the strike zone, Marty.

Yes, the two biggest uses the BLM seems to be pushing is conservation and tourism and energy production. To the detriment of grazing. Imagine that, promoting policies to benefit the majority of citizens. NO DOUBT YOU ARE OUTRAGED!!!!

 

[Mustang]

Bundy is not an honest rancher.

That's what makes him such a perfect and fitting RW hero.

Seriously. Just think about it. Remember Ollie North? He ran a shadow gov't out of the basement of Reagan's WH and lied under oath in his testimony to Congress. The Right virtually raised him to the level of sainthood as far as their hero worship of him was concerned. That was true of pretty much all of the Iran Contra group under both Reagan and Bush 41.

How about Scooter Libby and anyone else in the Bush 43 administration, including VP Cheney, involved in the leaking of Valerie Plame's undercover identity? How close does that come to outright treason? That didn't matter to most people on the right who had no problem in sacrificing Plame and any of her sources in the furtherance of their political goals.

For that matter, what about Jonathan Pollard, the American who spied for Israel and got caught while Reagan was in office? Many people on the right have wanted him released for years.

Hell, the American RW backs and supports anyone who helps to further thier own political ends even when it ends up costing thousands of Americans their lives. Remember the man with the moniker of Curveball? While the American RW might be willing to put almost anyone with an Arabic name in prison for life with a minimum of evidence against him, let one of them come forward to help them further their goals of sending American troops overseas, and he suddenly becomes the embodiment of American ideals in many RW circles even if his motives are suspicious because he had plenty of reasons to lie. So, when Rāfid Aḥmad Alwān came forward with a story of Saddam having WMDs, anything he said which just so happened to support Bush's and Cheney's claims that Iraq was a threat to the US, Curveball became the new Patrick Henry as far as the RW was concerned. Thousands of Americans were sent to war and ultimately were killed or seriously wounded as a result of the Bush administration blindly accepting what he said. And they accepted it not because they necessarily believed it, but because it helped to further their political goal of getting Congress and the American people on board with their plan to send troops to the ME.

Consequently, making a theif like Bundy a RW hero should be no surprise to anyone at all.

 

[rightwinger]

Do we entrust the BLM to de facto ban ranching by setting ridiculously low grazing allowances because of some asshole environmentalists?

Maybe Bundy should go to court?

Oh wait....he already did and lost

Bundy does not get to decide our environmental laws at the end of a gun

Yes, federal laws, federal courts, backing up federal agencies. And you dodged my question as usual.

Federal land

 

[martybegan]

Maybe Bundy should go to court?

Oh wait....he already did and lost

Bundy does not get to decide our environmental laws at the end of a gun

Yes, federal laws, federal courts, backing up federal agencies. And you dodged my question as usual.

Federal land

Thats supposed to be available for use by the owners of property nearby, in particular for cattle grazing. Then the BLM placed limits that were a de facto ban on grazing.

You just love sucking federal government dick, don't you.

 

[martybegan]

bendog is obviously unaware of the fact that the FEDS killed a bunch of tortoises on purpose in order to clear land for the solar panel project.

Hopenchange!

All tortoises are equal, but some tortoises are more equal than others.

Oh THAT was your point in pointing out that tortoises aren't turtles! Sorry, that connection sort of went past me .... three feet outside the strike zone, Marty.

Yes, the two biggest uses the BLM seems to be pushing is conservation and tourism and energy production. To the detriment of grazing. Imagine that, promoting policies to benefit the majority of citizens. NO DOUBT YOU ARE OUTRAGED!!!!

You just don't get it. Evidently the dog in your avatar has an IQ advantage on you.

National parks are for tourism. BLM lands are for using as a public commons.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Wrong as usual.

We are FUCKED because Big Government has enacted so many laws and regulations that We Are All Criminals. But is the law fairly and equally enforced? No.

Instead, the law is used against what used to be law-abiding citizens (until bureaucrats made innocuous behavior illegal) to keep them silent and compliant while real criminals get away with violent felonies.

That is why we are FUCKED.

I'm not I dont have cattle and I dam sure didnt get two chances to stop breaking the law and ignored it. So yeah, he lost in court and he kept on doing the thing that was ruled illegal twice and his reasoning goes like this: "Because I want to and I think I should be able to"

That dont fly with him or the local drug dealer

You sad, gullible little booby.

The laws and regulations are so complicated now that Everyone unknowingly or not breaks the law. It's a design feature for totalitarians...and you enable it.

No, what happened was he went to court twice and was told he was breaking the law...twice.

I dont see how that is complicated at all because its not. So what you have is someone who was KNOWINGLY breaking the law. So dont pull that shit

 

[bendog]

I'm frankly shocked that the BLM would seek to put the land to the most beneficial economic use. Shocked.

This isn't national park land that is set aside for recreational use, this is public land designated for use by commercial activity.

And how is restricting cattle on the land for a tortoise no one eats or really does anything else with economically beneficial?

commercial activity means most economic sense. And again, WILDLIFE WATCHING GENERATES MORE MONEY THAT FREE GRAZING.

 

[Mustang]

It's rather difficult to have private land when the feds own 84% of a state.

If the Obama Administration fairly enforced the law, I'd be tempted to agree with you.

But, they don't. On the day the SWAT team was sent in against Bundy, Obama went to an Al Sharpton event...Sharpton owes $millions in back taxes. Where's the SWAT team to apprehend him?

Rev. Al deep in the red | New York Post

You are allowed to lease that federal land...but not for free. And from what I understand, at quite a reasonable price. Try leasing private land for that rate. Or better yet, try leasing private land and then refuse to pay rent for 20 years.

Try having regulation create a de facto ban on your business and see how you react to it. BLM wanted the Ranchers out of the area, so they set the head of cattle limits so low so as to make the herd sizes for each Rancher economically nonviable, thus protecting the wee turtles and putting the ranchers out of business.

Sounds like just another conspiracy theory to me with no substantiating evidence to support it, by the way.

 

[boedicca]

I'm frankly shocked that the BLM would seek to put the land to the most beneficial economic use. Shocked.

This isn't national park land that is set aside for recreational use, this is public land designated for use by commercial activity.

And how is restricting cattle on the land for a tortoise no one eats or really does anything else with economically beneficial?

commercial activity means most economic sense. And again, WILDLIFE WATCHING GENERATES MORE MONEY THAT FREE GRAZING.

Try eating your wildlife photos instead of a hamburger.

 

[Erand7899]

The guy owes a million dollars in fees.

No sympathy from me.

I pay taxes and fees I don't agree with. Who the fuck does he think he and why should he get a free ride on what everyone would agree are very very low grazing fees?

As far as I'm concerned he is free to graze his cattle on someone's private land. Let's see how long he can do that and not pay.

It's rather difficult to have private land when the feds own 84% of a state.

If the Obama Administration fairly enforced the law, I'd be tempted to agree with you.

But, they don't. On the day the SWAT team was sent in against Bundy, Obama went to an Al Sharpton event...Sharpton owes $millions in back taxes. Where's the SWAT team to apprehend him?

Rev. Al deep in the red | New York Post

You are allowed to lease that federal land...but not for free. And from what I understand, at quite a reasonable price. Try leasing private land for that rate. Or better yet, try leasing private land and then refuse to pay rent for 20 years.

Ranchers DO NOT lease public lands. They lease grazing rights to public land. The public can still use the land for public purposes such as hunting, fishing, hiking, camping, etc..

There is no doubt that the grazing fees are below market value, however, that is not the fault of the ranchers. It is the fault of BLM and the forest service.

And, what many fail to appreciate, is that most ranchers spend money improving the land. Their cattle benefit from the improvements, and so does the public.

I detest being put in the position of defending ranchers and their use of public lands. I can find a lot of fault with the system. Especially when the deer and elk populations suffer. But, I cannot sit by and see ignorance and partisan BS trumping the truth. The Bundy standoff was not, and is not, a contest about grazing fees.

 

[boedicca]

You are allowed to lease that federal land...but not for free. And from what I understand, at quite a reasonable price. Try leasing private land for that rate. Or better yet, try leasing private land and then refuse to pay rent for 20 years.

Try having regulation create a de facto ban on your business and see how you react to it. BLM wanted the Ranchers out of the area, so they set the head of cattle limits so low so as to make the herd sizes for each Rancher economically nonviable, thus protecting the wee turtles and putting the ranchers out of business.

Sounds like just another conspiracy theory to me with no substantiating evidence to support it, by the way.

As usual, your opinion and comments are unblemished by facts.

In reality, the FEDS have driven every rancher besides Bundy out of business in Clark County. If it wouldn't cause your brain to explode, I'd suggest you contemplate WHY.

 

[Howey]

Victor Davis Hanson has an excellent piece on why so many people are sympathizing with Clive Bundy.

One observation: in the U.S., we have an increasingly lawless government which uses the law to reward friends and punish enemies. As Bundy really wants nothing more from the government than to be left alone, he is an enemy. And hence, is very way of life must be eliminated.

Or....there's a lot of old, white racist nutcases out there pissed off that a majority of Americans elected a niggrah into office in 2008.

If Bundy wants to be left alone, he'd pay his debt to the government and get his fucking cattle off government land.

Period.

 

[boedicca]

It is a truth universally acknowledged that when one plays the RACE CARD, one has conceded that one has no valid case to make.

 

[Ava]

It is a goal of this government to purge the nation of all those in rural America. To use force to put people into mega cities where they can easily be controlled.

And targeted....

 

[Erand7899]

I don't see much difference between Bundy and a farmer or air polluter, whose allotment of water or units of pollution, is regulated, and is subject to being reduced as amounts of water and pollution fluctuate.

California is going to come under pressure to put less emphasis on nature conservation and more on private water consumption. So long as everyone has input, and the ultimate decision reflects some compromise and impartial balance of competing interests, I don't see the gripe.

Though there seem to be posters here who think they have an uninfringable right to pollute water and air so long as the water and air pass through property they own.

I doubt there are any posters here who think they have any uninfringable right to pollute water, and/or air, whether, or not, it passes through their land.

Whenever government agencies make rules that put people out of business, they better have a damn good reason for doing so. Is that concept unreasonable?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Bundy can't be an endangered species. If he were, he'd have no friends on the right.

 

[Erand7899]

Bundy wasn't polluting water. His cattle were actually performing a vital service - removing burnable debris. One of the NV State Reps noted that the land on which cattle graze is in better shape than nearby federally managed land which burned in uncontrolled wildfires.

This is why we are all fucked. This guy breaks the law and Boe says his law breaking was valuable service.

Boe sounds like the local drug dealer who sees it as not breaking the law but providing a product that is in high demand.

And Boe believes if he talks enough, gives enough excuses, renames law breaking then it will fool everyone into believing his bullshit

What law has Bundy broken? And, if he has broken the law, why hasn't he been arrested for breaking the law?

In fact, why haven't millions of illegals been arrested for breaking the law? Why haven't those pot smokers in Colorado and Washington been arrested for breaking the law? Why hasn't Harry Reid been arrested for his part in the theft of public land?

Your selective outrage shows that you are nothing more than a partisan stooge.

 

[bendog]

I don't see much difference between Bundy and a farmer or air polluter, whose allotment of water or units of pollution, is regulated, and is subject to being reduced as amounts of water and pollution fluctuate.

California is going to come under pressure to put less emphasis on nature conservation and more on private water consumption. So long as everyone has input, and the ultimate decision reflects some compromise and impartial balance of competing interests, I don't see the gripe.

Though there seem to be posters here who think they have an uninfringable right to pollute water and air so long as the water and air pass through property they own.

I doubt there are any posters here who think they have any uninfringable right to pollute water, and/or air, whether, or not, it passes through their land.

Whenever government agencies make rules that put people out of business, they better have a damn good reason for doing so. Is that concept unreasonable?

I'd disagree as to the beliefs of some fringe folks here, but whatever. To the larger issue, I agree, that when the fed govt, or state, changes a regulatory framework that makes it harder on a guy in a private market, there has to be a good reason.

That was really my point. In California, some farmers will not make it through the drought with reductions in irrigation from rivers and dams. The govt probably will anger sportsmen and environmentalists by allowing the farmers to get more water than the sportsmen and enviros like to see.

The BLM is charged with managing the land so as to protect it while also using it for the most economically benefical use. If I can raise cattle on private land in a feed lot cheaper that Bundy can raise on a free range, he has no right to expect me to subsidize him when there are other uses for the public land that can bring in more revenue.