My revised position on the Bundy Ranch crisis

[Iceweasel]

Where were all of these gun monkeys when Bush passed the PATRIOT Act?

Do you assholes actually want to fight against the big government? Quit defending a rich man's ranch and go storm Congress. Put Senators on their knees and execute them. Go to war against your own country.

PROVE that you have what it takes to defend freedom.

Prove that you have a brain. I double dog dare ya.

 

[Vigilante]

Guy, we had an election. Your side lost.

The fact you guys talk this armed revolution shit when you can't get your way at the ballot box (not that you guys ever do it) kind of outs you all as nujobs.

Assholes like you will have to learn the lessons of history, Hitler was elected also!

]

Yes, he was. And most Germans were totally good with what he did until Germany lost the war.

What is your fucking point here?

And let's be honest, most of you conservatives are running away from George W. Bush like he was an ex-wife with a lawyer.

Seems like you want to not respect elections when you lose and not take responsibility when you win.

I voted For Bush twice. After losing tens of thousands of dollars when my investment tanked, and having to work three jobs now because I had to take a 20% pay cut in his recession, I'll admit I fucked up voting for the guy.

Obama hasn't been great- I personally think the guy is a bit of a wuss - but he isn't the complete screwup Bush was.

And 40% or so Americans are THRILLED about the entitlements they get...what's your point?

Listen ASSHOLE, we stood behind Bush simply because he WASN'T GORE or that Vietnam traitor, Kerry! Another of the BEST of the WORST.

Idiots like you STILL don't understand that Clinton's HUD sec. Andy Cuomo was the basic cause of the economic collapse. You idiots are in denial, but that can be for another thread!

I hardly can believe that YOU THINK (that alone is funny) that B. Insane isn't a complete screw up! Over $7 TRILLION further in DEBT with his policies, just for a start, and he didn't have 2 major wars that sucked up all that money!

Go buy yourself a clue!

 

[mudwhistle]

Guy, we had an election. Your side lost.

The fact you guys talk this armed revolution shit when you can't get your way at the ballot box (not that you guys ever do it) kind of outs you all as nujobs.

Assholes like you will have to learn the lessons of history, Hitler was elected also!

]

Yes, he was. And most Germans were totally good with what he did until Germany lost the war.

What is your fucking point here?

And let's be honest, most of you conservatives are running away from George W. Bush like he was an ex-wife with a lawyer.

Seems like you want to not respect elections when you lose and not take responsibility when you win.

I voted For Bush twice. After losing tens of thousands of dollars when my investment tanked, and having to work three jobs now because I had to take a 20% pay cut in his recession, I'll admit I fucked up voting for the guy.

Obama hasn't been great- I personally think the guy is a bit of a wuss - but he isn't the complete screwup Bush was.

So you think Bush was the cause of your poor investments?

Why don't you blame him for your fan-belt breaking while you're at it.

Please point out in specifics what law he signed or what policy he supported that caused you to lose your investment.

I can point to specifics on Obama's ill deeds. Can you do the same with Bush?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Militia mutts, listen up.

Your neighbors and your LEO know you, know where you live.

The vast majority of Americans will join the fight against you if you ever rise up.

Wrong. I've been a member on a cop forum for many years and they are overwhelmingly pro 2nd amendment types that do not like where we've been heading. You watch too much TV.

I know 100s of LEO federal, state, local, and being proAmendment does not mean to them being proreactionarysilly.

They will eliminate any rising immediately.

99% of America will not support you.

 

[R.C. Christian]

The dingbat who supposedly lives in Portugal new found position is predicated by the fact that she didn't want to be unpopular among her fellow communist party members who would love nothing more than see everyone of the good guys mowed down in a Branch Davidian style cluster fuck. Isn't that right EsmeralDUH? What little joy you have in your insignificant life would no doubt be degraded if you didn't receive thanks by your fellow kiddie fiddlers and Comrades would it?

 

[Iceweasel]

Militia mutts, listen up.

Your neighbors and your LEO know you, know where you live.

The vast majority of Americans will join the fight against you if you ever rise up.

Wrong. I've been a member on a cop forum for many years and they are overwhelmingly pro 2nd amendment types that do not like where we've been heading. You watch too much TV.

I know 100s of LEO federal, state, local, and being proAmendment does not mean to them being proreactionarysilly.

They will eliminate any rising immediately.

99% of America will not support you.

That isn't what they say and if a small incident like this can get so many people involved it doesn't take much to realize you're full of it. And watching TV doesn't mean that you know the people or what they'll do.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Okay. I never said I was perfect, but even I know when to change my views to reality. I promised myself I would never be so stubborn as to be blinded to the facts. Mr. Bundy did break the law. He lost two court cases which mandated he pack up and leave. In 1993, the Federal Government chose to designate the Bunkerville Range area as a habitat for an endangered species of desert tortoise. They told him that he could not have more than 150 head of cattle on that land at any point in time. Yet he chose to continue letting all 1000 of his cows graze on the land. According to the government, he now owes $1.1 million in back grazing fees.

Let's also get another thing straight here. He doesn't own the land. He owned (past tense) the grazing rights to the Bunkerville Allotment. Under the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, the government can revoke grazing rights for a set of reasons, including but not limited to circumstances which deplete the grazing area. He claims "preemptive rights" over the land in question, but as I see it, I tend to disagree. Being a Native American, I am inclined to believe that the Native American tribes who lived in that area for well over 3,000 years have a "preeminent right" to that land, not Mr. Bundy, or the Federal Government; but I digress.

In 1998, Clark County purchased the grazing rights to this 250 square mile swath of land and chose to retire them once again for the sake of a desert tortoise. Mr. Bundy contends that only the State of Nevada can solve this issue since it does indeed own the grazing rights. He would be correct. But he also did make threatening statements to government officials. That still doesn't change the fact he broke the law. That also does not excuse the government from its behavior either.

I cannot ignore how the government is handling this issue. They have assaulted protesters and set up "free speech" zones for these protesters. They proceeded to taser Bundy's son in the fracas. My support for Mr. Bundy doesn't hinge on his misconduct, but on how he is being treated by the government. He could have simply up and left, but he didn't. The government could have simply conducted this operation peacefully, not in a heavy handed manner, and without inflaming the surrounding populous plus ultimately Americans across the country. I think both the Federal Government and more ultimately the State of Nevada hold the fate of this entire conflict in their hands.

I am also inclined to believe that if further, more intense violence ensues i.e. gun violence, this could be the exact excuse that Democrats and our President would use to pass some sort of gun control legislation in Congress. Militias are falling for the bait, and any way you slice it, this won't be good for anyone.

That is all. Discuss this as you please.

I also revised my position yesterday, TK. Same reason. If we don't obey the law of the land we are acting in lawlessness and that is wrong. As I understand it there is a standing court order. That pretty much settles it unless he wants to challenge it in court. But inviting thousands of people out there to join in the stand off is wrong. What if these people get hurt? Does the rancher want that on his conscience? I wouldn't want it on mine. The situation seems to be escalating and it is very disturbing to me. Even if his rights were violated the place to settle this is in a court of law. For the sake of others he must rethink this. imo.

My GrandFather had a farm in Kentucky and farmed some 500 acres. Way back in the day the State decided to build interstate 64. There were some 35 farms that were "in the way" that the state wanted to build through.

They needed some 50 acres of my Grandfathers land - and in the process would cut off his water access for his cattle. They offered him 200 per acre. He paid 450 per acre plus 5000 for water rights. He turned their offer down.

Within 6 weeks, the courts had taken the land, and sent him a check for $10,000. He had to stop raising cattle - couldn't get to the water.

That's the LAW. Either give in and conform - or have it taken from you. Imminent Domain. So, remember that the next time you buy property...it will never be "yours". EVERYTHING belongs to the government, They merely "allow" you to live there - as long as you remain current on the taxes.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Wrong. I've been a member on a cop forum for many years and they are overwhelmingly pro 2nd amendment types that do not like where we've been heading. You watch too much TV.

I know 100s of LEO federal, state, local, and being proAmendment does not mean to them being proreactionarysilly.

They will eliminate any rising immediately.

99% of America will not support you.

That isn't what they say and if a small incident like this can get so many people involved it doesn't take much to realize you're full of it. And watching TV doesn't mean that you know the people or what they'll do.

Yes, it is what they say. You are trying to extrapolate from a very small sample a larger hypothesis.

And I do know that the mutts at the Bundy incident are being identified from video and license plates, etc., as well as from the informers inside the group.

Most them will be arrested individually, charged, and begin their presence in the system.

 

[Iceweasel]

I know 100s of LEO federal, state, local, and being proAmendment does not mean to them being proreactionarysilly.

They will eliminate any rising immediately.

99% of America will not support you.

That isn't what they say and if a small incident like this can get so many people involved it doesn't take much to realize you're full of it. And watching TV doesn't mean that you know the people or what they'll do.

Yes, it is what they say. You are trying to extrapolate from a very small sample a larger hypothesis.

And I do know that the mutts at the Bundy incident are being identified from video and license plates, etc., as well as from the informers inside the group.

Most them will be arrested individually, charged, and begin their presence in the system.

I'm extrapolating from a large group for over 8 years that spans the country so I'll believe them instead you. And I do fully expect the "rebels" to get audited, arrested? No. It will be sneaky behind the back stuff, not anything that Republicans can show in political ads.

 

[Vigilante]

 

[RandallFlagg]

Well, this is surfacing once again, and I'm glad that it is.

U.S. Senator Reid, son combine for China firm's desert plant | Reuters

I don't know if THIS is the "Southern Nevada desert" that they are talking about, but I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if it was.....

 

[Vigilante]

Well, this is surfacing once again, and I'm glad that it is.

U.S. Senator Reid, son combine for China firm's desert plant | Reuters

I don't know if THIS is the "Southern Nevada desert" that they are talking about, but I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if it was.....

 

[JakeStarkey]

That isn't what they say and if a small incident like this can get so many people involved it doesn't take much to realize you're full of it. And watching TV doesn't mean that you know the people or what they'll do.

Yes, it is what they say. You are trying to extrapolate from a very small sample a larger hypothesis.

And I do know that the mutts at the Bundy incident are being identified from video and license plates, etc., as well as from the informers inside the group.

Most them will be arrested individually, charged, and begin their presence in the system.

I'm extrapolating from a large group for over 8 years that spans the country so I'll believe them instead you. And I do fully expect the "rebels" to get audited, arrested? No. It will be sneaky behind the back stuff, not anything that Republicans can show in political ads.

You are fibbing, ice. Yes, the protestors will taken out of the game in the next few weeks into the justice system. I guarantee you the GOP mainstream in no way will back you weirdoes.

 

[idb]

Okay. I never said I was perfect, but even I know when to change my views to reality. I promised myself I would never be so stubborn as to be blinded to the facts. Mr. Bundy did break the law. He lost two court cases which mandated he pack up and leave. In 1993, the Federal Government chose to designate the Bunkerville Range area as a habitat for an endangered species of desert tortoise. They told him that he could not have more than 150 head of cattle on that land at any point in time. Yet he chose to continue letting all 1000 of his cows graze on the land. According to the government, he now owes $1.1 million in back grazing fees.

Let's also get another thing straight here. He doesn't own the land. He owned (past tense) the grazing rights to the Bunkerville Allotment. Under the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, the government can revoke grazing rights for a set of reasons, including but not limited to circumstances which deplete the grazing area. He claims "preemptive rights" over the land in question, but as I see it, I tend to disagree. Being a Native American, I am inclined to believe that the Native American tribes who lived in that area for well over 3,000 years have a "preeminent right" to that land, not Mr. Bundy, or the Federal Government; but I digress.

In 1998, Clark County purchased the grazing rights to this 250 square mile swath of land and chose to retire them once again for the sake of a desert tortoise. Mr. Bundy contends that only the State of Nevada can solve this issue since it does indeed own the grazing rights. He would be correct. But he also did make threatening statements to government officials. That still doesn't change the fact he broke the law. That also does not excuse the government from its behavior either.

I cannot ignore how the government is handling this issue. They have assaulted protesters and set up "free speech" zones for these protesters. They proceeded to taser Bundy's son in the fracas. My support for Mr. Bundy doesn't hinge on his misconduct, but on how he is being treated by the government. He could have simply up and left, but he didn't. The government could have simply conducted this operation peacefully, not in a heavy handed manner, and without inflaming the surrounding populous plus ultimately Americans across the country. I think both the Federal Government and more ultimately the State of Nevada hold the fate of this entire conflict in their hands.

I am also inclined to believe that if further, more intense violence ensues i.e. gun violence, this could be the exact excuse that Democrats and our President would use to pass some sort of gun control legislation in Congress. Militias are falling for the bait, and any way you slice it, this won't be good for anyone.

That is all. Discuss this as you please.

I am sure that in grade school, your composition teacher told you that you ought to conclude your essays with a statement that emphasizes the point that you wish to make.

Given that, you just submitted a load off shit disguised as a contrite admission of error.

One......the Democrats and our Preident ( nice of you to admit that ) could not pass "some sort" of gun control legislation even if they had the political will to do so........which they most certainly do not. You must know this.

Two......when an insane nutter calls for assistance from "militias" regarding a legal issue such as this......he needs to be taken seriously. The inflammation is not caused by "the government".

Three....the federal government and the state of Nevada do, in fact have the fate of this "conflict" in their hands. If it ends without a shot being fired......or otherwise. If the former, will you praise them for their handling if it?

Finally.....look again at your opening statement. Your comp teacher should have told you that the opening is equally as important as the close. You want the reader to know that you have never claimed to be perfect....but EVEN YOU know when to "change your views to reality".

How interesting. Even you? Meaning.....even someone as near perfect as you? I wonder why you ever find yourself outside the bounds if reality to begin with? Doing the research before taking a stance might help you to do that with less frequency. Reality is in the facts. The facts of this case have never changed. What changed, for you, is that you finally took the time to get them.

Decidedly imperfect.

Oooo, you're a tough marker.
I'm glad that you weren't my English teacher!

 

[RandallFlagg]

Okay. I never said I was perfect, but even I know when to change my views to reality. I promised myself I would never be so stubborn as to be blinded to the facts. Mr. Bundy did break the law. He lost two court cases which mandated he pack up and leave. In 1993, the Federal Government chose to designate the Bunkerville Range area as a habitat for an endangered species of desert tortoise. They told him that he could not have more than 150 head of cattle on that land at any point in time. Yet he chose to continue letting all 1000 of his cows graze on the land. According to the government, he now owes $1.1 million in back grazing fees.

Let's also get another thing straight here. He doesn't own the land. He owned (past tense) the grazing rights to the Bunkerville Allotment. Under the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, the government can revoke grazing rights for a set of reasons, including but not limited to circumstances which deplete the grazing area. He claims "preemptive rights" over the land in question, but as I see it, I tend to disagree. Being a Native American, I am inclined to believe that the Native American tribes who lived in that area for well over 3,000 years have a "preeminent right" to that land, not Mr. Bundy, or the Federal Government; but I digress.

In 1998, Clark County purchased the grazing rights to this 250 square mile swath of land and chose to retire them once again for the sake of a desert tortoise. Mr. Bundy contends that only the State of Nevada can solve this issue since it does indeed own the grazing rights. He would be correct. But he also did make threatening statements to government officials. That still doesn't change the fact he broke the law. That also does not excuse the government from its behavior either.

I cannot ignore how the government is handling this issue. They have assaulted protesters and set up "free speech" zones for these protesters. They proceeded to taser Bundy's son in the fracas. My support for Mr. Bundy doesn't hinge on his misconduct, but on how he is being treated by the government. He could have simply up and left, but he didn't. The government could have simply conducted this operation peacefully, not in a heavy handed manner, and without inflaming the surrounding populous plus ultimately Americans across the country. I think both the Federal Government and more ultimately the State of Nevada hold the fate of this entire conflict in their hands.

I am also inclined to believe that if further, more intense violence ensues i.e. gun violence, this could be the exact excuse that Democrats and our President would use to pass some sort of gun control legislation in Congress. Militias are falling for the bait, and any way you slice it, this won't be good for anyone.

That is all. Discuss this as you please.

I am sure that in grade school, your composition teacher told you that you ought to conclude your essays with a statement that emphasizes the point that you wish to make.

Given that, you just submitted a load off shit disguised as a contrite admission of error.

One......the Democrats and our Preident ( nice of you to admit that ) could not pass "some sort" of gun control legislation even if they had the political will to do so........which they most certainly do not. You must know this.

Two......when an insane nutter calls for assistance from "militias" regarding a legal issue such as this......he needs to be taken seriously. The inflammation is not caused by "the government".

Three....the federal government and the state of Nevada do, in fact have the fate of this "conflict" in their hands. If it ends without a shot being fired......or otherwise. If the former, will you praise them for their handling if it?

Finally.....look again at your opening statement. Your comp teacher should have told you that the opening is equally as important as the close. You want the reader to know that you have never claimed to be perfect....but EVEN YOU know when to "change your views to reality".

How interesting. Even you? Meaning.....even someone as near perfect as you? I wonder why you ever find yourself outside the bounds if reality to begin with? Doing the research before taking a stance might help you to do that with less frequency. Reality is in the facts. The facts of this case have never changed. What changed, for you, is that you finally took the time to get them.

Decidedly imperfect.

Oooo, you're a tough marker.
I'm glad that you weren't my English teacher!

I doubt very seriously that this clown ever took a College level English class. I'd be surprised to learn he even completed GED level classes.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Well, this is surfacing once again, and I'm glad that it is.

U.S. Senator Reid, son combine for China firm's desert plant | Reuters

I don't know if THIS is the "Southern Nevada desert" that they are talking about, but I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if it was.....

I see. So I guess that the Rancher's story that the "Feds own 85% of Nevada" would be correct. Still Reid and his Son shilling for China should put them both in prison. I understand it won't but it should. That land belongs to the people of the United States - not the People's Republic of China.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Militia mutts, listen up.

Your neighbors and your LEO know you, know where you live.

The vast majority of Americans will join the fight against you if you ever rise up.

The difference, Jake?

They aren't afraid of the LEO's, and odds are some of those LEO's are militia mutts. Guess you're boned, buddy!

 

[OnePercenter]

Okay. I never said I was perfect, but even I know when to change my views to reality. I promised myself I would never be so stubborn as to be blinded to the facts. Mr. Bundy did break the law. He lost two court cases which mandated he pack up and leave. In 1993, the Federal Government chose to designate the Bunkerville Range area as a habitat for an endangered species of desert tortoise. They told him that he could not have more than 150 head of cattle on that land at any point in time. Yet he chose to continue letting all 1000 of his cows graze on the land. According to the government, he now owes $1.1 million in back grazing fees.

Let's also get another thing straight here. He doesn't own the land. He owned (past tense) the grazing rights to the Bunkerville Allotment. Under the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, the government can revoke grazing rights for a set of reasons, including but not limited to circumstances which deplete the grazing area. He claims "preemptive rights" over the land in question, but as I see it, I tend to disagree. Being a Native American, I am inclined to believe that the Native American tribes who lived in that area for well over 3,000 years have a "preeminent right" to that land, not Mr. Bundy, or the Federal Government; but I digress.

In 1998, Clark County purchased the grazing rights to this 250 square mile swath of land and chose to retire them once again for the sake of a desert tortoise. Mr. Bundy contends that only the State of Nevada can solve this issue since it does indeed own the grazing rights. He would be correct. But he also did make threatening statements to government officials. That still doesn't change the fact he broke the law. That also does not excuse the government from its behavior either.

I cannot ignore how the government is handling this issue. They have assaulted protesters and set up "free speech" zones for these protesters. They proceeded to taser Bundy's son in the fracas. My support for Mr. Bundy doesn't hinge on his misconduct, but on how he is being treated by the government. He could have simply up and left, but he didn't. The government could have simply conducted this operation peacefully, not in a heavy handed manner, and without inflaming the surrounding populous plus ultimately Americans across the country. I think both the Federal Government and more ultimately the State of Nevada hold the fate of this entire conflict in their hands.

I am also inclined to believe that if further, more intense violence ensues i.e. gun violence, this could be the exact excuse that Democrats and our President would use to pass some sort of gun control legislation in Congress. Militias are falling for the bait, and any way you slice it, this won't be good for anyone.

That is all. Discuss this as you please.

He's a criminal.

And you're a liar, what's your point?

You're such a low thinker. Hey! Did ya hear read the newest GOP budget proposal? You get screwed while we rich receive a $58,000.00 tax break!!! God I LOVE AMERICA!!!!

 

[Papageorgio]

He's a criminal.

And you're a liar, what's your point?

You're such a low thinker. Hey! Did ya hear read the newest GOP budget proposal? You get screwed while we rich receive a $58,000.00 tax break!!! God I LOVE AMERICA!!!!

Oh the liar stirs again, you don't pay taxes, remember.

Lies get tough to keep straight, idiot.


Sent from my iPad using an Android.

 

[Smilebong]

Okay. I never said I was perfect, but even I know when to change my views to reality. I promised myself I would never be so stubborn as to be blinded to the facts. Mr. Bundy did break the law. He lost two court cases which mandated he pack up and leave. In 1993, the Federal Government chose to designate the Bunkerville Range area as a habitat for an endangered species of desert tortoise. They told him that he could not have more than 150 head of cattle on that land at any point in time. Yet he chose to continue letting all 1000 of his cows graze on the land. According to the government, he now owes $1.1 million in back grazing fees.

Let's also get another thing straight here. He doesn't own the land. He owned (past tense) the grazing rights to the Bunkerville Allotment. Under the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, the government can revoke grazing rights for a set of reasons, including but not limited to circumstances which deplete the grazing area. He claims "preemptive rights" over the land in question, but as I see it, I tend to disagree. Being a Native American, I am inclined to believe that the Native American tribes who lived in that area for well over 3,000 years have a "preeminent right" to that land, not Mr. Bundy, or the Federal Government; but I digress.

In 1998, Clark County purchased the grazing rights to this 250 square mile swath of land and chose to retire them once again for the sake of a desert tortoise. Mr. Bundy contends that only the State of Nevada can solve this issue since it does indeed own the grazing rights. He would be correct. But he also did make threatening statements to government officials. That still doesn't change the fact he broke the law. That also does not excuse the government from its behavior either.

I cannot ignore how the government is handling this issue. They have assaulted protesters and set up "free speech" zones for these protesters. They proceeded to taser Bundy's son in the fracas. My support for Mr. Bundy doesn't hinge on his misconduct, but on how he is being treated by the government. He could have simply up and left, but he didn't. The government could have simply conducted this operation peacefully, not in a heavy handed manner, and without inflaming the surrounding populous plus ultimately Americans across the country. I think both the Federal Government and more ultimately the State of Nevada hold the fate of this entire conflict in their hands.

I am also inclined to believe that if further, more intense violence ensues i.e. gun violence, this could be the exact excuse that Democrats and our President would use to pass some sort of gun control legislation in Congress. Militias are falling for the bait, and any way you slice it, this won't be good for anyone.

That is all. Discuss this as you please.

Yes, he lost court cases, but he still disputes the government's right to take over that land.