Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You can't just Dam up a water way and expect other property owners not to complain and take action.
But that is not what happened here. Plus, this is a non navigable waterway.
It's a creek. And the flow of the creek has not been stopped. The same volume of water flows out of the pond as flows into the pond.
Look, let's cut out the bullshit.
This case is about a bureaucrat's ego. That's all.
Some yokel who happens to have the ear of some prick in the EPA with which he is acquainted got pissy over this guy's pond. And why? Because he doesn't like him very much.
Rule of law ....My ass.
It is my hope that this government bureaucrat tries to go toe to toe with the Wyoming House member who's gotten involved on behalf of this family and the result is this fucking useless bureaucrat finds himself looking for work in the private sector.
Source?
Oh, Fox News. LOL
So Fox News is making a story based on the claims of a person....No surprise there, perfectly normal for Fox "News".
I see that when you said that your political philosophy is anti party you actually meant pro government control.
I see that you think you can't hold a Right Wing perspective and know that Fox News is FOS 99.9% of the time.
Again I'll ask about this claim. It's one man stating it, not NEWS at all. News is what happens when there is proof. Just last month people repeated that a white guy was shot by a black man and it turned out the white guy shot himself just to blame it on a black person. California man admits blaming black man after intentionally shooting himself | The Raw Story
A national news source repeating the word of one man with no proof is what gets me. Provide the proof and I'll get involved.
I WANT to be proved wrong so I can become smarter. Until then, I'm just as smart as I can be ......
Word of mouth media doesn't make America any smarter..Fox News isn't news, it's politically bias actors doing what they can to make money.
Oh, Fox News. LOL
So Fox News is making a story based on the claims of a person....No surprise there, perfectly normal for Fox "News".
I see that when you said that your political philosophy is anti party you actually meant pro government control.
I see that you think you can't hold a Right Wing perspective and know that Fox News is FOS 99.9% of the time.
Again I'll ask about this claim. It's one man stating it, not NEWS at all. News is what happens when there is proof. Just last month people repeated that a white guy was shot by a black man and it turned out the white guy shot himself just to blame it on a black person. California man admits blaming black man after intentionally shooting himself | The Raw Story
A national news source repeating the word of one man with no proof is what gets me. Provide the proof and I'll get involved.
I WANT to be proved wrong so I can become smarter. Until then, I'm just as smart as I can be ......
Word of mouth media doesn't make America any smarter..Fox News isn't news, it's politically bias actors doing what they can to make money.
But that is not what happened here. Plus, this is a non navigable waterway.
It's a creek. And the flow of the creek has not been stopped. The same volume of water flows out of the pond as flows into the pond.
Look, let's cut out the bullshit.
This case is about a bureaucrat's ego. That's all.
Some yokel who happens to have the ear of some prick in the EPA with which he is acquainted got pissy over this guy's pond. And why? Because he doesn't like him very much.
Rule of law ....My ass.
It is my hope that this government bureaucrat tries to go toe to toe with the Wyoming House member who's gotten involved on behalf of this family and the result is this fucking useless bureaucrat finds himself looking for work in the private sector.
Source?
Funny how when someone posts about someone attacking someone you don't like you remember that there is a presumption of innocence, but you conveniently assume that anyone who supposedly breaks a law covered by the EPA he is automatically guilty and has to prove he is innocent.
The EPA says it cannot be sued over fines.
Does it really say that about itself? Can you quote the EPA saying you can't sue the EPA over it's fines?
If you go back and read the thread you will see I already did.
Obviously the rw kooks are the ones against law and order.
yes......Obviously.....You have no clue as to your level of stupidity.
The lib playbook....When out of rebuttals, go on the attack with false accusations.
That shit doesn't fly here.
Get this through your thick skull. This has nothing to do with the rule of law.
This is a shit storm perpetrated by a federal bureaucrat with an inflated opinion of himself.
This family is being singled out in direct violation to their rights under the equal protection clause.
The EPA is going to get stomped upon by Wyoming elected officials in DC.
It is a matter of law. That is all that it is.
He should take the government to court.
You can't just Dam up a water way and expect other property owners not to complain and take action.
My problem with this story, is none mentions where he lives, and there is no local story on it. The only links you can find are biased stories put out by Fox or The Blaze.
And did he dam a creek? How did the EPA find out about his creek? And how is his pond feeding other waterways?
If senators and the state are on his side, he is probably in the right but where is all the info and other sources?
Sent from my iPhone using the tears of Raider's fans.
My problem with this story, is none mentions where he lives, and there is no local story on it. The only links you can find are biased stories put out by Fox or The Blaze.
And did he dam a creek? How did the EPA find out about his creek? And how is his pond feeding other waterways?
If senators and the state are on his side, he is probably in the right but where is all the info and other sources?
Sent from my iPhone using the tears of Raider's fans.
I posted the story using a link from the local newspaper. Google is your friend.
And once again, a liberal not liking the facts of the story, attacks the source in attempt to discredit the story.
What makes this guy think that the water in a creek that has egress on his property is HIS water?
People sue the government all the time (often times winning). If he doesn't want to fight for his pond...so be it.
Honestly? The man shouldn't have to "fight for HIS pond." It's his property and it's his pond. The EPA needs to look for serious problems and stop harassing hard working, honest, taxpaying, American citizens.
Environmental laws seem to say he's violating them. This is why we have courts.
What makes this guy think that the water in a creek that has egress on his property is HIS water?
Whose water is it? Surely, it doesn't belong to the EPA or the Corps of Engineers. Has any downstream landowner with a superior water right protested his pond?
BTW, just because someone else has rights to the water, the landowner has the right to prevent erosion of his land, and that sometimes requires dams to stop the erosion.
My problem with this story, is none mentions where he lives, and there is no local story on it. The only links you can find are biased stories put out by Fox or The Blaze.
And did he dam a creek? How did the EPA find out about his creek? And how is his pond feeding other waterways?
If senators and the state are on his side, he is probably in the right but where is all the info and other sources?
Sent from my iPhone using the tears of Raider's fans.
I posted the story using a link from the local newspaper. Google is your friend.
And once again, a liberal not liking the facts of the story, attacks the source in attempt to discredit the story.
I did google.
And did you miss my last statement? Where I said he was probably right? I am sorry I don't make up my mind based on one source that doesn't present all the facts.
In my eyes, stock bonds are important to farmers, but if he dammed a creek and that is why someone reported him to the EPA then I want to know before I make up my mind. Why do conservatives assume so much, especially when I haven't stated I am against this man?
Sent from my iPhone using the tears of Raider's fans.
What makes this guy think that the water in a creek that has egress on his property is HIS water?
Whose water is it? Surely, it doesn't belong to the EPA or the Corps of Engineers. Has any downstream landowner with a superior water right protested his pond?
BTW, just because someone else has rights to the water, the landowner has the right to prevent erosion of his land, and that sometimes requires dams to stop the erosion.
How did the EPA find out?
Sent from my iPhone using the tears of Raider's fans.
I posted the story using a link from the local newspaper. Google is your friend.
And once again, a liberal not liking the facts of the story, attacks the source in attempt to discredit the story.
I did google.
And did you miss my last statement? Where I said he was probably right? I am sorry I don't make up my mind based on one source that doesn't present all the facts.
In my eyes, stock bonds are important to farmers, but if he dammed a creek and that is why someone reported him to the EPA then I want to know before I make up my mind. Why do conservatives assume so much, especially when I haven't stated I am against this man?
Sent from my iPhone using the tears of Raider's fans.
This is what YOU wrote...."The only links you can find are biased stories put out by Fox or The Blaze. "...
That is a conclusion. You disqualify Fox News and The Blaze as legitimate news sources.
You have made an issue of the source rather than the story itself. That even with the availability of links from other sources.
Whose water is it? Surely, it doesn't belong to the EPA or the Corps of Engineers. Has any downstream landowner with a superior water right protested his pond?
BTW, just because someone else has rights to the water, the landowner has the right to prevent erosion of his land, and that sometimes requires dams to stop the erosion.
How did the EPA find out?
Sent from my iPhone using the tears of Raider's fans.
Who knows. More than likely a busybody neighbor jealous of the pond.
Honestly? The man shouldn't have to "fight for HIS pond." It's his property and it's his pond. The EPA needs to look for serious problems and stop harassing hard working, honest, taxpaying, American citizens.
Environmental laws seem to say he's violating them. This is why we have courts.
Environmental laws don't say anything. Bureaucrats do, and when it comes to the EPA, they make it up as they go. They are a bunch of environmental control freaks running wild with the conviction of their religion.
The last time I was in the Colorado Rockies, I surveyed a whole series of beaver dams, and not a single one of them had a permit from any government agency. Nor, have I heard any complaints that they were polluting the watershed.
People sue the government all the time (often times winning). If he doesn't want to fight for his pond...so be it.
Honestly? The man shouldn't have to "fight for HIS pond." It's his property and it's his pond. The EPA needs to look for serious problems and stop harassing hard working, honest, taxpaying, American citizens.
Environmental laws seem to say he's violating them. This is why we have courts.
