I can already imagine everyone backing him grabbing their parachutes and hitting the emergency spin button.
There is a strong possibility that the majority of the idiots supporting him feel exactly the same as Bundy. I would not hold your breath waiting for people to express their disappointment in a man they were willing to throw their wives and daughters on the front lines for.
Git 'er done.
"My brain's a good brain!"
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,297
another conservative racist with a cause glorified by fox news....
seriously, the REAL conservatives out there need to reign people like this in. if you keep giving them a platform the gop will never ever win the white house again.
I met a guy in the store yesterday that I would say is a real conservative who did just that. . He vehemently expressed outrage at the far right wing neo-cons. I suggested he might like reading Jim Bacevich and he said he was already a fan. He described himself as an "Eisenhower conservative" (while at the same time admitting that Eisenhower was not perfect). He said there are few true conservatives today, that too many who claim to be so are extremists. He was outraged by what we have been doing in the middle east and talked about how all the money we have wasted there could have been used to help people.
We didn't talk about Bundy but I'm sure he would not have giving this man any credence or backing for his actions. It was a pleasure to meet a self-proclaimed conservative with good common sense.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
the worst thing to happen to the gop and the conservative movement as a whole is the tea party. but they embrace the tea party because they need the votes.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,297
the worst thing to happen to the gop and the conservative movement as a whole is the tea party.
Yeah, I agree and along with this the whole mentality that we need to be super paranoid about terrorists. The whole constantly being on the alert, being suspicious of certain people because of their ethnicity or religion. And add to that the plethora of far right talk-show personalities who continue to whip up the paranoia and fear with religious-like zeal. But I would suggest to Dems that the failings of the GOP are not a reason to get too complacent.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
and Paul and Heller desperately scrambling to distance themselves..... how perfect I think maybe all of those yeehaw Patriots "didn't have nothing to do" either wow
It amazes me how so many people here get away from what the real issue is, and sit on their high horse and use name calling ect.
The main issue is, is it ok for the federal government to send in armed troops over collecting back fees and to confiscate someone's property? For something that has been going on for 20+ plus years, why didn't the government put a lien on his cattle? Why go in with a small army? It seems to me that there were far more better options to take than the one that was taken.
Is Cliven at fault? Yes. Is Cliven right? No. Should federal troops have been sent in? No.
It seems that even though that is the real issue, many people are turning the issue into his ridiculous comments. I think the guy is an idiot, but that still doesn't make it okay for the government to roll in with an army.
It amazes me how so many people here get away from what the real issue is, and sit on their high horse and use name calling ect.
The main issue is, is it ok for the federal government to send in armed troops over collecting back fees and to confiscate someone's property? For something that has been going on for 20+ plus years, why didn't the government put a lien on his cattle? Why go in with a small army? It seems to me that there were far more better options to take than the one that was taken.
Is Cliven at fault? Yes. Is Cliven right? No. Should federal troops have been sent in? No.
It seems that even though that is the real issue, many people are turning the issue into his ridiculous comments. I think the guy is an idiot, but that still doesn't make it okay for the government to roll in with an army.
So what are you saying?
After 20 years of refusing to pay what he owed... the government should have said, "Pretty please?"
Given what they were facing a mob- most of them not playing with a full deck- I'm pretty sure there are some children out there that are thankful their dad was protected as they carried out the duties they were dragged into fulfilling.
I'm saying why did it get to 20 years? Why all of a sudden after 20 years did it become an immediate issue for the BLM to take the actions they took? Why did they let it go for 20 years? Why didn't the government ever put a lien on his cattle, causing him not to be able to sell them until the fines were paid? They had 20 years to do that. Why all of a sudden send rangers in to gather the cattle? The whole situation has been mishandled from the start.
It amazes me how so many people here get away from what the real issue is, and sit on their high horse and use name calling ect.
The main issue is, is it ok for the federal government to send in armed troops over collecting back fees and to confiscate someone's property? For something that has been going on for 20+ plus years, why didn't the government put a lien on his cattle? Why go in with a small army? It seems to me that there were far more better options to take than the one that was taken.
Is Cliven at fault? Yes. Is Cliven right? No. Should federal troops have been sent in? No.
It seems that even though that is the real issue, many people are turning the issue into his ridiculous comments. I think the guy is an idiot, but that still doesn't make it okay for the government to roll in with an army.
... The Main Issue is that Mr. Bundy has been trespassing for 20+ years. And the only reason WHY the government sent in a force of that size was because its initial force was met with a large opposition of armed protestors. If those asshole with their guns weren't on site in the first place, a larger force by the government would not have been required. ... It is the same thing if you met 2 Marshals attempting to arrest you for illegal activities in the past 20 years and you had 100 friends, armed with guns on your property. They would leave... but, come back with more fire power that you and your friends possess. .... Does that make sense?
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
0
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
It's not about his personal opinion.
It's about the Feds grabbing land. How many of you on here would have the same position if Bush were President?
It's not about his personal opinion. It's about the Feds grabbing land. How many of you on here would have the same position if Bush were President? I know I would.
... I would, too. I would STILL believe that Mr. Bundy refuses to comply to courts decisions and continues to conduct his trespassing on public land for personal gain (profits from his cattle ranch business). It has NOTHING to do with who is President and everything to do with Mr. Bundy's behaviour. ... For the record... it is not a Federal 'Land Grab'... if the land already belongs to all of us U/s. citizens. It is more of a land grab by Mr. Bundy for land that belongs to you and me.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
So again I ask, in the past 20 years why wasn't a lien put on his cattle for federal violations? It would seem if this was done in the past 19 and a half years we wouldn't even know who this guy is. The only political issue is people making it one. Liberals using it a reason to bash 2nd amendment supporters, and 2nd amendment supporters using it as a reason we need the 2nd amendment.
and Paul and Heller desperately scrambling to distance themselves..... how perfect I think maybe all of those yeehaw Patriots "didn't have nothing to do" either wow
of course they are scattering like the rats that they are.
with the paul family's history of assocaiting with racists, rand needs to get as far away from this guy as possible. he needs to denounce and condemn him in the media.
perhaps these people with a hard on for all things anti federal government should vet their champions a little better before automatically defending and supporting them?? just a common sense thing to do, ya know?
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
It's about the Feds grabbing land. How many of you on here would have the same position if Bush were President?
I know I would.
No, its not about the Feds grabbing land. The Feds own the public land he's grazing his cattle on, illegally. No one is grabbing Bundy's land. He's more than welcome to continue to graze his cattle on his land. The Feds have owned 86% of Nevada since its inception as a state and joining the union. Why now is the Fed owning/controlling land in Nevada an issue? Why now after 100+ years?
So again I ask, in the past 20 years why wasn't a lien put on his cattle for federal violations? It would seem if this was done in the past 19 and a half years we wouldn't even know who this guy is. The only political issue is people making it one. Liberals using it a reason to bash 2nd amendment supporters, and 2nd amendment supporters using it as a reason we need the 2nd amendment.
... Here is why it took 20 years: March 3, 1877 Congress passes Desert Lands Act, allowing citizens to buy up to 640 acres of public land if the land is brought under cultivation.
1946 Congress forms the Bureau of Land Management by combining two existing agencies, the Grazing Service, established in 1934 to administer grazing on public rangelands, and the General Land Office, created in 1812 to oversee disposal of federal lands.
1954 The Bundy family of Southern Nevada seeks BLM approval to graze livestock on a section of federal land called the “Bunkerville Allotment” along the Virgin River.
1966 The Bundy family seeks approval of six grazing agreements with the BLM, agreements that could be terminated by the agency after due notice in writing because of default or violation.
Early 1990s BLM develops plans to protect the desert tortoise on federal lands in Southern Nevada. Tells Bundy permission to graze his cattle on public lands would depend on tortoise sitings.
March 1993 Bundy stops paying fees for grazing rights.
July 13, 1993 BLM sends Bundy a trespass notice on lands now deemed illegal for grazing.
January 24, 1994 Bundy throws away a BLM order to remove cattle that was left on his dashboard.
February 1994 Bundy pays grazing fees to Clark County. County returns check, citing lack of jurisdiction.
1995 BLM issues more trespass notices. Bundy challenges the agency’s authority.
1997 Bundy rejects BLM’s invitation to meet.
November 3, 1998 U.S. District Court for Nevada orders Bundy to remove his livestock from the Bunkerville allotment of federal land before Nov. 3, 1998. He also is ordered to pay trespass damages to the government.
April 2008 BLM notifies Bundy that if he doesn’t remove his livestock and fencing from public lands, the government would do it and charge him the costs.
May 2008 May 2008: Bundy tells BLM he will do whatever is necessary to protect his "unalienable forage, water and access rights.”
June 8, 2011 BLM sends trespass notice to Bundy.
July 2011 BLM notifies Bundy his livestock continues to graze on federal land and the cattle may be impounded and sold.
April 2012 Department of Interior offers to gather and ship the cattle for sale, with Bundy getting the money. Bundy rejects the offer.
2013 BLM officials say they would not use their impound authority because of concern the situation could escalate.
July 9, 2013U.S. District Court for Nevada finds that Bundy not only has failed to comply with the court’s 1998 order to remove cattle from the Bunkerville Allotment, but that he also is now grazing livestock on “a broad swath of additional public lands” without approval.
The court further finds that Bundy has caused “irreparable harm” by allowing his cattle to damage the public lands.
Bundy argues that the federal court lacks jurisdiction because the United States does not own the public lands in question. U.S. District Judge Lloyd George notes that in the 1998 ruling the court found that “the public lands in Nevada are the property of the United States because the United States has held title to those public lands since 1848, when Mexico ceded the land to the United States.”
The court rejects Bundy’s motion to dismiss the case and permanently enjoins him from trespassing on the public lands in question. He is given 45 days to remove his livestock. If he fails to comply, the government is authorized to seize and remove his cattle.
September 2013 BLM sends Bundy a list of his cattle seen on public lands. He is billed almost $330,000 in trespassing and investigation fee.
October 8, 2013U.S. District Court for Nevada finds that in spite of its July order, Bundy continues to graze his cattle illegally on public lands. The court also states that Bundy’s objections to the government’s actions are “without merit.”
U.S. District Judge Larry Hicks gives the government authority to enforce the July order and permanently prohibits Bundy from trespassing on the former Bunkerville Allotment.
March 19, 2014 Bureau of Land Management issues notice of intent to remove “unauthorized livestock” from 13 specific allotments in Clark County.
March 27, 2014 The Department of the Interior through the BLM publishes notice in the Federal Register of the planned temporary closure of certain public lands in Southern Nevada to allow the impoundment of livestock grazing illegally on the lands.
April 5, 2014 BLM begins impoundment and removal of Bundy’s livestock from public lands as authorized in two U.S. District court orders.
April 12, 2014 With armed Bundy supporters massing near Bunkerville, BLM Director Neil Kornze announces decision to conclude the gathering of cattle from federal lands and to return corralled cattle to the rancher.
Post edited by Cosmo on
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
Geez, I'd say the government was pretty patient and reasonable and had every right to show up with an armed army. Bundy is a huge dick and should go to jail for his actions. Yea, some hero he is. But I'd be happy if he just got his damn cattle off of my land.
And I'd suggest the Feds seize his assets and have the IRS do an audit of him and his family going back 20 years. Maybe he claimed the fees as a business expense but since he never paid them, he might be in a little deeper than he thinks. Jerk.
And I'd suggest the Feds seize his assets and have the IRS do an audit of him and his family going back 20 years. Maybe he claimed the fees as a business expense but since he never paid them, he might be in a little deeper than he thinks. Jerk.
Peace.
i would like to see an audit too.
look at al capone. you fuck with the feds too much and they will find something to nail you for. ie tax evasion.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
So again I ask, in the past 20 years why wasn't a lien put on his cattle for federal violations? It would seem if this was done in the past 19 and a half years we wouldn't even know who this guy is. The only political issue is people making it one. Liberals using it a reason to bash 2nd amendment supporters, and 2nd amendment supporters using it as a reason we need the 2nd amendment.
We all can agree the us gov's not efficient. As you, kills me when the law comes at you with lethal force as they did in Waco and ruby ridge so get what your saying. Also though don't want cattle destroying landscape and dude getting free rent. Could have been handled better. Is an ass though.
The Feds own it on our behalf and administer it on our behalf, so thieves like Bundy don't run willy nilly doing whatever they damn well please, like stealing cactuses or cutting down red woods, all for the benefit of future generations. Mr. Bundy could still be grazing his cattle and using the "public" lands, administered by the Feds, if he had only just kept up with his grazing permit fees. Pretty simple really. And he could take his cattle off my land and graze them on his ranch, which no one is trying to "grab", "steal" or tell him how to run his cattle on. Maybe Bundy should stop accepting welfare and pay his own damn way so he can stop being a slave?
Want to retract your statement that "Reid was bought off?" Or at least provide a link or factual information that this is so?
... Hate to break the news to you... but, the United States of America owns the land in question. You are free to use the land providing you pay the specified fees to acquire the necessary permits and follow the rules regarding land usage. That is why I cannot clear forests in Yosemite to build a cabin and build a fence around it to keep you out. .. Also, there is a difference between Public Property and Privately owned property, in case you didn't know. The government isn't out to 'steal' Mr. Bundy's private property... they are trying to evict him from OUR (U.S. Citizens) property.
Post edited by Cosmo on
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
Comments
let's see if fox keeps covering him or does a complee 180.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
I can already imagine everyone backing him grabbing their parachutes and hitting the emergency spin button.
Git 'er done.
We didn't talk about Bundy but I'm sure he would not have giving this man any credence or backing for his actions. It was a pleasure to meet a self-proclaimed conservative with good common sense.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
I think maybe all of those yeehaw Patriots "didn't have nothing to do" either
wow
The main issue is, is it ok for the federal government to send in armed troops over collecting back fees and to confiscate someone's property? For something that has been going on for 20+ plus years, why didn't the government put a lien on his cattle? Why go in with a small army? It seems to me that there were far more better options to take than the one that was taken.
Is Cliven at fault? Yes. Is Cliven right? No. Should federal troops have been sent in? No.
It seems that even though that is the real issue, many people are turning the issue into his ridiculous comments. I think the guy is an idiot, but that still doesn't make it okay for the government to roll in with an army.
After 20 years of refusing to pay what he owed... the government should have said, "Pretty please?"
Given what they were facing a mob- most of them not playing with a full deck- I'm pretty sure there are some children out there that are thankful their dad was protected as they carried out the duties they were dragged into fulfilling.
The Main Issue is that Mr. Bundy has been trespassing for 20+ years.
And the only reason WHY the government sent in a force of that size was because its initial force was met with a large opposition of armed protestors.
If those asshole with their guns weren't on site in the first place, a larger force by the government would not have been required.
...
It is the same thing if you met 2 Marshals attempting to arrest you for illegal activities in the past 20 years and you had 100 friends, armed with guns on your property. They would leave... but, come back with more fire power that you and your friends possess.
....
Does that make sense?
Hail, Hail!!!
It's about the Feds grabbing land. How many of you on here would have the same position if Bush were President?
I know I would.
I would, too.
I would STILL believe that Mr. Bundy refuses to comply to courts decisions and continues to conduct his trespassing on public land for personal gain (profits from his cattle ranch business).
It has NOTHING to do with who is President and everything to do with Mr. Bundy's behaviour.
...
For the record... it is not a Federal 'Land Grab'... if the land already belongs to all of us U/s. citizens. It is more of a land grab by Mr. Bundy for land that belongs to you and me.
Hail, Hail!!!
with the paul family's history of assocaiting with racists, rand needs to get as far away from this guy as possible. he needs to denounce and condemn him in the media.
perhaps these people with a hard on for all things anti federal government should vet their champions a little better before automatically defending and supporting them?? just a common sense thing to do, ya know?
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
ladies and gentlemen, i give you cliven palin!!!
=D> \m/
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Peace.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Here is why it took 20 years:
March 3, 1877 Congress passes Desert Lands Act, allowing citizens to buy up to 640 acres of public land if the land is brought under cultivation.
1946 Congress forms the Bureau of Land Management by combining two existing agencies, the Grazing Service, established in 1934 to administer grazing on public rangelands, and the General Land Office, created in 1812 to oversee disposal of federal lands.
1954 The Bundy family of Southern Nevada seeks BLM approval to graze livestock on a section of federal land called the “Bunkerville Allotment” along the Virgin River.
1966 The Bundy family seeks approval of six grazing agreements with the BLM, agreements that could be terminated by the agency after due notice in writing because of default or violation.
Early 1990s BLM develops plans to protect the desert tortoise on federal lands in Southern Nevada. Tells Bundy permission to graze his cattle on public lands would depend on tortoise sitings.
March 1993 Bundy stops paying fees for grazing rights.
July 13, 1993 BLM sends Bundy a trespass notice on lands now deemed illegal for grazing.
January 24, 1994 Bundy throws away a BLM order to remove cattle that was left on his dashboard.
February 1994 Bundy pays grazing fees to Clark County. County returns check, citing lack of jurisdiction.
1995 BLM issues more trespass notices. Bundy challenges the agency’s authority.
1997 Bundy rejects BLM’s invitation to meet.
November 3, 1998 U.S. District Court for Nevada orders Bundy to remove his livestock from the Bunkerville allotment of federal land before Nov. 3, 1998. He also is ordered to pay trespass damages to the government.
April 2008 BLM notifies Bundy that if he doesn’t remove his livestock and fencing from public lands, the government would do it and charge him the costs.
May 2008 May 2008: Bundy tells BLM he will do whatever is necessary to protect his "unalienable forage, water and access rights.”
June 8, 2011 BLM sends trespass notice to Bundy.
July 2011 BLM notifies Bundy his livestock continues to graze on federal land and the cattle may be impounded and sold.
April 2012 Department of Interior offers to gather and ship the cattle for sale, with Bundy getting the money. Bundy rejects the offer.
2013 BLM officials say they would not use their impound authority because of concern the situation could escalate.
July 9, 2013 U.S. District Court for Nevada finds that Bundy not only has failed to comply with the court’s 1998 order to remove cattle from the Bunkerville Allotment, but that he also is now grazing livestock on “a broad swath of additional public lands” without approval.
The court further finds that Bundy has caused “irreparable harm” by allowing his cattle to damage the public lands.
Bundy argues that the federal court lacks jurisdiction because the United States does not own the public lands in question. U.S. District Judge Lloyd George notes that in the 1998 ruling the court found that “the public lands in Nevada are the property of the United States because the United States has held title to those public lands since 1848, when Mexico ceded the land to the United States.”
The court rejects Bundy’s motion to dismiss the case and permanently enjoins him from trespassing on the public lands in question. He is given 45 days to remove his livestock. If he fails to comply, the government is authorized to seize and remove his cattle.
September 2013 BLM sends Bundy a list of his cattle seen on public lands. He is billed almost $330,000 in trespassing and investigation fee.
October 8, 2013 U.S. District Court for Nevada finds that in spite of its July order, Bundy continues to graze his cattle illegally on public lands. The court also states that Bundy’s objections to the government’s actions are “without merit.”
U.S. District Judge Larry Hicks gives the government authority to enforce the July order and permanently prohibits Bundy from trespassing on the former Bunkerville Allotment.
March 19, 2014 Bureau of Land Management issues notice of intent to remove “unauthorized livestock” from 13 specific allotments in Clark County.
March 27, 2014 The Department of the Interior through the BLM publishes notice in the Federal Register of the planned temporary closure of certain public lands in Southern Nevada to allow the impoundment of livestock grazing illegally on the lands.
April 5, 2014 BLM begins impoundment and removal of Bundy’s livestock from public lands as authorized in two U.S. District court orders.
April 12, 2014 With armed Bundy supporters massing near Bunkerville, BLM Director Neil Kornze announces decision to conclude the gathering of cattle from federal lands and to return corralled cattle to the rancher.
Hail, Hail!!!
Peace.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Peace.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
look at al capone. you fuck with the feds too much and they will find something to nail you for. ie tax evasion.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Which is it?
Want to retract your statement that "Reid was bought off?" Or at least provide a link or factual information that this is so?
Peace.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
So do the Feds own it or do we?
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Hate to break the news to you... but, the United States of America owns the land in question. You are free to use the land providing you pay the specified fees to acquire the necessary permits and follow the rules regarding land usage.
That is why I cannot clear forests in Yosemite to build a cabin and build a fence around it to keep you out.
..
Also, there is a difference between Public Property and Privately owned property, in case you didn't know. The government isn't out to 'steal' Mr. Bundy's private property... they are trying to evict him from OUR (U.S. Citizens) property.
Hail, Hail!!!