• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Feds move in on Nevada rancher's herd over illegal grazing

beefheart said:
Not the same. We have a government, we have rules, we have courts. You want anarchy? Move to Somalia.
Click to expand...

Which is where BLM should be pursuing their claim, the courts, not with an armed seizure of private property.
 
Ockham said:
That's incorrect. Bundy did not seek out confrontation, the Feds came on his land not the other way around.'

I agree that Bundy has to work out, without armed brown shirts surrounding his home, the legal issues between him and the BLM. Unlike others on this forum who wanted to see these people all shot without judicial process because they were "stealing" grass for their cattle (not the turtles which was a lie from the start).
Click to expand...


The feds did not come onto "Bundy's land" - kind of the point of the whole shebang, the cows were not on his privately-owned land, they were wandering around on federally-owned lands
 
Ockham said:
That's incorrect. Bundy did not seek out confrontation, the Feds came on his land not the other way around.'

I agree that Bundy has to work out, without armed brown shirts surrounding his home, the legal issues between him and the BLM. Unlike others on this forum who wanted to see these people all shot without judicial process because they were "stealing" grass for their cattle (not the turtles which was a lie from the start).
Click to expand...

He's had twenty years to do that.
 
Somerville said:
The feds did not come onto "Bundy's land" - kind of the point of the whole shebang, the cows were not on his privately-owned land, they were wandering around on federally-owned lands
Click to expand...

you keep confusing them with the facts
 
Somerville said:
You and others may think it is fair simply because the writer admits that Bundy is legally wrong, however the justifications as to why "You Should Be Sympathetic Toward Cliven Bundy" are simply fallacious.
Click to expand...

In most parts of Nevada good grazing land is scarce then when the government comes in and starts charging for that land use while substantially limiting the rancher's ability to use that land effectively they are, in essence, putting that rancher out of business. In this case they seem to be putting a political motive before the practical motives.
 
humbolt said:
It's rather odd that Al Sharpton can owe the feds $2.6 million for years, have meetings with Obama, and continue to roll without the nuisance of armed federal officers confronting his failure to pay while this guy, Bundy, gets the full treatment. Odd.
Click to expand...

Since two wrongs make a right, you do have a good point there.
 
Lutherf said:
In most parts of Nevada good grazing land is scarce then when the government comes in and starts charging for that land use while substantially limiting the rancher's ability to use that land effectively they are, in essence, putting that rancher out of business. In this case they seem to be putting a political motive before the practical motives.
Click to expand...

What "political motive" would that be?

As others have noted the Nevada Cattlemen's Assn is not supporting Mr Bundy and it is extremely likely that Mr Bundy has received some government subsidies during the same years he has refused to pay land use fees.
 
mac said:
Which is where BLM should be pursuing their claim, the courts, not with an armed seizure of private property.
Click to expand...

They did, they won, more than once in court. This has been going on for years, time for Bundy to pay up, or lose his assets.
 
Kobie said:
Sorry, amigo, but the facts of the case simply don't bear out for this guy.
Click to expand...

In this part I actually think you are on to something...He should have been paying he fees. Because he wants to make a stand against an over burdensome, and out of control federal government, I don't think that withholding fees is the way to do it...But with that said, you have to admit, that an armed to the teeth BLM (what the hell is that anyway?) pointing heavy weapons, and posting snipers against largely unarmed citizens, is not exactly the poster for a liberal President, and demo party that keeps proclaiming that they are one with the "little guy"....

So many questions, and nothing but support of a tyrannical fed under this administration.
 
beefheart said:
They did, they won, more than once in court. This has been going on for years, time for Bundy to pay up, or lose his assets.
Click to expand...

All they have to do is garnish his earnings, or his kids inheritance. Seizure at gunpoint is rediculous.
 
j-mac said:
In this part I actually think you are on to something...He should have been paying he fees. Because he wants to make a stand against an over burdensome, and out of control federal government, I don't think that withholding fees is the way to do it...But with that said, you have to admit, that an armed to the teeth BLM (what the hell is that anyway?) pointing heavy weapons, and posting snipers against largely unarmed citizens, is not exactly the poster for a liberal President, and demo party that keeps proclaiming that they are one with the "little guy"....

So many questions, and nothing but support of a tyrannical fed under this administration.
Click to expand...

What's the world coming to, where a guy can't even trespass on federal land without having a bunch of cops all up in his grill?
 
Kobie said:
What's the world coming to, where a guy can't even trespass on federal land without having a bunch of cops all up in his grill?
Click to expand...

I guess the cattle should have been illegals crossing the border, then they would have been left alone.
 
Ockham said:
I watched all 14 minutes of it.



Don't ignore that part or the rest of the video, just pick out the one sentence that sorta supports your point.



Can you link to where it's the "Bundy's militia". :lamo You guys are a ****ing hoot. I'm guessing Bundy is the head of the militia too right?
Click to expand...

I never said "Bundy's militia" dont put **** in quotes as if I said it. ANd I also never said anything even remotely close to implying that Bundy was a militia leader.


Fact: The Bundy Ranch is just 160 acres. Cliven has publicly said that he is grazing his cattle on public land. The BLM has never been on the Bundy Ranch.


Also it is quite obvious that Cliven was able to exploit the militia movement to gain a very short meaningless victory. Also Cliven and other Bundy"s have publicly espoused identical beliefs that are prevalent within the militia movement. Looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, its probably a duck. Or are you trying to claim that The Bundy's are not trying to promote a political position?

"You guys"? WTF I am only one person, I am not on a team. DOnt try and make me answer for other peoples beliefs dude.
 
How do you feel about Bundy's militia threatening to put women in front of them.
As I said days ago, hiding behind the skirt of the 2nd amendment.
Bundy's militia wanted the world to see BLM Police shoot women, their words.
And who defends them?
Disgusting and despicable .
j-mac said:
I guess the cattle should have been illegals crossing the border, then they would have been left alone.
Click to expand...
 
NIMBY said:
How do you feel about Bundy's militia threatening to put women in front of them.
As I said days ago, hiding behind the skirt of the 2nd amendment.
Bundy's militia wanted the world to see BLM Police shoot women, their words.
And who defends them?
Disgusting and despicable .
Click to expand...

Propaganda doesn't interest me....Who cares what "you said"....

Explain how the BLM has "police"? Where is the charter for that?
 
So you're not bothered by the FACT that Bundy's Militia would put women in front of them?
Let's go with that as your GOP's state right all the way to the election .
j-mac said:
Propaganda doesn't interest me....Who cares what "you said"....

Explain how the BLM has "police"? Where is the charter for that?
Click to expand...
 
mac said:
All they have to do is garnish his earnings, or his kids inheritance. Seizure at gunpoint is rediculous.
Click to expand...

So is having a bunch of goobers showing up with guns wanting to kill BLM agents.

bundy.jpg
 
NIMBY said:
So you're not bothered by the FACT that Bundy's Militia would put women in front of them?
Let's go with that as your GOP's state right all the way to the election .
Click to expand...

More lies about Bundy eh....I'd rather go with states rights over your fantasy of an authoritarian banana republic coming to the US....Your vision of what the US should be are pathetic.
 
j-mac said:
More lies about Bundy eh....
I'd rather go with states rights over your fantasy of an authoritarian banana republic coming to the US....Your vision of what the US should be are pathetic.
Click to expand...
Lies are refusing to watch tape of Bundy's militia threatening to put women in front of armed militiamen.
Why would you support such people?
Our Founding Fathers would not put women in front of them !!
 
NIMBY said:
How do you feel about Bundy's militia threatening to put women in front of them.
As I said days ago, hiding behind the skirt of the 2nd amendment.
Bundy's militia wanted the world to see BLM Police shoot women, their words.
And who defends them?
Disgusting and despicable .
Click to expand...

Selective reporting. The women were part of the planning....and it was a retired Sheriff that came up with that plan.
 
NIMBY said:
Lies are refusing to watch tape of Bundy's militia threatening to put women in front of armed militiamen.
Why would you support such people?
Our Founding Fathers would not put women in front of them !!
Click to expand...

Supply the supposed clip, or your just making it up....
 
mac said:
Selective reporting. The women were part of the planning....and it was a retired Sheriff that came up with that plan.
Click to expand...

Great, lets see Bundy condemn that kind of thing.....
 
j-mac said:
Supply the supposed clip, or your just making it up....
Click to expand...

Seriously....do the barest bit of research...really.

You have the entire interwebs in front of you.

 
So you defend the Bundy Militia Plan of putting women in front of armed militiamen on horseback as "selective reporting"? :lamo
mac said:
Selective reporting.
The women were part of the planning....and it was a retired Sheriff that came up with that plan.
Click to expand...
What in the hell does a retired sheriff have to do with coming up with the plan?
Why should other ranchers pay their fees?
Why are GOPs such tax scofflaws ?
 
NIMBY said:
So you defend the Bundy Militia Plan of putting women in front of armed militiamen on horseback as "selective reporting"? :lamo

What in the hell does a retired sheriff have to do with coming up with the plan?
Why should other ranchers pay their fees?
Why are GOPs such tax scofflaws ?
Click to expand...

Richard Mack has been one of the patriot movement militia tea party whack-a-doos for many years now. He is a leader of the kooks.

There is little question that Mack has been an important player in the resurgence of the Patriot movement, which has seen its numbers mushroom from 149 groups in 2008, the year President Obama was elected, to 1,274 by the end of 2011. His ideas, which include a heavy emphasis on state sovereignty, resonate with the armed militias and others in the broader movement, in addition to racist extremists across the radical right who chafe at federal laws protecting minorities from hate crimes and discrimination.

While Mack shakes his fist at the federal government and wants to devolve virtually all power to state and local governments, he says he does not favor violence. But his rhetoric is certainly confrontational and seems to fuel the passions of extremists as well as audiences closer to the mainstream. He once said he prayed for the day when a sheriff would be the “first one to fire the next shot around the world and arrest a couple of IRS agents.”

To the Tea Party activists who delight in his pugilistic attitude toward the government they distrust, Mack may seem like a natural ally. But some analysts say the ideas he is helping to transmit from the fringes of the radical right into the mainstream of conservative thought are extreme and, perhaps, dangerous.

“Ever since the notion of the supremacy of the county sheriff became popularized, it has continued to remain attractive — though when people hear it, they don’t understand that what is behind it is violent lawlessness and vigilantism,” said Daniel Levitas, author of The Terrorist Next Door, a book that chronicles the racist underpinnings of the militia movement of the 1990s. “That’s what Richard Mack stands for when you strip all the window dressing away: lawlessness and vigilantism

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2012/winter/resurrection
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom