bush_cheney2004 Posted April 27, 2014 Report Posted April 27, 2014 ...but not nearly as funny as Toronto's mayor ! Bundy wasn't elected by voters. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
On Guard for Thee Posted April 27, 2014 Report Posted April 27, 2014 ...but not nearly as funny as Toronto's mayor ! Bundy wasn't elected by voters. You're correct there, buffoonery does not respect borders. Quote
waldo Posted April 27, 2014 Report Posted April 27, 2014 Hey has anybody found a link to Stephen Colbert's "ballad of cliven bundy", I hear it's pretty funny but the links I have so far won't work in Canada for whatever reason. I love the way Fox news has played it, conservative laughing stock......again! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2o8NHUh12gE Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted April 27, 2014 Report Posted April 27, 2014 That one worked. Thank you. It is funny.Well except for the strange story it refers to. Off topic, it will be interesting to see how carries of from Dave Letterman. Quote
Argus Posted April 27, 2014 Report Posted April 27, 2014 Nope...it's not new at all. U.S. media has fawned over "freaks" for decades. The more outrageous the better. Politicians smelling an opportunity jump on board too. I still don't get how politicians don't see a guy who is clearly breaking the law and clearly a nut job (I don't believe in the American government) and then want to wrap their arms around him. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
kimmy Posted April 27, 2014 Author Report Posted April 27, 2014 Like I've already stated, the government was completely in the wrong to send in what was essentially a SWAT team over a tax issue. It's irrelevant whether this Bundy fellow is a saint, or the worst person in the world. You garnish wages, you put liens on property, etc. I don't know why people get so distracted by shiny objects, such as his ignorant views on anything, nevermind just race. Who he is is irrelevant. What he's done in terms of not paying fees, and the BLM's ridiculous response is the issue. They didn't just "send in a SWAT team". The government went to court and obtained a court order allowing them to seize Bundy's cattle and auction them to recover what he owes. I gotta ask, Shady, what was your stance regarding the use of force at Caledonia? -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 27, 2014 Report Posted April 27, 2014 I still don't get how politicians don't see a guy who is clearly breaking the law and clearly a nut job (I don't believe in the American government) and then want to wrap their arms around him. Anti-government actors at the local, state, or federal level can always find support at some level, including elected officeholders depending on the issue. It is a longstanding tradition for Americans to mistrust and criticize government policies that are perceived as intrusive and unfair, particularly in western states. Elected officials and candidates will seize upon this sentiment for political gain. This has been going on since before the Revolutionary War. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Shady Posted April 27, 2014 Report Posted April 27, 2014 They didn't just "send in a SWAT team". The government went to court and obtained a court order allowing them to seize Bundy's cattle and auction them to recover what he owes. I gotta ask, Shady, what was your stance regarding the use of force at Caledonia? -k They didn't seize Bundy's cattle to auction, they seized his cattle to kill. Which is about as retarded as it gets. Besides, auctioning a few cattle isn't going to come close to recovering what he owes, unless they're going to auction cattle for the next 100 years. Like I've said, garnish wages and/or put a lein on his land/house, etc. It was an overreaction in my opinion, that has little to do with his idiotic views on anything. That being said, I fully expect the mainstream media to continue to ask him questions on a variety of issues. Next will be his opinion of the crisis in Ukraine, and missing flight 370. Caledonia is a different issue, because there's no recourse such as leins or garnished wages etc. It's not a tax or fee issue. Quote
eyeball Posted April 27, 2014 Report Posted April 27, 2014 (edited) I still don't get how politicians don't see a guy who is clearly breaking the law and clearly a nut job (I don't believe in the American government) and then want to wrap their arms around him. Chris Hedge's offers this explanation to the apparent contradiction. Vigilante bands have served and continue to serve the interests of state power or, as in the case involving the Nevada rancher, corporations that seek to eradicate public lands. They are used to make sure the dispossessed and marginalized remain dispossessed and marginalized. They revel in a demented hypermasculinity. They champion a racist nationalism that is fused with the iconography, language and rituals of the Christian religion. And they have huge megaphones on the airwaves, funded by the most retrograde forces in American capitalism, to spread their message. They are the bedrock of American fascism Article This seems to mirror what's happening in Russia which is just a little farther down the same road. It's life in the cowardly new age of the oligarchs. Edited April 27, 2014 by eyeball Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
On Guard for Thee Posted April 27, 2014 Report Posted April 27, 2014 And hey, what's wrong with a little SWAT team action? I'm sure the NRA was in full support. Any excuse to get those guns out is a fun day in America. Quote
kimmy Posted April 27, 2014 Author Report Posted April 27, 2014 They didn't seize Bundy's cattle to auction, they seized his cattle to kill. Which is about as retarded as it gets. BS. The plan was to auction the cattle. It's the only asset Bundy has that's worth even a fraction of what Bundy owes. Besides, auctioning a few cattle isn't going to come close to recovering what he owes, unless they're going to auction cattle for the next 100 years. Like I've said, garnish wages and/or put a lein on his land/house, etc. He's a rancher. What "wages" does a rancher earn? A rancher gets paid when he sells his cattle. Taking his cattle to auction them is as close to "garnishing his wages" as is possible. If Bundy can raise a militia of mooks with AR15s to defend his herd, do you imagine it's going to be any easier to take his house? What's next? Deduct from his social security cheques? That'll work, if he lives to be 3000 years old. It was an overreaction in my opinion, that has little to do with his idiotic views on anything. That being said, I fully expect the mainstream media to continue to ask him questions on a variety of issues. Next will be his opinion of the crisis in Ukraine, and missing flight 370. If people are touting this guy as a "patriot" and a hero, then it seems fair to find out what kind of guy he is. Sorry that he turned out to be a pretty bad mascot for the "small government" crowd who rallied to his cause. Caledonia is a different issue, because there's no recourse such as leins or garnished wages etc. It's not a tax or fee issue. If your objection is to the deployment of armed peace officers to enforce the rule of law, then Caledonia seems like a pretty reasonable comparison. -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 27, 2014 Report Posted April 27, 2014 ...If people are touting this guy as a "patriot" and a hero, then it seems fair to find out what kind of guy he is. Sorry that he turned out to be a pretty bad mascot for the "small government" crowd who rallied to his cause. Bundy will do fine until something better comes along. They never have to be "model citizens". Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
GostHacked Posted April 28, 2014 Report Posted April 28, 2014 (edited) BS. The plan was to auction the cattle. It's the only asset Bundy has that's worth even a fraction of what Bundy owes. He's a rancher. What "wages" does a rancher earn? A rancher gets paid when he sells his cattle. Taking his cattle to auction them is as close to "garnishing his wages" as is possible. What's next? Deduct from his social security cheques? That'll work, if he lives to be 3000 years old. http://nation.foxnews.com/2014/04/22/long-bundy-standoff-rancher-waged-land-war-feds Long before Cliven Bundy faced down federal agents in his dispute with the Bureau of Land Management over grazing rights, fellow Nevada rancher Raymond Yowell, an 84-year-old former Shoshone chief, watched as the BLM seize his herd — and since 2008, as it's taken a piece of his Social Security checks. Yowell's 132 head of cattle had grazed for decades on the South Fork Western Shoshone Indian Reservation in northeastern Nevada until 2002, when the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) -- the same agency at odds with Bundy -- seized them. The federal agency sold the cattle at auction and used the proceeds to pay off the portion of back grazing fees it claimed Yowell owed. Once the cattle was sold, the agency sent Yowell a bill for the outstanding balance, some $180,000. They've been garnishing his monthly Social Security checks since 2008 to satisfy the debt Yowell says he does not owe. Yes they will. And what are the benefits of charging a fee for grazing? What is that money used for? Where does it go? What purpose does it serve to charge the farmer if the fees are that high and the farmer cannot maintain a profit? Means he needs to raise prices on his cattle to compensate, which means we pay more at the grocery store for the product. Most meat has at least doubled in price over the past 10 years. Bundy is not the only cattle rancher BLM has gone after. Edited April 28, 2014 by GostHacked Quote
Boges Posted April 28, 2014 Report Posted April 28, 2014 (edited) Dude is a thief. It's akin to a farmer using public land to grow X vegetable and pocket 100% of the profit. I think people that come to his defence are just anti-government in the first place. I wonder if they'd be so supportive if Bundy was using government land to grow weed? Edited April 28, 2014 by Boges Quote
Shady Posted April 28, 2014 Report Posted April 28, 2014 http://nation.foxnews.com/2014/04/22/long-bundy-standoff-rancher-waged-land-war-feds Yes they will. And what are the benefits of charging a fee for grazing? What is that money used for? Where does it go? What purpose does it serve to charge the farmer if the fees are that high and the farmer cannot maintain a profit? Means he needs to raise prices on his cattle to compensate, which means we pay more at the grocery store for the product. Most meat has at least doubled in price over the past 10 years. Bundy is not the only cattle rancher BLM has gone after. Good point, looks like they've already been garnishing wages. One has to wonder exactly what the point was of sending a SWAT team in to kill cattle. I guess some kind of show of force. Not very smart in my opinion. Garnishment and liens would be sufficient. Quote
GostHacked Posted April 28, 2014 Report Posted April 28, 2014 Good point, looks like they've already been garnishing wages. One has to wonder exactly what the point was of sending a SWAT team in to kill cattle. I guess some kind of show of force. Not very smart in my opinion. Garnishment and liens would be sufficient. From what I am reading, and I cannot confirm this, is that there were many restrictions put on the ranchers if they agreed to the BLM's terms. A reduction in cattle numbers allowed to graze seems to be one of those restrictions. So the rancher would pay a fee to BLM and get LESS access than they had before. All while paying for a bureaucratic entity that has existed only since 1993 and has grown to become a powerful entity. And that power is being used against not just cattle farmers, but any farmer that would need public land to graze livestock. Quote
Argus Posted April 28, 2014 Report Posted April 28, 2014 And hey, what's wrong with a little SWAT team action? I'm sure the NRA was in full support. Any excuse to get those guns out is a fun day in America. Given the amount of nut jobs there with the Bundys who were outfitted in camo gear and toting weapons, including guys with sniper rifles watching from freeway overpasses, they were perfectly right to bring in SWAT. In fact, they should have arrested most of these people on the spot. I understand the government wanting to avoid another WACO, but really, the more of these people that are dead the better that country is. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted April 28, 2014 Report Posted April 28, 2014 What purpose does it serve to charge the farmer if the fees are that high and the farmer cannot maintain a profit? Means he needs to raise prices on his cattle to compensate, Maybe the purpose it serves is to discourage ranchers from using protected public land for grazing. Maybe they ought to use their own damn land, huh? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Shady Posted April 28, 2014 Report Posted April 28, 2014 Maybe the purpose it serves is to discourage ranchers from using protected public land for grazing. Maybe they ought to use their own damn land, huh? Probably right. But they may not want to wait 20 years next time. Quote
Shady Posted April 28, 2014 Report Posted April 28, 2014 Given the amount of nut jobs there with the Bundys who were outfitted in camo gear and toting weapons, including guys with sniper rifles watching from freeway overpasses, they were perfectly right to bring in SWAT. In fact, they should have arrested most of these people on the spot. I understand the government wanting to avoid another WACO, but really, the more of these people that are dead the better that country is. The people with guns showed up after the SWAT team did. Which again was completely unnecessary. I don't know what you'd arrest them for though. Legally possessing firearms on private property? *rolls eyes* Quote
eyeball Posted April 28, 2014 Report Posted April 28, 2014 I don't know what you'd arrest them for though. Legally possessing firearms on private property? *rolls eyes*Sedition. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Shady Posted April 28, 2014 Report Posted April 28, 2014 Sedition. So protesting is now considered sedition? Authority must love you. Quote
Boges Posted April 28, 2014 Report Posted April 28, 2014 I saw one of these yahoos on TV saying he'd have women infront of them so if the Feds were to fire they'd be mowing down women. How al Queda of them. It was more than protesting. Quote
Shady Posted April 28, 2014 Report Posted April 28, 2014 I saw one of these yahoos on TV saying he'd have women infront of them so if the Feds were to fire they'd be mowing down women. How al Queda of them. It was more than protesting. That's just an urban legend. Never happened. Let's everybody try and stick to facts here. Quote
Boges Posted April 28, 2014 Report Posted April 28, 2014 That's just an urban legend. Never happened. Let's everybody try and stick to facts here. So the video on TV was doctored somehow? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.