Printable View
I DO love US political debates - so well thought through. You should congratulate yourselves on such an amazing group of total political loonies - who still think they are driving their covered-wagons across the plains and killing off the natives.
The best we can do in Britain is this guy.
This is another non-issue that conservative radio has inflated so it's incensed listeners will stay listening an extra 5 minutes and maybe hear that ad for the aluminum siding that they need. Harry Reid should drag this out through the entire summer, saying it's nothing, but it ain't over. Let Republican Senatorial candidates talk about Cliven Bundy and Joe the Plumber. Let Reporters scream questions on how they feel about Cliven Bundy for the six o'clock news.
Great guy this Bundy.
....RANCHER CLIVEN BUNDY, darling of FOX News, Limbaugh, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, et al, exposes himself for what he really is: a pro-slavery madman! And he has the nerve to criticize government subsidies! Now watch his high-placed fans squirm. Choice quote from today's NY Times:
“They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And I’ve often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy? They didn’t get no more freedom. They got less freedom.”
read the whole article with that quote and other choice stuff on this great hero....
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/24/us...e-west.html?hp
Cliven is the gift that keeps on given.Quote:
Originally Posted by Prospero
http://mediamatters.org/video/2014/0...ypocrit/198963
I didn't know Cliven Bundy had made pro-slavery comments! Just highlights what a nut he is. Shouldn't be a surprise when you see the madmen he's attracted.
Hannity and Jon Stewart are going back and forth. The video above came out Monday...Hannity responded Tuesday, and then Stewart responded again last night. I'll see if I can post the other two since it's an amusing back and forth.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/jon-stewa...arbys-of-news/
Okay so basically Hannity responded that Stewart misunderstood his argument. That he didn't think what Bundy was doing was legal but that the federal government hadn't acted proportionally. So this was the response last night. I thought it was quite funny.
Edit: So now Rand Paul and Senator Heller have responded to the slavery comments reported in the above NY times article. They denounce them in the most strenuous way! Has Rand Paul commented on the racist comments Ron Paul put in his newsletter years ago?
What a fucking shocker that a man who tried to engage federal agents in a gunfight, who doesn't recognize the government as existing, and who attracted a bunch of militia nutjobs setting up shop as snipers on public highways has ended up being pro-slavery. Nobody could have seen that coming!
Bundy may be an old fart, with opinions commonly held by people his age from the 1950's, but this does not detract from the issue at hand.
The United States federal government uses outrageous excessive force to accomplish its goals, whoever the target of it may be. The Feds are historically known for using brutal violence and acts of terror to deal with situations that did not need such levels of force, if the situation at hand was even valid at all to begin with.
In the case of Cliven Bundy and his ranch, the issue is less about the seizure of his property and the land issue, as it is more about the level of force used by the federal agents on scene. This entire incident between Bundy and the BLM would have been a non-existent issue, and no fucks would have been given, had the federal government not used the force they chose. The moment the BLM positioned hilltop snipers, sighting on the Bundy family home, and 200 federal agents armed with M4 carbines, they made this no longer a bullshit issue over cows eating grass, and made it a Ruby Ridge 2.0 bloodbath in the making. The only reason militias and protesters responded at all to this was because the Bundy family released photos and videos of federal agents aiming sniper rifles at their house. We all saw it for what it was. The feds were at it again, using overdone excessive force when it could have conducted a simplistic dozen officer raid and arrest on his home.
While there may be multiple other questionable issues, like why the federal government claims authority over 80% of the lands in the western U.S., disregards state sovereignty clauses of the Bill of Rights, the questionable nature of desert tortoises being threatened by cows eating grass, among others, the issue was the feds were acting like this was a raid on the bin Laden compound and not that of a 70 something year old rancher and his children and grandchildren.
At this point, the Bundy Ranch issue is blown way out of proportion. And the mainstream media is only reporting on the Bundy Ranch issue now because of the juicy news that the evil terrorist grandpa is a racist and the government should take him down.
The conduct of the BLM and the federal agents and rangers on the scene was mishandled, excessive, poorly planned, and an embarrassment for the bureaucratic federal agency having to retreat because they fucked up a simple situation and attracted the attention of people who don't agree with authorities sending in an army to deal with non-issues. However, this Bundy Ranch situation ended over a week ago. It's over and done. I don't support the racist remarks or any form of discrimination. My interests in the situation revolved around the force the government sought to use against a ranching family over cows eating grass.
So, enjoy the media race card baiting bullshit. Liberal tears tsunami watch is in effect.
A long post that is mostly untrue. The issue was reported before Cliven Bundy let the world know he's a racist. He doesn't have 1950's views but 1850's views.
Second, the federal government's use of force was reasonable given the nature of the threats. He failed to respond to four court orders demanding payments for fees he was delinquent in honoring. The government had an injunction against his use of federal lands (which was an ongoing violation), and this gives them the right to use force to prevent him from continuing to graze his cattle illegally. When threatened with the prospect of having his cattle seized, Bundy called on militia men and threatened to take up arms. This is the natural consequence of taking up arms against the U.S government.
Finally, federal government land ownership is not contradicted by the bill of rights. You must be talking about the reserve power in the 10th amendment. There is nothing about the federal government's ownership of large tracts of land that threatens state sovereignty. Our Constitution was set up to make allowance for dual sovereignty, which is why we have enumerated federal powers, the supremacy clause, and the 10th amendment leaving those powers not vested in the federal government to the states and the people respectively. As I've already stated, the property clause assumes that the government owns land, and with the exception of the district of columbia and indian lands, where else would this land be but within states?
The issue was barely touched until long after militias started joining the cause. Until then it was all over alternative media and social media.Quote:
Originally Posted by broncofan
The use of force was NOT reasonable. The guy is a 70 something year old man. Snipers, hundreds of feds armed with combat rifles and helicopters were NOT necessary. Bundy called for help from protesters and patriots after he released photos of snipers aiming at him and his home, filled with his family and grandchildren. The guy was little to no threat at all. The use of force and intimidation by the BLM and rangers was beyond excessive. Because of that, and only that, did militia groups respond. It was like Waco and Ruby Ridge all over again. A family surrounded by hundreds of heavily armed federal agents.
Enough of your lies and disinfo. There was no justifiable threat to warrant that level of force.