« Your life savings will bail in SIFIs | Main | Typhoon Tarnaev – one year on »

13 April 2014

Comments

Walt

Dead link Dr.
This one still works.
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/57836973-90/utah-lands-lawmakers-federal.html.csp

Don't forget we still have the EPA wanting control and say over every spot that will retain water as a puddle, no matter how small. Fill in that low spot that was left by a rotted tree stump, and expect a full blown raid by the Coast Guard. ( if it has to do with water, it will be their responsibility.)

Brad Croul

I think it is great that you going all enviro/monkey wrencher, Walt, worrying about the poor solar fried gulls and whatnot, lol! BTW, I remember you posted a while back on Icelandic earthquakes (I think). What do you think about the 8.2 in Chile, 7.5 in Mexico, and 5.1 in So. Cal? Is the Bay Area next? What has it been, 25 years since the Loma Prieta quake?

I checked the map on the link Russ provided, and the Solar Zone is not even close to Bunkerville, NV. It is southwest of the Moapa River Rez. Bunkerville is NE of the rez.

Brad Croul

Here is the link,

http://clashdaily.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/TN_444.pdf

George Rebane

Walt 352pm - Thanks Walt, have fixed the link in the post.

Russ Steele

Brad,

It it true, the solar facility is a long way from the Bundy grazing area, but if your read the BLM documents you will see that the BLM needs the grazing land to relocate the tortoises from the solar area. It was a mitigation agreement need to create the Solar Zone. On these issues one need to drill down and ask why? The real reason is often hidden from the public. We get treated to hand waving.

Walt

Yup,, I did mention Iceland a while back after it had a pretty good shake.
You DO realize that's part of the "Mid Atlantic Ridge"? No far from that spot
are two sleeping giants, and it's never taken much to rudely awaken them.
I attribute "global cooling" to volcanism. That last burp out of Iceland
erased all the feel good "eco buggy" guilt trip in less than one day.( yet spewed every element in the book for over a month.)
Never mind all the other volcanos that have been active.

So Brad,, what's with the "selective protection"? It seems it's just fine to fry some endangered birds, ( with a permit even!!) But an armed response for turtles? ( Have yet to find a cow on turtle murder spree)

Right here at home, the Delta Smelt is more important than our food supply.
Great reasoning....

Walt

Since this Bundy situation is about gov. over-reach, I found something in an unrelated story that adds fuel to that fire.
This is from a story about profiling Colorado cars in an another state.
Which opens a whole new can of worms.

"Under federal law, an officer may stop a vehicle as long as he has probable cause to believe that a traffic violation occurred, even if his subjective intent is to seek evidence of drug possession for which he lacks probable cause," Bederow said. Still, he said, "an officer still violates the Fourth Amendment if his subsequent actions are unreasonable."

The poor SOB got hauled to the pokey just for being from CO. Government "over-reach"? ( But the cops "just KNEW" he had to have "something" illegal.... but he didn't...)

The local pot crowd has been griping about "over zealous" government for how long? " It's just a harmless plant!,,Dude,,!" But it's OK when it's a cow poke getting screwed.

Don't forget. The Ca. government was allowed to "take" our 2ND Amendment right to OPEN CARRY a sidearm, even UNLOADED. Now they are well on the way for long guns as well.
Nope,, it's not just the FEDS we need to worry about.

LIBS can kiss the Senate Goodbye, and Reid knows it. He's out to do as much harm and damage as possible before Nov. If that means starting a civil war, so be it.

Gregory

Walt, DHS/DEA has been subjecting pilots to search with the 'probable cause' often being nothing more than flying from California under VFR without a VFR flight plan, which is the majority of VFR flights and perfectly legal. As of last month, the AOPA had "received nearly 50 reports of stops of general aviation aircraft made without a warrant, probable cause, or reasonable suspicion that illegal activity was taking place. Some of those stops involved officers with drawn weapons and dogs, and many resulted in aircraft being searched and passengers and pilots being questioned or detained."

One stop's probable cause was flying West from California without a VFR flight plan being activated (which is both legal and very common), and I should note Larry Gaines is a stand up guy who I've exchanged correspondence over the last few years. They kept asking him variations on "may we search your airplane" until he cracked and consented to letting the dog sniff, not fully realizing he was consenting to a search.

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/05/annals-of-the-security-state-more-airplane-stories/276018/


Why do they do it? Because they can.

Walt

Instances of gov. over reach are so numerous and common, they hardly make the news anymore. Remember how Lefty's went insane when the Patriot act first came to be? Bush was their own super Villon. Yet "O" and Co. have taken that to use against the American people instead of the terrorists for which it was made for.
We pretty much have a "Vladimir Putin" of color running the show on U.S. soil.

With that,, Happy Easter. Even to the non believers.

Bill Tozer

Walt, Brad has a point. The turtle habitat/solar farm is 200 miles from The Brady Bunch. So, we got to toss Harry Reid's rump ranger boy out of the equation.

I do worry endlessly about all the documented reports of solar farms in the desert frying birds and even worse, screwing up their internal navigation devices. Birds are going crazy, crazy than a hoot owl I say. They are now flying off course and die a horrible death around them green mean solar machine farms. Heck,our beloved fowl of the air are acting crazier than road lizards. Not to mention the desert tortoise and various bush rats watching their habitat destroyed. If we can put a stop to the Shredded Tweet wind turbines chewing up our few surviving predators of the sky, then we surely can put a stop to solar farms turning our feathered friends into Crispy Critters.

Definitely a good reason to stand on the overpass if I ever heard one. The time is ripe. Just look how the Possum Posse gathered on the overpass and in the court room seeking justice for one solitary opossum. Time to unite! Stop evil corporate Chinese America from killing eagles and falcons and loons.

Hate to be a bearer of bad news, but Hurricane Carter has passed away. I know Mr. Carter would have joined us in our stand against the BLM and saving our birds. The BLM all ready shot two bulls belonging to Brady. We must stop this senseless killing. Whats next? Shooting wild mustangs for sport? Geez, mustangs did not ask to be brought to North America, now did they? No way to treat a defenseless animal, be it mammal or fowl. Shame on Chinese-America and their bought and paid for Democrat Party. Shame.

Gregory

Let's remember one of the most cogent thoughts of Gerald Ford:"A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have." While one of our own apologists thinks "You are all worked up into a lather over some desert scrub lands. The Fed is changing the land use from ag to industrial scale power generation. Bye, bye Bundy, hello construction jobs, employment, energy production... I don't give much of a hoot about some goomba graveyard outside of Vegas."

... he is missing the point that it shouldn't be in the power of the Department of the Interior to decide to ruin 53 cattle businesses (to accept Russ' figures) whether goombas or not (lovely dehumanizing term there, Brad) in order to have a place to put some tortoises displaced by a solar generation plant, in an underhanded way.

stevenfrisch

"... it shouldn't be in the power of the Department of the Interior ..."

And I want a pony.

Now stomp you feet like a bunch of babies and say after me. "I want a pony."

The FACT it it has always been in the power of the Department of Interior to decide how public lands are used. It is an enumerated power in the Constitution, upheld in the courts, and has been the law of the west for 150 years.

The case made here has not one CONSTITUTIONAL leg to stand on, which just goes to show you, when people decide to make their name on being "Constitionalists" and then can't read the goddam Constitution, they are the ones send the country to hell in a hand-basket.

stevenfrisch

I say again, "Constitutionalists" Ha!

George Rebane

What the progressives don’t want to even acknowledge is that there are Americans of good will who do agree that the Constitution’s Art 4, Sec 3, Clause 2

“The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.”

construed nothing to allow the federal government to retain title to and control of lands after such lands had been divided into the several states. That is the point of opposing the federal usurpation referred to herein. By stubbornly continuing to cite an obviously misconstrued law from the court decisions handed down over the years is the same as arguments made against the Civil Rights Act and Women’s Suffrage before they became law. The opponents of both were full of themselves claiming that the existing Constitution and US Code fully supported ‘separate but equal’ and denied voting suffrage to women. It has always been those who had the courage to point out the injustice of existing laws who have dared forge progress in our social order.

To teach that codified law is indelibly chiseled in stone and should not be opposed regardless the circumstances hearkens back to the same justifications used by those scoundrels who followed ‘legal orders’ and committed perfectly ‘legal’ atrocities against their fellow countrymen. That the Left is the champion of such social code of behavior is another one of their many hypocrisies which strikes fear into the heart of the rest of us should they get complete control of the state and again walk the dreadful path of their collectivist forebears.

Todd Juvinall

Just last week there was a group of western Congressmen discussing a bill to remand the lands within the borders of a state yo the state. One can read Frisch's words as perhaps a old way to place mark the ownership of these lands but now we have a movement to return states rights under Amendments 9 and 10. As we see the world moving towards smaller countries, the US Feds must see that a state needs to be in charge of its own territory. The Commerce Clause abuse has hopefully ended and we may start seeing a removal of all those federal alpha bet soup regulators from our property.

stevenfrisch

"...make all needful rules..." has been consistently interpreted to mean just what it says, Congress makes the rules. Congress made the rules that govern the management of or disposal of federal lands.

I love how conservatives try to wrap themselves in the positive light of opposing segregation and gender discrimination to try to prove a point. First, it was conservatives, in the democratic party (and later the republican party after the big switch of the southern strategy) who have consistently resisted voting rights and civil rights. It was conservatives in both parties who where the primary opponent of women's suffrage. Who opposed the equal rights amendment?

It is conservatives who choose today to fight for the rights of a guy who has not paid his rent for 21 years, but wants to restrict voting rights across the country. If conservatives cared about the individual rights of everyone they would be fighting for equality in marriage laws. Or they would be incensed that someone would shoot a kid walking home from the store or who texts in a movie theater and gets shot dead based on 'stand your ground." Arn't those injustices? The truth is today conservatives pick and choose whose rights they are going to stand up for, and it speaks volumes that you are standing for a guy who openly calls for people to show up with guns instead of everyone else who might need your help.

By the way I don't see our local conservatives standing with the property rights of landowners who want to grow marijuana, which is a legal substance for medicinal purposes in California. Why so silent on that locally?

So don't tell me you are the crusaders for individual rights, you are only the crusaders for the individual rights of those whom you like.

No where did I say 'law' cannot change, I said we have law, and there is a remedy, if you chose to use it, go to Congress, who is empowered to change the law, and do so. Then we can have a rational debate about the appropriate use of federal lands.

By the way, what about the rights of all the other 16,000 ranchers who are following the law, and paying federal grazing fees? Are they not put at a competitive disadvantage by Mr. Bundy? I thought libertarians stood for the fair enforcement of contracts to ensure a level playing field. Or has that principle of libertarian thought been thrown out with the bathwater to rally around a law breaker?

I'll tell you what makes me frightened, children showing up to an art show with weapons, to prove some arcane point that pre-teenagers have a 'right to carry'.

The hypocrisy of your position is pretty obvious to the impartial reader, and you can't cloak yourselves in civil rights or women's rights to avoid the point. No one with a brain is being fooled.

Todd Juvinall

Frisch is at it again. What a bore.

fish

WOW....That's right Steve let it out! All the bad things.....!

Jeez......concede that the guy may have a point on one land use issue and he goes full "Inherit the Wind" on the thread!

Stevie....you need a valium??

Walt

Wow.. a Progressive sighting the Constitution? ( In a " Bill of negative liberty's" kind of way.)

If you don't exercise your 2ND Amendment rights, you don't know what your missing. The family came by, and after dinner, we retired to the backyard range.
My shirt tail Son-in-law, forgot how fun some trigger time is.
500 rounds latter, and not a soda can, plastic bottle, over ripe fruit, or teddy bears left to be found, the thought of buying a gun of his own is well seated. Hopefully this will become a regular "family time".
Gunfire on a regular basis is a great crime deterrent.

As for what's going on at the Bundy ranch, it's not playing well for LIBS nation wide. Even the low info voters are getting wind of this. That's not good for LIBS. The less info from "unapproved" sources the better.
The Internet has become their downfall. ( Ask Bill Clinton)
The Left is done in Nov. and they know it. ( Speaking of feet stomping, and wanting a pony,,, Would you like that in Unicorn?)

stevenfrisch

Yeah well Walt I think I am citing the Constitution, and I have done my share of target practice.

Bundy is making you guys look really bad. But I like that.

Todd Juvinall

No Steve, Bundy is a true American patriot, those guys you love to hate. He is a simple rancher, supplying the beef you had last night along with your tofu. You could care less about the Constitution as you have proved over and over here. You are the typical liberal. When it suits you you name a couple of Amendments to show everyone how smart you think you are. Your target practice is with a ripe plum.

The Constitution does not say anything about my government giving non-profits that do political work a tax write off. After AB32 and Prop 23, I fully expected you to cite a Amendment granting my money to you. Where is that? So, don't speak to us of the Constitution, it only suits you if there is a buck in it for you. There are too many non profit pimps out there.

Walt

OUCH!... That might leave a mark....

Walt

Now back to business.. This may explain it a little better to the low info Lefty. ( MSNBC loyalists) This tells it pretty good.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/376053/united-states-swat-john-fund

stevenfrisch

I can always tell when Todd is bested, he goes for the irrelevant and personal; and since he is always bested....well, what can I say....must be sad going through life that stupid.

Nighty, night little Toddy, tomorrow we'll take you to the park!

Brad Croul

I can see the Fed deeding all federal lands (that don't have some type of national security installations on them) to the states.
That way, if Nevada, for example, wanted to promote ranching more than industry, Nevada would be the one to decide, not the Fed.
However, in states that have a state income tax, I foresee taxes going up due to increased costs of administering those lands.
So, I wonder what difference would make to have the Fed vs. the state own these "public" lands.

fish

However, in states that have a state income tax, I foresee taxes going up due to increased costs of administering those lands.
So, I wonder what difference would make to have the Fed vs. the state own these "public" lands.

One less layer of bureaucracy to contend with when making decisions regarding their use.

Gregory

"I can always tell when Todd is bested, he goes for the irrelevant and personal; and since he is always bested....well, what can I say....must be sad going through life that stupid.

Nighty, night little Toddy, tomorrow we'll take you to the park!"-Frisch 10:34PM

I can always tell when Frisch is bested, he goes for the irrelevant and personal; and since he is often bested....well, what can I say....must be sad going through life that clueless. Hint: Steve, if you think someone is being irrelevant and personal, maybe meeting that with irrelevant and snotty ad hominems is not the most adult response.

I gather there was a typepad snafu last night, with a number of posts apparently lost after Frisch's 10:34. Gone forever?

Todd Juvinall

Sorry to say Frisch, but you are too easy to best anymore. Greg wipes the floor with you better than anyone else. He is just plain smarter than you. Me, I am just a humble fellow from the backwoods of Nevada County. Raised by two rabbts and a Robin Red Breast. Just a simple guy. And I still defeated your intellectual limts. Too funny. Nighty nite SteveF.

Walt

Maybe Steve can come up with some facts. ( I'll make this real simple)
You have claimed ( as most LIBS have) that Mr. Bundy owes close to a million bucks.
Find proof of that. ( official proof.. Not MSNBC "proof") When this first broke, it was said to be 300 grand. If you don't send a bill, you can't claim nonpayment.

So How bout that official count of euthanized endangered tortoises? 1000 has been the word. Now isn't that special? I'm sure the number snuffed under BLM tires in this endeavor, will bubble to the top soon enough.

Since the FEDS were flexing their mussels over " FED LAW",, they could have slid on over to Denver and rounded up that stoned herd of FED law breaking hippys. " HAY,,, The law is the law". At least any standoff would have been kept to a minimum.
A trail of PB&J sandwiches to a holding pen would have worked beyond belief.

Gregory

Here's an interesting claim...

"The Bureau of Land Management has suffered a huge black eye this week because of their response to the Bundy situation. Perhaps though, there is a reason the BLM chose force over the courts.

In an exclusive interview with Benswann.com, Montana cattle rancher Todd Devlin says the BLM is now considering new ways of dealing with the Cliven Bundy situation. Devlin is not just a Montana cattle rancher but is also a County Commissioner in Prairie County, Montana and he has worked with the Department of Interior, having taught workshops for the agency in the past. On Monday, Devlin reached out to his contacts in the Department of the Interior to find out why the Bureau of Land Management has refused to work with Bundy rather than simply attempting to run over him.

Among the questions Devlin asked of the BLM: “Is it possible that this guy (Cliven Bundy) has prescriptive rights?”

The response from top officials at the BLM: “We are worried that he might and he might use that defense.”

http://www.shiftfrequency.com/ben-swann-michael-lotfi-prescriptive-rights-a-constitutional-perspective-on-the-bundy-ranch-crisis/

I've not dug into the bona fides, maybe Sherlock Frisch would like to take that one on.

Walt

" Dirty Harry" doesn't fit anymore. George "Harry" Custer seems more appropriate
these days, and the BLM boys is his 7TH Cav.
Smarter people than me have said Reid has opened himself up to slander liability
for leaving the safety of the Sen. floor to publically call groups and individual
people nasty names. ( Seems it fine to slander INSIDE the Capital... Got me on that one.) But a LIB news interview opens a whole new set of doors. Or so I've heard.

It may take a while for news of any court action against this. If I had made it there, and was part of the group,, HELL YES I would test that theory.
At the least, ethics violations investigations are in order here. But since Progressive LIBS have no ethics to start with, not much will happen.

But "Snowman" Sharpton is still walking the streets. ( and owes more money to the man than Bundy.)

Walt

Off topic (sorta) But law enforcement used against "anti government" people again.
This time it's just Common Core...
"at West Side Elementary School — a police officer barred the Finneys from setting foot on school property.

If the kids weren’t going to take the tests, their presence at school was a “kind of trespassing thing,” according to the officer.

And a cop there all day to make sure those TRESPASSERS didn't set foot on government soil.

Maybe Steve and friends would like to see our county have building dept employees at every home improvement store to make sure you have a permit to do whatever your buying "those materials" for.
Would that be enough government intrusion? Just give them time.. Look at the revenue
just by enforcing the permit laws... What's the harm?,, Right??
Just a hint of Lefty Utopia for the likes of Steve to salivate over.

Gregory

Regarding grazing rights on Federal lands... a recent Federal case in Nevada:

"Chief Judge Robert C. Jones of the Federal District Court of Nevada found in favor of Hage concerning water rights, grazing rights and all but two livestock trespass charges in United States vs. Wayne Hage (2013).[1][2]

Judge Jones found:[3]

Congress prescribed grazing rights on federal lands were to be granted based on a rancher’s ownership of water rights established under local law and custom.[3]

Hage has a right of access to put his livestock water rights to beneficial use, therefore the livestock could not be found in trespass.[3] [Within one half mile of water rights][1]

USFS employee Steve Williams was found in contempt of court and guilty of witness intimidation.[2][1][4]

Tonopah BLM manager Tom Seley as found in contempt of court and guilty of witness intimidation.[2][1][4]

Williams and Seley were held personally liable for damages with fines exceeding $33,000.[3]

The Hage’s were found guilty of only two minor trespass violations and were fined $165.88[1]

Regional Forester Harv Forsgren was excluded from testifying at trial during witness credibility hearing for lying to the Court.[3][4]

Chief Judge Robert C. Jones stated at the conclusion of the case:

“I find specifically that beginning in the late ‘70s and ‘80s, first, the Forest Service entered into a conspiracy to intentionally deprive the defendants here of their grazing rights, permit rights, preference rights.” [3][4]"

Walt

Didn't someone say the government's land accusations stopped a long time ago?
I'm throwing the BS flag on that one ( even though it was known BS at the time)
Here is a little more of the BLM exploits.

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/04/21/The-Eyes-of-the-BLM-are-on-Texas

Brad Croul

"One less layer of bureaucracy to contend with when making decisions regarding their use." -
So, it hardly seems worth the effort.

Brad Croul

“I find specifically that beginning in the late ‘70s and ‘80s, first, the Forest Service entered into a conspiracy to intentionally deprive the defendants here of their grazing rights, permit rights, preference rights.” -

Hmm, it all started during rancher/Marlboro man/President Reagan's term. Unless you believe the President is always 100% responsible for everything that happens during their time in office, it sounds like the BLM has been going rogue for decades. Note that the BLM has been well armed at least since the Reagan era - it is not just an Obama thing.

Bill Tozer

You could have seen this whole thing coming two decades ago. The environmentalists and NGO environmentalism simply do not want any economic activity on BLM land. Heard than newer Nation Park Great Basin is nice. There are so many "new" parks and "new" off limits huge tracks of land I can't keep up. Even California got another "new" National Park last year to go along with all the "new" regs erupting up from the ground from Sea to Shining Sea. Thar she blows.

Maybe 30 years ago I read that the Feds owned 90% of Alaska, 50% of Washington State....or was that 75%? Don't matter, Big Bro never sleeps and his appetite insatiable. Excuse me for using one of my favorite quotes again: "The man who worries about his well running dry draws water that will never quench his thirst." Power and corrupted power of the Feds will not cease as they cannot help themselves. They will be never satisfied, ever.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/04/21/environmentalists-pushed-bundy-ranch-standoff-over-endangered-tortoises/

The good news is since there is an election coming in November the food police are taking a break. The thought police, however, are working overtime.

fish

"One less layer of bureaucracy to contend with when making decisions regarding their use." -
So, it hardly seems worth the effort.

Maybe in Brads world it isn't. Apparently there are some who feel that it might be an improvement.

Gregory

"Unless you believe the President is always 100% responsible for everything that happens during their time in office..."

What an inane strawman.

Bill Tozer

I am starting to believe the environmentalists simply don't like people. Or at least people seen outside their designated urban jungles. Mt Rushmore would never get made today. Has human faces on the mountain.....scarred and degraded for centuries hence. Not natural I tell ya.

Imagine being upon some solidarity mountain in the Great Woods and running across another human being. Certainly would destroy the moment of bliss and tranquility. Or imagine surveying the vast expanses of the great outdoors under the purple sky of the desert at golden hour and seeing the glare off somebody's pickup truck 20 miles away. That would kill a perfectly good woodie. There ought to be a law against people not staying put in their designed Skinner's cages. Open space for you, but not for me.

Yep, environmentalists don't like people. I wonder how they can tolerate themselves.

Gregory

""...make all needful rules..." has been consistently interpreted to mean just what it says, Congress makes the rules. Congress made the rules that govern the management of or disposal of federal lands." Frisch 5:55PM

Yes, and apparently "Congress prescribed grazing rights on federal lands were to be granted based on a rancher’s ownership of water rights established under local law and custom".

By golly, maybe Bundy really does have a case, eh, Steve?

"By the way, what about the rights of all the other 16,000 ranchers who are following the law, and paying federal grazing fees? Are they not put at a competitive disadvantage by Mr. Bundy?" -Frisch 5:55PM

Bundy offered to pay usual and customary grazing fees to Clark County after the break, but worked within the BLM system until two decades ago when his ranch was being pressured to sell their grazing rights and to reduce the size of their herd by 90%. The other 52 ranchers getting the same treatment went out of business, a real competitive disadvantage.

"It is conservatives who choose today to fight for the rights of a guy who has not paid his rent for 21 years, but wants to restrict voting rights across the country. If conservatives cared about the individual rights of everyone they would be fighting for equality in marriage laws. Or they would be incensed that someone would shoot a kid walking home from the store or who texts in a movie theater and gets shot dead based on 'stand your ground." Arn't those injustices? The truth is today conservatives pick and choose whose rights they are going to stand up for, and it speaks volumes that you are standing for a guy who openly calls for people to show up with guns instead of everyone else who might need your help. ....So don't tell me you are the crusaders for individual rights, you are only the crusaders for the individual rights of those whom you like." Frisch 5:55PM

Never has Frisch been so "projecting". Steve, the reason a small army being sent by the *FEDERAL* BLM to take 1000 head of cattle belonging to a rancher is different than a kid being shot the guy whose head was being slammed onto the concrete in a supposed act of 'whupass' is that one is an injustice perpetrated by the government and the other is a matter for the criminal justice system to sort out, which it did.

Brad Croul

"One less layer of bureaucracy to contend with when making decisions regarding their use." -
So, it hardly seems worth the effort." - since you are just trading a fed bureaucracy for a state (of Jefferson?) bureaucracy.

You can have pretty much all the BLM lands you want, Fish, as long as you pay fair market value for it.
However, I am thinking that pretty much all the "decent" BLM land has been sold, traded, and developed. All you have left is the stuff no one can find a use for.

Bill Tozer

"Never has Frisch been so "projecting".

Nay, he is just externalizing his internalies.

fish

You can have pretty much all the BLM lands you want, Fish, as long as you pay fair market value for it.
However, I am thinking that pretty much all the "decent" BLM land has been sold, traded, and developed. All you have left is the stuff no one can find a use for.


Apparently Mr. Bundy has a use for it.....and given that it's hardly suitable for anything else it should be pretty cheap. Let's make sure that "Greasy Harry" doesn't get to squander the peoples property at twenty cents on the dollar like it appears that he was trying to do to line his idiot kids pockets.

Brad Croul

"Unless you believe the President is always 100% responsible for everything that happens during their time in office..." -
Not really a strawman Greg, just trying to give Reagan (and Obama) a break here.

I hear a lot around here about leftys and envriros and how it is all because of Obama. So, I would be interested to know what you think about Reagan' BLM in the 70's, armed to the teeth, harassing ranchers.

Gregory

Let's also remember the BLM "1st Amendment" zone ghetto roped off for protesters.

fish

So, I would be interested to know what you think about Reagan' BLM in the 70's, armed to the teeth, harassing ranchers.

How was the federal Bureau of Land Management in any way Ronald Reagans in the 1970's?

Gregory

Fish, not only were they not Reagan's (who was sworn into office in 1981), they weren't armed to the teeth, nor were hundreds sent out to round up cattle and protesters who went off the 1st Amendment Zone plantation.

As was reported from a court decision, "the Forest Service entered into a conspiracy to intentionally deprive the defendants here of their grazing rights, permit rights, preference rights" wasn't done by a few platoons with machine guns. Just the garden variety "swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance" that even King George IV would recognize.

fish

Fish, not only were they not Reagan's (who was sworn into office in 1981), they weren't armed to the teeth, nor were hundreds sent out to round up cattle and protesters who went off the 1st Amendment Zone plantation.

Indeed.

I was curious since Brad posted the comment if he was aware of these facts.

Walt

So how bout that new land grab proposal over on the Red River?
Now BLM wants to try this in Texas? This time it's full blown private property
they are after.( BLM claims Texas never had a right to deed the property into private hands.)And you think that will go over any better than the Bundy bungle?
The resident LIBS have ignored that story like the plague.

When it comes to Presidents who are in power when domestic trouble hits, that's only a small part of the equation. Who has control of the House and Senate is a bigger factor. When LIBS control 2/3ds of government, and the internal workings are infested by Progressive LIB sympathizers who use their hired and appointed positions to the benefit of their party, there lies the problem. No one will be held accountable for the breaking of the public trust.

When the Right regains power, a purging of LIBS from government employ should be employed. A review of voter registration should be the simple way. ( LIBS give a rats ass about private info obtained by government for nefarious reasons as it is..... Except when it may apply to them.)

I recall asking for legitimate info on just what Bundy "owes" the government.
Yet not one LIB has produced any legit proof. You would think a LIB looking to score a point would be all over that. What gives???

Michael Anderson

Guys, your petticoats are all a flutter. Settle down. And BTW, the first "1st Amendment Zones" came out of the Bush II administration. So chill out for Christ's sake.

My good friend Urban Brother created a super graphic for y'all. This is a special work of art for Tozer, Fish, and Walt, good sports every one of ya: http://postimg.org/image/k5kq20qbl/

Michael A.

Michael Anderson

One more funyun for y'all, especially for those who accuse some of us of having GWB-aFlutter-Disease: http://www.theonion.com/video/george-w-bush-debuts-new-paintings-of-dogs-friends,35799/

fish

Morning Michael,

Two things....from your mention of free speech zones as being started by Bush the Lesser and continued by the Messiah... I take this as an endorsement of the practice by you? Second....I appreciate biting satire from any political perspective....I'm still waiting....was there another panel, I mean one with some element of humor, that was to accompany that comic?

Michael Anderson

Mornin' Fish,

Nope, the one panel was it. I like my comedy dry, but your mileage may vary.

And nope #2, I always felt the free speech zones to be bad manners on the part of who built 'em from the moment they were introduced. But I will note that I didn't hear a peep from the Tea Party's ancestors during that time.

Michael A.

fish

But I will note that I didn't hear a peep from the Tea Party's ancestors during that time.

Who would they be?

fish

Oh my...you guys are so much braver in your own sandbox!


Yeah, don’t want to mess up that government pension now do you, Fish?

I shant be collecting a government pension Stevie.

Holding up Cliven Bundy, who does not recognize the legal rights of the United States Government, as a hero, while he stands in front of an American flag every day on Fox News might appear hypocritical?

I'm not holding Mr. Bundy as a hero, and if you go back and re-read the pertinent posts in the thread you will see where I conceded your point. The Federal government is under no obligation it would seem to allow Mr. Bundy to continue grazing his livestock on that land. My complaints had to do with the Feds potentially depriving Mr. Bundy of existing access and grazing tights established prior to the establishment of the BLM and their regulatory apparatus. While I conceeded to your argument I'm not sure that the issue is settled in law based on some of Gregs subsequent posts.

Here is our last substantive exchange on l’affaire Bundy

Posted by: fish | 16 April 2014 at 08:53 AM

He is the last rancher working leases in a portion of the Gold Buttes [Google map it in SE Nevada between the east edge of Lake Meade and the Utah border south of Mesquite}. I actually love that eastern Nevada area, and Pioche just north of Mesquite is one of my favorite western towns.

There are ranchers working BLM leases all around Bundy to the north and east. There are thousand of BLM grazing leases in Nevada, and 18,000 BLM grazing leases to more than 16,000 ranchers on more than 155 million acres of BLM land in the west. That is about 65% of all BLM lands that have grazing leases on them.
Hope that helps put Mr. Bundy in a little perspective.

And my concession:

I am fond of SE Nevada as well.....less south and more east though. Okay Stevie I got nothing else....well done!
Still wish the morons on both sides could work this shit out reasonably.

It would seem that in addition to reading comprehension issues you’re shitty in victory as well! More’s the pity!

Don’t want to mess with that government pension while cheering for militia members to rally to Bundy’s cause on the anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing, do you?

No pension Stevie as mentioned above. You'll need to show me where I cheered for the "militia members to rally to Bundy’s cause on the anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing" (A simple cut and paste will be sufficient Steve...I'll recognize my own opinions). I do love how your reasoning skills desert you when you really get worked up.....it took me 8 cans of PBR to get that worked up at Ben last summer!

Don’t want to mess up that government pension while your buddies are excoriating the ‘evil unions’ for getting workers pensions; or [erroneously] railing against government workers getting paid more than the private sector; or claiming to be wary of government power while working for the national security arm of the state?

Third time Stevie.....there will be no pension.....I have a 401(k) just like the rest of you noble proletarians. No problems with unions either. It would seem though that there is an issue where it comes to government unions…..in that, proglodyte hero FDR and I are in agreement. And as to, "or claiming to be wary of government power while working for the national security arm of the state. where and when the fuck did you think I started to question the behavior of the benevolent state? Fifteen years ago I was a mindless statist suckup like you...well not like you because you're not stupid…more like JoKe who be always be relied upon to cheerlead for government regardless of its misdeeds. You are just as selective in your outrage as those you with whom you disagree.

Please recall that it was Yankee Doodle Mikey who got me to reveal my employment status when he started the...."You guys aren't patriotic enough...maybe I should make a few calls" dick measuring contest last summer.

What hypocrites.

So says the man who lauds the government at every turn yet apparently didn't feel it important enough to pay all the taxes required of him by the state. Say what you want about my hypocrisy I’ve never not paid my taxes. I shouldn't be surprised by your fervor Stevie....there is never a greater zealot than he who is redeemed by Big Brother. Did you self report in a fit of remorse at your disloyalty or did you get popped in an audit because you were sloppy about fudging the numbers?

I've admitted my hypocrisy regarding the employment choices I’ve made get back to me when you can as well Winston.


I post this directly at Associate Bobs site but he censors those opinions that he doesn't care for...yeah I know...funny for a "newsman"...the casual indifference to free speech.

Todd Juvinall

fish, you have exposed the hypocrite Steve Frisch again. I give him nary a thought regarding his allegations against conservatives for anything. He in fact was a tax scofflaw and the fact he would call others names is too funny. Nothing worse than a business owner who does not send in the employee tax payments. Is there anything worse? And all this is in the County Records as puvlic records. Nothing personal now, just the plain old everyday facts. He will cry that it is personal though. Whiny libs are pathetic.

Regarding the "free speech" zones. Yes they were used when Bush was speaking somewhere or passing through as a protection of him by the Secret Service. Here is a snippet from Wiki

"Free speech zones were commonly used by President George W. Bush after the September 11 attacks and through the 2004 election. Free speech zones were set up by the Secret Service, who scouted locations where the U.S. president was scheduled to speak, or pass through. "

Otherwise it appears all the other uses were for democrats. Or in democrat cities or functions. I would suggest the "free speech" zones put in place by BLM were very different than the ones the Secret Service put in place to protect Bush. But, as usual, the libs like Frisch and MichaelA get a tiny bit of truth, twist it, and expand it to man made global warming!

RL Crabb

Fish...What kind of fish? Trout? Cod? Perch? Flounder? I'm still wondering who "Windy" is. Is it the person the Association sang about all those years ago, or just another tilting windmill?

Gregory

From the wiki, it was Democrats who started the free speech zone concept, in Atlanta under Mayor Andrew Young, protecting the '88 Democratic National Convention... I guess they didn't want a repeat of the likes of Sister Boom Boom at the Frisco convention four years earlier. That there would actually be free speech zones at universities, especially public ones, is particularly troubling.

Gregory

""What hypocrites"

So says the man who lauds the government at every turn yet apparently didn't feel it important enough to pay all the taxes required of him by the state." -phish

IIRC, it was worse than that... he took the money withheld from employees and didn't forward that to the guvmint. That can be considered theft.

From the coverage to date it appears Bundy stopped sending money to the BLM when they told him he had to cut his herd by 90%. A "F U" moment, and something like 80% of the million dollars he is said to be on the hook for are penalties for not cutting his herd by 90% and later 100%, like the other 52 ranches in the area.

While Bundy's legal expertise is akin to those tax consultants who were giving seminars about how one can ignore the income tax because it wasn't legal (I think many of them have been paroled by now), he was being screwed by the BLM and it looks like that tide has stopped rising. Sagebrush Rebellion, part deux, anyone?

I'd bet Sen. Reid will keep the BLM from moving against Bundy until after the November elections.

Walt

I don't know Gregory,,,, Harry "Custer" Reid only has till Nov. to do his dirty work. After that he's going to lose his "LIB" given power. ( Can Steve or Mike say,,, "irrelevant"?) He will do his best to get the "civil war" started. It's a matter of principal now. ( How dare anyone stand up to government will.)
This is what LIBS feared most when they went after 2ND Amendment rights.
Gotta get those AR style weapons out of the hands of people who know how to properly use them! ( Never mind that shootings and killing involving the "evil" black gun are the lowest in all the categories of crime stats)
Reality be damned.
Yes, the founding Fathers saw this day when government believes they are "all powerful". Praise the Lord and the 2ND Amen.

Someone needs to go to our favorite overpass and paint a 3x3 foot box in yellow, and mark it " Approved free speech zone". Any bets on just who would bitch first?

OHH!!! Word has it the "burning man" clan is wanting to have their own little "gathering" across from the Bundy property."No rules" is the billing... ( Really? On endangered critter land??)
OH... PLEASE do it!! Half of Nevada City would attend, and only half of those will ever find their way back. Yes,,, there will be arrests from the Lefty camp. Illegal drugs are still illegal in Nev.
Obviously the LIBS are looking to start a ruckus with the "other side",, and that's really the main intent.( in my opinion)
A bunch of drugged up "hipsters" wanting to "mix it up" with "cowboys".
Nope,, that won't end well for the hipsters. We have seen just what they call "peaceful". Remember that BS from the OWS idiots?
I didn't see anyone at the Bundy standoff wearing scarfs to cover their identities, like the OWS trouble makers did.

I wish them luck in obtaining a permit for that 30 day "party".
The Bundy supporters are camped on private property.

When our resident Lefties get done gutter sniping, what is too much government intrusion in their book? They never seem to have an answer to that.

stevenfrisch

Here you go you great scholars of the Constitution, your American hero:

"I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro,” he said. Mr. Bundy recalled driving past a public-housing project in North Las Vegas, “and in front of that government house the door was usually open and the older people and the kids — and there is always at least a half a dozen people sitting on the porch — they didn’t have nothing to do. They didn’t have nothing for their kids to do. They didn’t have nothing for their young girls to do.

“And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do?” he asked. “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.”

----Cliven Bundy

I hear he is giving marriage advice next Todd, you better rush down and listen!

I love how he does not recognize the United States as even existing but stands in front of the American flag every time he pontificates about what it really means to be an American.

I think he should get his own freaking flag. Oh that's right, he waves the Gadsen Flag!

fish

Here you go you great scholars of the Constitution, your American hero:

"I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro,” he said. Mr. Bundy recalled driving past a public-housing project in North Las Vegas, “and in front of that government house the door was usually open and the older people and the kids — and there is always at least a half a dozen people sitting on the porch — they didn’t have nothing to do. They didn’t have nothing for their kids to do. They didn’t have nothing for their young girls to do.

“And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do?” he asked. “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.”

----Cliven Bundy

You are, at least reliable partisan putz!

Lets just tart up that language and suddenly it's a plea for more spending on the urban underclass.

"I want to tell you one more thing I know about the inner city undeclass,” he said. Mr. Frisch recalled driving past a public-housing project in North Las Vegas, “and in front of that government house the door was usually open and the older people and the kids — and there is always at least a half a dozen people sitting on the porch.... they didn’t have anything to do. There are few opportunities for recreation or community gathering. They didn't have anything for their kids to do. They didn’t have anything for their young girls to do. This lack of resources leads to continuing the cycle of poverty and despair that we city in our urban cores

“And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do?” They can't accept paid work because as soon as they have some income they are removed from public assistance. “They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned any job skills. And I’ve often wondered, are they significantly different than slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy? They didn’t get more freedom. They got less freedom.”

(Edited for greater Lefty palatability)

So how is what Mr. Bundy stated any substatively different than any number of pleas for "more resources" and "improved funding mechanisms" that we here routinely from TEAM DEMOCRAT.
Mr. Bundy is awkward in his selection of language to be sure, but he has identified the problem accurately. Are you saying Stevie that he is in endorsement of these conditions? It sounds as though he deplores them.

fish

....here routinely

...hear routinely....

Shit!

stevenfrisch

The difference is Mr. Fish that if it were stated that way almost everyone here would roundly oppose it as a welfare...which is exactly what Mr. Bundy is getting by continuing to graze on public land without paying his grazing fees.

And really, 'they never learned to pick cotton'....."are they better off as slaves.." You really going to hitch yourself to that cracker ass racist wagon? I guess so.

I note no one answered my question about creating a competitive advantage for Mr. Bundy by not enforcing contracts equitably....a libertarian shibboleth.

I also note that although you were quick to say you will not be collecting a direct government pension, you did not answer Mr. Anderson's question regarding the source of your income or the nature of the contracts or employment that support you. As an anonymous poster who is unable to provide that information we must assume YOUR original statement was true...you are a government supported employee of some sort who feels his identity must be protected to protect his pension...

Walt

Finally...A Bundy story printed in our local rag. And a LIB syndication
no less!! I'm pretty sure some locals have submitted "their two cents",
but have yet to be printed.( if at all)
With all the typical "name calling" just how in hell did this pass the censor test? If it had come from a Conservative, more likely than not it would have been rejected for being "insensitive".

As for Steve's,, " LOOK!! That Bundy is a RASISIT!!!" Ya,,, Every LIB in the nation has jumped on that bandwagon. ( since that all they want to see)
Make a simple analogy and it get's twisted to fit ones needs.

Gregory

Frisch, the information you promised is still not received. You promised contact information for your board months ago; should I just go ahead and contact only the members I've independently found addresses for?

Back to the ranch, Bundy doesn't have a million dollar bill for grazing, he has a million dollar fine for not going out of the cattle business like the 52 other ranches in Clark County after the rangeland he'd been using for grazing, long enough to have rights to graze, was slated to be tortoise habitat despite really not hosting a significant number of tortoises yet. If I've got it straight (it's been hard to separate the wheat from the chaff) the prime tortoise habitat is in an adjoining area slated for solar development.

BTW the three large solar electric generators south of Vegas (they're across the border in California's Mojave, just south of Jean, NV) looked to be in full operation yesterday. Too bad Frisch can't see them from his house, I'm sure he'd appreciate the blight on the landscape for what it is. California made sure they got built where only Nevadans would have to look at them.

Gregory

"I love how he does not recognize the United States as even existing"

While he has 'interesting' ideas, not recognizing the existence of the USA does not seem to be one of them. Another Frisch lie?


"I note no one answered my question about creating a competitive advantage for Mr. Bundy by not enforcing contracts equitably....a libertarian shibboleth." -Frisch

Bullshit isn't just on Clark County rangeland. I wrote the following in response:

"Bundy offered to pay usual and customary grazing fees to Clark County after the break, but worked within the BLM system until two decades ago when his ranch was being pressured to sell their grazing rights and to reduce the size of their herd by 90%. The other 52 ranchers getting the same treatment went out of business, a real competitive disadvantage."

The usual and customary grazing fees, paid by all those non-Clark County ranchers, would have amounted to closer to $200k, which Bundy offered to pay Clark County.

fish

You're really not very good at this Stevie. You have your moments but you really aren't.

The difference is Mr. Fish that if it were stated that way almost everyone here would roundly oppose it as a welfare...which is exactly what Mr. Bundy is getting by continuing to graze on public land without paying his grazing fees.

I conceded that Mr. Bundy should have paid his fees on two other occasions following your arguments. What does that have to do with your attempt at tarring Mr. Bundy as a racist above?

And really, 'they never learned to pick cotton'....."are they better off as slaves.." You really going to hitch yourself to that cracker ass racist wagon? I guess so.

You'll need to do better Stevie. My response was to demonstrate that Mr. Bundys language, although inelegant is not so different than language used routinely to both lament the conditions and plead for improvement in the lives of inner city African Americans. Reading comprehension really isn't your thing when there might be the slightest opportunity for you to vent a little lefty promethean rage.

I note no one answered my question about creating a competitive advantage for Mr. Bundy by not enforcing contracts equitably....a libertarian shibboleth.

How many times do you need me to concede the argument Stevie? Not getting enough positive reinforcement at home?

I also note that although you were quick to say you will not be collecting a direct government pension, you did not answer Mr. Anderson's question regarding the source of your income or the nature of the contracts or employment that support you. As an anonymous poster who is unable to provide that information we must assume YOUR original statement was true...you are a government supported employee of some sort who feels his identity must be protected to protect his pension...

Admitted to long ago with no specifics because I know how you nitwits are...I wouldn't put it past any of you (especially pets.com boy) to fuck things up for me at a time not of my choosing. I do note you routinely whine about Greg "going to the SBC board" about things, and charges and counter charges tossed back and forth freely. Sorry Stevie you'll just need to wait. If me not telling you the exact funding source for my employment is a DQ in your eyes....well OK....life will go on nicely for me Grant Money Boy!

Brad Croul

The problem with choosing sides based on who your friend's enemies are is that when they implode, like Bundy seems to be- the more he keeps talking, you have to ask yourself if you made the right decision in supporting his position. Looks like a media circus out at the ranch with all the "minutemen" in the latest (woodland?) camo fashions, walking around all puffed up with their hoglegs strapped to there sides. What a hoot!

I am not sure why, all of sudden, Bundy is the poster child for the evils of big government interference. He has some crackpot ideas about things.
But, in some ways it reminds me of how people view Edward Snowden as a hero, and some view him as a traitor.

The Shoshone have been hassled by the Fed over the same kind of thing for years. Unlike the Bundy case, the grazing land taken was actually the indian's land.

The Fed was paying the Shoshone in cattle for easements and the use of their lands based on a 1983 treaty, now the Fed wants to take away their grazing rights, along with all the other lands they have already taken. Why, because they can since they have the bigger guns.

That's politics.

UNITED STATES TREATY WITH THE WESTERN SHOSHONI, 1863

October 1, 1863, 18 Statutes at Large 689

Treaty of Peace and Friendship made at Ruby Valley, in the Territory of Nevada, this first day of October, A.D. one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, between the United States of America, represented by the undersigned commissioners, and the Western Bands of the Shoshonee Nation of Indians, represented by their Chiefs and Principal Men and warriors, as follows:

ARTICLE 1

Peace and friendship shall be hereafter established and maintained between the Western Bands of the Shoshonee nation and the people and government of the United States; and the said bands stipulate and agree that hostilities and all depredations upon the emigrant trains,the mail and telegraph lines, and upon the citizens of the United States within their country, shall cease.

ARTICLE 2

The several routes of travel through the Shoshonee country, now or hereafter used by white men, shall be forever free, and unobstructed by the said bands, for the use of the government of the United States, and of all emigrants and travellers under its authority and protection,without molestation or injury from them. And if depredations are at any time committed by bad men of their nation, the offenders shall be immediately taken and delivered up to the proper officers of the United States, to be punished as their offences shall deserve; and the safety of all travellers passing peaceably over either of said routes is hereby guarantied by said bands.

Military posts may be established by the President of the United states along said routes or elsewhere in their country; and station houses may be erected and occupied at such points as may be necessary for the comfort and convenience of travellers or for mail or telegraph companies.

ARTICLE 3

The telegraph and overland stage lines having been established and operated by companies under the authority of the United States through a part of the Shoshonee country, it is expressly agreed that the same may be continued without hindrance, molestation, or injury from the people of said bands, and that their property and the lives and property of passengers in the stages and of the employes of the respective companies, shall be protected by them. And further, it being understood that provision has been made by the government of the United States for the construction of a railway from the plains west to the Pacific ocean, it is stipulated by the said bands that the said railway or its branches may be located, constructed, and operated, and without molestation from them, through any portion of country claimed or occupied by them.

ARTICLE 4

It is further agreed by the parties hereto, that the shoshonee country may be explored and prospected for gold and silver, or other minerals; and when mines are discovered, they may be worked, and mining and agricultural settlements formed, and ranches established whenever they may be required. Mills may be erected and timber taken for their use, as also for building and other purposes in any part of the country claimed by said bands.

ARTICLE 5

It is understood that the boundaries of the country claimed and occupied by said bands are defined and described by them as follows:

On the north by Wong-goga-da Mountains and Shoshonee River Valley;on the west by Su-non-to-yah Mountains or Smith Creek Mountains; on the south by Wi-co-bah and the Colorado Desert; on the east by Po-ho-no-be Valley or Steptoe Valley and Great Salt Lake Valley.

ARTICLE 6

The said bands agree that whenever the President of the United states shall deem it expedient for them to abandon the roaming life,which, they now lead, and become herdsmen or agriculturalists, he is hereby authorized to make such reservations for their use as he may deem necessary within the country above described; and they do also hereby agree to remove their camps to such reservations as he may indicate, and to reside and remain therein.

ARTICLE 7

The United States, being aware of the inconvenience resulting to the Indians in consequence of the driving away and destruction of game along the routes travelled by white men, and by the formation of agricultural and mining settlements, are willing to fairly compensate them for the same; therefore, and in consideration of the preceding stipulations, and of their faithful observance by the said bands, the United States promise and agree to pay to the said bands of the Shoshonee nation parties hereto, annually for the term of twenty years,the sum of five thousand dollars in such articles, including cattle for herding or other purposes, as the President of the United States shall deem suitable for their wants and condition, either as hunters or herdsmen. And the said bands hereby acknowledge the reception of the said stipulated annuities as a full compensation and equivalent for the loss of game and the rights and privileges hereby conceded.

ARTICLE 8

The said bands hereby acknowledge that they have received from said commissioners provisions and clothing amounting to five thousand dollars as presents at the conclusion of this treaty.

Done at Ruby Valley the day and year above written.

James W. Nye
James Duane Doty
Te-moak, his x mark
Mo-ho-a
Kirk-weedgwa, his x mark
To-nag, his x mark
To-so-wee-so-op, his x mark
Sow-er-e-gah, his x mark
Po-on-go-sah, his x mark
Par-a-woat-ze, his x mark
Ga-ha-dier, his x mark
Ko-ro-kout-ze, his x mark
Pon-ge-mah, his x mark
Buck, his x mark
Witnesses:

J. B. Moore, lieutenant-colonel Third Infantry California Volunteers
Jacob T. Lockhart, Indian agent Nevada Territory
Henry Butterfield, interpreter
Ratified June 26, 1866
Proclaimed Oct. 21, 1869

Gregory

"The Shoshone have been hassled by the Fed over the same kind of thing for years. Unlike the Bundy case, the grazing land taken was actually the indian's land."

You may have noticed a post of mine over at Crabb's mentioning a Shoshone claim. A couple more predating your Ruby Valley Treaty note here are stuck in Crabbman limbo, including links to a couple of Ruby Valley Treaty pieces.

BTW the Ruby Valley, is stunning, as are the Ruby mountains; a stepson of mine lived there for a time, working for a chief in their law practice.

Paul Emery

So Bundy's idea of freedom is catching on from unlikely supporters. Here's an example

Some of the organizers of the annual Burning Man festival are planning an event aimed at mocking the claims of a Nevada rancher who refuses to pay government-mandated fees for using federal lands.

“For years, we paid permitting fees to hold Burning Man on the beautiful Playa in Northern Nevada,” said the event’s organizers on a Facebook page. “But now, Cliven Bundy has shown us a NEW WAY! ABSOLUTE FREEDOM! Bundy has declared the entire area surrounding Bundy Ranch as a TOTALLY RULES-FREE ZONE! ANYTHING GOES! WOO-HOO!!!”

Progressive activist Sean Shealy said Bundyfest, which will be held across the road from Bundy’s ranch in Bunkerville, Nevada, for one month starting on Sept. 5.

That’s just after the conclusion of the Burning Man festival, and Shealy hopes attendees will travel south to see 240 bands perform 24 hours a day near the rancher’s home.

“Some people have asked me, where will we camp, where will we park?” Shealy said. “Anywhere, really. It’s f*cking anarchy.”

The Facebook page for the event promises no permits will be required, full nudity will be permitted, and the atmosphere will be gay-friendly.

However, Shealy warned, no bathroom facilities would be provided.

“You’re free to let it all hang out right there, just like Bundy’s cattle, right there in the Virgin River, if you want to,” Shealy said.

Organizers also plan a “penis erection contest,” where participants will be awarded prizes for the largest phallic structure built in the desert.

Shealy said organizers expect about 50,000 people to show up in the desert near Bundy’s home.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/04/22/burning-man-organizer-plans-anything-goes-bundyfest-to-mock-scofflaw-rancher/

Paul Emery

George

Your Sheriff Mack is really going off the deep end on this one supporting that racist asshole.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/15/richard-mack-_n_5154606.html


"Former Arizona sheriff Richard Mack says he would have put women in the line of fire if the federal officers had started shooting during a standoff with Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy.

A former Arizona sheriff who supported a Nevada rancher in his land dispute with the federal government says he would have put women in the frontline if officers started shooting.

An armed standoff between Cliven Bundy and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management over grazing rights ended with the federal government abandoning its plans on Saturday to impound Bundy's cows that roamed public lands.

Richard Mack, a Bundy supporter who served as sheriff of Graham County, Ariz., between 1988-1997, told Fox News on Monday about a planned strategy if "rogue federal agents" had opened fire.

“We were actually strategizing to put all the women up at the front,” he said on Fox News, according to TheBlaze.com. “If they are going to start shooting, it’s going to be women that are going to be televised all across the world getting shot by these rogue federal officers.”

fish

Richard Mack, a Bundy supporter who served as sheriff of Graham County, Ariz., between 1988-1997, told Fox News on Monday about a planned strategy if "rogue federal agents" had opened fire.

“We were actually strategizing to put all the women up at the front,” he said on Fox News, according to TheBlaze.com. “If they are going to start shooting, it’s going to be women that are going to be televised all across the world getting shot by these rogue federal officers.”

It's a brilliant move Paul! As I mentioned up thread...it's worthy of a Chicago political activist.

Paul Emery

Help me with this Fish

What is the purpose of Macks "brilliant move"?

stevenfrisch

Yep, brilliant move. After all it is just political theater until someone gets shot in the head.

Gregory

"“But now, Cliven Bundy has shown us a NEW WAY! ABSOLUTE FREEDOM! Bundy has declared the entire area surrounding Bundy Ranch as a TOTALLY RULES-FREE ZONE! ANYTHING GOES! WOO-HOO!!!”

It really is amazing how oblivious the left can be to what the right is saying.

fish

Yep, brilliant move. After all it is just political theater until someone gets shot in the head.

Stevie....I'm surprised at you.....way, way up thread you were praising the Feds for de-escalating the situation. Putting women up front does just that. I'm sure the notoriously heavy handed feds would be ecstatic to slaughter every member of the Bundy family down to the last hired ranch hand....what they would really prefer not to suffer though is negative press.

It raises awkward questions during appropriation cycles.

But even if some "Ranger" decided to go all "Ludlow Massacre" on the Bundys what would you care.....after all they're just family and friends of a cracker ass racist and no loss the the "new class" at all.

Brad Croul

" I'm sure the notoriously heavy handed feds would be ecstatic to slaughter every member of the Bundy family down to the last hired ranch hand."- Fish, I hope that was a joke- Otherwise, I can see why you don't use your real name since your employer and/or underlings might be surprised at the "real" you.

I would say Mack is less "Chicago activist" and more Saddam (human shield) Hussein.

Maybe we can get him back up her for an encore performance. I missed the last one. What a hoot!

fish

I would say Mack is less "Chicago activist" and more Saddam (human shield) Hussein.

I'm sure you would because you're confusing the reference....the "Chicago Activist" reference refers to the Alinskyite practice of turning an opponents strength into a weakness. Putting women on the front lines does that.

And as always.....LOL.

stevenfrisch

Posted by: fish | 25 April 2014 at 05:27 AM

"......praising the Feds for de-escalating the situation. Putting women up front does just that."

I don't think the threat is from the BLM law enforcement at this point. I am much more concerned about the motley collection of rural western militia members with semi-automatic scoped weapons roaming the hills and controlling access to what Mr. Bundy claims is his land. One hopped up, tweaker, neo-nazi, second amendment waving, anti-federal government asshole could ruin the whole day by shooting someone in the head then the women and children in the front line would pay the price.

The very ethics of putting your women and children up front so you build sympathy for your movement if they are killed is, as Brad pointed out, Saddam Hussein ethics.

My praise was for the Feds plan to lien Bund'y property, take him into custody when he goes into town for a beer, then seize his home ranch to pay his back taxes, fees and penalties while he is in custody, preferably during a snow storm so the militia assholes stay up in Idaho.

fish

I don't think the threat is from the BLM law enforcement at this point. I am much more concerned about the motley collection of rural western militia members with semi-automatic scoped weapons roaming the hills and controlling access to what Mr. Bundy claims is his land. One hopped up, tweaker, neo-nazi, second amendment waving, anti-federal government asshole could ruin the whole day by shooting someone in the head then the women and children in the front line would pay the price.

Yeah they could...but they haven't yet so I guess we'll just need to wait and see!

The very ethics of putting your women and children up front so you build sympathy for your movement if they are killed is, as Brad pointed out, Saddam Hussein ethics.

Again..... matter of opinion. The who's a "terrorist" vs. who's a "freedom fighter" argument all over again.

Gregory

"I don't think the threat is from the BLM law enforcement at this point" -Frisch

It would still be were it not for the motley collection of rural western militia members with semi-automatic scoped weapons showing up.

"controlling access to what Mr. Bundy claims is his land" -Frisch

Bundy hasn't ever claimed the public rangelands as his own. Lying again, Steve? How about coughing up the contact info for your board, as you once promised? You have my email address.


"One hopped up, tweaker, neo-nazi, second amendment waving, anti-federal government asshole could ruin the whole day by shooting someone in the head then the women and children in the front line would pay the price."-Frisch

Steve, they're in Nevada, call it Baja Utah. Not your native Chicago, where Subway sandwich employees can work in bulletproof safety. What a world.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/chicago-subway-bulletproof-case-protect-employees-article-1.1768270

Paul Emery

So Fish, you r support of Bundy makes it seem logical that you have no problem with pot farmers using Federal land for grows that conform to California State law.

Gregory

Paul, planting crops isn't a moral or a legal equivalent to grazing on the Commons, and never has been.

Paul Emery

Gregory

Huh? 11:24 Can you explain that?

fish

So Fish, you r support of Bundy makes it seem logical that you have no problem with pot farmers using Federal land for grows that conform to California State law.


No Paul it's far deeper than merely conforming with or not conforming with state law, and where I must depart from my more conservative bretheren!

I have no problem with anyone planting pot anywhere for any reason medicinal or not. I think people oughta have window boxes with weed....I think they ought to be able to grow it out back next to the tomatoes......and all of it untaxed by the cold dead hand of the state.

Will that be sufficient?

stevenfrisch

Greg, you have our address.

Gregory

Steve, you promised contact info for your Board, were I to send you a email request. I sent the email, you did not follow through.

So, were you lying?

Gregory

Paul, there are essential differences between letting an animal wander in a Commons, free to graze, and planting crops, whether pot, wheat or oranges. Grazing doesn't exclude other uses; planting crops does.

Paul Emery

Gregory

How about mining or logging ? What category does that fall under? Also who should be responsible for enforcing restridctions that you feel are necessary (cultivation for example)

Gregory

C'mon, Paul, you aren't that dense. Perhaps I can help you if you can tell me what crops, legal under Federal law, are now being legally grown on Federal land in our state sp we have something to compare your Pot reference to.

Brad Croul

"Grazing doesn't exclude other uses; planting crops does" - except when they graze on your pot plants, lol!

I think you could overgraze land so the roots die, the topsoil blows away, and thereby exclude grazing, or growing. That is what the Forest Service and BLM are tasked to monitor. Overgrazing is, or has been, rampant for decades. The ranchers (generally speaking) using BLM might not have as much of an incentive to husband the BLM land as well as their own since they can walk away from it. If ranchers were held to the same standards as, say, mining operations are, they might have more of an incentive to make sure the place was not overworked.

fish

How about mining or logging ? What category does that fall under? Also who should be responsible for enforcing restridctions that you feel are necessary (cultivation for example)

So not about grazing anymore......and always, always back to the bureaucracy with you.

fish

Pity....can't get anyone to acknowledge Mr. Bundys distasteful and off putting lack of racism over on the ruminations thread.

Have at him you fabulously anti racist proglodyte warriors.....


It would seem that the Old Grey Lady employs those who attended the "Jeff Pelline Academy for Selective Editing" to show those not aligned with your politics in the worst possible light.

In a YouTube video, he is filmed already in mid-sentence.

"... and so what I've testified to you -- I was in the Watts riot, I seen the beginning fire and I seen that last fire. What I seen is civil disturbance. People are not happy, people are thinking they don't have their freedoms, they didn't have these things, and they didn't have them.

We've progressed quite a bit from that day until now, and we sure don't want to go back. We sure don't want the colored people to go back to that point. We sure don't want these Mexican people to go back to that point. And we can make a difference right now by taking care of some of these bureaucracies, and do it in a peaceful way.

Those comments appear to change the context of the next section, which was quoted in the New York Times. One clear point the rancher made: America has progressed since the 1965 race riots and "we sure don't want to go back."

Here are the heavily quoted comments from Bundy that followed the above section edited out by most news organizations.

"Let me tell, talk to you about the Mexicans, and these are just things I know about the negroes. I want to tell you one more thing I know about the negro. When I go, went, go to Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, and I would see these little government houses, and in front of that government house the door was usually open and the older people and the kids -- and there's always at least a half a dozen people sitting on the porch. They didn’t have nothing to do. They didn’t have nothing for their kids to do. They didn’t have nothing for their young girls to do.

And because they were basically on government subsidy -- so now what do they do? They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never, they never learned how to pick cotton. And I’ve often wondered are they were better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things? Or are they better off under government subsidy?

You know they didn’t get more freedom, they got less freedom -- they got less family life, and their happiness -- you could see it in their faces -- they wasn't happy sitting on that concrete sidewalk. Down there they was probably growing their turnips -- so that’s all government, that’s not freedom."

But Bundy went on after saying that -- and again, his comments were edited out of most reports.

"Now, let me talk about the Spanish people. You know, I understand that they come over here against our Constitution and cross our borders. But they’re here and they’re people -- and I’ve worked side by side a lot of them.

Don’t tell me they don’t work, and don’t tell me they don’t pay taxes. And don’t tell me they don’t have better family structures than most of us white people. When you see those Mexican families, they’re together, they picnic together, they’re spending their time together, and I’ll tell you in my way of thinking they’re awful nice people. And we need to have those people join us and be with us not, not come to our party."


http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/unedited-tape-bundy-emerges-sheds-light-racist-remarks

As I said.....inelegant language.

Well that just sucks now don't it.....time to put down the pitchforks and douse the torches....I guess you'll need to find something else to carp about this weekend

....and....3....2....1.....GO!

Paul Emery

Gregory

But your icon, Bundy, doesn't believe the feds have any place in regulating federal lands. I assumed you shared that belief. But now it seems only to apply to grazing. You're position is beyond comprehension.

Also. I didn't see any response from you when the Feds were romping over private property last year enforcing Federal laws that were contrary to California laws. You are a classic example of Libertarian light or perhaps you are just a run of the mill Republican. Beats me.

Russ Steele

Local lefty quick to jump on Bundy the Racist mime, that was all the result of some lefty editing of what he really said.

The controversy over Cliven Bundy’s “racist” remarks has taken a new turn after longer unedited footage emerged showing the Nevada cattle rancher making pro-black and pro-Mexican comments that were excised out of media reports.

You can see that the lefty media edited and what Bundy really said HERE.

Walt

Back to the "women and children in front"?? Really? LIBS have historically used them as "human shields". How many instances do you need? Hell! LIBS have gone out of their way to play that game. The even go as far as the Middle East to get in on the action.
Then want to sue because they happen to have been injured in the process. ( remember the local fools that did that and one took a tear gas canister to the melon?)
So when another group does the "same",, LIBS take issue?? LOL!!

Sorry Paul,, I beat you to the news of the "BM" idiot fest. yet not a rebuttal on the "endangered FED land" the hipsters want to squat on ( yes,, literally)
Then again,, LET the " eco lovers" show their true colors. The place would be a trash heap within a week. Just who will have to clean up after them? LIBS of this caliber are not known for their "pack it in,, pack it out". They leave the problem for others to deal with.

Then there are Mr. Bundy's comments that were twisted to fit the needs of the Left.
Instant racist. ( never mind Dirty Harry used the same analogy a while back.... But that was different.. It's OK for a Progressive to say things like that.)
Just like it was fine for " Snowman" Sharpton to repeatedly use the "N" word in speeches...( I guess it's just fine when the room is full of like minded people "of color".)

Brad Croul


The Bundyfest/minuteman love-in aside,

How far has Bundy taken the case that he his grazing use trumps the planned forced bussing of the turtle horde ? I assume it has not made it to the Supremes yet. Does he have a leg to stand on as a, formally, "permitted grazer"? I think not.

The comments to this entry are closed.