Residents of Harney County are poor, white, and conservative.

[guno]

Not a single one of them has joined the Bundy militia.

Wonder why the locals wanted nothing to do with these nuts




'Many of the men are veterans of the 2014 clash between federal agents and Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, whose son Ammon is running the show at Malheur. Ammon Bundy initially claimed to have as many as 100 supporters at the bird sanctuary. His brother, Ryan Bundy, said they were “willing to kill and be killed if necessary.” A former Marine named Jon Ritzheimer recorded something of a martyrdom video in his truck, in which he tearfully addressed his family and announced that he “want to die a free man.”

A tour of the compound on Sunday afternoon suggested a much smaller force than Ammon Bundy boasted of, made up of gruff militiamen and amiable ranchers from out of town with pocket Constitutions and “the God threadrunning hard through them,” as one put it. Though the media reported a “standoff,” there was nobody there for the militants to stand off against—no police, no federal agents apparent anywhere on the stretch between the refuge and the town of Burns, population 2,800.'


Inside the Bundy Brothers’ Armed Occupation

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The issue is valid. The fight is correct.

The fighters were dumber than rock.

 

[bullwinkle]

The issue is valid. The fight is correct.

The fighters were dumber than rock.

Billy, do you think the States with large tracts of Federal land will sue for ownership? And why are there large tracts of Fed land in the States in the first place? When the territories became States, did the Fed deny them those parts, or did the new States opt to turn those parts over to the Feds for convenience and economy? If the States do eventually get control over those lands, will they not charge grazing fees?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The issue is valid. The fight is correct.

The fighters were dumber than rock.

Billy, do you think the States with large tracts of Federal land will sue for ownership? And why are there large tracts of Fed land in the States in the first place? When the territories became States, did the Fed deny them those parts, or did the new States opt to turn those parts over to the Feds for convenience and economy? If the States do eventually get control over those lands, will they not charge grazing fees?

Federal Land Ownership: Is It Constitutional? | Tenth Amendment Center

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Not a single one of them has joined the Bundy militia.

Wonder why the locals wanted nothing to do with these nuts




'Many of the men are veterans of the 2014 clash between federal agents and Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, whose son Ammon is running the show at Malheur. Ammon Bundy initially claimed to have as many as 100 supporters at the bird sanctuary. His brother, Ryan Bundy, said they were “willing to kill and be killed if necessary.” A former Marine named Jon Ritzheimer recorded something of a martyrdom video in his truck, in which he tearfully addressed his family and announced that he “want to die a free man.”

A tour of the compound on Sunday afternoon suggested a much smaller force than Ammon Bundy boasted of, made up of gruff militiamen and amiable ranchers from out of town with pocket Constitutions and “the God threadrunning hard through them,” as one put it. Though the media reported a “standoff,” there was nobody there for the militants to stand off against—no police, no federal agents apparent anywhere on the stretch between the refuge and the town of Burns, population 2,800.'


Inside the Bundy Brothers’ Armed Occupation

So, they're your brothers, right Guno?

 

[bullwinkle]

The issue is valid. The fight is correct.

The fighters were dumber than rock.

Billy, do you think the States with large tracts of Federal land will sue for ownership? And why are there large tracts of Fed land in the States in the first place? When the territories became States, did the Fed deny them those parts, or did the new States opt to turn those parts over to the Feds for convenience and economy? If the States do eventually get control over those lands, will they not charge grazing fees?

Federal Land Ownership: Is It Constitutional? | Tenth Amendment Center

Thanks for the informative link and Mr. Natelson's opinion on Fed land management. After a brief history, it states:

"The current regime of federal land management is blatantly unconstitutional. The founding fathers never intended to create a Republic where the feds could impose draconian fees on peaceful individuals and force them from the land. As a matter of fact, that is exactly the arrangement that the Constitution was written to prevent, as it clearly violates the principles of fiduciary government, sympathy and independence."

This brings a smile to me in that when 2A is contested many scorn those who bring up what the Founding Fathers "never intended".

"When the historical record is examined, it makes it abundantly clear that the Republic has gone awry since the days of the founders. Systematic attacks on the property rights of Americans have been justified through deliberate misreadings of the Constitution. This will only be changed when the public wakes up, re-discovers their rights and takes action against unjust federal power. Natelson’s article can provide a kick start toward creating a proper understanding of the Constitution amongst the American people."

Everyone hates Eminent Domain, but what are fair grazing fees? And again, will the States manage better, cheaper? I am reminded of days of yore when an aged Michigan Senator (R-Vandenberg) passionately (there were great orators back then) plead for the Feds to take over the Sleeping Bear Dunes of NE Michigan. He said that when he was young he wanted to save the world. As he aged, he wanted to save his State. Now in his declining years, his dearest wish is to save the Sleeping Bear. BTW, he won and Sleeping Bear became a national park! Point being is the question, who will manage the land better? I would love to see this matter go thru the courts. Both sides have valid and viable arguments.

 

[bucs90]

Because unlike liberals we can think for ourselves. We don't have a mandatory jump-in clause like liberalism does which requires you to jump head first into every left wing cause.

White conservatives don't practice tribal herd like behavior where the whole must jump at the will of one.

It's called thinking independently. You libs should try it.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The issue is valid. The fight is correct.

The fighters were dumber than rock.

Billy, do you think the States with large tracts of Federal land will sue for ownership? And why are there large tracts of Fed land in the States in the first place? When the territories became States, did the Fed deny them those parts, or did the new States opt to turn those parts over to the Feds for convenience and economy? If the States do eventually get control over those lands, will they not charge grazing fees?

Federal Land Ownership: Is It Constitutional? | Tenth Amendment Center

Thanks for the informative link and Mr. Natelson's opinion on Fed land management. After a brief history, it states:

"The current regime of federal land management is blatantly unconstitutional. The founding fathers never intended to create a Republic where the feds could impose draconian fees on peaceful individuals and force them from the land. As a matter of fact, that is exactly the arrangement that the Constitution was written to prevent, as it clearly violates the principles of fiduciary government, sympathy and independence."

This brings a smile to me in that when 2A is contested many scorn those who bring up what the Founding Fathers "never intended".

A casual reading of the writings left by the FF clearly show what they intended.

Read ALL of them. Don't cherry-pick.

 

[jc456]

The issue is valid. The fight is correct.

The fighters were dumber than rock.

what fight?

 

[jc456]

Because unlike liberals we can think for ourselves. We don't have a mandatory jump-in clause like liberalism does which requires you to jump head first into every left wing cause.

White conservatives don't practice tribal herd like behavior where the whole must jump at the will of one.

It's called thinking independently. You libs should try it.

never going to happen.

 

[bullwinkle]

Because unlike liberals we can think for ourselves. We don't have a mandatory jump-in clause like liberalism does which requires you to jump head first into every left wing cause.

White conservatives don't practice tribal herd like behavior where the whole must jump at the will of one.

It's called thinking independently. You libs should try it.

You showed me how 'independent' your thinking is when you sucked up the 'mushroom cloud over Nantucket in 45 minutes' ginned up excuse for invading bystander countries not related to Saudi Arabia.