Conservative Action Alerts and Nevada Rancher

[theDoctorisIn]

The talking points have been blown out of the water repeatedly: killing his cows, throwing him off his land for turtles, homestead idiocy... they don't care. Their masters gave them their talking points and ordered them to spread 'em. They dutifully obey no matter how stupid they appear. I guess you gotta admire their willingness to be such fools for the sake of their masters. There's a lot to be said for a good lapdog.

its obvious that they've been spoon-fed their marching orders for today.

I guess the Governor of Nevada got his talking points too right? The Governor of Nevada is obeying his master whoever it is right?

Hell's bells all of you left wingers should call up the Governor of Nevada and give him shit for being spoon fed.

Indeed, Nevada's governor has criticized the cattle roundup and what he calls "intimidation" in the dispute.

On Wednesday, officials from the federal Bureau of Land Management and National Park Service didn't immediately respond to Gov. Brian Sandoval's call for the BLM to 'reconsider its approach and act accordingly' in the ongoing roundup of about 900 cattle roaming a vast area about half the size of the state of Delaware.

'No cow justifies the atmosphere of intimidation which currently exists nor the limitation of constitutional rights that are sacred to all Nevadans,' Sandoval said in a statement released after business hours Tuesday.

South Nevada rancher takes on armed federal agents in standoff | Mail Online

Looks like he did.

 

[Steinlight]

They don't mind if the rancher gets anything for free, only minorities in urban areas....

You don't mind if non-whites in urban areas get free shit, but mind if white ranchers that provide value to society graze their cattle as they have for over a hundred years.

 

[Steinlight]

 

[TemplarKormac]

Ewww, did I spot a gramatical error there ?????

How embarassing for one of the better debaters here ....

Ok, here ya go. Dude's family has been grazing their cattle on this public land for 127 years. They've never owned it.

They were allowed to graze their cattle on this land for free up until the 1940s or so when the feds started charging grazing fees. They paid and kept grazing their cattle there. ThenI this guy decides he isn't going to pay anymore. He stops paying. Legal battles go on and in 1993 a court says, you donMt pay - your cows don't graze. Pay or move your cattle off this public land. He does neither. Last year a court authorizes the removal of the cattle and they started doing that this week.

So, how is stating what I already know proving they never owned it? His family had been using the land for 127 years (according to you), moreover, the Mormon settlers had been using that land long before the government came in. They have preemptive rights over that land now. It has been used for one sole purpose, not for any other. The BLM was formed in 1946, and began implementing grazing fees. Yes, I know.

All was fine until the government started interfering with the livelihoods of the cattle ranchers in Nevada.

Those cattle ranchers in Nevada wouldn't exist at all, if it wasn't for the federal government, who bought the whole damn state from Mexico.

We can play this game all day.

[MENTION=20452]theDoctorisIn[/MENTION]

The Mormons had begun migrating into what was still colonial Mexico in 1846, two years before the US entered into Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. Meaning they had laid claim there before the US won the territory from Mexico. So, you're telling me government had something to do with that? Sorry, those ranchers owe their existence to the Mormons; mainly to the likes of Brigham Young, the Great Mormon Migration of 1846-48, the Mormon Battalion (who crossed that area of Nevada in 1846 on their way to San Diego) and the Mormon Vanguard Company of 1847, who blazed a trail straight to Salt Lake Valley, Utah.

If it had not been for Brigham Young, or the Mormons in general, Mormons would not have so readily settled in the west, nor would have any of these ranchers dared lay claim to the land. The Government played no role in their mass exodus west, thus these ranchers (including Mr. Bundy) owe none of their existence to the government. The government had no claim on the land either. None. They (the Mormon Pioneers) were already settling the area during the Mexican-American War, fleeing from Nauvoo, Illinois after the assassination of their previous leader, Joseph Smith.

And I was unaware this was a game. I was under the impression this was a serious discussion.

 

[NoNukes]

I don't know who is right or wrong as far as the land goes but I do know that this is a truly idiotic time for fed. police to play Nazi unless they want to start a war.

Who would they be starting a war with?

 

[TemplarKormac]

It sounds like you've been getting your news from reading militia websites, and you're looking for the wrong thing. The ranch is where Bundy lives. The cattle were not on a ranch, they were on open grazing land.

That's how people keep herds of cattle in the West. They let them graze freely, on BLM land near the ranch, and round them up once or twice a year to sell, for the vet, or anything like that.

That's why cows are branded - so one rancher knows his cattle from other ranchers.

In addition, the land has not been "designated" for the preservation of any sort of reptile.

A year ago, an environmental organization threatened to sue to protect the tortoise - that's the only relevance the tortoise has to this story at all.

I've not been reading militia websites. That's one false assumption. I've read pages from CBS affiliates, the IJ Review, Fox News, The Washington Post... the last places I would be looking for info is from some hackneyed militia website. No sir. Not even I am that gullible.

This is what made me think that:

Feds Force Family Off 120-Year-Old Ranch To Protect Tortoise | Off The Grid News

"Off the Grid News" is a bit on the looney militia side.

I was scouring for quotes. I pull quotes from anywhere, irregardless of what site they happen to be copy pasted from. It would be wrong of me not to cite where it came from would it not? I didn't read that article, I just clicked on the first link that had the quotes I was looking for via Google. But no. I do not take news from those sites, nor will I ever. Picking quotes should be innocuous enough, wouldn't you agree?

 

[Erand7899]

I don't know who is right or wrong as far as the land goes but I do know that this is a truly idiotic time for fed. police to play Nazi unless they want to start a war.

The fed is only "playing Nazi" to the people who see Nazis under their bed.

Why would ejecting trespassers from federal land start a "war"?

It isn't federal land, it is public land managed by the federal government. And, when the federal land managers consider the public to be trespassers, then we have a problem.

The first obvious problem, is why is the federal government paying almost a million dollars to round up a few hundred head of cattle? Ten cowboys could do the job for a couple of thousand dollars.

The second obvious problem, is why does the federal government need a couple hundred federal agents in combat gear to keep cattle off of public range?

The third obvious problem is free range laws in the Western states. Under free range, it is the responsibility of a land owner to fence range animals off of their property. If it is public land managed by the Bureau of Land Management, and they don't want range animals on the public lands, then they have a responsibility to fence those animals out.

The fourth obvious problem is that Western ranchers need public grazing to make raising cattle profitable. Cutting a rancher off of public graze pretty well puts him out of business, and takes away his livlihood.

The permitting cost of public grazing should be competitive and tied to the quality of the grazing area. Ranchers should pay the fees, and should remove their cattle at the end of the grazing season. But, this is a business transaction and should be handled in the courts, and not with armed agents in the field.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I don't know who is right or wrong as far as the land goes but I do know that this is a truly idiotic time for fed. police to play Nazi unless they want to start a war.

The fed is only "playing Nazi" to the people who see Nazis under their bed.

Why would ejecting trespassers from federal land start a "war"?

It isn't federal land, it is public land managed by the federal government. And, when the federal land managers consider the public to be trespassers, then we have a problem.

That's a distinction without a difference, legally.

The first obvious problem, is why is the federal government paying almost a million dollars to round up a few hundred head of cattle? Ten cowboys could do the job for a couple of thousand dollars.

900 heads of cattle spread over 500,000 acres?

The second obvious problem, is why does the federal government need a couple hundred federal agents in combat gear to keep cattle off of public range?

Perhaps because the rancher has been calling his militia friends from all over the country to "make a stand" at his house.

The third obvious problem is free range laws in the Western states. Under free range, it is the responsibility of a land owner to fence range animals off of their property. If it is public land managed by the Bureau of Land Management, and they don't want range animals on the public lands, then they have a responsibility to fence those animals out.

BLM isn't trying to keep cattle out, they just want to be paid their grazing fees.

The fourth obvious problem is that Western ranchers need public grazing to make raising cattle profitable. Cutting a rancher off of public graze pretty well puts him out of business, and takes away his livlihood.

He should have thought of that during the 20 years he's been refusing to pay grazing fees.

The permitting cost of public grazing should be competitive and tied to the quality of the grazing area. Ranchers should pay the fees, and should remove their cattle at the end of the grazing season. But, this is a business transaction and should be handled in the courts, and not with armed agents in the field.

It was handled by the courts - it's been "handled" by the courts since 1993 - the court ordered him to remove his cattle and pay the fees. He refused, and that's why there are armed agents there.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Apparently nobody here has ever heard of the Sagebrush Rebellion...

 

[WinterBorn]

I'd like to see the feds go after those who are illegally grazing on food stamps The zeal they are exhibiting here is ludicrous; contrasted with the malfeasance replete in this administration.

Yeah, the zeal they have shown is amazing. A judge orders Bundy to stop grazing on public land and to remove his cattle. And almost immediately (only 16 years) the feds are out there removing his cattle.

 

[WinterBorn]

The talking points have been blown out of the water repeatedly: killing his cows, throwing him off his land for turtles, homestead idiocy... they don't care. Their masters gave them their talking points and ordered them to spread 'em. They dutifully obey no matter how stupid they appear. I guess you gotta admire their willingness to be such fools for the sake of their masters. There's a lot to be said for a good lapdog.

its obvious that they've been spoon-fed their marching orders for today.

I guess the Governor of Nevada got his talking points too right? The Governor of Nevada is obeying his master whoever it is right?

Hell's bells all of you left wingers should call up the Governor of Nevada and give him shit for being spoon fed.

Indeed, Nevada's governor has criticized the cattle roundup and what he calls "intimidation" in the dispute.

On Wednesday, officials from the federal Bureau of Land Management and National Park Service didn't immediately respond to Gov. Brian Sandoval's call for the BLM to 'reconsider its approach and act accordingly' in the ongoing roundup of about 900 cattle roaming a vast area about half the size of the state of Delaware.

'No cow justifies the atmosphere of intimidation which currently exists nor the limitation of constitutional rights that are sacred to all Nevadans,' Sandoval said in a statement released after business hours Tuesday.

South Nevada rancher takes on armed federal agents in standoff | Mail Online

The Gov is absolutely right in his condemnation of the whole "First Amendment Area" nonsense.

But this rancher has ignored the federal judge's ruling for 16 years. It is obvious that he had no intention of removing his cattle from the public lands. So the feds brought in contractors to move them. Since the rancher and his friends have threatened a "range war", the feds came in armed.

 

[Plasmaball]

I've not been reading militia websites. That's one false assumption. I've read pages from CBS affiliates, the IJ Review, Fox News, The Washington Post... the last places I would be looking for info is from some hackneyed militia website. No sir. Not even I am that gullible.

This is what made me think that:

Feds Force Family Off 120-Year-Old Ranch To Protect Tortoise | Off The Grid News

"Off the Grid News" is a bit on the looney militia side.

I was scouring for quotes. I pull quotes from anywhere, irregardless of what site they happen to be copy pasted from. It would be wrong of me not to cite where it came from would it not? I didn't read that article, I just clicked on the first link that had the quotes I was looking for via Google. But no. I do not take news from those sites, nor will I ever. Picking quotes should be innocuous enough, wouldn't you agree?

Or you know...read the quote and where it came from before posting it. The proper way

 

[nodoginnafight]

its obvious that they've been spoon-fed their marching orders for today.

I guess the Governor of Nevada got his talking points too right? The Governor of Nevada is obeying his master whoever it is right?

Hell's bells all of you left wingers should call up the Governor of Nevada and give him shit for being spoon fed.

Indeed, Nevada's governor has criticized the cattle roundup and what he calls "intimidation" in the dispute.

On Wednesday, officials from the federal Bureau of Land Management and National Park Service didn't immediately respond to Gov. Brian Sandoval's call for the BLM to 'reconsider its approach and act accordingly' in the ongoing roundup of about 900 cattle roaming a vast area about half the size of the state of Delaware.

'No cow justifies the atmosphere of intimidation which currently exists nor the limitation of constitutional rights that are sacred to all Nevadans,' Sandoval said in a statement released after business hours Tuesday.

South Nevada rancher takes on armed federal agents in standoff | Mail Online

The Gov is absolutely right in his condemnation of the whole "First Amendment Area" nonsense.

But this rancher has ignored the federal judge's ruling for 16 years. It is obvious that he had no intention of removing his cattle from the public lands. So the feds brought in contractors to move them. Since the rancher and his friends have threatened a "range war", the feds came in armed.

Bingo!

 

[nodoginnafight]

There are MANY legitimate instances of governmental abuse of power.

THIS ain't one of 'em.

 

[WinterBorn]

I don't know who is right or wrong as far as the land goes but I do know that this is a truly idiotic time for fed. police to play Nazi unless they want to start a war.

The fed is only "playing Nazi" to the people who see Nazis under their bed.

Why would ejecting trespassers from federal land start a "war"?

It isn't federal land, it is public land managed by the federal government. And, when the federal land managers consider the public to be trespassers, then we have a problem.

The first obvious problem, is why is the federal government paying almost a million dollars to round up a few hundred head of cattle? Ten cowboys could do the job for a couple of thousand dollars.

The second obvious problem, is why does the federal government need a couple hundred federal agents in combat gear to keep cattle off of public range?

The third obvious problem is free range laws in the Western states. Under free range, it is the responsibility of a land owner to fence range animals off of their property. If it is public land managed by the Bureau of Land Management, and they don't want range animals on the public lands, then they have a responsibility to fence those animals out.

The fourth obvious problem is that Western ranchers need public grazing to make raising cattle profitable. Cutting a rancher off of public graze pretty well puts him out of business, and takes away his livlihood.

The permitting cost of public grazing should be competitive and tied to the quality of the grazing area. Ranchers should pay the fees, and should remove their cattle at the end of the grazing season. But, this is a business transaction and should be handled in the courts, and not with armed agents in the field.

It WAS handled in the courts. The rancher stopped paying his fees in 1993. In 1998 a federal judge ordered him to stop grazing on public lands and to remove his cattle. Another judge, years later, agreed with that ruling. The rancher has refused to abide by the court ruling for 16 years.

 

[nodoginnafight]

So, how is stating what I already know proving they never owned it? His family had been using the land for 127 years (according to you), moreover, the Mormon settlers had been using that land long before the government came in. They have preemptive rights over that land now. It has been used for one sole purpose, not for any other. The BLM was formed in 1946, and began implementing grazing fees. Yes, I know.

All was fine until the government started interfering with the livelihoods of the cattle ranchers in Nevada.

Those cattle ranchers in Nevada wouldn't exist at all, if it wasn't for the federal government, who bought the whole damn state from Mexico.

We can play this game all day.

[MENTION=20452]theDoctorisIn[/MENTION]

The Mormons had begun migrating into what was still colonial Mexico in 1846, two years before the US entered into Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. Meaning they had laid claim there before the US won the territory from Mexico. So, you're telling me government had something to do with that? Sorry, those ranchers owe their existence to the Mormons; mainly to the likes of Brigham Young, the Great Mormon Migration of 1846-48, the Mormon Battalion (who crossed that area of Nevada in 1846 on their way to San Diego) and the Mormon Vanguard Company of 1847, who blazed a trail straight to Salt Lake Valley, Utah.

If it had not been for Brigham Young, or the Mormons in general, Mormons would not have so readily settled in the west, nor would have any of these ranchers dared lay claim to the land. The Government played no role in their mass exodus west, thus these ranchers (including Mr. Bundy) owe none of their existence to the government. The government had no claim on the land either. None. They (the Mormon Pioneers) were already settling the area during the Mexican-American War, fleeing from Nauvoo, Illinois after the assassination of their previous leader, Joseph Smith.

And I was unaware this was a game. I was under the impression this was a serious discussion.

Bundy himself says his family came into the area in 1877.

So who cares when other Mormons showed up?

 

[Katzndogz]

Using the same tactics, the feds drove out all cattle ranchers in this area. The Bundys are the last ones left. After his ranch is taken, the feds can move on to other ranches until the entire cattle industry is gone. The government must be stopped. The democrat progressive movement must be stopped.

If this incident has any worth at all, it's that the world is watching and President Putin is laughing his ass off right now. This is the kind of little thing, put aside, saved, and brought out when it can do the most damage.

 

[ClosedCaption]

This is what made me think that:



"Off the Grid News" is a bit on the looney militia side.

I was scouring for quotes. I pull quotes from anywhere, irregardless of what site they happen to be copy pasted from. It would be wrong of me not to cite where it came from would it not? I didn't read that article, I just clicked on the first link that had the quotes I was looking for via Google. But no. I do not take news from those sites, nor will I ever. Picking quotes should be innocuous enough, wouldn't you agree?

Or you know...read the quote and where it came from before posting it. The proper way

I love how Templar comes in full of piss and vinegar then finds out hes completely wrong on everything. And instead of admitting it he describes WHY hes ignorant like he gets a pass for "looking for quotes" and believing anything the rancher says.

Who needs facts when you can just believe what you are told?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The fact is that the feds will put the entire crowd in jail today if they pull the same crap again.

 

[WinterBorn]

Just to clarify what is actually happening and to refute the nonsense spouted by some:

http://rt.com/usa/nevada-ranch-armed-feds-520/
"After 20 years of battling the US government for use of his family's land, a Nevada rancher’s “one-man range war” may soon end. The family says heavily-armed federal agents have surrounded the ranch as "trespass cattle” are removed from the disputed land."

Nevada Rancher Says He?s Surrounded by Militarized US Government Forces Who?ve Come to Remove Cattle | The Dissenter
"The Bureau of Land Management obtained a federal court order to have about 908 “trespassing” cattle owned by Cliven Bundy, who is the last rancher in Clark County, Nevada, removed."

Showdown: Nevada rancher, feds face off over grazing rights - CNN.com
"Between Saturday and Wednesday, contracted wranglers impounded a total of 352 cattle, federal officials said. Bundy says he owns 500 of the more than 900 cattle that federal officials are planning to confiscate for illegal grazing, the Las Vegas Review-Journal reported. Bundy told the newspaper that each head of his livestock is worth about $1,000."

Authorities Seize Nevada Rancher's 134 Cattle in Land Use Standoff - Fox Nation
"Armed federal officials and contract cowboys have been brought in to execute a 2013 court order and remove the trespassing cattle."

Last Man Standing | Washington Free Beacon
"After years of court battles, the BLM secured a federal court order to have Bundy’s “trespass cattle” forcibly removed with heavy artillery, the family said."


The cattle are being removed, not killed.