This is always comforting

KeithLockhart said:
Never said I agree with the fees but the government is our creation. We can't tell government to make laws then whine when the laws are enforced. I know where you stand on government so it's a moot point.
Click to expand...

Sure you can. It happens all the time. That's one of the main reasons we have a court system.

Look, we clearly don't want people using violence or the threat of violence. So in that regard the protestors are in the wrong. But at the same time it is nice to see some awareness here lately in regards to government regulator overreach. It was concerning to me that there hasn't/isn't more outrage over the IRS thing.
 
weso1 said:
As I understand it, this fee was increased for his particular grazing region because of turtles.

This thread isn't about that though, it's about the stupid comments by Reid. I mean you guys make fun of GOP politicians for saying idiotic things, but man, the democrat senate majority leader is a moron.
Click to expand...

The endagered turtles is relevant to the case bc Reids son is involved in the solar panels on land to the north.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/04/why-you-should-be-sympathetic-toward-cliven-bundy.php

So it is possible that the federal government is driving Bundy off federal lands to make way for mitigation activities that enable the solar energy development to the north. But I don’t think it is necessary to go there. Rather–this is the second and more important point–it is obvious that some activities are favored by the Obama administration’s BLM, and others are disfavored. The favored developments include solar and wind projects. No surprise there: the developers of such projects are invariably major Democratic Party donors. Wind and solar energy survive only by virtue of federal subsidies, so influencing people like Barack Obama and Harry Reid is fundamental to the developers’ business plans. Ranchers, on the other hand, ask nothing from the federal government other than the continuation of their historic rights. It is a safe bet that Cliven Bundy is not an Obama or Reid contributor.
Click to expand...

I don't see where the fees were actually raised. I see where the fees were being used to run Bundy out of business and thus he stopped paying the fees to the BLM and sent to money to the State instead, who refused to accept (bc it isn't their land)
 
gilesfan said:
The endagered turtles is relevant to the case bc Reids son is involved in the solar panels on land to the north.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/04/why-you-should-be-sympathetic-toward-cliven-bundy.php

I don't see where the fees were actually raised. I see where the fees were being used to run Bundy out of business and thus he stopped paying the fees to the BLM and sent to money to the State instead, who refused to accept (bc it isn't their land)
Click to expand...

I see that... now. That article you posted on page one was very helpful.
 
weso1 said:
Sure you can. It happens all the time. That's one of the main reasons we have a court system.

Look, we clearly don't want people using violence or the threat of violence. So in that regard the protestors are in the wrong. But at the same time it is nice to see some awareness here lately in regards to government regulator overreach. It was concerning to me that there hasn't/isn't more outrage over the IRS thing.
Click to expand...

The IRS is going after Ron Paul's Campaign For Liberty now
 
Govt is cracking down on cow farts and saving the ozone layer... You peasants need to be appreciative.
 
Tapate50 said:
A lot of bad precedents have been set here.
Click to expand...

I think the precedent was set with the Whiskey Rebellion and the Federal reaction then and I don't see a whole lot of difference.

I just see a lot of government inconsistency here, which led to considerable incompetence. Simple fact is that if there was truly a fee structure in place, there should have been an easy way to collect it and if there were pending changes, they should have been announced. It is Federal land and like it or not, the Feds can do what they want with the land they own. There's a legitimate question as to how much land like this the Feds should own and why they choose to own it. I doubt it has a lot to do with the tortoise issue, but that's an easy target.

PS--Democrat though I may be, I've always seen Reid as an empty suit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top