Posted on 04/23/2014 11:14:29 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy is being portrayed by some as a man of principle, an iconoclast who should be admired for his willingness to stand up to the federal government. But in fact he's a petty scofflaw who seems to think that he has the right to pick and choose which rules must be obeyed.
Bundy is the cattleman who grazes his herd on federal land operated by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, but unlike more than 15,000 other ranchers, he refuses to pay the associated grazing fees. After 20 years of disagreements and court battles, the U.S. government began rounding up his cattle this month. The rancher and a group of armed supporters confronted the federal authorities, leading to a standoff; the authorities withdrew.
Bundy justifies his stingy and illegal behavior with a variety of claims. One is that this is a states' rights issue and that he doesn't "recognize" the federal government. Another is that his family grazed the land long before it came under the jurisdiction of the BLM.
Actually, more than 70% of the land in Nevada is federally owned, including the land in question; the state Constitution recognized that ownership years before Bundy's ancestors arrived, despite his assertion otherwise. (Various reports also have cast serious doubt on whether his family was grazing cattle on the land as long ago as he claims.) For that matter, if prior use of land were all that was needed to avoid paying a landlord, the land would revert back not to Bundy but to the control of Native Americans, who were on the Nevada land long before any white settlement of the area...
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
He needs to win this battle so we can start the return of land to the States and strip the feds of all the land!
“I abide by all state laws. But I abide by almost zero federal laws.” - Cliven Bundy
In his Motion to Dismiss, Bundy said he is “a citizen of Nevada and not a citizen of a territory of the United States” and that Article IV of the U.S. Constitution “cannot be imposed” on him.
He makes some rather odd assertions.
Nonetheless, the BLM handled the dispute reprehensibly and got what they deserved - an armed response to tyranny.
And because First Amendment areas are unconstitutional.
And because a federal land-management agency must not be allowed to use military-style operations against American citizens.
As someone so intelligently added to one of those "First Amendment Area" signs the BLM posted in the area, "is between Mexico, and Canada!" The Fedzilla needs to get wise that the Constitution applies to *ALL* of the US, not just where they post their little (spit) "permission signs". If they haven't the wit to understand that, then they haven't the wit to 'serve' us, and we can dispense with their dubious 'services' altogether...
the infowarrior
Yeah! Who the hell does he think he is? Eric Holder?
This pretty well defines the Federal Government today in Obama's America. The Left never was very self-reflective, which is how they can tell utter lies without a crease or wrinkle.
The once great L.A. Times is a parrot for obammy and company just like msnbc, nbc, cbs the N.Y. Times etc.
Worthless rag.
The once great L.A. Times is a parrot for obammy and company just like msnbc, nbc, cbs the N.Y. Times etc.
Worthless rag.
“.....he’s a petty scofflaw who seems to think that he has the right to pick and choose which rules must be obeyed.”......
WOW!!! We have a president and attorney general just like that.
AMAZING!
By that map, AK, ID, NV, OR and UT should not be states Since the government “owns” more than 50% of the state, it should be a Federal Protectorate. AZ, CA, WY and NM are close to being non-states.
Let’s see how state and local officials like that.
It does seem to be very hypocritical to insist the law be enforced in one case while suggesting it be ignored in another.
I live in central Wisconsin where 1/3 of our county is federally owned land. They pay NO TAX on this land, the rest of us carry the burden. When/if any timber is harvested off that land, a VERY SMALL portion of the money taken in as result of the sale is paid to the local townships towards school tax and “penny’s” go to the county.
All roads through the federal lands are TOWN roads and maintained by the local tax payers. Being a very economically depressed area, the “feds” are NOT popular people around these parts either.
Then why all the U.S. flags around him in pictures?
They are pimping very hard for California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Nevada, and Utah to be returned to Mexico.
0bama and Holder??
As a Private Corporation, does the BLM pay any State Tax for the Revenues they derive from said land???
Well, the leftist, Obama-shilling-and-fellating Journolists have spoken -I guess the issue is settled!
Why is the BLM a foreign owned Private Corporation??
Can Microsoft, Google, or IBM send armed Contractors to crash into your home and start tazing Civilians, and establish a perimeter that includes snipers??
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.