Posted on 01/04/2016 10:33:31 AM PST by ObozoMustGo2012
Republican presidential hopeful Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas.) on Monday slammed the protesters who have taken over a federal building in rural Oregon, urging them to lay down their arms.
“Every one of us has a constitutional right to protest, to speak our minds,†Cruz told reporters at campaign event in Iowa, according to NBC News.
“But we don't have a constitutional right to use force and violence and to threaten force and violence on others,†he said. “And so it is our hope that the protesters there will stand down peaceably, that there will not be a violent confrontation.†Cruz said he is praying for everyone involved in the dispute, particularly law enforcement officials who “are risking their lives.â€
The protesters, led by two sons of the Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, say they are taking a stand against a prison sentence for two landowners convicted of arson on federal property.
They’re also part of a group that frequently protests against federal government's management of Western lands. They protesters have told media outlets that they plan to stay on the refuge for years.
The standoff has put Republican presidential candidates on the spot, with some of them having expressed support in a similar dispute in 2014 between Bundy and the government over unpaid grazing fees.
The support for Bundy eroded when he began making racially charged statements in interviews.
Up until Monday, most of the GOP's White House contenders had refrained from speaking out on the Oregon dispute, but that is beginning to change.
Like Cruz, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) condemned the takeover at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, though he told an Iowa radio station that he sympathizes with the movement to shrink federal land holdings.
“You’ve got to follow the law. You cannot be lawless,†Rubio told KBUR in an interview highlighted by Buzzfeed. “We live in a republic. There are ways to change the laws of this country and the policies. And if we get frustrated with it, that’s why we have elections, that’s why we have people we can hold accountable.â€
Rubio lent some credit to the stated goals of the occupation, reported by local media to involve a small group of armed men with very few local residents. The group is objecting to federal land control and ownership and pushing for the federal land to be given to states or individuals.
“I agree that there is too much federal control over land, especially out in the western part of the United States. There are states, for example, like Nevada that are dominated by the federal government in terms of land holding, and we should fix it,†Rubio said, adding that it shouldn’t be done “in a way that is outside the law.â€
Among the 2016 hopefuls, Cruz has been one of the most vocal advocates for reducing federal land ownership, along with Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.).
Cruz led the charge against the Bureau of Land Management’s claims over property around the Red River in Texas, saying he wants to “protect landowners from federal overreach.â€
Rubio has been less vocal about federal land ownership, but his energy policy platform calls for more local and state control over federal property for oil and natural gas drilling or other uses.
Land management is a major political issue in Western states. Nationwide, the federal government owns and manages nearly 630 million acres, with most located west of the Mississippi River.
Cruz and Rubio have increasingly clashed in recent weeks, with both seeking to overtake Donald Trump in polls of the Republican race.
While Rubio is seeking to gain ground in New Hampshire, the first primary state, Cruz has taken the lead in Iowa, which will hold its caucuses on Feb. 1.
They are full of easily-hacked software, otherwise-unemployable drones, and lots of conference rooms.
They are also often located in the least desirable parts of town, so they're not particularly useful real estate for the most part.
If I were a revolutionary strategist I would simply ignore federal buildings, not target them.
The banks. that's where they're vulnerable. extremely vulnerable.
They have been quite clear: the Bundys do not speak for them, they reject the solution the Bundys propose, and they want nothing to do with the Bundys.
The Bundys are in this solely for their own aggrandizement, and what they are doing is self-serving.
If I wanted I could start a business using only Euro-denominated or Swiss franc-denominated loans, and accept digital payments.
Banks close branches due to low foot traffic more and more each day.
Sun Tzu says “when I wish to make my enemy move, I attack a position he must secure”.
Ted Cruz cannot come out and support the illegal occupation of a federal government facility. I'm not against the folks taking a stand. I am also not against Ted Cruz for taking the stand he is taking.
There is a tiny amount of people involved in this Hammond thing compared to millions that are attempting to figger out what this is all about. If Ted Cruz were to come out and support what the militia dudes are doing, the media would skewer him and make Cruz appear to be supporting domestic terrorism.
Get real guyz.
He is not opposing the Hammonds. The Bundys are.
I have said for a long time that the American People were never more free than just before the Revolution. One King thousands of miles away for 330 million kings next door.
Wideawake... You are not a patriot.
Maybe a suit is not the way to go either. But if you lose the public, you lose the war. If we are for America and almost all Americans oppose our fight, or rather, how we choose to fight, what is there to win? How can you win? If we don’t win hearts and minds, it is over. I doubt Bundy and his gang with win over the soul of America the way they are trying to. Unless the soul of America is won, all is lost. But we will see if Bundy saves America.
***œEvery one of us has a constitutional right to protest, to speak our minds,†Cruz told reporters at campaign event in Iowa, according to NBC News.
“But we don’t have a constitutional right to use force and violence and to threaten force and violence on others,†he said.***
Wow. I guess he would have condemned George Washington.
Except this, as most, is not really a case of eminent domain. It is an example of an illegitimate federal land grab outside Art I, Sec 8, Cl 17 requirements as I outlined in Post #32. Regardless of the means, the feds have no constitutional right to be holding these lands.
Let the thread know when you get to Malheur National Wildlife Refuge with your rifle in hand, newbie.
What, you're not going? But, but . . . aren't you a patriot?
It so happens that I agree with you, but politicians pushed it because the voters like all the zero tolerance, tough on crime rhetoric. Eventually it leads to a police state. We can see it from here.
Watch and pray is mostly what I do. I’ve studied enough revolutions to realize that we really don’t want one unless it is truly the last option.
I agree....if you look at the back story in this situation the guys that were arrested should have been...when you ‘lease land’ you cannot just go out and set fires to burn what you don’t want there.
However I stand with the idea the Government has too much control of our lands and ‘the ranchers need to lobby’ for those changes.....I believe they would surely have the publics support. But doing things this way is breaking laws and going about it the wrong way.
I think also the younger Bundy is hoping to get media attention on the issue of Government lands.....but it seems there are better ways he could go about that.
“....America is losing the battle for our sovereignty. Far too many good hearted people are sound asleep.”
Sadly, yes. It’s kinda hard to blame those who are asleep, since most do not live in an area (mainly the West) where the feds are doing their constant land and water grabs. Their livelyhoods are not dependent on these private lands and the contract lands. These lands have grass to feed their livestock which fills our grocery stores with meat, the timber in the forests, that when properly harvested makes a healthy forest not prone to catastrophic fire and is used for building our homes, the very ground, giving us all the minerals needed for pretty much everything in our modern world, and even the very water, needed to sustain all life. The damn agenda 21, supported by militant environazis, starry eyed “save the Erf” sorts on both “sides” of the aisle, the politicians (crooks) who deal it all away for both personal gain by perpetuating the LIE that the modern environmental movement has become, but the very worst are the biggest globalist power brokers wanting a one world government: control of all. These same people are the ones who want to get rid of our borders and create new “regions” under control of their new global governance. All the Uniparty members are aware of this and guilty. They’ve caved in, convincing themselves that it IS the future, and there’s nothing they can do about it, but still hope that they will not be found out during their watch, such is the pace of its implementation.
As you so well point out, it is the crux of the matter.
When it comes to ANYTHING having to do with the feds, Americans need to put the Constitution back in front and center as the crux of ALL federal issues. We need to return to being a free nation under the constitutional rule of law and bury today’s federal tyranny which rule by the whims of man.
I’m fairly certain that those who wish to destroy the nation intend to do it by thousands and thousands of little moves towards their goals. By using such tactics, people will protest, vent steam, go home, but the destroyers continue their advance, one little bit at a time. Repeat this over and over. It’s really a clever strategy to win.
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.