Due, I give you credit for a new American term.
But the fact of the matter is that nobody think Bundy is the issue, on either side.
Few, if any, are in this for Bundy.
The engagement principles are:
1. First, ensure the Feds know the poeple will resist, with arms if necessary. Nobody wants to kill or die. But at least one side is willing to do both.
2. The Federal Government is not the Master of the People. They are our servants. We thank them for that.
3. Should they forget their proper role, it is up to us, not our children, to remind them.
4. To forget the above dooms us, and our children to slavery.
Bundy is the face of this - like it or not. It’s his argument that is being used for a rallying cry and it’s terribly flawed.
My view of the government is probably identical to yours. However, I own a good plot of acreage and I am sitting the middle of it typing. If my neighbor just pushed his cows onto my property that would be wrong and illegal. I like that it is wrong and illegal. It protects my property and rights.
Bundy let his cows graze on land that was not his. He paid for the rights then stopped paying. A nice profit there. He is not a victim - he is a thief. Showing that we will rally behind his cause is telling my neighbor he can push his cows on my grass for free - sorry, if you can’t see the problem.
You and I probably agree that the land Bundy’s cows were grazing should belong to the state of Nevada because it would likely generate more economic activity benefitting us all. I don’t like the amount of landlord business our government is doing, but I do like laws that protect my property. If those laws are not enforced on public lands what would they care about my lands?
I am not your enemy. If we can’t win the battle of public debate over government it will be each man or group of men for themselves. That is the reality we face, but let’s be realistic - right now the federal government, my state government, and county government to include the courts all protect my right to let my grass grow and die each year as I see fit. Bundy opposed that - albeit on public land, but the principle remains the same.
His cows are not a constant - they are born - they graze and fatten up, and they are harvested. He can’t plant trees he is going to sell on my land either without my permission. That is the real argument here and I am disappointed more of us seem to miss the point. If Bundy can’t cut it in the cattle business he should fold. I can grow apples you won’t believe in my orchard here in the Northwest, but I could not do the same thing living in Florida. Range cattle in scrub brush like this is a tough business and the market dictates if they make a living or not.
If Bundy’s family did not have enough land to support a ranch that’s not my fault, but it does not give him the right to graze his cattle on my land without compensation or my permission. Again, the BLM is NOT price gouging these guys and every roundup every year this man should have adjusted his herd to what he could legally support. That is ranching.
As is, you and your children are sold into slavery.
Or do you think that our servants
have any intention of bringing to heel the debt that we are on the hook for (currently to the tune of more than $17 Trillion)? This is even now happening. (In 2011 United States public debt-to-GDP ratio was about 100%.)
The truth is that the political caste views themselves not as your servant, but as your master.
You can either accept this implicit assertion, or fight them… it is quickly becoming a binary choice between these two options.