[Jim Robinson]

From another article:

According to [Ron] Paul, the entire incident in Clark County could have emerged differently if the government reconsidered the way it claimed land rights. Bundy said that the disputed property had been in his family for nearly 150 years, but the BLM insisted that his animals were trespassing on federal land since he stopped paying the government a grazing fee back in the early 1990s.

“I don’t believe I owe one penny to the United States government,” Bundy told Nevada’s Desert News last week. “I don’t have a contract with the United States government.”

On Friday, Paul told Cavuto that the Bundy family “had virtual ownership of that land because they had been using it,” yet the law is “not clean enough.”

“I think land should be in the states and I think the states should sell it to the people,” he continued, adding that “it’s worked out quite well in big states.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

And here’s an interesting and relevant post on that thread:

To: Jim Robinson

I wish the media would get out the whole story on this. They start with the Rancher refusing to pay federal grazing fees. They leave out that the fed confiscated his land, of which has been in the family for generations, years ago and then turned around and told him to pay for his cattle to graze on it. The land was confiscated and dedicated to the fed in order to protect a tortoise (and something else). But in the same vacinity, the fed allowed commercial development on the same land that was previously undeveloped.

The family refused to pay the fed to use their own property and refused to recognize the feds ownership of the property. So 20 years later, the fed decides to enforce the fees retroactively and confiscate the cattle that graze there.

What recourse did the family have? You can’t very well take the government to court or file a law suit against the fed or the BLM. Property rights are (or were) a founding fundamental right established by our founding fathers. It’s one of the things our freedom and existence is based on.

4 posted on 4/15/2014 10:43:59 AM by Tenacious 1

[Steely Tom]

Back in college, the first time I read about Ben Franklin's famous "a Republic if you can keep it" retort, I wondered "what could he have meant by that?"

Now, more than thirty years later, I know exactly what he meant.

How could he have been so prescient?

[fatnotlazy]

No, the Founding Fathers did not create this government, but the free stuff crowd has allowed it to happen. Trade your freedom and rights for Obamaphones will never turn our well.

[celmak]

And Al Sharpton owes how much to the IRS?

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/24545747/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/t/sharpton-owes-nearly-million-back-taxes/

And how are they treating him on this debt?

.

[Enterprise]

"A Nevada rancher said Monday he’s trying to determine if federal agents damaged his cattle when the animals were rounded up then released in a showdown with angry protesters"

After any given movie which utilizes animals, there is a politically correct warm and fuzzy feel good statement at the end that no animals were harmed during the filming of the movie. I haven't heard a Government spokesman announce yet that no animals were harmed during the commission of this Keystone Cops debacle.

[inpajamas]

So where was/is PETA in all of this?

[Southside_Chicago_Republican]

Later.

[bkopto]

‘The Founding Fathers Didn’t Create A Government Like This’

Oh boy: Bundy need to go to college to get his thinking straightened out - he certainly seems to be filled with all sorts of quaint, antiquated notions about how governance works in this country.

/s