Posted on 04/21/2014 12:43:54 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
(VIDEO-AT-LINK)
OKLAHOMA - A dispute over land in Nevada between rancher Cliven Bundy and the Federal Government began decades ago.
Bundy says his family’s cattle have grazed on the land without interference since 1870.
The Bureau of Land Management says Bundy hadn’t paid his grazing fees since 1993, owing the government more than 1 million dollars.
The B.L.M. says Bundy was allowing his cattle to graze illegally, which triggered a forced round-up of about 400 of Bundy’s cattle just last week. The cows were later released.
Organizers with the Oklahoma Militia say they have members in Nevada who say Bundy’s cattle were unlawfully rounded up by the B.L.M.
Militia member Scott Shaw comments on the round-up “evidently in America we don’t actually own the property anymore, if you ever did.”
The round-up sparked an armed standoff, but it wasn’t the Bundy family who owns the cattle, it was militia members from across the nation going up against the B.L.M.
Oklahoma Senator Jim Inhofe weighed in on the matter “You’ve got a bunch of people there trying to take the law into their own hands and they shouldn’t be doing that and the bureau of land management is not government-owned, its publicly owned, there’s a big difference there. I blame both sides.”
Here in Oklahoma, militia members say they have nearly 50,000 volunteers. Members say they are taking Bundy’s side and fear this governmental practice could spread to the Sooner State.
Scott Shaw says with all of the recent constitutional infringements by the Federal Government, the Oklahoma volunteer militia is ready to take up arms if needed. “It’s up to the feds, the balls in their court! You can do this legally or if you want to try to do a land grab violently, you can do that, were going to resist you!”
Shaw says they haven’t had to defend Oklahoma from the Feds yet, but says its beginning to become a concern.
“Just look around the country they are doing it everywhere. If they can do it in Nevada, they can do it in Colorado, Texas. I mean what’s to stop them from coming to Oklahoma? The only thing to stop them is we the people.”
well, I'm from Texassong-and-dance are trying to create an association (to some ideal TX) with themselves without any actual effort.
* El Paso manages to combine the worst of (A) a border town, (B) a military town, and (C) a university town — it was recently given good ratings for having a low murder-rate, but the reason this happened was because El Paso has THREE trauma hospitals so there's a LOT of medical services which prevent the death which would be a murder in a different town.
Please tell me what state I'm calling to... you've dodged it 3 time so far.
I'll give you the benefit of a doubt that you're more ignorant than quarrelsome (or a troll).
TX has more TX taxpayer funded supreme court challenges to Fed over reach than any other state (probably all combined). Good thing business is going so well, least the lame a$$ place you're from would have to actually cough up money to help peel back Fed overreach!
Clearly, you're all hat and no cowboy...
New Mexico...? Using your vernacular "Bwahahaha"!
No wonder you were evasive! Gorgeous state - no question! But, bottom of the barrel on just about every other category. So, perhaps you should step down from your tiny, unstable, sanctimonious soap box...
*sigh* — I thought you would've at least looked at my profile.
The little yellow and red flag is New Mexico.
I'll give you the benefit of a doubt that you're more ignorant than quarrelsome (or a troll).
Thank you.
TX has more TX taxpayer funded supreme court challenges to Fed over reach than any other state (probably all combined).
Yeah, and looking at the USSC and it's decisions I'd say that's not something to boast about… especially the more recent ones.
Good thing business is going so well, least the lame a$$ place you're from would have to actually cough up money to help peel back Fed overreach!
How do you know we don't; actually I've done my own personal investigations into the matter ant there's some huge problems to taking things to court… namely, you have to first violate the statute/law/rule that you believe to be contraconstitutional (this intentionality means that you are implicitly acknowledging the legitimacy of its authority), then as the accused you raise your objections/arguments, and even then there's some [rather large] risk that things will not swing your way.
For example, last year there was a New Mexico Supreme Court decision regarding a photographer who refused to photograph a homosexual wedding wherein they decided that the hoosexual's rights had been violated — this in complete defiance of the State's own Constitution, which says:
Art 2, Sec. 11. [Freedom of religion.]So, obviously the refusal to participate in a homosexual wedding on religious grounds constitutes a religious opinion; it is equally obvious that the ability to refuse your services to someone is a civil right. Therefore, their decision is the abridgement of this portion of the State's own Constitution.
Every man shall be free to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, and no person shall ever be molested or denied any civil or political right or privilege on account of his religious opinion or mode of religious worship. No person shall be required to attend any place of worship or support any religious sect or denomination; nor shall any preference be given by law to any religious denomination or mode of worship.
Now, if you were to argue that federal law could apply here you're right — the 13th Amendment prohibits involuntary servitude [save as conviction result] and forcing someone to provide a service, even if you pay them, is placing them into servitude and, because of the voiced religious objection, such servitude is invoulentary. Moreover, congress is prohibited from passing any law which prohibits the exercise of religion.
Now, all of the above legal reasoning means nothing.
Why? Because the courts don't give a crap about the Constitution.
They're all into precedent, and penumbras, and what they can get away with* rather than any sound reasoning — doubly so if that reasoning is based on the Constitution.
Clearly, you're all hat and no cowboy...
Really? When'd I ever claim to be a cowboy?
* Baffle `em with bullshit!
You did reasonably well with that tactic... but facts get in the way...
Forbes Best States for Business 2013
TX # 7; NM # 45 (Mich is #47)
Chief Executive 2013 Best & Worst States for Business
CNBC top states for business: The winner is . . .TX # 1; NM # 32
Texas, which has never finished below second place in our study, keeps the streak alive in 2013.Area Development Magazine - Top States for Doing Business 2013: Texas on Top....Again
I never said that business was bad in TX; why do you keep bringing it up?
Really?
Freedom = greater opportunity = greater output = greater success...
Lower state gov regulations and tax burdens, including successfully fighting the Feds - with TX being the largest hydrocarbon producer in the nation (oil & gas) = freedom.
Great STATE schools. Great cities and rural communities that produce needed products and services worldwide only happens within an environment of liberty. Need I go on...?
Why is America better than, say.. Pakistan? Or the UK? Or France? Or Russia, Japan, and so on.
Economic success is a VERY important barometer of liberty. You should understand that with all of chosen quotes on your profile page.
False equivalence — here's why: Nazi Germany.
In just a few short years Germany went from drowning in debt to a powerhouse (militarily and economically) — one of the the things that enabled this was the seizure of real properties, real wealth of its Jewish citizens — this is, by some measures, a great success.
Lower state gov regulations and tax burdens, including successfully fighting the Feds* - with TX being the largest hydrocarbon producer in the nation (oil & gas) = freedom.
I thought ND was now the biggest oil producer in the US, AK probably would be if ANWR had been opened up — but those are probably second-/third-hand info in the articles I [vaguely] remember reading.
Great STATE schools.
No, not really.
Do you have seven year olds doing matrices? Do you have 12 year-olds doing calculus? Do you still have problems reading? What about foreign languages — do you have people graduating who are bi-/tri-lingual due to the school-system? (How about widely differing languages like Japanese and Irish?)
Great cities and rural communities that produce needed products and services worldwide only happens within an environment of liberty.
Yeah, liberty — do you have:
foundno longer applies as per both the Affordable Care Act and the NSA's domestic espionage/data-collection programs?)
in chargewant it to, and doesn't when they don't.
Need I go on...?
No — I can see your Texas is great because… Texas!
from here.
Like I said, it's all a bunch of big-talk, and a lot of it is really just self deception.
(I'm not saying there aren't good aspects to TX; I am saying that you're not realistically assessing TX.)
* I don't believe it; the Feds have ways of making a success hollow — mostly because they're statists and will twist anything around to avoid weakening their god, the government, and everything in their power to make it more powerful. (The next Waco will be their human sacrifices.)
Yes; I understand it's a barometer, but by no means the only barometer.
Moreover, I am completely convinced of the correctness, and astuteness, of our Declaration:
all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomedThere are many injustices, tyrannies, and evils that we (a) do not notice, or (b) are terrified to change because we have become
used tothem.
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.