Cliven Bundy and The Rural Way: We'd rather be wrong with Clive than right with Harry Reid

Pajamas Media ^ | 04/21/2014 | Victor Davis Hanson

[Former Proud Canadian]

"...we cannot have a world of Cliven Bundys if a legal system is to function."

Even VDH gets it wrong sometimes. Does he think there is a "functioning legal system" in the US right now? Ask the "secured" Chrysler and GM bondholders.

[greyfoxx39]

BTTT

[P-Marlowe]

So, yes, I can make some allowances for the nihilism of Cliven Bundy.

Nihilism?

Very strange choice of words for Bundy's stand.

I really don't understand Mr. Hanson's point. This article seemed to suggest he was on Bundy's side, but then he did not defend his position once. It was a self serving article at best as he reminisced about his grandfather.

Tell me Mr Hanson? DO YOU STAND WITH BUNDY, or are you just going to comment from the peanut gallery as the nation slips into metrosexual fascism?

[G Larry]

We’d rather be wrong with Clive than LEFT with Harry Reid

fixed it

[Logical me]

One look at the HLS and the BLM military brown shirt and you have the answer. There is no need for these units and they should be limited to a handgun only. If more action is needed they it should be up to the local police to do the job. We are living in a near communists dictatorship now. Soon will not be able to turn it around and the time may have passed us now.

[MamaTexan]

EXCELLENT!

Thanks for posting.

[ponygirl]

ping

[nonsporting]

Those who pervert the law will leave us no choice but to be "wrong" according to their twisted standards.

The law perverted! And the police powers of the state perverted along with it! The law, I say, not only turned from its proper purpose but made to follow an entirely contrary purpose! The law become the weapon of every kind of greed! Instead of checking crime, the law itself guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish!

(Bastiat, The Law)

[Ben Ficklin]

If you don't think there is a functioning legal system, then you and Bundy are wasting your time with BLM.

You need to go out and start killing judges.

Without a judge or judicial decision, this is a citizen versus bureaucrat conflict.

So it is really a conflict between Bundy and the judge(s). The saps at the BLM merely enforce the judge's decision.

An in the bigger picture, there is the congressional act FLPMA(legislative branch), administered by BLM(executive branch), resolved by a judge(judicial branch)

But Bundy says he doesn't recognize the federal govt so he doesn't recognize the legislative, executive, or judicial branch.

[massgopguy]

Article 1 Section 8 paragraph 27. The Feds can’t own more than ten square miles in a state. Once it was admitted to the Union, Nevada was no longer an owned territory of the United States. But a sovereign state with equal standing as all the others.

[jiggyboy]

Read your excerpt again:

“we cannot have a world of Cliven Bundys if a legal system is to function.”

That’s the view of the government. The government thinks the legal system, which includes all their discretionary enforcement decisions, is working just fine, and that anybody who thinks otherwise is, all together now, racist, stupid, evil, etc.

[Tupelo]

Quote of the year from Victor Davis Hanson

“So Mr. Bundy must realize that in about 1990 we decided to focus on the misdemeanor of the law-abiding citizen and to ignore the felony of the lawbreaker. The former gave law enforcement respect; the latter ignored their authority. The first made or at least did not cost enforcers money; arresting the second began a money-losing odyssey of incarceration, trials, lawyers, appeals, and all the rest.”

[Georgia Girl 2]

Sentimental, poetic and off the mark.

I would say Cliven Bundy has his stetson planted firmly in 2014.

Cliven Bundy is not going to lay down and let the Progressive train run over him anymore that the rest of us are. He is standing tall for freedom and inspiring the rest of us to do the same. Its time to drink a little tea and talk a little treason.

[Ben Ficklin]

Hire a lawyer and take it to court. Or, hire the oathkeepers and militia and start an armed revolution.

[greene66]

I don’t know. This VDH piece is getting a bit of criticism here, but I thought it was an excellent read. It seemed to encaspsulate and reflect the actual reason WHY I’m in strong support of Bundy moreso than anything else I’ve read.

It admittedly a bit downbeat, though. But when I look at the current state of the American populace (versus Bundy and the ilk of my own ancestors), it tends to merit a pretty downbeat tone.

[Sherman Logan]

Article 1 Section 8 paragraph 27. The Feds can’t own more than ten square miles in a state.

Utterly irrelevant. That provision is with regard to land for a national capital, and anyway it applies to land ceded to the federal government by a state or states, not to land within a state.

FWIW, the notion that Nevada is some sort of outlier or anomaly with regard to the federal government retaining title to land after it became a state is just untrue.

Kansas, for example, which became a state in 1861, had public (federal) land still being homesteaded by settlers many decades later. In fact, that's how some of my ancestors acquired their farms.

Nevada has the highest percentage of public (federal) land for the simple reason that it has more land nobody wanted to buy or settle on than any other state.

I'm curious if anybody has a link to actual information on whether some land remained as yet unsold in federal title after statehood in states farther east than Kansas.

[B4Ranch]

>>But Bundy says he doesn't recognize the federal govt so he doesn't recognize the legislative, executive, or judicial branch. <<<{> But Bundy says he doesn't recognize the federal govt REGARDING THE FEDS AUTHORITY OVER STATE LANDS IN NEVADA.

A quick background as to why the BLM should not be harassing Cliven Bundy. This issue goes all the way back to the Confederation Papers, prior to the writing of our US Constitution.

Please remember that the Supreme Court has reversed more than 150 of earlier Supreme Court decisions on natural law. Is that what you would consider as someone being consistent and reliable in interpreting the Constitution?

The Resolution of 1780, "the federal trust respecting public lands obligated the united States to extinguish both their governmental jurisdiction and their title to land that achieved statehood."

In the Constitutional Convention of 1787, The Charter of Liberty contained these words, "The new Federal Government is an agent serving the states.", "The delegated powers are few and defined", "All powers not listed are retained by the states or the people", "The Resolution of 1780 formed the basis upon which Congress was required to dispose of territorial and public lands", "All laws shall be made by the Congress of the United States". (not agency bureaucrats!)

That should be sufficient for you to determine who all public lands belong to, hint - NOT the Federal Government!

"The Constitution is a written instrument. As such, it's meaning does not alter. That which it meant when adopted. it means now". So said the Supreme Court in South Carolina v United States in 1905

Articles of Confederation, Article VI, clause 1 All engagements entered into before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation. In Article IX "... no State shall be deprived of territory for the benefit of the United States."

Formation of a "more perfect union" does not absolve that union of prior engagements, including those obligations establish by the resolution of 1780 and the Articles of Confederation.

Our government system is established by compact, not between the Government and the State Governments but between the States as Sovereign Communities. By James Madison 1821 (This is what make the County Sheriffs the highest law enforcement officer in that County and gives him/her the authority to tell the BLM, the FBI or any other Federal Agency to get out of the County or they will be arrested and jailed.)

What I have written here is but a short piece of the process that the Founder went through to establish our Constitution and system of government.

Please view these videos and see if they don't change your mind about whether or not Cliven Bundy is in the wrong by defying the BLM.

1of3 Stephen Pratt speaking to Sheriffs at WSSA conference

2of3 Stephen Pratt speaking to Sheriffs at WSSA conference

3of3 Stephen Pratt speaking to Sheriffs at WSSA conference

Here's one that shows why the Sheriff of Clark County is duty bound to keep the BLM and all Federal agents from arresting Cliven Bundy.

Steven Pratt, Bound by Oath to Support THIS Constitution,

[Graewoulf]

* The EPA assigns one million acres to previous owners in Wyoming.

* The BLM Rustles cattle in Nevada.

* Now the USFS Rustles Cattle in New Mexico.

What will Speaker Boehner do now to punish these lawless Federal Bureaus?

BTW, have y’all noticed that Obama is very effectively using these lawless events by his Bureaus to distract from the NSA, Benghazi, IRS and Obamacare Scandals?

_________________________

Is the modern day equivalent of the KKK the Bureau of Feudal Land Management, (BFLM) ?

If so, then Feudal Lord Reid would then be “The Grand Dragon of the BFLM.”

Feudal Lord Reid’s Rustlers are hired guns, who are furious but not fast, which also applies to their multimillionaire Leader: Feudal Lord Reid.

With the past Democrat-based KKK, and now the present Democrat-controlled BFLM, ethics be damned, as abject fear is the main goal of both of these Medieval Outlaw Gangs, past and present.

“Ethics” will be justified later by Liberals who will write the ‘revised” PC History of these times, past and present; of powerful men with outlaw hatred toward free people in America, Black or White, poor or rich.

The Jackboot Heel of Democat Tyranny is now upon us, again !

FORWARD!

[Sherman Logan]

Found a nifty site on the BLM website. Record of all title transfers out of public (federal) ownership.

Turns out there was still a lot of homesteading going on in Missouri, by definition on federal public land, in the teens of the last century.

http://www.glorecords.blm.gov/results/default.aspx?searchCriteria=type=patent|st=MO|cty=043|sp=true|sw=true|sadv=false#resultsTabIndex=0&page=100&sortField=6&sortDir=0

Missouri became a state in 1821. Federally owned land was still being homesteaded a century later.

There are good arguments that Bundy is being mistreated. The notion that it is illegal for the federal government to hold title to land within a state is not one of them. Or, if it is illegal, it’s an illegality that has been ongoing since the early days of the nation.

Here’s a link to similar land transfers from federal ownership to private in Florida in the middle 20th.

http://www.glorecords.blm.gov/results/default.aspx?searchCriteria=type=patent|st=FL|cty=095|sp=true|sw=true|sadv=false#resultsTabIndex=0&page=1&sortField=6&sortDir=1

Florida became a state in 1845.