More Hannity and Napolitano

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2014/04/23...ranch-standoff

Cool poasts brah.

U should run in the big show.

Why doesn't just keep his cattle our our public lands. The true eco terrorists is Fox news. Why does not Bundy pay the obscenely cheap grazing fees? There is no over reach. So are all fishing and hunting license fees invalid? Are all hunting and fishing regulations invalid? According to Hannity it is overreach. Nevada lost 2 million acres of BLM land to in the last 25 years to rich ranchers.

As said in the economic section. If Iowa claimed all the farmland and leased it out, not only would farm production increase there would be no sales, property, income or any other taxes and the state would generate $2 billion in extra revenue. Production would increase as only the most productive workers would farm the land. Furthermore, the leased land would be open to everyone at $270 per acre.

Bundy could fight if the city wanted him to get a building permit, but these are basic permits that make sense. What is unfair is that these AUMs are allocated based on history. Certain landowners get rights to them unjustly. The AUMs should be available to the highest bidder and open to every U.S. citizen. Bundy should lose the right to graze on federal land and his AUMs should be given to another farmer/rancher.

In another interview Bundy insinuated that the western states got a poor deal from the feds when they traded 80% of their landmass to the feds in exchange for statehood. He believes that Nevada should have gotten the same deal as Virginia.

I also think Bundy believes that there should be no Federal land at all and that such issues should be left to the state of Nevada and that he has gladly payed and would continue to pay all state related fees.

I happen to agree with him. If the federal government wants to control land for a park or military base or whatever, then why doesn't it lease the land from the state?

Lol at bolded being relevant.

I can't tell if this is a real meme or if it was made ironically. What "context" is it even referring to? No one was asking Bundy's opinion on the plight of black people in America, he decided to offer the classic confederate apologist "black people on welfare are basically slaves to the government, so was slavery really that bad?" argument for no reason, then basically blamed MLK for people being offended. Oh, but he took a picture with a black guy instead of running off screaming, which would really be the ONLY actual way to determine whether or not someone is racist.

Perhaps they did get a poor deal but it's those are the current laws of the land and it says as much in Nevada's constitution. Individuals don't just get to decide that they don't care for the government's rules and start ignoring them. It's not as if the state of Nevada is in this guy's corner, trying to free its lands from an unjust federal government that won't give in to them. Bundy is not some ideological warrior, he's a freeloader who wants to ignore laws that affect his own self interest.

EDIT: Oh yeah, Hannity is an idiot

Dude, this is who you are talking to:

Why does it matter if it is state or federal land? Don't you like the ability to go to Yellowstone on your public lands? I love the idea Nevada is 88% owned by the federal government. Ever drive across the country and you get out of the car and there is usually a fence there. In Nevada there is no fence you can walk out there. Does it hurt mining? No Nevada is the #1 gold producing state by wide margin. It helps mining as the mined land is not locked up on private property.

What I don't like about Bundy is that he is not thankful for the situation he is in. He is not thankful for the tortoise. He is not thankful for the federal lands that make his state so great. He is not thankful for the low cost grazing rights he has.

The eco terrorists like Hannity and Bundy make me sick.

Because the more power an entity has over property the more companies, groups, and individuals will seek to control that power.

Just like you mentioned in the Economics thread, the government and those that control it will seek to plunder more and more until there is nothing left.

Read about Legal Plunder here: http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html#SECTION_G008

The BLM is losing land out in the west. Nevada lost 2 million acres in 25 years. They will lose more as Las Vegas, ranchers, and growing areas figure out ways to take it. The government is not plundering more and more. They want more and more cattle and oil to be pulled out so they can make more money. They want fishing and hunting licenses. They want campground fees. The government is not in a rush to pull out the minerals now, because they can take them out tomorrow.

It is Bundy who is attempting to plunder the BLM land. It is the people that vote for people like Barack Obama. It is the farmers out in California that want to plunder the smelt.

A sovereign state overseeing a chunk of land is almost completely indistinguishable from a sovereign federal government overseeing a chunk of land or a sovereign city overseeing a chunk of land. The amount of power they have over that chunk of land is virtually the same.

good work you're doing with the race-based "shaming", moderator...

stay busy in here. Know your strengths.

I must throw a bone out to Hannity he does visit veterans and generally treats them with respect, however why does he pick on the smelt and tortoises that have no way to defend themselves. Has he talked to any biologists? Has he talked with any fishing groups? Instead he wants the water turned on. Whos water Los Angeles water? New farmers water? Why does he pick on the smelt (a baitfish for other fishes), it is not their fault. Fox news is suppose to be a news agency, so why don't they find the entire who what when where why on the issues? I also notice Bundy and Farmers are big time land owners. Maybe the smelt can use a lot less water if certain construction projects take place.

A guy named Paul Schneider did a study of the tortoise population in the year 1980 in AZ, and came to the conclusion that cattle grazing hurt the tortoise population. The study was not peer reviewed but was paid for.... By the BLM Phoenix office.

This study was used as the rational to reduce the ranchers allotment for the number of cattle they could graze to numbers below the break even point. Most all sold out, Bundy said FU and continued to graze.

Now what is real interesting is that every other study, published and peer reviewed I might add, found that more cattle = more tortoise. Where cattle are not allowed like the test site, the populations are under the most stress and in the worst health.

Desert Tortoise eat dung, and a big steaming cow turd is mighty fine dining (high water content too).

Now I can't fathom a guess as to what BLM's motives are, but the welfare of the tortoise isn't one of them.

Then why did he lose in court? There are a lot of people that live in the cities that just want the public lands wild. I for one want all my allocation to California water (even though most belongs to U.S. citizens) to go to the smelt. I like to protect things that can not protect themselves. If the farms want water they can get it from the Trinity or Washington state. They can't just demand water because they have the land.

Considering about 90% of the Sacramento Valley water goes to the cities and farmers, if 50% of the people want the water to go to the Salmon and the smelt don't we have a choice too. The Colorado does not even flow to the ocean anymore.

Maybe we should implement a 1 child policy in the United States and stop illegal and legal immigration. That is a more sound policy than to dry up the rivers to make us even fatter.

The BLM lost 2 million acres in Nevada in the last 30 years. Just look in the Nevada newspapers to see how it is done. I am sure another 2 million will be lost in the next 30 years eventually we will get is a big barbed wire desert with the signs "Taken" everywhere.

Furthermore, allowing wild game to increase on the deserts and allow hunting to thin the herds will assure a more sustainable desert.

if there is ever a famine in the United States, as long as the land is public the people can move from the cities without a permit and set-up temporary farms in the Desert. Yes it may be illegal but at least you won't get shot. If you read about the Irish famine most of the land was locked up in large private estates and the people were forced to die on the streets, the only land they legally could own.

The tortoise thing is basically a red herring at this point. It was the impetus for the 1993 court case against Bundy but at this time no one is telling him that he can't have his cattle there because of the tortoise population; they are saying he needs to be his grazing fee to continue using the land, just like everyone else does. I have no clue what the motivation to continue defending this guy is outside of "general dislike of government"

Bundy picked a bad legal argument and represented himself pro bono.

Wayne Hage picked a different tact. The courts came down hard on the BLM on that one:

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews...n-abusive-feds

The feds still control 87% of the land in Nevada

^Cool story bro. They look like generally unrelated stories considering Bundy is using land he doesn't own (and no one is arguing he owns) whereas Hage may have actually had a legit claim to the property, though I couldn't tell because the article you posted is fairly short on facts and really large on rhetoric on how the case was a great victory for property rights. Bundy is a tax cheat, not a hero of the American West.

The feds control the state land because that's what the Nevada constitution says; sorry if this makes you uncomfortable. For much more information please go see the related threads about Bundy in these forums.

The issue in both cases was BLM controlled land. Grazing fees are not a tax. When you cut the check to the BLM for grazing fees you are agreeing to a contract with the BLM. Buddy didn't agree to a number of head that made the ranch non-viable. The other 50 or so ranchers gave up and went out of business. Buddy attempted to pay the money to the county instead, who wouldn't take it.

Calling him a "tax cheat" is pure puffery, no taxes are involved.

If he removes the cattle he looses his adverse possession rights to the water among other things.

The issues in the Hage and Bundy case are the same, Hage argued a violation of the taking clause and won, Bundy argued ownership (state vs. fed) and lost...


As to the Nevada constitution, that was a requirement set by congress for admission. There is a fairly good argument that that exceeded congresses lawful authority. Durning the sagebrush rebellion, the Nevada legislature passed NRS 321.596 through 321.599

Link to statutes: http://leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-321.html#NRS321Sec596

effectively saying you hoodwinked us, been a bad steward of the land, and we are prepared to take it back.

I am not making an argument that Bundy went about this in the correct way, but I am saying if you don't fight back when your livelihood is threatened by the Feds they will continue to take more control.

Next thing you know they will say we can't play online poker.

https://www.wellsfargo.com/com/indus...3-12-pistachio

If you read the last paragraph. It looks like Hannity wants the smelt to die so we can sell pistachio's to China. As said before, I want my fair share of the States water to go to the smelt and pupfish.

"The big question for the California pistachio industry is how long this amazingly profitable run can last. By 2017, all of the currently non-bearing acreage will be in full production and crops are expected to average 800 MM lbs., a 60% increase over the current biennial average production of 497 MM lbs. Assuming current drought conditions continue, increasing water costs will likely drive up pistachio production costs. And as more of the crop is exported to China, the relative strength of the dollar and the sustainability of Chinese demand are factors which will affect the future health of the California pistachio industry." - Wells Fargo