Clark County (Vegas) commissioner tells lawful Americans to make funeral plans

public land not protected

.

I Have sucked dick in 50 states , and 20 foreign countries. Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Well you have been a busy fella!

public land not protected


Originally Posted by CJ7

So a little mud is going to bring the end of the world? Is that what you are saying?
http://www.riderplanet-usa.com/atv/t.../ride_e02e.htm

rednecks tear up the world

rednecks tear up the world Originally Posted by CJ7

You metrosexuals never stop crying...

So a little mud is going to bring the end of the world? Is that what you are saying?
http://www.riderplanet-usa.com/atv/t.../ride_e02e.htm Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

Yes, it is. Idiot.

Especially when the mud is created by assholes riding on ATVs and destroying the habitats of the animals living there. You don't see any animals in that photo, do you?

Just the usual beer-guzzling, NASCAR enthusiasts out to create chaos and ruin the quiet enjoyment of others.

I can't believe you are actually taking the side of ATVs in national parks.

Yes, it is. Idiot.

Especially when the mud is created by assholes riding on ATVs and destroying the habitats of the animals living there. You don't see any animals in that photo, do you?

Just the usual beer-guzzling, NASCAR enthusiasts out to create chaos and ruin the quiet enjoyment of others.

I can't believe you are actually taking the side of ATVs in national parks. Originally Posted by ExNYer

Your inner Liberal is shinning brite on this one. Please don't stop... I'm having a blast. Have a good read... RINO FUCKFACE.


Free Republic

What Is The Rule Of Law, Anyway?
Renew America ^ | 4/20/2014 | Sylvia Thompson
Posted on 4/20/2014 1:15:34 PM by MHGinTN

What is the rule of law, anyway?

Sylvia Thompson

April 20, 2014

Talking heads and elitists from both the left and right of the political spectrum are decrying that Cliven Bundy (the rancher who recently defied the federal government) must follow the "rule of law." Why should he? Barack Obama, the President of the United States does not follow the rule of law. Eric Holder, the Attorney General of the United States, pays no heed to the rule of law. Why, then, must an average citizen?

Recently, a Congressional Committee called upon a group of legal and policy professionals to testify regarding Obama's blatant disregard for his Constitutional limits. In that committee hearing, a Cato Institute policy director (Michael Cannon) offered that if citizens conclude that government officials are not bound by law, they may also conclude that neither should they be. And I will add that citizens most certainly will not see a need to obey wrong-headed laws that serve to enslave them.

Yes, the jackboots who control the government can bring down the full force of that government upon citizens, and to varying degrees, they have been doing just that. What else would you call the IRS scandals and the umpteen lawless agencies at their command to harass citizens? Yes indeed they can and do exert force. The issue, however, is not what this corrupt, vile government can and will do; the issue is how long Americans will cower on their knees in the dirt, shielding their necks from the next boot drop. That is the issue.

The organized group of armed Americans who came to the aid of the Bundy family were not thinking in terms of "I might be killed today," although they knew that could happen. They were more likely thinking that on this day if I do not stand up to the federal jackboots, I will live to see myself and my progeny enslaved to people who are drunk on power and hateful of individual freedom. I am sure that this is the thinking looming foremost in their minds.

The irritating hype coming from all the media types (conservative and otherwise) imposing themselves on the situation to bring "calm" and to "avoid violence," was so typical of weak people with agendas. The most disgusting to me were the politicos who glommed onto petty issues, such as the construction of the "Free Speech" zones by the feds and the over-dramatization of a woman being pushed, or a Bundy son being tasered. All that energy expended on relatively minor issues when it should have been laser-focused on the diabolical, tyrannical United States federal government that ordered the armed agents there in the first place.

While the Washington political and pundit elites (including Fox News) are whining and moaning about preventing violence and the rule of law, the Bundys and their supporters (who, I think, represent a majority of Americans) have vowed that they will not play victim to an enslaving government. Freedom is what the Founders envisioned for America, so much so, that they endured a revolutionary war and a civil war to bring the vision to full fruition. Some of us do not fear the power of the federal government and are not willing to see that freedom destroyed without a fight. Thank God for that.

I am encouraged by my sense that the Americans standing up for the Bundys are worlds apart from the likes of the Nevada Governor (Brian Sandoval) and the Clark County Sheriff (Douglas Gillespie), the two officials who seem most fearful of the federal government. I am also heartened by the fact that so many Americans are armed and are fighting leftist and federal attempts to disarm them. The only reason that those people were able to face down federal agents is because the Constitution allows them to be armed. Additionally, there were alternative media to the mainstream news agencies. Those alternative sources reported in real time what was transpiring. The federal government could not lie about the consequences of its behavior.

My fervent hope and prayer is that organized militia groups spread out over America (many, by necessity, remaining under the radar) are poised and at the ready to do what they have trained to do. Fight for their country against tyranny from within. They will receive no encouragement from conservative leadership or any government entities, or any elites – those who profit from the status quo. Nor will they receive support from media pundits, left or right. The left will always vilify and condemn and the right will implore them to lie down and grovel – for the sake of nonviolence and peace. I say ignore them all. These patriots must keep ever vigilant and always prepared to fight, with weapons if necessary, and maybe, just maybe, more will have the courage to join them in that inevitable (and I stress inevitable) final clash over what will be the future of America.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sylvia Thompson is a black conservative writer whose aim is to counter the liberal spin on issues pertaining to race and culture.

Ms. Thompson is a copy editor by trade currently residing in Tennessee. She formerly wrote for the Conservative Forum of Silicon Valley California Newsletter and the online conservative blog ChronWatch, also out of California.

She grew up in Southeast Texas during the waning years of Jim Crow-era legalized segregation, and she concludes that race relations in America will never improve, nor will we ever elevate our culture, as long as there are victims to be pandered to and villains to be vilified. America is better served without victims or villains.

© Copyright 2014 by Sylvia Thompson

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/sthompson/140420

Well you have been a busy fella! Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

fuck you stupid sniffy new trend on the board now. From IB'S little bitch whiffy.

Actually, no, you were pretty much advocating that privatizing every last acre of federal land. Really? Point that one out, please.

You don't get to rephrase your earlier statement (already a second attempt) which was: Well, I did, anyway.

"Let me restate the question. What do we gain from federal ownership of otherwise productive land? I understand about not wanting a convenience store at the bottom of the Grand Canyon, or a casino at Mt. Rushmore, but the vast majority of federal land is not a National Park or Monument. So, to make this a little easier for CBJ7 to grasp, if we take the monuments and parks out of the equation, what do we gain by federal ownership of otherwise productive land?"

So, to recap, you wanted to take the national parks and monuments out of the equation, but put the VAST MAJORITY of federal land up for sale. Now, be honest. Is that what I said? No.

So, no, I did not exaggerate your question "well beyond its parameters". Actually, you did.

I pretty much hit the nail on the head - once you take the national parks and monuments out, right? Better check your thumb. You completely missed the nail.

And what other productive uses of land are there besides businesses and housing? When I wrote "businesses" I wasn't taking about just stores and malls. I mean ANY business, including mining, farming, tourism, etc.

And as for the Ayn Rand comment, even if you didn't mention her, it is well known how much value she placed on productive use of land and pretty much everything else. Then argue with her. Why bring her up in an argument against me? Unbridled capitalism at its finest. That also is NOT a conservative position. Which means what, exactly? I am not a conservative. Originally Posted by ExNYer

I hope you feel better about yourself after making stuff up about me. And dodging the question.

its about the 4 wheel crowd doing what they want and the people that enjoy elk meadows etc doing what they want ... an elk meadow is protected from 4 wheelers

I've yet to hear of a 4 wheel park needing protection from a heard of elk

BLM land ..
Originally Posted by CJ7

That picture is from Yellowstone National Park which is administered by the "National Park Service", CBJ7; not BLM.

This is public land managed by BLM, CBJ7: see how pretty and pristine it is:

As stated before, you should quit while you are behind. But you keep digging deeper.

This time, try to read all the way to the bottom before making statements that are disproved or contradicted by something I later write.

You like to simply "declare" that the BLM is acting arbitrarily, like you are a judge handing down a ruling.

But you are not, you are just an anti-government zealot with WITH NO FACTS to back up his argument.

All of your supposed fact about the tortoise and Spanish cattle are NONSENSE. The tortoise issue is irrelevant even if someone in the BLM once used it as an excuse. The BLM can close federal land from grazing without using the tortoise as an excuse. But you will keep beating that dead horse to avoid explaining why Bundy has ANY rights to graze on federal land free of charge.

Another dead horse you will beat is the supposed connection to Harry Reid and that solar farm. Except, as pointed out above, Bundy was fighting the BLM for YEARS before that solar farm was ever proposed, the solar farm plan was also scrapped years ago, AND - most importantly - the solar farm is located 200 miles away on the other side of Las Vegas and has NOTHING to do with Bundy's grazing area.

Strawman much, redneck?

So let me ask again - What LEGAL claim does Bundy have to graze on federal land free of charge?

If you can't answer THAT question, IBHankering, just admit it.

And pointing out that the IRS has snooped on Tea Party groups or that the BLM threw some woman on the ground - even if true - is NOT an argument demonstrating that Bundy has a LEGAL claim.
[/I] Originally Posted by ExNYer

Once again you throw up your straw man arguments and then knock them down so you can run around in your pathetic little circles and pretend you achieved something.

Again, who has what "power" and who doesn't have a "power" is not always the most important factor in these cases, and sometimes that factor is far less important than the people's perception that a government agency is abusing its power. This influences the people's willingness to rise up and stand in rebellion against such perceived abuses, and that is happening. The current perception is that the BLM was allowing Reid, et al, to proceed with the commercial development of property deemed "too fragile" for use by cattle, and that seems arbitrary. The arbitrary enforcement of laws by a government agency is illegal. All laws must apply to all citizens equally: members of Congress and their families included. BTW, you're still dragging rear.

Looks like a suckoff between Ib and JL... Originally Posted by i'va biggen

That's not what you posted earlier, Ekim the Inbred Chimp.

I Have sucked dick in 50 states , and 20 foreign countries. Originally Posted by i'va biggen

http://www.ourpubliclands.org/oil_shale_public_meetings








stfu creepy

http://www.ourpubliclands.org/oil_shale_public_meetings





stfu creepy Originally Posted by CJ7

Perhaps you're the ignorant fuck-tard that needs to STFU, because you're the ignorant fuck-tard that was using a bogus source to support your POV, CBJ7.

BTW, jackass, you didn't comment on the how "pretty and pristine" those wind turbines looked on BLM managed public property.

Or, CBJ7, maybe you want to ignorantly argue that this type of "green-weenie-tree-hugging" development (below) is somehow less intrusive than grazing herbivores that have demonstrably coexisted in that region for hundreds if not thousands of years.

Buttman is speaking in code again.

[QUOTE=I B Hankering;1055219710]That picture is from Yellowstone National Park which is administered by the "National Park Service", CBJ7; not BLM.

This is public land managed by BLM, CBJ7: see how pretty and pristine it is:





Once again you throw up your straw man arguments and then knock them down so you can run around in your pathetic little circles and pretend you achieved something.

Again, who has what "power" and who doesn't have a "power" is not always the most important factor in these cases, and sometimes that factor is far less important than the people's perception that a government agency is abusing its power. This influences the people's willingness to rise up and stand in rebellion against such perceived abuses, and that is happening. The current perception is that the BLM was allowing Reid, et al, to proceed with the commercial development of property deemed "too fragile" for use by cattle, and that seems arbitrary. The arbitrary enforcement of laws by a government agency is illegal. All laws must apply to all citizens equally: members of Congress and their families included. BTW, you're still dragging rear.



That's not what you posted earlier, Ekim the Inbred Chimp.



from now on if it has nothing to do with the OP you can kiss my ass cocksucker.