Is it surprising to find that a person who believes that the government should give him exclusive rights to large tracts of land based on an ancestral claim also believes that government should give him the right to enslave others, based upon ancestry?
lol I do believe that is currently the world's safest bet.I take it Bundy is no longer being considered as the Republican's new Joe The Plumber for the elections??
To be fair, that's not what he said. I too took his statements to that conclusion - that if he were allowed to own them they'd be better off - but that's our own logical inference, not what he actually said. DVC made that argument better than can Bundy, even though like any thinking person DVC rejects its conclusion. Just as when people are claiming he refused to pay his grazing fees, it's important to use the actual facts.Is it surprising to find that a person who believes that the government should give him exclusive rights to large tracts of land based on an ancestral claim also believes that government should give him the right to enslave others, also based upon ancestry?
My Conservative response (*and not just me but Hannity) is that the fed fuckers were over stepping their bounds and now they are playing this horse shit with a ranch in Texas. ARE THEY NUTS!? You don't fuck with Texas.
And BTW, Hannity spoke out against his bigot comments. But no one here would know because you all watch MSNBC shit or the Communist News Network.
Fuck me! Just Google Hannity and you will see the lame stream media BS about Hannity. Did they not watch tonight's show???
Fuck! there are too many douche bag liberals in here.
Why is it that grazing fees went from some 300 thousand to a round, ripe old number of 1 million? It cost's that much? Cows eat that much?
Oh! John Stewart is an asshole and anyone who thinks he's a news source is ignorant as fuck!
What about the overarching issue of Republicans and Fox News always making a comfortable home for people like him.
Just as when people are claiming he refused to pay his grazing fees, it's important to use the actual facts.
lol I do believe that is currently the world's safest bet.
To be fair, that's not what he said. I too took his statements to that conclusion - that if he were allowed to own them they'd be better off - but that's our own logical inference, not what he actually said. DVC made that argument better than can Bundy, even though like any thinking person DVC rejects its conclusion. Just as when people are claiming he refused to pay his grazing fees, it's important to use the actual facts.
People who want to be left alone tend to favor the party claiming to leave them alone. In other news, water is wet.
He refused to pay the grazing fees one year, when the BLM dropped the cattle quota to 1/5 or 1/6 of its traditional number. The next year the BLM dropped that land from grazing acreage, so at that point no fees were due or payable.Bundy did refuse to pay his grazing fees and, in fact, didn't pay his grazing fees. In his wife's words "He fired BLM." When one "fires" one's landlord, one generally moves out. Bundy didn't do that. Instead he squatted. He's a deadbeat welfare cheat.
I see what you're saying, but the error (and racism) in Bundy's thinking is that not all black Americans were slaves prior to the civil war, nor are all black Americans on welfare today (in fact, there are more whites on welfare than blacks).
I maintain that Bundy is not a freedom fighter of any sort, but is wannabe nobility.
Fuck! there are too many douche bag liberals in here.
Why is it that grazing fees went from some 300 thousand to a round, ripe old number of 1 million? It cost's that much? Cows eat that much?
Oh! John Stewart is an asshole and anyone who thinks he's a news source is ignorant as fuck!
This is an often overlooked fact. The areas of the US with the highest proportion of public assistance recipients are overwhelmingly rural. I always found it interesting that people such as Bundy think of welfare recipients as black, city folk when so many if them are white, rural folk.
Oh, I think there's nothing but error in Bundy's thinking, such as it is. Under slavery blacks were allowed and encouraged to have families, but with no guaranty that those families would not be ripped apart if that best suited their owners. As with any livestock one needs to avoid inbreeding so slaves were encouraged to marry outsiders. That isn't security, it is just selfish self-interest on the owners' part.I see what you're saying, but the error (and racism) in Bundy's thinking is that not all black Americans were slaves prior to the civil war, nor are all black Americans on welfare today (in fact, there are more whites on welfare than blacks).
I maintain that Bundy is not a freedom fighter of any sort, but is wannabe nobility.
Oh! John Stewart is an asshole and anyone who thinks he's a news source is ignorant as fuck!
People who want to be left alone tend to favor the party claiming to leave them alone. In other news, water is wet.
Well said. One thing we should do in my opinion is remove the restrictions against families with fathers getting welfare. The extra cost is well worth not doing more societal damage.True, but to some extent these statistics are misleading. Recipients of food stamps, for example, are relatively likely to be white and rural, but recipients of federal welfare are disproportionally black and urban. The most recent statistics show about the same actual number of white and black people receive welfare nationwide - http://www.statisticbrain.com/welfare-statistics/ - but there are about 6 times as many white people as black people in the US (meaning that the usage is 6 times higher among black people than white people). These statistics are somewhat tricky to wrangle in that most long-term public assistance benefits are now administered through state programs, but in my state the same sort of pattern is true. Here, state welfare benefits are paid about 40% to white people and 37% to black people, but there are 17 times as many white people as black, making the actual usage rates far higher among black people.
I really do think Minnesota, in particular, has created a huge problem through its longstanding generous social-welfare programs. We actually have the highest disparity in unemployment between white people and black people of any state, and I can say with some confidence it isn't because we are the most racist state. We have a vanishingly small black middle class here, with the great majority of black people living in poverty. I see that as a direct by-product of our well-intentioned but ultimately unwise social welfare programs.
He refused to pay the grazing fees one year, when the BLM dropped the cattle quota to 1/5 or 1/6 of its traditional number. The next year the BLM dropped that land from grazing acreage, so at that point no fees were due or payable.
Mind you, I'm not necessarily saying the BLM was wrong to cut the cattle quota to 1/5 or 1/6 or to drop that acreage from available grazing lease acreage. I have a huge problem with the BLM historically, but I can think of several perfectly valid reasons why the cattle quota would be dropped to a small fraction or even reduced to zero. Until this is cleared up one way or another, I'll remain suspicious but I'll assume the BLM had valid reasons for its actions.
True, but to some extent these statistics are misleading. Recipients of food stamps, for example, are relatively likely to be white and rural, but recipients of federal welfare are disproportionally black and urban. The most recent statistics show about the same actual number of white and black people receive welfare nationwide - http://www.statisticbrain.com/welfare-statistics/ - but there are about 6 times as many white people as black people in the US (meaning that the usage is 6 times higher among black people than white people). These statistics are somewhat tricky to wrangle in that most long-term public assistance benefits are now administered through state programs, but in my state the same sort of pattern is true. Here, state welfare benefits are paid about 40% to white people and 37% to black people, but there are 17 times as many white people as black, making the actual usage rates far higher among black people.
I really do think Minnesota, in particular, has created a huge problem through its longstanding generous social-welfare programs. We actually have the highest disparity in unemployment between white people and black people of any state, and I can say with some confidence it isn't because we are the most racist state. We have a vanishingly small black middle class here, with the great majority of black people living in poverty. I see that as a direct by-product of our well-intentioned but ultimately unwise social welfare programs.
I just wish you guys on the right could keep your lunatics from becoming armed terroristic menaces stealing and terrorizing the rest of America.
I am surprised that you would give the least bit of support to this rancher.
While you can look at this in a bunch of different ways, I for one wouldn't choose to differentiate between food stamps and welfare. Both are money out the door into their pockets.
For SNAP benefits in particular not only are poverty rates higher in rural areas than in urban ones, but a greater proportion of those in poverty who are eligible for benefits actually utilize them in rural areas than in urban ones.
http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/rura...-being/geography-of-poverty.aspx#.U1qRi_ldV8F
http://blog.metrotrends.org/2013/01/urban-rural-trends-snap-participation-on/
I also think that national trends are more informative than state level trends.
Stewox, you have to keep in mind that most of these people voted for either (or both) Back Obama and George Bush. Some of them may also have voted for John Kerry or even Mitt frickin Romney. So you know right off the bat that all of them are crazy, since a vote for any of that scum is akin to wearing a nazi yellow armband. I do not know why you would wish to seek validation from them. They will do as crazies do, including vote for the next iteration of Bushbama. Let them say what they will of people like Alex Jones. The fact remains that, as crazy as Alex appears to those inside "the system", the truth is that he is far more sane and normal than anyone who has not yet wholly withdrawn their consent for the corrupt cesspit in washington DC.
I certainly think both food stamps and welfare are potentially problematic, but I see welfare as more so in that at least food stamps are often a bridge for poor people and families who are gainfully employed. When I was in the military I knew several enlisted people whose families were receiving food stamps. I don't see this as being as significant a problem as the fairly frequent phenomenon of entire families receiving public benefits in lieu of ever seeking employment. Those are the families that are, in my view, most profoundly harmed by public assistance, and also the families whose kids are likelier to fall into their own non-productivity, substance abuse and/or criminality. I used to do a ton of defense work for our local transit authority, and was startled how often I met reasonably bright, able-bodied plaintiffs who had never worked, whose spouses had never worked, and who had kids and grandkids in the house, none of whom were employed. To me that is about as humiliating and depressing as any situation I can dream up.
As for whether national or state statistics are more "informative," I guess it depends what you're trying to address. This is obviously a topic about which I have particular sensitivity, because I live a lovely, urbane, highly literate urban area that has also created a shockingly persistent black underclass, most of whom live in dangerous and crime-ridden conditions. This problem has gotten visibly worse during my lifetime (actually I went to high school in a predominantly black neighborhood in order to attend a magnet program, and that neighborhood is now far too dangerous for that to be a viable possibility). This is the biggest problem we face as a community. If I lived in a place like, say, Atlanta or New York, where most people of color are working and there is a healthy black middle class, I would probably see things differently. I obviously have no idea what Cliven Bundy has experienced - my sense is that he has fairly limited real-world experience with such things.