Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

kelliekat44

(7,759 posts)
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 07:18 AM Apr 2014

Here is what is really bothers me about the Bundy - Nevada issue

Yeah, it's personal:

My daughter who is now 49 has worked all her life from age 16 until 3 years ago when she lost her security clearance because of a bad credit rating caused by foreclosure and bankruptcy. Widowed at age 45 (as she lost her husband to pancreatic cancer) with two young daughters now 8 and 9, she lost their home through one of those vulture mortgage deals which the banks refused to give her any help by refinancing. Forced into bankruptcy and unable to pay back taxes owed by herself and deceased husband, she lost her security rating which had allowed her to be employed by private contractor with huge government contracts. Even with her background in information tech and computer tech, she has been unable to secure employment, although she has worked on three and four-month stints at various tech jobs. She has been successful at reaching the final levels of job interviews but when the final job clearance completes she is always turned down because of her owing Federal taxes (which she makes payments on when she can) and her CREDIT RATING. And now she gets no unemployment thanks to the GOP and food stamps were cut to the bones.

Naturally when I see people like Bundy owing the government millions that are not even collected and refusing to pay what he owes and still not in jail and still able to get benefits from the government it pisses me off. I bet everyone in his family collects some kind of benefit from the Federal government that has not been withheld. Why can't they garnish his bank accounts and assets like they do the rest of us?

92 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Here is what is really bothers me about the Bundy - Nevada issue (Original Post) kelliekat44 Apr 2014 OP
A really excellent question... druidity33 Apr 2014 #1
it went Cryptoad Apr 2014 #44
and bring out the swat teams like they do when a sheriff serves a civil warrant Hestia Apr 2014 #47
They wanted to avoid a Ruby Ridge... Rockyj Apr 2014 #58
At the very least this tax evader/criminal bundy kydo Apr 2014 #2
Unfairness beemer27 Apr 2014 #3
It's like that old saying, "If you owe the bank $5000, you have a problem... Buns_of_Fire Apr 2014 #66
Exactly, like Enron, AIG, etc. anneboleyn Apr 2014 #85
I'm sure they can treestar Apr 2014 #4
I'm pretty sure they'll put a lien on his property tridim Apr 2014 #5
He might refuse to pay the lien... Jerry442 Apr 2014 #18
I don't think the lien strategy would work. The lien would be on his real property snappyturtle Apr 2014 #26
Looks like our own government is far more fearful of... TRoN33 Apr 2014 #6
Ain't no liberals who would fit. seabeckind Apr 2014 #8
You don't believe that the Federal government ... 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2014 #9
I have the same suspicion you have about supporters of Bundy on this board. CTyankee Apr 2014 #10
I want to know how many of the Bundy supporters here are Mormons siligut Apr 2014 #12
+1 n/t FSogol Apr 2014 #20
There clearly is a anti-government (read: libertarian) vibe ... 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2014 #28
and there clearly is a movement to hijack Progressivism by the gun activists... CTyankee Apr 2014 #34
As the ever optimist ... 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2014 #35
I have asked them "why are you here?" and some seem to be hurt by that question! CTyankee Apr 2014 #45
And he-e--e-r-r-e come the gunz. Again... Eleanors38 Apr 2014 #49
I'm a liberal and a progressive. Why are you here? CTyankee Apr 2014 #52
I'm a liberal and a progressive. Eleanors38 Apr 2014 #75
If Obama gets to appoint another liberal and progressive Supreme Court justice would you CTyankee Apr 2014 #76
Answers: Yes. No. Eleanors38 Apr 2014 #77
Do you support the Heller decision? CTyankee Apr 2014 #78
Yes. And the McDonald one as well. Eleanors38 Apr 2014 #79
the Court members you support on these cases were there because of Republican presidents. CTyankee Apr 2014 #80
I've been voting Democratic since I was eligible, some 45 yrs. Eleanors38 Apr 2014 #81
Well, shoot pinboy3niner Apr 2014 #82
I have a veritable magazine of activism. Eleanors38 Apr 2014 #88
oh, c'mon, don't even try that tactic...it's too obvious... CTyankee Apr 2014 #83
Jeez, I supported Obama's guns-4-all policy, guess I can back Lizzy. Eleanors38 Apr 2014 #84
It's nice to hear you get out of the gungeon on occasion... CTyankee Apr 2014 #86
Your constructing a narrative, and you won't be dissuaded. Eleanors38 Apr 2014 #87
oh, good lord...it's been ages since my first demonstration but it was against the Vietnam War. CTyankee Apr 2014 #89
I'm so sorry your family had such a tragedy. I suppose Eleanors38 Apr 2014 #91
I do wonder some times about how it was we could get so far on LGBT and go backwards CTyankee Apr 2014 #92
I do not support him Samantha Apr 2014 #73
It's pretty bizarre. JoeyT Apr 2014 #27
I made this same point to a Bundy supporter yesterday. plantwomyn Apr 2014 #55
As they should have. SWAT teams sure don't have problems killing a 90 year old on a false warrant Hestia Apr 2014 #48
I'm failing to understand your response ... 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2014 #53
I'm glad the President decided leftynyc Apr 2014 #90
there is some crap about how they want to give the land to china JI7 Apr 2014 #60
LOL ... 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2014 #61
Even infowars backed off the bogus Chinese claim, lol pinboy3niner Apr 2014 #63
I heard the Federal Government ... 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2014 #64
They really should stop giving us ideas pinboy3niner Apr 2014 #65
It's not been kept particularly quiet. Crunchy Frog Apr 2014 #67
So the government should be fearful of all of us. Puzzledtraveller Apr 2014 #29
RHIP seabeckind Apr 2014 #7
I agree Entheory Apr 2014 #56
Same deal. "Special rights." Enthusiast Apr 2014 #68
Just wondering if the government is afraid of another Waco? n/t TxGrandpa Apr 2014 #11
Sad... seabeckind Apr 2014 #16
Your parallel is inaccurate. JayhawkSD Apr 2014 #19
Disagree... seabeckind Apr 2014 #23
I don't see where your difference is with me. JayhawkSD Apr 2014 #33
Differences. seabeckind Apr 2014 #36
And non-differences. JayhawkSD Apr 2014 #69
Here is a point that was brought up in an article (from NM paper?) Hestia Apr 2014 #50
When a state joins the union it must cede seabeckind Apr 2014 #54
Has your daughter tried speaking with legal counsel? siligut Apr 2014 #13
Most of the jobs she applies for require security clearance even though it is not a direct gov. job. kelliekat44 Apr 2014 #24
Right, like she has been blacklisted. siligut Apr 2014 #25
i'm sure is he had that sort of assets, they would be long gone. mopinko Apr 2014 #14
"personal" perhaps . . . but I would bet there are MANY who agree with you 100% DrDan Apr 2014 #15
They encourage this guy to rip off the government... LTR Apr 2014 #17
Mr. Bundy is about to feel the pain of the power of the US government. lonestarnot Apr 2014 #21
Is that something you would like to see? Puzzledtraveller Apr 2014 #30
I, for one, say ... 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2014 #31
+1000 JustAnotherGen Apr 2014 #37
+++++++++++++ BlancheSplanchnik Apr 2014 #39
Hmmm...let me think... progressoid Apr 2014 #51
Traveling puzzled? lonestarnot Apr 2014 #74
This message was self-deleted by its author Autumn Apr 2014 #22
She might want to consider moving, if possible. jeff47 Apr 2014 #32
She can't afford to move away from me right now. Childcare issues...job hunting, temp work, rent... kelliekat44 Apr 2014 #62
good question...heartbreaking, infuriating. I hope you'll share this BlancheSplanchnik Apr 2014 #38
Credit scores are nothing but JEB Apr 2014 #40
Excellent use of an authentic experience to make this very real emsimon33 Apr 2014 #41
Seems a better idea than surrounding the place with guns. Kablooie Apr 2014 #42
Perhaps the IRS can take care of this. I'm sure this guy will pay. The other ranchers who do pay ancianita Apr 2014 #43
He HAD his day in court and LOST. Spitfire of ATJ Apr 2014 #46
Message auto-removed Name removed Apr 2014 #59
i agree, but i hope the piece of shit is forced to pay soon and ends up in prison JI7 Apr 2014 #57
Unknown. But it sure does stink. blkmusclmachine Apr 2014 #70
Indeed quakerboy Apr 2014 #71
Sorry for the hell your daughter is going through! Jasana Apr 2014 #72

druidity33

(6,435 posts)
1. A really excellent question...
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 07:35 AM
Apr 2014
Why can't they garnish his bank accounts and assets like they do the rest of us?

Can we ask someone that? Who has that "garnishing" power? IRS, BLM, DOJ, etc? (i garnish all the time, but i'm a cook...)

K&R

Cryptoad

(8,254 posts)
44. it went
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 02:31 PM
Apr 2014

to court and the court judged that the Tea Party Thug's cattle could be rounded up and sold for his debt. That is what the BLM was doing. It aint over,,,,,,,,

 

Hestia

(3,818 posts)
47. and bring out the swat teams like they do when a sheriff serves a civil warrant
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 03:06 PM
Apr 2014

supposedly the BLM were scared off. Of what? The yahoo's son reported "snipers in the hills" - if so, why did the BLM back down? They aren't scared of killing us when a situation escalates, why do tea baggers get a free pass?

If I thought a different way, one would almost think this tax dodger is getting cover from someone in the BLM. If looks like a duck...

kydo

(2,679 posts)
2. At the very least this tax evader/criminal bundy
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 07:57 AM
Apr 2014

Should have had all gov'ment assistance checks ceased (get that bagger of the gov'ment teat, frigging welfare queen) and all is bank accounts and credit frozen until this thief pays the US tax payers back the million he owes. If he has to declare bankruptcy and his property is foreclosed during the process, oh well, welcome to the real world mr bundy. You know the one the 99% reside. And in this world, the real one, it won't be The Honorable Senator Harry Reid with solar farms buying your land. It will be mr bundy's rich 1%er pals the Koch brothers buying for dirt cheap so they can rip it to shreds digging for oil/gas and precious metals.

I'm sorry about your daughter, this should never be happening to her.

beemer27

(457 posts)
3. Unfairness
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 07:58 AM
Apr 2014

We hear stories of people who owe large amounts in taxes "negotiating" a settlement with the government, but never hear about the little guy who owes a small amount getting any breaks at all. The little guy can not afford to hire a retired judge or one-time IRS official to represent him in his dealings with the government. Bundy paid no fees for 20 years, and will end up with a slap on the wrist. The best that we can hope for is that the so-called militias that have rallied to support him will soon lose interest and leave. Perhaps that is what the authorities are waiting for. If this guy gets away with ignoring the law, every other person in his situation will try the same thing. The only good thing to come out of this affair is that it will make more people revise their opinions of "public"grazing, and how our public lands are used by private interests.

Buns_of_Fire

(17,119 posts)
66. It's like that old saying, "If you owe the bank $5000, you have a problem...
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 06:48 PM
Apr 2014

"...if you owe the bank $5,000,000, they have a problem."

treestar

(82,383 posts)
4. I'm sure they can
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 08:00 AM
Apr 2014

But the legal system works slowly. And if they are rich enough to afford lawyers, they can keep appealing a case to the higher level, and at each step it will take a long time.

I feel for your daughter. She's dealing with a tough job market, in a good one those things wouldn't matter as they'd need the worker. It is ironic how the right will tell the poor to get a job yet make it harder to get one if you have scars of being poor. Right wingers refuse to see your daughter's bad luck and insist on seeing only imagined harm to themselves - what's the worst that could happen to them, having to garnish her wages for some creditor?

tridim

(45,358 posts)
5. I'm pretty sure they'll put a lien on his property
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 08:03 AM
Apr 2014

Which he will refuse to pay because he think his guns give him the right to do whatever he wants.

Regardless, it isn't over.

Jerry442

(1,265 posts)
18. He might refuse to pay the lien...
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 10:04 AM
Apr 2014

...but good luck doing business when no one will extend credit, any money in a bank will be seized, and no one will buy the cattle because they have a lien on them.

snappyturtle

(14,656 posts)
26. I don't think the lien strategy would work. The lien would be on his real property
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 11:29 AM
Apr 2014

160 acres. It would remained attached to the property until the property is sold, is my understanding. I have gone to the CLark County website and looked up property owners in the county. Lots of Bundy names show up but not Cliven. (???)

I also read that back in the early 90's Bundy lost his leasing rights and they were bought by Clark County for $375,000. It wasn't clear that that amount didn't also include other ranchers leases who had to quit ranching due to the environmental restrictions.

One thing is for certain, it's a big mess.

edit: Supposedly Bundy would pay the county for grazing....that makes more sense if Clark County in fact bought the leases from the BLM....again

 

TRoN33

(769 posts)
6. Looks like our own government is far more fearful of...
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 08:11 AM
Apr 2014

Tea Party and neocon movement than they are of Liberals, Progressives, and others. It's sheer display of double standard because if a liberal rancher and his liberal militia are doing what Bundy did, conservative would be losing their minds. Tea party continue to reverend themselves as a patriots. Horseshit.

seabeckind

(1,957 posts)
8. Ain't no liberals who would fit.
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 08:16 AM
Apr 2014

The 2 paths would have diverged long, long before.

Even if the man had a liberal offspring, that offspring would have off sprung as soon as he could afford a bus ticket.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
9. You don't believe that the Federal government ...
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 08:24 AM
Apr 2014

is afraid of the tea party or the neo con movement do you?

It's sheer display of double standard because if a liberal rancher and his liberal militia are doing what Bundy did, conservative would be losing their minds.


As quiet as it's kept, Bundy's actions has/had plenty of unvoiced support on this board. So yes, the right would freak out if there were a militia of the left (if there were such an animal) doing this; but that freak out would pale in comparison to the freak out from the left, if the BLM had stood up to Bundy and his merry band.

CTyankee

(63,768 posts)
10. I have the same suspicion you have about supporters of Bundy on this board.
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 08:29 AM
Apr 2014

I'd like to see them be honest about their convictions in this instance. I don't think they will because that would take courage on their part and I just don't think they're up to it...

siligut

(12,272 posts)
12. I want to know how many of the Bundy supporters here are Mormons
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 08:47 AM
Apr 2014

The unmitigated support from other LDS members is part of the deal you get when you sell your soul.

CTyankee

(63,768 posts)
34. and there clearly is a movement to hijack Progressivism by the gun activists...
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 12:18 PM
Apr 2014

sometimes I wonder if this is by a plan of the RW (posing as civil libertarians of course) or by true believers who want to convert us old time liberals to the "cause" of "gun freedom." Either way, I also wonder why they don't realize how transparent they are. They keep it up with their tired old arguments that we have rebutted successfully many times, but they still offer the same ones over and over again. They don't even try to "freshen up"their arguments...it's just the same old, same old...

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
35. As the ever optimist ...
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 12:33 PM
Apr 2014

I believe it's the latter. While I believe there are rwingers posing as civil libertarians here, I believe that the majority of these are "true believing" civil libertarians with gun freedom being consistent with their main concern as libertarians, personal freedom.

CTyankee

(63,768 posts)
45. I have asked them "why are you here?" and some seem to be hurt by that question!
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 02:31 PM
Apr 2014

I asked one to please not be so thin-skinned about it, because I really wanted to know why he would subject himself to getting heaped with ridicule by progressives who believe in sensible gun laws. Hopefully, with folks like us driving the message to them over and over again, they will get the message and go back to the shooting range to comfort themselves or go look at gun porn...

 

Eleanors38

(18,318 posts)
49. And he-e--e-r-r-e come the gunz. Again...
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 03:20 PM
Apr 2014

I'm as liberal as the next one on DU and I think Bundy is full of it as well. But, another yee-hah attack on gun-owners as if we be all the same?

No one's hijacking DU for anything -- except maybe those seeking to control the ideologically-pure turnstile.

BTW, why are you here?

CTyankee

(63,768 posts)
76. If Obama gets to appoint another liberal and progressive Supreme Court justice would you
Wed Apr 16, 2014, 03:42 PM
Apr 2014

support a SCOTUS reversal of Heller?

CTyankee

(63,768 posts)
80. the Court members you support on these cases were there because of Republican presidents.
Wed Apr 16, 2014, 04:39 PM
Apr 2014

These SCOTUS members have also tried to decimate the Civil Rights Act and women's reproductive rights, in addition to their pro-gun decisions. These cases were fundamental to the liberal/progressive agenda. It is hard for me to believe that a person calling themselves "liberal and progressive" could in the same breath support this SC.

Given the possibility that a Democrat, such as Hillary Clinton, could be our next President and therefore capable of appointing several Supreme Court justices in her term(s) in office, why would you even CONSIDER voting Democratic in 2016 and possibly 2020?

 

Eleanors38

(18,318 posts)
81. I've been voting Democratic since I was eligible, some 45 yrs.
Wed Apr 16, 2014, 11:18 PM
Apr 2014

I don't get your logic. The SCOTUS has made crap decisions, but manage to get a few right; same as it ever was. Once they get appointed, you don't have much say in what they do. Fortunately, they upheld the ACA, and unfortunately they upheld the ability of government to take private prop. for private gain, courtesy of Justice Breyer's butt-headed efforts.

Frankly, I prefer Elizabeth Warren, but you may be more centrist than I.

CTyankee

(63,768 posts)
83. oh, c'mon, don't even try that tactic...it's too obvious...
Thu Apr 17, 2014, 03:49 AM
Apr 2014

honestly, I have to laugh...you guys can't even avoid stepping in it, can you?

If you support Warren, then you support her ideas of gun safety laws, which, in case you haven't been paying attention, are quite different from yours.

You are fooling no one. snicker...

CTyankee

(63,768 posts)
86. It's nice to hear you get out of the gungeon on occasion...
Thu Apr 17, 2014, 08:35 AM
Apr 2014

but I haven't seen you in the Elizabeth Warren group that I subscribe too and get notifications about...as a matter of fact I haven't seen you in pretty much anything else but RKBA...I know it's more in your comfort zone and all that, but there's a big world out there...don't be shy...share with us all your leftie ideas...we're dying to hear them...

edit to add this http://www.democraticunderground.com/12626261

in case you missed it!

 

Eleanors38

(18,318 posts)
87. Your constructing a narrative, and you won't be dissuaded.
Thu Apr 17, 2014, 09:06 AM
Apr 2014

Nothing new. I can't help but notice some if the antis have as their "favorite" group the...

Gungeon.

Hope your contributing real $$$ to your favorite candidate(s). I do. Go Wendy. Go van de Putte.

BTW, What was your first demonstration where you participated? I was discussing this with some activists the other day. Mine was a Chavez farm workers demo supporting the union ('67). My latest was Occupy Austin. We really need a leader to get the ball rolling as in Raleigh, NC. I understand they have had several thousand participating in regular events. I believe the min. wage issue and the student loan debts are future flashpoints for a new progressive movement.

One of the many issues I have commented on.

CTyankee

(63,768 posts)
89. oh, good lord...it's been ages since my first demonstration but it was against the Vietnam War.
Thu Apr 17, 2014, 09:42 AM
Apr 2014

I had a young son and was terrified about constant war making so I joined Another Mother for Peace and did my own thing locally (which got me into some hot water with the Cub Scouts where I was a den mother). I went to work for an organization called Clergy and Laity Concerned, a multi-denominational religious group that included leaders such as William Sloan Coffin, Jr. and Rabbi Abraham Heschel. They are now both dead, unfortunately...great leaders...

I went to work for the ACLU in NYC as Aryeh Neier's assistant . Ruth Bader Ginsburg was General Counsel to the Women's Rights office of the organization at that time and I met her briefly. Moved to D.C. and worked for the ACLU Legislative office there. My boss was John H.F. Shattuck who would go on to be Ambassador to the Czech Republic in the Clinton Admin. (he was a classmate of Bill's at Yale Law...of course, when I worked for him nobody knew about Bill Clinton!). Also, while in D.C. The Hyde Amendment was a very hot issue during this time as was the ERA. I went then to the League of Women Voters in the membership development office. It was an exciting time. The ERA ratification process was underway...I still have photos of myself dressed all in white (after the earlier suffragists did) and carrying signs (my new in-laws were not very happy, tho). It was a terrible defeat.

When I moved to New Haven I worked for a local women's clinic as a fundraiser back when clinic invasions were a regular thing. They tried but were thwarted from closing us down on one occasion. Our friends from the Yale campus organized a defense group that ringed the clinic and when the Rescue people showed up they saw they were totally outnumbered, gave up and left.

I then worked for Planned Parenthood's state office (now regional with RI) in New Haven, as a major gifts officer, retiring in 2004.

Since I was interested in working for causes, I deliberately learned everything I could about fundraising and found that there was a real demand for people who knew how to do it. A lot of it I didn't like but being skilled in it helped me get jobs for causes I believed in. It didn't make me rich, that's for sure...

Now I am an active Literacy Volunteer, specializing in tutoring Intermediate/Advanced speakers of other languages.

Edited to add: I am in this group because my niece was killed by her step-grandfather who got drunk and was angry and took out his handgun (which he kept for "protection&quot and started shooting. My brother's life was ruined. She had just been married for 4 months. The pallbearers at her funeral had been ushers at her wedding.

 

Eleanors38

(18,318 posts)
91. I'm so sorry your family had such a tragedy. I suppose
Thu Apr 17, 2014, 01:10 PM
Apr 2014

most families, including mine, have senseless tragedies.

I have been an activist in Austin and elsewhere for many years; pretty much made it my career and suffered the financial consequences for it. Now, the language and "tech" of activism I knew has dissipated or the new ones are not yet in existence. One of the many people I supported for office was one Sarah Weddington, who argued Roe v. Wade before the Supremes in '72. Here we are, losing all that good work. But at least there is enduring work in the area of LGBT rights and in the fight to end AIDS. I helped with fund-raising and equipping a hospice, and keeping a box truck used in a then-llegal needle exchange program on the road. And I helped organize 2 pot legalization demonstrations, so there's that. Currently, I work to keep under-funded public parks in good shape. Helps keep me in a little better shape, too!

Maybe we'll meet up in the streets again on the same side.

CTyankee

(63,768 posts)
92. I do wonder some times about how it was we could get so far on LGBT and go backwards
Thu Apr 17, 2014, 01:16 PM
Apr 2014

on repro rights and civil rights (e.g. voting rights). Not complaining, just wondering...any thoughts?

Samantha

(9,314 posts)
73. I do not support him
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 10:31 PM
Apr 2014

The rest of the cattlemen in the area pay their fair share, I think it is like $4.00+ per head per month for each grazing cow (which seems to me who knows nothing about these issues extremely reasonable). Bundy was offered a really great deal, something like $1.25 per head, and he refused to pay that.

I do think the government did the right thing in not allowing the showdown to become violent. That would have been a really big mistake. Why?

The really stunning show-stopper of this whole thing was when one participant bragged they would put the women and the children in front of the line so they would be the first killed.

How can anyone on this Board support people who conduct themselves in this manner?

Uncle Sam will circle the wagons and come back and address the situation again but in a manner where no one gives up their life.

Bundy does not even recognize the legitimacy of the Federal Government. Our society may not be perfect, and that certainly includes our Federal Government, but without some semblance of rules and laws, this Country would dissolve into chaos. And people like Bundy do not get to re-write the rules.

Sam

JoeyT

(6,785 posts)
27. It's pretty bizarre.
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 11:30 AM
Apr 2014

Some people that support security state programs are supporting Bundy, some that oppose them are opposing him. The daily shifting of alliances from issue to issue always fascinates me.

At the very least law enforcement needs to round up every asshole that waved or pointed a gun and charge them with felony brandishing. "Wave guns at local law enforcement and the feds? No problem! Also, no more guns." You don't need a tank battalion to do that. You just go pick them up at work or home or the IHOP or whatever. They were pretty freely giving their names because they think nothing will be done because the government is scared of them. They need to be shown they're wrong.

Edited to add: This really doesn't need a "Deal with the nuts in an armed compound" solution because it isn't a bunch of nuts in a compound that never leave. When everyone goes home, drop the fucking hammer and charge them with everything from impeding a law enforcement officer in the execution of his duties to malicious loitering. It's not like there's a lack of evidence after all that preening for the cameras.

plantwomyn

(876 posts)
55. I made this same point to a Bundy supporter yesterday.
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 04:08 PM
Apr 2014

I may be naive but the Feds may have finally figured out that waiting until these militia boys go home and take them at their leisure is a much smarter way to go. I hope all of their pictures were taken and their license place noted. Their vehicles and weapons can and should be confiscated since they were used in committing a crime. Wonder how many have outstanding warrants, unpaid child support or maybe even unpaid taxes of their own. Nail them all. I would love to see a simultaneous raid to pick up them all up. I wouldn't overlook the bloggers who participated in inciting a riot. The person who kicked the dog should just be drawn and quartered.

 

Hestia

(3,818 posts)
48. As they should have. SWAT teams sure don't have problems killing a 90 year old on a false warrant
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 03:17 PM
Apr 2014

but somehow ALWAYS SIMPLY ALWAYS tea baggers are given free rein in this country, on all levels large and small. It seems the incident this weekend proves it. Now their side is braying at the top of lungs that they WON they WON against the government.

I am not a gun person living in a gun rights states but you know, I kinda do hope there is a Left Militia cause after reading the absolute crimes that tea baggers and their cover minions - up to and including Obama - are getting away with, all with tacit understanding - strap a gun on and you automatically win every argument.

Evidently a lot of us don't have the password and secret handshake and I ain't buying a gun to get this info.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
53. I'm failing to understand your response ...
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 03:42 PM
Apr 2014
SWAT teams sure don't have problems killing a 90 year old on a false warrant but somehow ALWAYS SIMPLY ALWAYS tea baggers are given free rein in this country, on all levels large and small.


"As they should have." Who is "they?" ... and what should they do/have done?

Are you suggesting that the left should (should not) be up in arms if the BLM had shot up Bundy and his merry crew because SWAT teams have errantly kills 90 yr olds; but not (as frequently) right-wingers?

Now their side is braying at the top of lungs that they WON they WON against the government.


Who cares about their braying ... It is unwise, and ill-considered, to base life and death decisions on one's ego, or one's dislike of President Obama (cover minions - up to and including Obama ... Really?!?

 

leftynyc

(26,060 posts)
90. I'm glad the President decided
Thu Apr 17, 2014, 10:00 AM
Apr 2014

not to make martyrs out of these clowns. They wanted a Branch Dividian clusterfuck and the President didn't oblige them. Good for him.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
61. LOL ...
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 06:02 PM
Apr 2014

the conspiracy-King, glenn "70 Degrees of Black-board Separation" beck didn't even buy that ... must have been hot off of infowars.

pinboy3niner

(53,339 posts)
63. Even infowars backed off the bogus Chinese claim, lol
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 06:08 PM
Apr 2014

Too many people know that not only was the Chinese proposal canceled 10 months ago, it was to be located on Clark County (not federal) land 180 miles away from Bundy's ranch on the other side of Las Vegas.

Now they're trying to make the same claims about a tribal energy project and about Harry Reid having desires for unspecified future energy projects in the state. Same scandal-mongering, they just moved the goalposts.

seabeckind

(1,957 posts)
7. RHIP
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 08:13 AM
Apr 2014

From what I've seen...rich rancher.

Buddies with the entrenched gop -- sheriff on speed dial.

Brainwashed commoners who are thrilled to get a job shovelling out the barn.

When needed, they hide behind state' rights, when needed they hide behind federal rights.

Need a parallel?

Plantation owner in the deep south.

Enthusiast

(50,983 posts)
68. Same deal. "Special rights."
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 07:53 PM
Apr 2014

The righties always accuse gays and minorities as wanting special rights, which is untrue. But these connected assholes do have special rights.

seabeckind

(1,957 posts)
16. Sad...
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 09:06 AM
Apr 2014

At some point this battle will have to be fought again. The whole state's rights business has gotten totally out of hand. Not just for this issue but voting, workers' rights, health insurance, banking, etc.

Laws apply to everyone or they apply to no one.

As far as a fear of Waco? No, I don't think so. There was no fear to break up the occupy camps. Waco is the battle cry of the supremacists and pretty much moot in the general populace.

I think there are entrenched forces within our gov't that are in favor of many of these mini-rebellions or at least turning a blind eye to them.

I'm sure if these were students at Berkeley or Kent State they would have been staring at national guard uniforms. When George Wallace was rebelling against federal law, he was facing a totally different attitude.

Where's Holder?

 

JayhawkSD

(3,163 posts)
19. Your parallel is inaccurate.
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 10:13 AM
Apr 2014
"As far as a fear of Waco? No, I don't think so. There was no fear to break up the occupy camps."

The occupy camps were not armed, and there was no reason to suspect that anyone in them was suicidal. Events proved those assumptions entirely correct. These dudes in Nevada were armed and were proclaiming at the tops of their lungs their readiness to "die for the cause." Yes, they were afraid of another Waco. They withdrew on orders from higher up specifically to assure that there would not be another Waco.

seabeckind

(1,957 posts)
23. Disagree...
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 10:40 AM
Apr 2014

None of the things you point out were involved in the occupy confrontation. In fact, the confrontation was NOT between the federal gov't and the occupy, it was between the local establishment and the occupy. Totally different rules were in play.

Our federal gov't did not get involved in the controversy for the exact reason I pointed out -- that "there are entrenched forces within our gov't that are in favor of many of these mini-rebellions or at least turning a blind eye to them."

As I said...we have had many, many instances where states have flaunted the federal laws and ten ran and hid behind the 10th amendment. Which was total BS. That isn't what that amendment says.

The confrontation here in NV is much more like the one the USA had with Alabama during the civil rights movement.

And, as I asked, where is Holder? Forget the confrontation over the cattle, have federal marshalls arrest the rancher when he doesn't have the militia's and Beck to hide behind. If the local sheriff gets in the way, arrest him also.

If the laws don't apply to everyone they apply to no one.

I can understand why the fed had an excuse to not intervene in the occupy confrontation since the occupy was trespassing, but why not with the voting? Why not with the workers' rights...

 

JayhawkSD

(3,163 posts)
33. I don't see where your difference is with me.
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 12:17 PM
Apr 2014

Were the occupy groups armed? Were they vocally willing to die for their cause?

Whether it was local or federal police disbanding them is not really the point. I was responding to someone whi said that the feds did not invoke armed confrontation in Nevada, but that they had done so with occupy. I pointed out that the situations were different. Where was I wrong? How were the situations the same?

It had reached the point where shooting was about to start and people were about to die, and cooler heads prevailed. It was realized that private cattle on public land was not worth killing people over; that people dying for such a trivial reason would spark a public outrage that would be very much like the outrage which foillowed Waco.

If "the entrenced forces within the government" were in favor of private parties using government property without payment, why did they invoke the confrointation to begin with? If they did not know it was being invoked, why did they allow it to escalate to the point that it did?

"Forget the confrontation over the cattle, have federal marshalls arrest the rancher..."
The alledged misuse of land was not an arrestable offense. Holder can't just waltz in nand arrest anyone whose actions he doesn't like. We have not yet become a police state.

"I can understand why the fed had an excuse to not intervene in the occupy confrontation since the occupy was trespassing, but why not with the voting? Why not with the workers' rights..."
Maybe because they were making a legal protest on public property?

seabeckind

(1,957 posts)
36. Differences.
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 12:38 PM
Apr 2014

"The alledged misuse of land was not an arrestable offense"

The violation of a federal court order is. Has nothing to do with a police state...that's the argument of the militias. BTW he's had numerous days in court. And lost. That's what precipitated all this.

"a legal protest on public property"

The occupy was not on federal property. It might have been public in some cases (NYC, I believe, was a private park). The fed had no jurisdiction.

Lastly, there wasn't that much outrage over Waco except in the right wing echo chamber. They already hated Reno and, just like today with Obama, the echo chamber is ready to crucify for any perceived offense. I believe that once you left the "p"outrage, the issue was collateral damage, that innocents were killed. That the confrontation should have been resolved without hurting the innocents. But that was never to be. There was only one outcome because just like in this case, you cannot reason with the unreasonable.

IMO Koresh was seen more as a Jim Jones. There were many, like me, who felt he was hiding behind the children and LE couldn't get at him. In fact, there was some doubt that the fire damage was a result of LE.

 

JayhawkSD

(3,163 posts)
69. And non-differences.
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 08:44 PM
Apr 2014
"The violation of a federal court order is."
Not always, and they were not there to arrest the rancher. They were there to round up cattle which were illegally present on federal land, and decided to abort an operation which was spiralling out of control.

"Has nothing to do with a police state...that's the argument of the militias."
True. They claim it is and I say it's not. Which side are you on? Apparently theirs, since you say the rancher should have been summarily arrested.

"The occupy was not on federal property. The fed had no jurisdiction."
And your point in saying that inresponse to my statement that "Whether it was local or federal police disbanding them is not really the point" is?

"Lastly, there wasn't that much outrage over Waco except in the right wing echo chamber."
Again, what is your point? The government decided not to stir up outrage. Whether it was outrage in the Democratic Party or in what you call the "right wing echo chamber" is relevant how? Why is that necessarily a bad decision? To cause loss of life and agitation in a small but vocal subgroup would serve what purpose? I regard it as a sensible decision.

It seems, in fact, that not shooting a bunch of them dead has caused considerable outrage in the left wing echo chamber. You seem to think that Waco was a laudable event caused not by the feds but by the right wing subversives who died in the event; some sort of self glorifying suicide by cop.

 

Hestia

(3,818 posts)
50. Here is a point that was brought up in an article (from NM paper?)
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 03:22 PM
Apr 2014

After the Civil War, the US has citizens; states have residents. This is where the US gets its sovereignty from (?).

Is this true? I've tried to use the google on searching this but I am not that great at it.

seabeckind

(1,957 posts)
54. When a state joins the union it must cede
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 03:59 PM
Apr 2014

some sovereign powers to the central gov't. I can't remember the term...I read it some time ago but have since forgotten the source. These powers include the right to an army, denial of citizens rights guaranteed by the fed, etc. I'm sure one of our brethren here will know.

According to wiki:

"A state of the United States is one of the 50 constituent political entities that shares its sovereignty with the United States federal government. Because of the shared sovereignty between each U.S. state and the U.S. federal government, an American is a citizen of both the federal republic and of his or her state of domicile. State citizenship and residency are flexible and no government approval is required to move between states, except for persons covered by certain types of court orders (e.g., paroled convicts and children of divorced spouses who are sharing custody)."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._state

The problem I have with the states rights business is that there are corporate entities today that have more power than many of the states and they play our states against each other. Ie, race to the bottom, beggar thy neighbor, etc. Add in their push for deregulation and we are in a position that hurts our people.

For example, credit card laws. The SCOTUS in the late 80's (?) said that it was ok for a corp to apply rules based on their hq location. Next thing we know every credit card corp wanted to be hqed in SD (where there aren't many regs) until NJ started under-regging them.

Time to evaluate our interests on a federal level. A polluted watershed affects a lot more than a single state and a corporation is now big enough to affect that much more.

siligut

(12,272 posts)
13. Has your daughter tried speaking with legal counsel?
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 08:52 AM
Apr 2014

There are free legal clinics in most cities, job discrimination due to tax debt doesn't seem right.

 

kelliekat44

(7,759 posts)
24. Most of the jobs she applies for require security clearance even though it is not a direct gov. job.
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 10:52 AM
Apr 2014

You would be surprised how many jobs out here are labeled "private sector" but are really contractors with huge Federal contracts. Taxes affect the "public trust" issue that is used against those who owe the government. She does take odd jobs that require no clearance but they pay minimum wage and a little more. She will never get out of the Federal debt like that. She taking all sorts of training that is free when she can to prepare for different jobs. But the idea that credit ratings can hurt your job chances irks me. I think it is something that employers can hold against you but don't have to so it become a back door way to discriminate.

siligut

(12,272 posts)
25. Right, like she has been blacklisted.
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 11:08 AM
Apr 2014

It might help to also speak with a career counselor, maybe she can shift into an area that isn't so authoritarian.

mopinko

(69,803 posts)
14. i'm sure is he had that sort of assets, they would be long gone.
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 08:55 AM
Apr 2014

i would be surprised to hear he trusted banks.
they dont come after your cattle if you have the cash in the bank

DrDan

(20,411 posts)
15. "personal" perhaps . . . but I would bet there are MANY who agree with you 100%
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 08:59 AM
Apr 2014

backing down to a bully is NOT a good move

LTR

(13,227 posts)
17. They encourage this guy to rip off the government...
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 09:54 AM
Apr 2014

...and freak out when someone buys a candy bar with a SNAP card.

 

lonestarnot

(77,097 posts)
21. Mr. Bundy is about to feel the pain of the power of the US government.
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 10:37 AM
Apr 2014

I'll bet that we see him jailed and broke soon.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
31. I, for one, say ...
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 12:06 PM
Apr 2014

Yes (though I wish no one jail).

Bundy is no more a sympathetic figure than the bankers everyone wants jailed ... less so, as he threatened violence to pursue his continued law breaking.

And far, far, far less a sympathetic figure than the OP writer's daughter.

BlancheSplanchnik

(20,219 posts)
39. +++++++++++++
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 12:49 PM
Apr 2014

You nailed it again, 1.

This kind of lawbreaker absolutely deserves jail and massive fines. And a change in the tax system.

Response to kelliekat44 (Original post)

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
32. She might want to consider moving, if possible.
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 12:16 PM
Apr 2014

Yes, the situation is terrible.

But moving may be the shortest path to improving her situation. Moving to a "tech hub" city should make it easier to find work, regardless of the security clearance. Such as San Jose, Austin or Raleigh.

Last year I was trying to move closer to family in Colorado, and only found about 10 "tech" job listings per day in the entire state. Raleigh (close to other family) had more than 100 per day.

Though that would require having enough money to actually move, so it may be a non-starter.

 

kelliekat44

(7,759 posts)
62. She can't afford to move away from me right now. Childcare issues...job hunting, temp work, rent...
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 06:07 PM
Apr 2014

We look on the brighter side, though. She said at this time she gets to spend more time with her girls at school functions, activities, homework...etc. When she was working it was tough working 12 hours/day, especially after her husband died.

BlancheSplanchnik

(20,219 posts)
38. good question...heartbreaking, infuriating. I hope you'll share this
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 12:46 PM
Apr 2014

Maybe a few LTTE's and on social media...... anything you can think of.

This is what people need to understand. This exemplifies the sickness we are all living with, but which is hidden because of puke media and short attention spans, among other things.


I'm serious....maybe naive, but I really think this story needs to be told widely.

 

JEB

(4,748 posts)
40. Credit scores are nothing but
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 01:19 PM
Apr 2014

corporate citizen ratings. Fuck all credit score keepers. They are designed to exclude people. I CHOOSE not to participate.

emsimon33

(3,128 posts)
41. Excellent use of an authentic experience to make this very real
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 01:41 PM
Apr 2014

Thank you and I am so sorry about your daughter!

Kablooie

(18,571 posts)
42. Seems a better idea than surrounding the place with guns.
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 02:10 PM
Apr 2014

We do that with foreign countries.
Why not with criminal citizens?

ancianita

(35,812 posts)
43. Perhaps the IRS can take care of this. I'm sure this guy will pay. The other ranchers who do pay
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 02:30 PM
Apr 2014

feel the same way you do.

Response to Spitfire of ATJ (Reply #46)

quakerboy

(13,901 posts)
71. Indeed
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 09:14 PM
Apr 2014

Some parts make sense. They didnt want a shoot out, so they backed off and stopped collecting cattle. I'm not quite getting why they released the ones they had already, but thats less important than why its taken them 20 years to do anything about something that seems so cut and Dried. Garnish, lein, deal with this in a court of law.

It seems like the most obvious answer is to turn the whole situation in a new direction

They owe money. Put a lien on the property. If it doesn't get paid up, foreclose. Sell it to a bank or big agro of some sort. Let the bank deal with the eviction. Let the militias and the corporations fight it out.

Jasana

(490 posts)
72. Sorry for the hell your daughter is going through!
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 09:48 PM
Apr 2014

I have an idea of how she feels but my slow slide down the ladder was due to disability. It is horridly distressing no matter what the cause. I don't blame you for being pissed. This nonsense has been going on with guy some 21 years. He should be in jail!

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Here is what is really bo...