gov improving their skills at euthanizing bovine herds.

towermonkey wrote: I think people are being fed a bunch of talking points that drive a wedge between us for the simple reason that it keeps them from noticing what is really going on. Yeah, we all have differing points of view, but I think we could all agree that congress passing laws that only benefit a particular lobbyist is wrong, so it is easier to keep us looking the other way. This is child's play to them any more because Americans eat it up with such fervor. But that's just my wacked out world view. By all means everyone, continue to cut each other to pieces.

tm, I agree with your post. I have no problem voting out members of the political class, r or d.

I have no problem working with anyone who is concerned with big brother. I do not care if they are occupy or teaparty. I see a lot of congruences but it seems to escape them.

What do people believe? Does anyone care for either of these alternatives? Who likes Obama's America, RomneY's, Paul's?

What do you support TM? It is easy to rail against everyone. I do it, you do it. What should we be doing?


http://www.thecitrusreport.com/2011/hea ... nd-orwell/

Voting for candidates that support the Constitution and limited government, not the ever increasing government and stolen powers.

HEARTLESS wrote: Voting for candidates that support the Constitution and limited government, not the ever increasing government and stolen powers.

As long as they have an actual voting record to prove it. Talk is cheap.

BlazerBob wrote:

towermonkey wrote: I think people are being fed a bunch of talking points that drive a wedge between us for the simple reason that it keeps them from noticing what is really going on. Yeah, we all have differing points of view, but I think we could all agree that congress passing laws that only benefit a particular lobbyist is wrong, so it is easier to keep us looking the other way. This is child's play to them any more because Americans eat it up with such fervor. But that's just my wacked out world view. By all means everyone, continue to cut each other to pieces.

tm, I agree with your post. I have no problem voting out members of the political class, r or d.

I have no problem working with anyone who is concerned with big brother. I do not care if they are occupy or teaparty. I see a lot of congruences but it seems to escape them.

What do people believe? Does anyone care for either of these alternatives? Who likes Obama's America, RomneY's, Paul's?

What do you support TM? It is easy to rail against everyone. I do it, you do it. What should we be doing?


http://www.thecitrusreport.com/2011/hea ... nd-orwell/

I support the rancher's right to pay his damned bill then be left alone. He doesn't have the right to graze federal land without payment. I also think the BLM and Harry Reid overstepped their authority to deal with a purely financial situation and showed the government's strong arm off when they really didn't have to. Bundy should now have to right to sue the government for the lost cattle and also for the "Domestic Terrorists" comment as defamation of character. Both parties here were in the wrong, but the government's wrong was much greater.

I am glad to see that not everyone believes in the whole R vs D narrative that seems to be pervading every discussion. It is really easier to look at this from the point of view that every person that posts here has the betterment of our society as a goal. The differences are only about how.

Yes. Does BLM really need a SWAT team? Just garnish the rancher's taxes and any sales he makes.

Do any of these. Railroad Retirement Board, say what? Dept. of Agriculture I can understand. One never knows when the vegetables will rise up and start eating us. That could be worse than Zombie Apocalypse.

This should be the stuff of Saturday Night Live or the Onion.

FredHayek wrote: Yes. Does BLM really need a SWAT team? Just garnish the rancher's taxes and any sales he makes.

"They shouldn’t have been. Dozens of federal agencies now have Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) teams to further an expanding definition of their missions. It’s not controversial that the Secret Service and the Bureau of Prisons have them. But what about the Department of Agriculture, the Railroad Retirement Board, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Office of Personnel Management, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? All of these have their own SWAT units and are part of a worrying trend towards the militarization of federal agencies — not to mention local police forces."...

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/3 ... -john-fund

LOL, I'd rather take a chance on a new unproven candidate than keep re-electing the entrenched liars.

HEARTLESS wrote: LOL, I'd rather take a chance on a new unproven candidate than keep re-electing the entrenched liars.

Good point. If you have a representative that keeps his campaign promises and you like him, keep him in, too often it seems like that the candidate follows the party line instead of the people he/she represents.
Constantly bringing fresh blood in might help shake up DC. Make them realize who does the hiring and firing.

FredHayek wrote: Yes. Does BLM really need a SWAT team? Just garnish the rancher's taxes and any sales he makes.

Does the IRS?
you should see what they do to citizens that is never reported on the media.

The situation with Bundy would have never even been seen if it weren't for Private citizens exposing goverment BS.
Yes both are to blame.

IRS, the same way. They can easily garnish anyone they want to and make their lives a living hell, why do they need machine guns and body armor.