patrick.net

Aw, something near & dear to me. You see, I know the Bundys. That's a huge family in my neck of the woods.

Mr Bundy's "supporters" showed up with guns, ready to shoot. They're continuing to provide "security" for the Bundys, even though the govt has no snipers in the hills. But hey, if it keeps them in the news, so be it. They've bought into the drama, but they also got the BLM to release Mr. Bundy's cattle.

The BLM has been telling Mr. Bundy to remove his cattle from the range for 20 years in order to preserve the hallowed hunting grounds of the desert tortoise.

Mr. Bundy hasn't paid his grazing fees for 20 years, so says the BLM. However, the BLM probably isn't willing to accept the payments if he had attempted to make them. The BLM is also attempting to cut the grazing rights of many ranchers in the west:

http://www.thespectrum.com/article/20140414/NEWS01/304140032/Ranchers-loss-cattle-would-hit-county

It's not all cut & dried out here on the range, where there are few structures and ranchers have grazed their cattle for over 100 years.

An example of the definition of "few structures:" A few years ago, it seemed like the whole state of Utah was on fire. The fire blazed through 363,052 acres and burned two structures. Yep - two.

My point is that this seems like such a simple issue for both sides - but the truth is different. The west is being declared off limits by the federal government (they say because of the drought) in an attempt to "manage" the range. The small cattlemen, none of whom are wealthy, are being pushed out of an area that is so rugged there are no homes for miles in any direction. Ranchers help the wildlife - they provide watering stations for their cattle that are also used by local wildlife.

Please remember that the herd of which we are speaking is spread over many miles, so much so that the BLM hired helicopters & planes to help round up the animals.

By the way, Cap'n. You love to claim that libs hate guns. I've made no secret that I'm "liberal," but I also own 3 guns and intend to buy more. I like to go shooting, am pretty good at it. Come over to my house unannounced in the middle of the night and see how my aim is. :)

Mitt Romney didn't win so this is how YOUR BOY, is fucking you over just like you said Mittens would. Obama has you face down in the pillow with your face planted in the playmorman spread of Mitt Romney in his cheese cloth underwear.

You don't know if Obama is cumming or going.

It's the fault of the roman dogs and their lackeys from the biblical times. They set a precedent for this!

True moochers are 18% - http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2012/09/18/who-are-the-47/57802074/1

think it has anything to do with not selling many homes?

elliemae says

Come over to my house unannounced in the middle of the night and see how my aim is. :)

Sounds like a certain Craigslist ad.

Call it Crazy says

smaulgld says

think it has anything to do with not selling many homes?

Ya think??

Hello...... You can't sell if you don't build.
It's a horrible situation, with Buyers who lose bidding wars resorting to felonies.

Funny how the article says confidence in the west is down while all I see around here is people paying crazy amounts of money for dilapidated hovels good for nothing more than a date with a torch.

Strategist says

climbed to 47

Yippie! It climbed and the recovery is full force. Ever think of why they always go back and revise the previous month lower. Maybe, just maybe so they can claim it "Climbed". Idiots.

Call it Crazy says

smaulgld says

think it has anything to do with not selling many homes?

Ya think??

Says it all - BUT BUT there is a RECOVERY!!!

Thanks downloaded, will check it out later

I know lots of people who are living off uncle Sam and they definitely, positively voted for Obama.

When Romney said "I want to grow jobs" they all thought to themselves "Oh shit, I don't want to change things, I'm comfortable now!"

sbh must have forgotten all of the dough Obama and Chew took from taxpayers to give to the guys at Solyndra and other corporate welfare shemes, windmills with GE, etc.

Corporations and (some) people pay for our 1. war economy 2. huge govt. payroll 3. huge welfare state.

Taxes on spirits, beer, tobacco, tariffs paid for the govt.s needs from the colonies until WW1.

CaptainShuddup says

Awe the Liberals who swear they hate guns

We don't hate guns, just the assholes who use them to take innocent lives.

clambo says

Taxes on spirits, beer, tobacco, tariffs paid for the govt.s needs from the
colonies until WW1.

To think this country existed without income taxes until what 1920s?? prior to that there was a short period of income taxes to pay off debt from the civil war and then it was abolished again. Just imagine, no endless wars, no arresting millions of Americans to build the prison industrial complex and people feel the hunger in the belly and will start rioting against offshoring etc.

clambo says

When Romney said "I want to grow jobs" they all thought to themselves "Oh shit, I don't want to change things, I'm comfortable now!"

They all said they want to grow jobs. Neither one of them would.

Romney is all for wealthy not paying any taxes, Obama is all for adding more illegals to the already strained government safety net. Both would bankrupt our nation.

If they spent money on infrastructure, at least an effing fraction of what they spend blowing shit up in middle east, than we'd have a much much better economy and jobs!

clambo says

I know lots of people who are living off uncle Sam and they definitely, positively voted for Obama.

Really?

In order for you to know who they voted for, they would have to be within your social sphere - ie, someone you maintain a social relationship with. There are many numbers for the maximum number of social relationships one can maintain - Dunbar's number is generally around 150, while other studies indicate this may be as high as 231.

Even assuming your social sphere is 2x the upper estimate, out of 462 people you know, "lots" live off the government. You didn't really define how many "lots" are, nor do you define what living off the government is.

For me personally, I know one person living off the government. My cousin who has been institutionalized for psychological issues several times - receives disability from the government. So for me, out of 462 people, I know 1, who is legitimately clinically crazy.

Then again I don't count senior citizens collecting social security as living off the government.

Anyway, I mention all of this to ask a question: I am as liberal as they get, and there is exactly 1 person in my social sphere that is living on government welfare. A very large majority of my social sphere is center right to far left. You are a conservative, and you know "lots" on government welfare, who in the hell do you socialize with? It is very unusual for you to be a conservative that socializes with a high percentage of Obama voters, actually.

Or you could just be making the whole thing up.. My guess, much like your hero Paul Ryan, you are making it up.

Dan8267 says

CaptainShuddup says

Awe the Liberals who swear they hate guns

We don't hate guns, just the assholes who use them to take innocent lives.

I appreciate guns for their engineering alone!

control point says

Really?

In order for you to know who they voted for, they would have to be within
your social sphere

Not necessarily. I can introduce you to a BUNCH of people who lived in the apartment complex that I use to live in. That complex was 90% black, and of those (and I'm talking over 200 people) I'd be willing to wager you that over 85% of them voted for Obama. I would also be willing to wager that at least 40% of them were recieving some type of public assistance from food stamps to full-blown welfare. It really doesn't take much investigative work to figure some things out. Just watch and listen and you'll get a pretty darn good idea.

"Use Women as Human Shields"

That's because the gov can't tell the difference between chattels and cattles, heifers and hefters.

Besides, it's a cheap divorce.

I don't make anything up.

Fortwayne is wrong, Romney knew more about how to grow the economy and he said he would specifically not lower taxes on the rich, he often said that the rich were doing fine and they didn't need help.

For you and others, wealth is derived from 1. production 2. innovation . Innovation frequently increases productivity.

Capital for investment is savings of excesss production that is not taxed.

There is nothing wrong with building and improving infrastructure, but this is not actual production nor does it produce excess capital.

The reason Microsoft, Apple, Google, HP, eBay, Ford, Oracle others are here is that in the U.S.A. you can actually keep a portion of your property and the founders can get rich.

Control Point, I live in Santa Cruz and you evidently don't know who lives here.

Believe it or not, I also have resided in Mexico and am bilingual, so I also know many illegal aliens from Mexico who claimed the earned income credit using ITINs to file and got tons of money.

mmmarvel says

Not necessarily. I can introduce you to a BUNCH of people who lived in the apartment complex that I use to live in. That complex was 90% black,

....

This is making an assumption. You may be directionally correct, you may be mostly correct, you may even be completely correct. However, just because your assumption is correct does not mean you know.

Assumption is not knowing. It is a guess, some better than others. Assumptions are biased on bias - that bias is either founded or unfounded.

What you are both doing here is going with the assumption that all people who are black are poor; all people who are poor are on government assistance; all people who are on government assistance don't want a job; and all people who don't want a job vote democrat.

Black people voted for the black guy the last 2 elections? The hell you say. To go from there to assuming a democrat/lazy government parasite correlation is a stretch.

First of all, lazy government parasites don't vote.

And second of all, highly educated white people with jobs vote democrat too. In higher numbers than republicans.

So don't blame the welfare queens for 2 terms of Obama. Blame your more successful and highly educated boss.

clambo says

Capital for investment is savings of excesss production that is not taxed.

Excess production that is invested is never taxed.

clambo says

There is nothing wrong with building and improving infrastructure, but this is not actual production nor does it produce excess capital.

Hahaha. This is mind-numbingly stupid. Investing in the means of production does not contribute to increased efficiency (and capital creation)?

clambo says

illegal aliens from Mexico who claimed the earned income credit using ITINs to file and got tons of money.

They voted for Obama too? Pretty hard to do considering citizenship is a requisite to vote...

Call it Crazy says

True, but control point would rather assume... It's less work...

Say what you really want to say to me, chief. I generally don't argue with retards so you have one chance to make a point, any point, worthy of my response.

When I don't respond it doesn't mean you've won, it means your argument isn't even worthy of a response. So, above clambo made some statements that I responded to, they were much more thought provoking than anything I have seen from you.

bgamall4 says

This still is part of Romney's 47 percent. Those damn corporations are a part of it. But you know Romney would never admit corporations were a part of the 47 percent he called moochers.

When you stop pretending that Obama hasn't exhibited and announced on several occasions that he would govern alone with his pen. So anything at this point, and I do mean anything, about this administrations short Cummings, would rest squarely on Obama's shoulder for not giving a good greasy crank about it.

If you're butt hurt because those big ole corporations did do this and they didn't pay that, just consider who really could do the most in Washington to stop it.

And if you're dirty liberal filthy blame finger is still pointing at Mitt Romney.

Then it would appear that Mitt Romney really did win the 2012 elections, and Obama is just playing Token at this point.

bgamall4 says

This is going off in about 1 hour, so get the free copy.

You did say today.
If the book is anti Jewish I would like to say........
People are not bad, individuals are bad.
People the world over just want to live peaceful, happy lives, and provide for their families. They are no different then us.

Call it Crazy says

"It's The Weather, Duh"

It is the weather. It was so good out here, I went to the beach, and saw everyone there.

Call it Crazy says

Strategist says

Call it Crazy says

"It's The Weather, Duh"

It is the weather. It was so good out here, I went to the beach, and saw everyone there.

Ahhhh, so that's why houses aren't selling in the West. Everyone is hanging out at the beach instead of buying.... That explains the slow down...

Now you get it. It's a California thing.

clambo says

I know lots of people who are living off uncle Sam and they definitely, positively voted for Obama.

Really? So all the trailer trash low teeth to tattoo ratio rednecks are voting Obama? I never knew that. Learn something new on patnet every day.

bgamall4 says

There is over 30 trillion dollars hidden offshore that needs to be taxed, and we would not have a financial problem.

The parent company for the IRS is off-shore and foreign. Imagine that revenue if taxed.

CaptainShuddup says

When you stop pretending that Obama hasn't exhibited and announced on several occasions that he would govern alone with his pen. So anything at this point, and I do mean anything, about this administrations short Cummings, would rest squarely on Obama's shoulder for not giving a good greasy crank about it.

If you're butt hurt because those big ole corporations did do this and they didn't pay that, just consider who really could do the most in Washington to stop it.

And if you're dirty liberal filthy blame finger is still pointing at Mitt Romney.

Then it would appear that Mitt Romney really did win the 2012 elections, and Obama is just playing Token at this point.

THis is some vintage captainSU.

bob2356 says

So all the trailer trash low teeth to tattoo ratio rednecks are voting Obama?

Mr. Romney is doing very well among Republicans (86%-9%), voters over 65 (58%-35%), men (49%-43%), evangelicals (62%-28%), married voters (50%-40%), conservatives (77%-18%), and investors (56%-39%). He has opened up a lead among weekly Wal-Mart Shoppers (50%-39%).

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251142986

lostand confused says

To think this country existed without income taxes until what 1920s?? prior to that there was a short period of income taxes to pay off debt from the civil war and then it was abolished again. Just imagine, no endless wars, no arresting millions of Americans to build the prison industrial complex and people feel the hunger in the belly and will start rioting against offshoring etc.

Boy oh boy, the 1920s, the good ol' days. Back when stocks only went up, house prices only went up, the leading causes of death included flu and TB, people were largely uneducated, many lived on farms, airplanes had propellers, the middle class cranked their cars or put on their gym shoes (ahem) to walk to work.

But hey, let's try that again; I'm sure it would be a blast.

sbh says

Bush/Cheny gave the oil companies far, far more in tax payer funded subsidies and credits and breaks

plus they spent over $2T to take over Iraq in the attempt to give US oil interests biz ops there.

Compared to that, Obama is a piker.

I joke, but that's EXACTLY what they did, and why.

See how it goes?
Mention Solyndra and they say that Bush "gave money to oil companies".
Well, the oil companies produce a product that we actually use, unlike Solyndra. But, I also think oil companies don't need any capital from Bush or Cheney, oil companies have their own capital (from shareholders like you, you do own mutual funds don't you?)
People who disagree with the government confiscating our money to give to pet projects or the underclass are now "walmart rednecks in trailer parks"?
The USA operated previously as the state of New Hampshire does today, it survived on taxes on alcohol and tobacco. New Hampshire has no state income tax and all booze is sold in state owned liquor stores.
How can New Hampshire do it? Well, unlike the USA, it has no military and can't wage war for one thing.
What is bizarre to me is that someone who wants to keep his own money is considered morally inferior to someone who wants to take it from him to give to someone else.
Wars cost a fortune, military pensions cost a fortune, social welfare programs only produce more demand for more programs, govt. likes to grow itself into ever more absurd departments (a Federal Dept. of Education? Why?).
Remember that the median salary in DC is double the USA median.
Now we've got a new govt. entitlement and it also has lots of taxes to go with it.

clambo says

People who disagree with the government confiscating our money to give to pet projects or the underclass are now "walmart rednecks in trailer parks"

Try to sharpen your reading comprehension. The point was of walmart rednecks collect money from the government also, while voting republican to cut taxes.

clambo says

Mention Solyndra and they say that Bush "gave money to oil companies".

Well, the oil companies produce a product that we actually use, unlike Solyndra.

So corporate welfare is ok as long as it's corporations you approve of?

Everyone wants someone else's government waste cut. We are all hypocrites, especially the alleged conservatives.

control point says

What you are both doing here is going with the assumption that all people who
are black are poor

Wow - talk about assumptions and putting words in someone's mouth. Nope, never said all poor people were black. I said that 90% of the people who lived in the last apartment complex (that I lived in) were black. Didn't say a THING about those people being poor. The VAST majority voted for Obama, strictly because he is black, not because they are poor or (necessarily) on some form of PA.

control point says

all people who are on government assistance don't want a job; and all people who
don't want a job vote democrat.

Again, never said either of those things. Just said a majority of the people living in the complex where black and (from listening) that many (note I did not say majority) were on some type of PA. However, how many of them knew someone who was on PA, if they themselves weren't on it. I don't know, but I can certainly surmise.

control point says

First of all, lazy government parasites don't vote.

Hmmm, now who's assuming? Actually, they DO know the tit that feeds them and they DO tend to vote. Many vote by mail, in some cases it's been shown in a court of law that they vote more than once. Oh yes, many, many of them vote.

control point says

And second of all, highly educated white people with jobs vote democrat too. In
higher numbers than republicans

Really? Then how do you explain this?
"Mitt Romney won 59 percent of the overall white vote"
http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/11/09/164791497/obamas-feat-not-just-winning-but-how-he-won
via NPR which isn't exactly a conservative source.

Sorry control point - you're wrong.

mmmarvel says

Really? Then how do you explain this?

"Mitt Romney won 59 percent of the overall white vote"

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/11/09/164791497/obamas-feat-not-just-winning-but-how-he-won

via NPR which isn't exactly a conservative source.

Sorry control point - you're wrong.

http://kalenkimm.com/2012/11/2012-presidential-election-demographic-analysis/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_African-American_population

I said "Highly Educated" white. Obama won the top 16 states by educational attainment, and 18 of the top 20.

Romney won the top 7 states with highest black population by percentage, and 8 of the top 10.

Presidents are elected by electoral votes - allocated to the states (and DC). Of the states with the highest percentage of highly educated population, Obama won 18 of 20 and 20 of the top 25. Romney won 18 of the bottom 26 (51 total includes DC) states by educational attainment.

Of the 28 states Obama won, 71% of them are in the top half by education attainment and 29% of them were in the bottom half of educational attainment. Of the 23 States Romney won, 78% were in the bottom half by education attainment and 22% were in the top half.

Of the top half of states with highest percentage of black population, Romney won 14, Obama 11. Of the bottom half, Obama won 17, Romney 9.

Think about that above, how is that possible? In Mississippi, 37% of the population is black, of Which Obama got over 90% support. That means his percentage of the total vote from black alone in that state was close to .9*.37 = 33.3%. But Obama only got 43.8% of the vote in MS, so that means of the remaining non-black population in MS, he got .105/.63 = 16.7% support. So Romney carried 83.3% support among non-black voters in MS. Yeah, the deep south isn't racist anymore....

Aggregate popular vote does not elect the President.

Who is wrong????

mmmarvel says

Actually, they DO know the tit that feeds them and they DO tend to vote.

Wrong again.

http://www.demos.org/data-byte/voter-turnout-income-2008-us-presidential-election

control point says

I said "Highly Educated" white. Obama won the top 16 states by educational
attainment, and 18 of the top 20.

Sorry Sir - there is no data showing that the 'high educated' folks were white. Meanwhile the article I linked to did mention that "African-Americans, for instance, gave 88 percent of their vote to Kerry in 2004; Obama won 93 percent of their vote this year and 95 percent in 2008."
Nuff said.

control point says

Presidents are elected by electoral votes - allocated to the states (and DC).

Dang, really? Shoot, when did that happen? Come on man, I'm well aware of that.

control point says

Who is wrong????

You still are.

control point says

Wrong again.

http://www.demos.org/data-byte/voter-turnout-income-2008-us-presidential-election

Huh? The chart is beyond confusing. Let's see the total turnout is ... 59.7 what, million? Percent of voters or what? Then it does a breakdown of economic earnings but if it's percentages then it's more than 100%, if it's millions of voters then its more than what is claimed to be total votes. Bad chart dude. Look at my link, Obama did not win the majority of white votes - period.