I understand this point you've made several times now, and noticed you've repeated yourself that we're all not getting it but trust me that we do. I too would like to know exactly why they thought the muscle was necessary (though the complaints that are getting everyone riled being over-sensationalized by some, and possibly manufactured for sympathy). I was directing the question more as a philosophical inquiry based on your comments about the family being there since the beginning of time and not being properly recognized for their charity. I can see how emotionally involved you are and it was a bad time to ask you about it. Sorry.
Also, kudos to your wife for taking the bull by the horns with this.
I don't think you read through the site I was talking about. In addition to that complaint, the author is mildly disguising open violence, preparing for treasonous last stands, promotes partaking in illegal activities, etc.
I noticed the Bundy wife is purposefully distancing her family from these types of people. That's a very good idea.
I'd like to take up your specific inquiries, if I may. . . .
Well, maybe I'd rather just ramble. . . . I remember when a Bundy family lived across the street form me. Their mom was my babysitter, one boy was my age. We played Andy-I-Over and had great fun. They moved back out to Bundyville, though, and then to Hurricane. When I was in High School a bunch of Bundys would come to town on Saturday nights to roller skate in the rink I was managing. Their whole point in coming skating was to raise hell. . .. test my limits. They were all heavy-set boys who could throw a bale of hay over their heads.
I didn't need to call the cops though, because I was just good enough on skates, and they were just bad enough on skates, I could sit them down so hard their tailbones would hurt, and when I told them to take off their skates and get out of the rink, they did so.
Later in my miserable life, one of those boys was my boss for almost ten years. It was payback time.
In American politics we have a lot of ideas competing for legitimacy. I think Cliven Bundy isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer regarding innate human rights and natural human liberty, but I agree with him absolutely.
The rest of you derelict bums are selling your birthrights for a mess of socialist pottage.
come see me on the LTE in a few days. I'm going to Bunkerville.
Under democratic or republican constitutional principles, our government is obligated to be subject to the people. If it isn't, it's time for a new government, whatever it takes. The ball is in the government's court right now, and those honchos are going to decide if it's time to jump the shark and take down democracy. The entire concept of government agencies with heavily armed swat teams, acting on their own orders, playing judge and jury and executioner, is just absolutely and intolerably wrong. Just as wrong for some hayseed patriots to go extra-legal and outside of the democratic process as well, but that is absolutely not what the Bundys did.
They had cameras, for hell's sake. They were going to take pictures and show them to judges. And our brownshirt Nazi thug BLM morons had some objections to that.
That's the whole story, buddy. It's exactly what we cannot tolerate, as a free people.
As long as cameras can trump guns, we will still have a republic with human rights.
