Yesterday - Bundy Ranch

[Duck Rodgers]

So Fox news got it wrong? Who would have guessed? I remember some women being their on the news clip I saw on TV.

Well, I'm talking about all the articles that came from that source as well when I say media. Fox News only reaches a small segment of people afterall. I think him being a Sheriff alone gives him instant credibility. If you're picturing that whole situation and somebody mentions a Sheriff being there amongst a rag tag militia type ensemble contemplating strategy....it seems natural to think he would be a powerful figure.

Supposedly they are/have been the only big news network out there so far so even if you have something against them, there's that. They are doing some leg work.

 

[cowhide]

Didn't you just reference Fox News as a source, guy?

Edit. Nm. Thought you said something different.

I did. I wasn't the one saying that news reports were wrong. It was someone else. I simply made fun of the fact that they said the news got it wrong because usually they are blaming the "liberal" media. I guess it went over your head. Sarcasm is sometimes hard to understand, guy!!

 

[Stoked]

cowhide, bro... I was THERE. I have video and pics on MY phone. I may have lost my mind, but there were no women anywhere near the front line of confrontation. Any video you've seen with women in it is being taken out of context of the when/where.

But, hey, we should always believe the news over our own eyes.

Don't you know that only Fox News gets it wrong or spins things to their angle?

 

[Dr. Jones]

Seems like you are misinformed again.

I'll do us both a favor and make this my last attempt to explain this to you.

You stated there was a plan to put the women in the front row of fire. I stated that was not true. I also stated that at the actual major conflict... there was one defining moment where the two parties went toe-to-toe... and there were no women near the line.

Now you're trying to prove to me that women are/were at the ranch... that is completely different than your original claim and one I don't deny. My wife, for one, goes to the ranch with me.. but gets nowhere near any heated action.

I guess you're calling me a liar since I'm saying I have been there, in person, to witness the events, yet you're calling me misguided.

From now on just ignore what I have to say because I'm sure google will be glad to oblige you with a counter-reality to what has actually happened.

 

[Archie Moses]

I did. I wasn't the one saying that news reports were wrong. It was someone else. I simply made fun of the fact that they said the news got it wrong because usually they are blaming the "liberal" media. I guess it went over your head. Sarcasm is sometimes hard to understand, guy!!

Hence the edit

 

[cowhide]

Well, I'm talking about all the articles that came from that source as well when I say media. Fox News only reaches a small segment of people afterall. I think him being a Sheriff alone gives him instant credibility. If you're picturing that whole situation and somebody mentions a Sheriff being there amongst a rag tag militia type ensemble contemplating strategy....it seems natural to think he would be a powerful figure.

Supposedly they are/have been the only big news network out there so far so even if you have something against them, there's that. They are doing some leg work.

I am not shocked or surprised Fox news is out there covering this type of story. This type of story is what Fox News watchers love. I was being sarcastic when I said they got it wrong. Let me go back and see if I can explain. PKM is on the side of the Bundy's despite his claim he doesn't necessarily think Bundy is in the right. He is upset with the way the gov't handled it. I agree somewhat but think were PKM is wrong is that regardless of how the situation is being dealt with Bundy is still breaking the Law.. fast forward.. PKM stated my claim about an x sheriff on Fox News stating that the group thought about putting women and children as body shields so it would make the Feds look even worse if the shooting started.

It is beyond me how any one could rationalize this away or say it didn't happen which is what PKM said. He said it was a lie, basically calling me a liar. He didn't say I disagree or that you are misinformed. He said it was a lie.

Then another poster backed me up with the actual link from Fox News. I used Fox News in my original post along with the Washington Post because they happened to be the news station/paper covering this event and the ones I've seen. So I wasn't lying as PKM insinuated and he was simply uninformed.

Instead PKM decided to take it a step further and claim that he was there and you can't believe the media so I provided a link where there clearly are women there with feds and a ruckus going on. In the article a woman (Clive's sister) stating she was throw to the ground. I made the sarcastic remark about Fox News not getting it right after PKM or another poster discounted the idea that woman and children would be used as shields. Some, I believe Fox News supporters, jumped to defend the honor of Fox News and completely missed the point. I was joking because I was surprised that people like this anti-gov't group would discount their main sources for news (Fox0 and it was nothing more than that.

I guess in the end people believe what they want to believe despite the evidence. Heck you can find a website where people are discussing if the world is flat or not. In the end I think Bundy and his supports are simply rationalizING away what the real issue is and since they lost their argument they are now acting like anarchists. Unless the Bundy's can prove they have a prescriptive easement on the land which I am assuming they have already tried or perhaps they haven't done so because this land doesn't qualify, then they are breaking the law and playing the victim card which like I stated before is laughable.

 

[cowhide]

Hence the edit

What edit are you talking about?

 

[Dr. Jones]

I am not shocked or surprised Fox news is out there covering this type of story. This type of story is what Fox News watchers love. I was being sarcastic when I said they got it wrong. Let me go back and see if I can explain. PKM is on the side of the Bundy's despite his claim he doesn't necessarily think Bundy is in the right. He is upset with the way the gov't handled it. I agree somewhat but think were PKM is wrong is that regardless of how the situation is being dealt with Bundy is still breaking the Law.. fast forward.. PKM stated my claim about an x sheriff on Fox News stating that the group thought about putting women and children as body shields so it would make the Feds look even worse if the shooting started.

It is beyond me how any one could rationalize this away or say it didn't happen which is what PKM said. He said it was a lie, basically calling me a liar. He didn't say I disagree or that you are misinformed. He said it was a lie.

Then another poster backed me up with the actual link from Fox News. I used Fox News in my original post along with the Washington Post because they happened to be the news station/paper covering this event and the ones I've seen. So I wasn't lying as PKM insinuated and he was simply uninformed.

Instead PKM decided to take it a step further and claim that he was there and you can't believe the media so I provided a link where there clearly are women there with feds and a ruckus going on. In the article a woman (Clive's sister) stating she was throw to the ground. I made the sarcastic remark about Fox News not getting it right after PKM or another poster discounted the idea that woman and children would be used as shields. Some, I believe Fox News supporters, jumped to defend the honor of Fox News and completely missed the point. I was joking because I was surprised that people like this anti-gov't group would discount their main sources for news (Fox0 and it was nothing more than that.

I guess in the end people believe what they want to believe despite the evidence. Heck you can find a website where people are discussing if the world is flat or not. In the end I think Bundy and his supports are simply rationalizING away what the real issue is and since they lost their argument they are now acting like anarchists. Unless the Bundy's can prove they have a prescriptive easement on the land which I am assuming they have already tried or perhaps they haven't done so because this land doesn't qualify, then they are breaking the law and playing the victim card which like I stated before is laughable.

Rich.

 

[Dr. Jones]

and I called the sheriff a liar/**** stirrer, not you.

 

[Dr. Jones]

and if you care to go back to the beginning of this thread, I called what the Bundy's are doing as 'douchey.' It is within my rights to have an opinion the government handled it wrong. They did. I think they're even admitting that now (no link).

I'm not 'siding' with the Bundy's... never have.

I have only a few thoughts on this.. and they're very simple (obviously);
1) I think the government handled it wrong.. they should have acted swiftly rather than slow and heavy-handed.
2) I think the Bundy's are wrong, legally.
3) It's been very cool to be part of this and witness it, I can't lie.
4) I hate dirty self-dealing politicians. We've tons of these problems (huge) right here in St. George for years.
5) I can't help but correct inaccuracies reported by whomever.

 

[Archie Moses]

What edit are you talking about?

The one that says, "edit" aka my first comment.

*rubs forehead*

 

[cowhide]

I'll do us both a favor and make this my last attempt to explain this to you.

You stated there was a plan to put the women in the front row of fire. I stated that was not true. I also stated that at the actual major conflict... there was one defining moment where the two parties went toe-to-toe... and there were no women near the line.

Now you're trying to prove to me that women are/were at the ranch... that is completely different than your original claim and one I don't deny. My wife, for one, goes to the ranch with me.. but gets nowhere near any heated action.

I guess you're calling me a liar since I'm saying I have been there, in person, to witness the events, yet you're calling me misguided.

From now on just ignore what I have to say because I'm sure google will be glad to oblige you with a counter-reality to what has actually happened.

You are getting a little defensive I see. No I didn't call you a liar, you called me one. I said you must be misinformed if you said there where no women there. you are right that media can be misleading so can eye witnesses.

I NEVER said their was a plan to put women and children in the line of fire. I simply stated that the X sheriff said they considered the idea. You denied the claim saying it was false and I provided a link and you decided to ignore it and said it was false. So since your wife isn't near all the ruckus means that all women aren't near it. How do you explain the article with the women standing there and then claiming she was thrown to the ground. You're right I wasn't there but I can still have an opinion about the situation since you are so concerned about civil liberties and all. Just because there are media reports that don't agree with your "eye witness" account doesn't mean I have to take your word on it. Since you have gone on record that you agree that Bundy is breaking the law and yet you are still supporting him then I should have known I was wasting my time having a reasonable debate with you.