Friday, April 18, 2014

From NRO:The import of rancher Bundy vs. the Obama administration

The Problem with Cliven Bundy; "His plight is sympathetic; his actions are indefensible."
Could this not have been said about the original Tea Party as well? What of the lawlessness of the "Occupy" movement? Their actions were indefensible as well, were they not? Had the ranchers been Democrats opposing actions of a Republican administration, you can be sure that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid would have rallied to their support. Can you convince us otherwise?  Anyway; here are excerpts from the article:

... "Forged in revolution, informed by soaring sentiment, and defined by acts of variously prudent dissidence, Americans of all sorts fancy themselves to be fighting the good fight. Judging by the rapturous reception that he has received from conservatives of late, Cliven Bundy is one of these sorts, and protests such as his, it seems, are how the West was won. After a longtime dispute with the federal government, the rebellious cattle rancher has forced the government to back down. Hooray?"
....
"These grievances serve as an indictment of the regulatory state, yes. But they do not serve as an executioner for our ailing rule of law. If Cliven Bundy’s behavior is legitimized by the gravity of his circumstances, how many others may follow suit, singing his name as they go?"...  By Charles C. W. Cooke at NRO
Bindy: He’s an unapologetic freeloader, but the BLM and the feds are appallingly bad landlords.    ..."Testing Bundy’s claim is simple. If he has a right to do what he is doing on public land to which he does not have title, then so should you and I. What would happen if a hundred other people each put a hundred head of cattle on the same property? The grass would run out; every animal would, eventually, starve.

"This “tragedy of the commons” — the depletion of resources that occurs when ranching, farming, timbering, or drilling happen on the same public land without a means to restrict and compensate for that access — is something that grazing rules on BLM property are meant to address. And it works pretty well. Most ranchers who lease BLM land pay a per-head fee (this year, $1.35 per animal unit month) and live a life with no armed standoffs."...
....  There is a "however" coming:
"Sadly, buried in the fine print of these bureaucratic tomes are real inhibitions to making productive use of the federal estate. Most recently, the BLM has put the brakes on oil-and-gas drilling in the energy-rich West due to the possibility that it might disturb the breeding habitat of the greater sage grouse, which is just the latest in a long list of species used as an excuse to stymie America’s nominal commitment to energy independence. Then there are bars on developing wind energy (also a bird thing) and solar energy (a tortoise thing); unrealistic mandates to put electric transmission lines underground; and the perennial threat that a bureaucrat in Washington will one day wake up and, in a sweeping vision, decree that cows are out and wild bison are in..."
 
Armed federal agents defend turtle habitat but fail to secure our national borders.     ... "Cliven Bundy’s cattle are treated as trespassers, and federal agents have been dispatched to rectify that trespass; at the same time, millions of illegal aliens present within our borders are treated as an inevitability that must be accommodated."
 
John Fund: The United States of SWAT?  "Military-style units from government agencies are wreaking havoc on non-violent citizens."
...
 
... "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."...
 
Plus this one from earlier:
Alan Caruba: Declaring War on Americans  
One has to appreciate this well-balanced look at the incident that just transpired between the Nevada rancher and the forces of this government. TD
" 'If the U.S. didn’t own most of Nevada, Bundy would not need to pay grazing fees. Most certainly, his ancestors didn’t. The other excuse, that the government is trying to protect an endangered tortoise, is just part of the environmental movement’s efforts to keep energy sources from being available to all of us. Endangered species is pure fiction.' "

No comments: