Tag Archives: Cliven Bundy

Roundup, including Nevada as a test of the GOP Autopsy

Heck photo There’s an interesting piece in Talking Points Memo today about the Nevada senate race, Representative Joe Heck, included, and questioning Heck’s capacity to attract Hispanic voters in the state.  Perhaps someone should ask the GOP candidate if he supports Donald Trump’s bid for the presidency? The answer should tell us if Heck listened to the “autopsy” or is part of the corpse of the Republican party?

Loon How can we miss you if you won’t go away?  The Malheur Refuge Loons, the ones wearing camo, and pretending to be “patriots,” are still in court – including one Larry “The Loon” Klayman who wants very much to insert himself and his stack of conspiracy theories into the “movement” supporting Cliven Bundy in court.    Ammon Bundy intends to argue he can’t be prosecuted because the Federal government really doesn’t own the Malheur Refuge, no matter that there are similar cases with decisions  on record which dismissed this argument as having no merit.  Meanwhile, a Nevadan who participated in the Loon-acy has entered a guilty plea to charges of conspiracy.

Trump white power We’re Shocked. Shocked I say… to discover that there’s another white nationalist on the list of Trump delegates to the Republican convention.  In her own words: “I’m all for closing the borders. I’m all for not allowing Muslims in this country. I’m all for keeping illegals out and get as many of them who are here out as soon as possible. … Why do I want my taxpayer money taking care of criminals and murderers who aren’t supposed to be here?” We can add her to the folks already on the list who have child porn and weapons charges on their CV’s.  Meanwhile, back on April 28th Pew Research reported Republican “favorability” ratings edging lower.

Advertisements

Comments Off on Roundup, including Nevada as a test of the GOP Autopsy

Filed under conservatism, Nevada politics, Politics, presidential race, public lands, Republicans

The Manufactured Martyrs: Nevada’s Bundyland Bunch

Bundy 2

There are specious arguments, and then there are those which are just downright hysterical. Hysterically funny or screaming tantrums hysterical;  the defense of the Bundy Bunch looks to fit into both those categories.

Cliven Bundy wants to be released from Federal custody because the government is holding him as a Political Prisoner?  At least according to attorney Joel Hansen:

“The government seems to be afraid that it might lose in a jury trial, so it wants to keep him in prison, in solitary confinement, as long as it can because he, like Nelson Mandela, is a political prisoner,” Hansen wrote. “There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution allowing the federal government to hold political prisoners without a trial. Nothing.” [LVRJ]

For those unfamiliar with the right wing of Nevada’s right wing politics, Joel Hansen is part of the Hansen Family Party, aka the Independent American Party which boasts 70,323 registered voters in Nevada, making it the third largest party in the state. The numbers sound impressive until it’s noted that there are 585,890 registered Democrats and 493,612 registered Republicans; and, 295,319 registered as non-partisan. [NV SoS]  As recently as 2002 the Hansen family was the heart of the IAP in Nevada, and members were running for all manner of offices – some inviting controversy with then Secretary of State Dean Heller by not filing campaign financial reports with his office. [LVSun]

So, where does Joel Hansen find the justification for comparing failing rancher Cliven Bundy with international hero Mandela?  We can start with the IAP Platform:

“We believe that to maintain freedom, our political institutions must be founded upon faith in God and upon moral laws and principles embodied in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution for the United States, the Bill of Rights, and the Holy Scriptures.  We believe that the function of government is to protect life, liberty, property, and the fundamental and God-given rights of the people, and that anything more than this is usurpation and oppression.” [IAP

And they do mean Anything, including the management of federal land and properties.

We oppose intrusion of the federal government in areas that rightfully belong to the states.  We favor abolishing federal control of all lands, except for necessary forts, military bases, post offices, etc., as enumerated in, but limited by, the Constitution.  We support the return to the states of all lands unconstitutionally seized, acquired or controlled by the federal government (10th Amendment), and those taken unconstitutionally as “required” for that state to join the Union. [IAP]

Indeed, manufacturing martyrs requires believing that federal management of federal facilities, and federal lands, constitutes “usurpation and oppression.”

Further, the Hansen-Bundy philosophy requires looping into the realm of a fantasy in which the armed resistance to BLM operations, and the armed takeover of a federal wildlife refuge meets the definition of a “peaceful protest.”  Additionally, it’s still a peaceful protest even if it was originally estimated to cost $3.3 million to clean up the mess made at the Malheur Wildlife Refuge, and then the estimate increased to approximately $6 million by March 23, 2016. [OregonLive]  Evidently, abandoned homes, compromised bank accounts, and death threats to workers at the Malheur Refuge were part of a “peaceful protest?” [OregonLive]

Cliven Bundy’s problems, however, stem not from the Malheur assault and occupation – that bundle falls to his offspring — but from his response to BLM attempts to enforce federal regulations on lands it is tasked to manage near Bunkerville, NV.

“Bundy faces 16 felony counts, including extortion, obstruction of justice, conspiracy to commit an offense against the United States, conspiracy to impede or injure a federal officer, assault on a federal officer, threatening a federal law enforcement officer and using and carrying a firearm in a crime of violence.

Bundy and 18 others — including four of his sons, Ammon, Ryan, Melvyn and David — were charged in a new federal indictment in Las Vegas last week in connection with the April 12, 2014, Bunkerville showdown.” [LVRJ]

Bundy Armed

Photos from the Bunkerville “peaceful protest” don’t seem to argue for an interpretation of a  non-violent approach to discussing issues of cattle operations with the Bureau of Land Management.

 

Hansen and his client have a bit of a problem trying to turn the actions at Bunkerville into Bunker Hill.  Either the demonstrations at the site were peaceful, and none of the armed gunmen actually intended to fire their weapons, or it was a exemplar of armed resistance to the Federal oppressors and usurpers – at which time it’s no longer a “peaceful protest,” and that part about “obstruction of justice,” and “threatening law enforcement officers” is  both relevant and provable.

Hansen: “Does Mr. Bundy have the right to raise a constitutional question about the legality of the high-handed tactics of the BLM?” Hansen asked in his court papers. “Of course he does — and particularly by making statements about the actions of the BLM and by the exercise of people’s First Amendment right to peacefully assemble and the people’s Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.” [LVRJ]

By this logic, if one were to show up at a BLM office, armed with a semi-automatic rifle, fully loaded, and pointed at the personnel inside, this would be “making a statement?” Exercising freedom of speech? And, just showing support for the 2nd Amendment?  This ought to explain fully and quickly precisely how the sons decided that taking over a wildlife refuge was a “good idea.”   It goes nowhere toward explaining how attorney and IAP pillar Joel Hansen is going to turn the muggers into martyrs.

1 Comment

Filed under Nevada politics, Politics, public lands

Power for the Loons: A small electric co-op considers what to do with the Loons at the Malheur Wildlife Refuge

Harney Electric Map Harney Electric Cooperative is the power transmission and distribution provider for approximately 20,000 square miles of southeastern Oregon and northern Nevada, and right in the midst of their service territory map is the Malheur Wildlife Refuge – currently occupied by more loons than pin tails, swans, and geese.

The Co-op has about 4,000 power meters, 350 miles of transmission line, and more than 2,400 miles of distribution line across the six counties shown on the map.  And there are numerous voices asking why the power hasn’t been cut off at the Malheur Refuge…

A major consideration is Safety.  Harney Electric, for all its territorial expanse, isn’t a very large company.  In fact, the members read their own meters. The company audits meter readings once a year, but for all 12 months of the year the meters are read by the customer/members and not by designated meter readers.  The main office is in Hines, OR (population 1,510) with a branch office in Orovada, NV (population 155) and another small satellite office in Fields, OR (population 120).   It isn’t too far off the mark to say that the administration and management of the co-op is a case of everyone knowing everyone else – employees included.  No one is particularly excited about sending in a lineman to shut off the power at the Refuge since the Loons have an unfortunate track record of actually shooting and killing people.  Case in point: the two miscreants who joined the Bundy Militia for a time in Their Great Delusional Standoff in southern Nevada, and then saw fit to assassinate two police officers in Las Vegas. [MSNBC]  There’s frankly little way for the power company to win —

If they send in an unarmed lineman – do the Loons take offense and physically attack the lineman?  If they send in police or national guard with the lineman – does this constitute an “assault” by the authorities, and also place the lineman in peril?  Should the lineman and a police escort approach the “boundary” does this create a justification in the twisted minds of the trespassers for the shooting to start?  No one in charge at the power company is particularly happy about the prospect of seeing a lineman’s body draped in a Tea Party flag.

Gee, offer some naysayers – why can’t the co-op cut the power off well outside the range of the Loons?  That assumes that the co-op has isolation capacity, and the equipment already installed to shut down portions of the distribution line.  Since its founding in 1961, the co-op’s primary concern has been to get power to isolated areas, NOT how to shut off power to isolated portions of its service area.   The co-op has shut off power to the Frenchglen, OR BLM fire station [OregonLive] as of January 7, 2016, another target of the Loons, but not occupied by them.  The integrity of the BLM fire station at Frenchglen is an important component in the safety of Harney Electric Cooperative’s transmission and distribution lines in southeastern Oregon and northern Nevada.

And then there’s the matter of the bill.  The Bundy Loons are using metered power to prepare their grilled cheese sandwiches – the current rate for power at minimum is $28.75 per month for the first 150 kilowatt hours.  No one’s heard how the Bundy’s intend to pay for the power they’re using – any more than anyone’s figured out how they intend to pay for the $1 million in back grazing fees and penalties they already owe.  However, this time the Bundy’s aren’t ripping off the federal government – they’re ripping off the customers of a small electric cooperative.

If the Loons keep up their occupation to March 1, 2016 they should be mindful that Harney Electric’s minimum rate will increase to $31.50 per month with a 9 cent charge for every kilowatt hour after 150.  Security light pricing will be at $9 a month for a 100 watt light on a meter or transformer pole, and the charge for a specially placed pole will be $11.80 per month.  If the Loons are using a 150 watt security light, that will cost them $13.00 per month.

Somewhere in the midst of their Grand Delusion about Sticking It to the Federal Government, the Loon Militia (#YallQaeda) in their Cowliphate, have forgotten that it isn’t the Federal Government keeping the lights on at the Malheur Wildlife Refuge, it’s a small electric cooperative, which expects its customers to read their meters and pay promptly.   It appears that the Bundy definition of Liberty incorporates taking what they want, when they want it, without consideration of how this narcissistic selfishness impacts others … like the Harney Electric Cooperative and its customers.

1 Comment

Filed under Politics

Silhouettes in Courage

It’s been confirmed that the perpetrators of the Bundystan sit in at the Malheur Wildlife Refuge are free to go into town for their “snacks.”  There are at least two ways to view this element of the situation. One, the authorities are allowing the continuation of the occupation of federal property in ways that are inconceivable to those who remember the May 1985 assault on Osage Avenue, Philadelphia, PA. [Guardian] Another perspective is that the authorities aren’t taking the Grand Occupation of the YallQaeda Militia as seriously as the YeeHawdists wanted.  Thus, this isn’t the Alamo – it certainly isn’t Ruby Ridge, much less Waco.  And, there the YallQaeda sits — assured in their own minds that their actions will cause significant discourse about public land management and a Rising of the Populace – being held up to ridicule instead of admiration.

Case in point: The man who says he won’t be locked in a concrete box is more than happy to sit inside a blue tarp for the duration —

Tarp Man Granted that prisons are unpleasant places in which to reside, but being stuck in a chair under a tarp in  weather not predicted to get much over 17 degrees Fahrenheit at night for the next week isn’t my idea of Freedom.  And, to do so while insinuating that you’d fight to the death before you’d leave the “comfort” of your Little Blue Tarp because you won’t tolerate  an arrest, leaves one wondering if some kind soul won’t donate a copy of Magnus Mill’s 1998 novel “The Restraint of Beasts” to help the ‘patriots’ pass the time?

The wildlife refuge has been a contentious issue for the Hammond family for some time [TPM] but with the Hammonds reporting to authorities to complete their prison sentence there seems little for the YallQaeda to do but crank up the verbiage and get the perfectly predictable Twitter backlash.  The level of self delusion is, indeed, remarkable.  Who, while illegally occupying federal property, would NOT think arrest warrants are a logical outcome?  Ammon Bundy cites his “credible sources” as informing him of impending arrest warrants [Oregonian] Well, gee… what would a person expect in the circumstances?

There are some voices in support, albeit tangential at best. For example, Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR) used his time on the House Floor to excoriate the Bureau of Land Management for its insensitivity to the “culture” of the American West. [Oregonian]  However, Rep. Walden’s aim seems a bit off the mark,  if for no other reason than the Malheur Refuge is administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.  Walden was explicit is his condemnation of illegal occupations, and his speech was hardly a ringing endorsement of the Bundy Bunch.

So the Bundy Boys Camp Out will continue until the residents of Burns, OR have exhausted their patience, and the YallQaeda has worn out its welcome.  The federal, state, and local reaction seems to imply that (1) there aren’t very many occupiers, and (2) they aren’t actually doing very much; except sitting in an isolated camp from which the TV trucks will depart for the Next Shiny Object getting cold and wondering why the Great Insurrection hasn’t started.

Silhouettes in courage.

Comments Off on Silhouettes in Courage

Filed under Politics

Dispatches from Bundystan

Dispatch Case While the Bundyites and their associated #VanillaISIS #Y’AllQaeda #YeeHawDist members, there are some informative and serious pieces of background writing which deserve our attention.  One of these is Elaine Hunt’s piece for Lets Talk Nevada, “Senator Dean Heller on the Bundys and the BLM.”   Hunt provides local context for the ongoing situation between the “Sovereign” Bundys, including the stances taken by city and county officials.

There’s no shortage of articles available concerning the tactics which might be adopted to resolve the situation in the Malheur Wildlife Reserve.  Newsweek offers its advice on how the Federal government can resolve the issue peacefully.  The Washington Post provides some context for the ongoing fight over public lands in Oregon.   The piece also provides a bit of encouraging news: The government position that the Bundy Gang is invading the area is taking hold with local officials in the local area.

Meanwhile, authorities are planning to cut the power to the facilities at the Malheur Refuge [Guardian] To which the #VanillaISIS responded they were ready – however, surely they know that if the Federal and local agencies cut off traffic to the Refuge it won’t be all that long before they’ve run through the gasoline in the pickups to run a generator?  This point highlights some questions which such radical activities raise in general.

Question Marks

# How do radicals convince themselves that there is a vast reservoir of support for their cause?  From the Whiskey Rebellion of 1791, with sporadic anti-tax violence until 1794, which ended with the “rebels” fleeing in the face of Washington’s collection of 13,000 militia members from Virginia, Maryland, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania – to John Brown’s unsuccessful raid on the Harper’s Ferry federal arsenal – to Charleston murderer Dylann Roof’s pathetic attempt to “start a race war” [Nwk] – to the equally pathetic request of the #Y’AllQaeda for people to send “snacks” and come to join them – the radicals have vastly overestimated the breadth and depth of their causes.

# Why do movements such as #Y’AllQaeda almost invariably include leadership which indulges in pseudo-military activities rather than actually enlisting in the U.S. Armed Forces?   Oathkeepers being the exception, as would be the likes of Timothy McVeigh, many of the self styled Militia types don’t  have what might be considered even para-military training.  Target shooting, gun collecting, and video games don’t create real soldiers.  A point which appears to have escaped many militants.

# It’s interesting that some of the loudest critics of range management often include individuals who aren’t all that successful in ranching enterprises?   Previous  Nevada protests, in Elko County (Gardner), and in Nye County (Hage), were sparked by the actions of individuals who blamed the Bureau of Land Management for problems they may very well have created for themselves. 

I suppose we’ll always have among us those who have inflated views of their own agency, and unrealistic perspectives concerning the level of support for their own cause.  The play-soldiers will continue to conflate fantasy with professional military reality.  And, those who cannot accept or admit their limitations will invariably blame others for their problems.  The trick is not to allow this to fester and metastasize in the body politic.

Comments Off on Dispatches from Bundystan

Filed under Politics

Bundys in Birdland

Malheur Birds The Malheur Wildlife Refuge has a message posted explaining the closure of the area:

The Fish and Wildlife Service is aware that an unknown number of armed individuals have broken into and occupied the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge facility near Burns, Oregon. While the situation is ongoing, the main concern is employee safety and we can confirm that no federal staff were in the building at the time of the initial incident. We will continue to monitor the situation for additional developments.

The number of “invaders” varies according to reports ranging from 150, a number about half those who were protesting the incarceration of a local rancher, to 24, a number based on sightings in the local area.  We’ve met these people before. 

Specifically, we met them in the ongoing dispute over the Bundy’s refusal to pay $1.1 million in grazing fees and penalties, and a standoff with federal, local, and state authorities which ended peacefully – but with the Bundy’s back in court having resolved nothing about their payment of fees and assessments.  However, all was not peaceful about the people the Bundys tend to attract – two of whom assassinated two Las Vegas police officers and killed a “good guy with a gun” in a nearby retail store.

Categorically speaking, they are part and parcel of the Sovereign Citizen movement.  Indeed, after the federal authorities moved personnel out of Bundystan to prevent attacks on Bureau of Land Management employees, the Bundys pitched a party celebrating one year of ‘freedom’ from federal control.  Their “Liberty Celebration” included some predictable faces like that of  Robert Crooks, founder of the Montana Minutemen. [NPR]

The FBI is clear on who these people are – domestic terrorists.  The FBI assessment concludes:

Although the sovereign-citizen movement does not always rise to violence, its members’ illegal activities and past violent—including fatal—incidents against law enforcement make it a group that should be approached with knowledge and caution. It is important that law enforcement be aware of sovereign citizens’ tactics so agencies can warn the public of potential scams, spot illegal activity and understand its potential severity, and be prepared for and protect against violent behavior or backlash through intimidation and harassment.

OK City bombing baby It’s important to remember at this point that trespassing cattle, making phony license plates, and filing nuisance law suits aren’t the only thing these people are capable of doing – Terry Nichols, of Oklahoma City Bombing infamy claimed to be a Sovereign Citizen. [FBI]

There are some politicians who appear to want Americans to focus on foreign or foreign inspired terrorism, but a significant number of voices are reminding us that we are at more risk of insult, injury, or death at the hands of right wing domestic terrorists than from any foreign source or sources.

The following chart, published by Mother Jones after the Charleston, SC church shooting illustrates the point:

Chart domestic terrorism Or, to look at the situation from another perspective — “The Sovereign Citizen Movement is the number one domestic terrorism threat today, a bit jump from just seven years ago when the group was seventh on the list.” [D&T]

Given this record and the data from serious sources like the University of Maryland’s START group, [pdf] we know the right wing extremists are dangerous.  Additionally, even if the numbers aren’t readily at hand the images of Oklahoma City are still an emotional tag reminding anyone who cares to be concerned that the danger is constantly with us.  Coping with a domestic threat of this nature is another matter.

If we know these people are domestic terrorists, and we know they are dangerous why haven’t we done more to minimize their effectiveness?

First, there are too many voices rising in support of right wing extremist views which conflate conservatism with right wing extremism.  It wasn’t so long ago that Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano issued a report indicating the dangers posed by domestic right wing individuals and groups, and she endured Congressional and political lambasting for her efforts. [WaPo]  It would be helpful if (1) conservative members of the punditry could distance themselves from the “Freedom” rants of their extremist cohorts, and (2) the media could differentiate between conservative and extremist elements.  This is made all the more difficult as so called “conservative voices” move toward extremist positions; but, it’s not an impossible task.

Secondly, we need to disentangle the Gun Rights Lobby from the domestic terrorism issue.   The transparently irrational argument that the 2nd Amendment protects all others is an invitation to the arms accumulations of right wing extremists.  It is perfectly possible to require background checks, enact safe storage laws, and limit the capacity of firearms without damaging anyone’s enjoyment of hunting or target practice.  It is also perfectly possible to limit the number of firearms a person can purchase during a specific period of time, or preclude straw purchases, without infringing on personal liberties.   In fact, we could reduce the necessity of “militarizing the police” if we could decrease the availability of military style weaponry available to domestic terrorists.

Third, we could apply the framework we use for discussing foreign terrorism to domestic terrorism.  The tendency of some media outlets to describe domestic terrorists as “mentally disturbed,” or “loners,” or “disengaged” individuals; or more dramatically — “loons,” “whack jobs,” and “childish,” – leaves the impression that these people are not as dangerous as their foreign counterparts.  The 168 killed and more than 680 injured in Oklahoma City would argue otherwise.

We might also want to ask some of the same questions about domestic terrorism we pose concerning foreign or foreign inspired terrorism.  How were these people “radicalized?”  What information sources are they using to implement their plans and encourage their conspiracy theories?  What motivates them to move into the dark realm of domestic terrorism? How can we encourage members of their communities to divulge information about upcoming plots and plans?  Why didn’t some family member, neighbor, fellow church member, inform authorities that there was a plot to occupy a federal facility?  Why do we sanction police action against protesters with signs but urge “caution” when facing right wing domestic terrorists?

The answers to these kinds of questions aren’t always pleasant.  In the case of the Bundys and their allies there are significant elements of racism and religiosity which are difficult for many Americans to discuss.  However, discuss them we must.

Fourth, we might want to pay attention to the NYPD’s assessment of radicalization in domestic terms, in which the extremism comes to the forefront.  There is the initial or pre-radical stage, commonly associated with Internet searches for like minded associates; the self identification state during with the person identifies with an extremist perspective becoming immersed in the ideology; moving into the indoctrination stage wherein the person takes on the ideological perspective more intensely; and finally the “jihadist” phase in which the person takes on the persona of a “warrior” – for “babies,” for “God,” or perhaps individual control of public lands? [Minteh]

If we demand that family members and associates notify authorities if someone is progressing along these stages in regard to transnational terrorism, then why don’t we emphasize the necessity of this reporting in regard to domestic terrorism?

Fifth and finally, why aren’t we demanding that someone turn down the rhetoric?  Polarization is one thing, extremism is the manifestation of polarization beyond normal comprehension.  Those infected with a sense of victimization – or potential victimization – don’t really need to be treated to reinforcement of their bigotry, their prejudices, or their hatred.  No, it’s not acceptable to be a bigot, and it’s not acceptable to be a racist, and it’s certainly not acceptable to take up arms against your own government. We have ballot boxes and courts in which to settle differences.

Duck 2 And so we are left with some right wing radical fringe types occupying a federal facility harboring a wish to expand their “territory” into a fire camp (just what this section of the country doesn’t need) who have been radicalized, and whose extremism is reinforced by the babble of extreme views to which they listen intently.  We can only hope that they don’t decide to feast on the wildlife the refuge is meant to protect for all of us – the Trumpeter Swans, the Sand Hill Cranes, the Red Band Trout, or any of the other species depending on us for protection and refuge.

Comments Off on Bundys in Birdland

Filed under Politics

Cliven Bundy: How Can We Miss You If You Won’t Go Away?

Bundy Riders

Let’s Talk Nevada covered the adventures of Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) in Mesquite, NV complete with pictures, and an interesting exchange:

“Cliven Bundy’s son, Ryan, stated there is no place in the U.S. Constitution that allows the federal government to hold land and he asked Paul what he would do to correct that problem. Paul agreed that public land should belong to the states and local governments, but that private ownership is best.”

Tricky Answer: The notion that the federal government may not own land, (pretty well covered by Article IV, section 3, clause 2 if we want to get specific about it, put to one side for the moment) – Notice that Senator Paul really didn’t answer the question.  What Bundy 2.0 wanted was reassurance that his outlandish right wing theory was correct, but what he got was pure corporate libertarian-speak. The candidate didn’t say he would actually do anything about the reversion of public domain lands, to the state, to the locality, or to any other public entity. He merely recited the corporate mantra that private ownership is always best.  If Bundy 2.0 was listening carefully, the response could easily mean that corporate interests would be able to purchase land and then charge users (ranchers) for the use of the property.   If for-profit entities were in charge, does Bundy 2.0 believe they would be under any compulsion to perform  land management activities other than that which would enhance the corporate bottom line?  Re-seeding? Noxious weed control? Grazing management? Would Bundy be able to evade paying for land use under corporate control, as his father has tried to avoid paying grazing fees?  And, if a higher bidder came along – would Bundy be looking for grazing property elsewhere?

But wait, there’s more:  There was more than a question from the audience.  Politico reports:

“The encounter came after Bundy attended an event for the Kentucky senator’s presidential campaign at the Eureka Casino in Mesquite, Nevada. When the larger group dispersed, Bundy said, he was escorted by Paul’s aides to a back room where he and the Republican 2016 contender spoke for approximately 45 minutes. (“There were no scheduled meetings at Senator Paul’s stop in Mesquite. He spoke to many people who came to this public event, none for 45 minutes and none planned,” Paul spokesman Sergio Gor said.)”

Cliven Bundy seems to have picked up the point about state ownership, “The state already owns the land…”

“The Nevada rancher said that he had expected only to have an opportunity to shake hands with Paul and make small-talk. He was surprised when campaign aides found a private room and allowed Bundy, his wife and son to speak with the candidate for the better part of an hour.

According to Bundy, the two mainly discussed federal land oversight and states’ rights, in addition to education policy — a theme Paul brought up in his speech.

“I don’t think he really understood how land rights really work in the western United States,” Bundy said. “I was happy to be able to sort of teach him.” [Politico]

How nice of Mr. Bundy to be so “educational?”  He doesn’t claim ownership, he claims “rights.”  Bundy 1.0 apparently understands that private ownership means private responsibilities – for fire prevention and fighting, grazing management, re-seeding, and maintenance – and he doesn’t want to pay for these.  He’d like the state to do it and let him put his livestock on the ground for free. Because? Freedom. Freedom as in Free loader.

Reprise:  Little wonder the Rand Campaign staff was anxious to tell us that the session between the Bundys and the candidate wasn’t “scheduled.” The candidate has already had to back away from Mr. Bundy once before:

“I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro,” Bundy told supporters shortly after the standoff, according to video footage captured by an onlooker. He recounted a time he drove past public-housing in Las Vegas “and in front of that government house the door was usually open and the older people and the kids — and there is always at least a half a dozen people sitting on the porch — they didn’t have nothing to do.

“And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do? They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And I’ve often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy? They didn’t get no more freedom.” [Politico]

Thus much for any outreach to African American voters? So, are the Bundys “in tune with” the Paul Campaign? [MSNBC]

And even more:  Last June two Las Vegas Police officers were gunned down by anti-government extremists.  Officers Alyn Beck and Igor Soldo were assassinated and the motivation was reasonably clear:

“…a “Don’t Tread on Me” flag and a Nazi swastika the couple placed on one of the police officers they ambushed Sunday at a pizza restaurant. They pinned onto the other officer’s body a note saying something to the effect of “this is the beginning of the revolution,” Second Assistant Sheriff Kevin McMahill told reporters.” [CNN]

Later reports said the Millers were too much even for the Bundyland bunch, not necessarily because of their views, but because of Jerad Miller’s criminal past.

“Jerad Miller was eager to support Bundy, who was confronted by federal officials after years of refusing to pay grazing fees. On April 9, he wrote on Facebook:

“I will be supporting Clive Bundy and his family from Federal Government slaughter. This is the next Waco! His ranch is under seige right now! The federal gov is stealing his cattle! Arresting his family and beating on them! We must do something. I will be doing something.”

I was out there but they told me and my wife to leave because I am a felon. They don’t seem to understand that they are all felons now for intimidating law enforcement with deadly weapons. So don’t tell you that they need people. We sold everything we had to buy supplies and quit our jobs to be there 24/7. How dare you ask for help and shun us dedicated patriots.” [MJ]

And here comes another Rand Paul connection:

“Jerad Miller’s Facebook “likes” include the NRA, American Patriot Media Network, Support the 2nd Amendment, The Patriot Party, Rand Paul 2016, Ron Paul, the Washington Examiner, Legalize Weed, Draft Judge Andrew Napolitano, the Heritage Foundation, FreedomWorks, American Crossroads, and Allen West.” [MJ]

Granted, any campaign gets its share of whackies. However, the Millers were making connections which the Paul campaign isn’t avoiding: Guns + Ultra Libertarianism + Candidates who espouse the connections between guns and ultra-libertarian views.  And, if one Paul campaign in Nevada could create chaos, there were some people imagining what a second one could do to the state’s clout in national elections.  (AB 302, SB 421, 2015)

The Ron Paul Campaign, which made the 2008 Republican state caucus such an interesting debacle for all to watch unfold, could be the prologue to a 2016 version of chaos created by Rand Paul’s version?  Efforts to convert Nevada’s caucuses into primary elections failed in the latest session of the Legislature. [Ralston]

In Nevada it’s hard to find room to wield a fly swatter without slapping at least one Tea Party enthusiast.  However, with that enthusiasm comes some perilous ground:  Association with dead beat rancher and resident racist Cliven Bundy; Association with the circumstances that left two police officers murdered in a Las Vegas pizza parlor; and, Association with one of the most controversial (but entertaining for Democrats) presidential season caucuses the Republicans have ever convened.  However, there are 496 days until the next presidential election so the GOP could find ways to skirt the impact of the Paul campaign in the Silver State.

Comments Off on Cliven Bundy: How Can We Miss You If You Won’t Go Away?

Filed under conservatism, elections, Nativism, Nevada legislature, Nevada news, Nevada politics, public lands, Republicans, Rural Nevada