Bundy a Byproduct of Globilzation
- Thread starter HAY MAKER
- Start date
Help Support Ranchers.net:
hypocritexposer
Well-known member
HAY MAKER said:
Agenda 21, agriculture, gun rights, global socialism, it has it all. obama is a fan...most Democrats/Left of center Repubs. are.
A
Anonymous
Guest
HAY MAKER said:
Yep- and as long as the U.S. consumer is not informed of what is U.S.A. born, raised, and slaughtered beef they can't even support the American rancher in their effort to be pro-American against the imports that tend to grow yearly ....
All US ranchers should be supporting USA BEEF- Born, Raised and Slaughtered - rather than outsourcing to the 40+ countries that beef is imported from and has been passed off as US/domestic because of the USDA stamp...
Oldtimer said:HAY MAKER said:
Yep- and as long as the U.S. consumer is not informed of what is U.S.A. born, raised, and slaughtered beef they can't even support the American rancher in their effort to be pro-American against the imports that tend to grow yearly ....
All US ranchers should be supporting USA BEEF- Born, Raised and Slaughtered - rather than outsourcing to the 40+ countries that beef is imported from and has been passed off as US/domestic because of the USDA stamp...
I do believe in true labeling - - - we have become accustomed to 100% labeling ( like juice ) that only requires a much smaller percentage than 100% - - - our elected officials allow this - - - they also allow food imports without labeling yet every toy or nic nak must have a label of origin.
This makes no sense to me but I am a small cog in the wheel of progress!
George said:
A product is a product of the country in which it last underwent significant change. Your truck might say made in USA, but odds are the parts and pieces came from somewhere else. Your raspberry jam might say made in USA, but the berries could have come from somewhere else. That is the law. I would not want beef raised on my place shipped to the US and processed then have a "Canada" label on it. I'm sure you wouldn't want your healthy cattle shipped here, processed, get contaminated with Listeria in my country and you get the blame for it.
If beef is processed in Canada and shipped to the US then it should have a Canadian label on it, but is also needs to be inspected by the USDA to ensure it's safety don't you think?
Silver said:
Or like a Harley Davidson which says "Assembled in the USA from parts originating in Japan, Mexico and other countries" Is it an American Made product?
I don't know how the label should read but I would suggest "Canadian Beef processed in the USA" or something to that effect - - - bottom line is we should have labeling and it should be truthful and clear.
Mike
Well-known member
If labeled beef was more desirable, the voluntarily labeled beef market would gobble it up.
Capitalism makes a lot of problems go away.
Capitalism makes a lot of problems go away.
That is absolutely correect, Mike. Just look at all the 'brands' of beef available in most stores and meat markets these days. Most are high quality and carefully raised and processed and even identified as to RANCH of origin, something R-CALF wants no part of, it seems.
They just want someone else to do the hard and expensive work of labeling for them. Wonder what their answer if for people who get a poor quality piece of beef with that 'made in the USA' label on it, since they imply that all beef produced here is of the best quality.
That label is just more cost to consumers at a time when prices are already high enough to cause consumers to choose other meats when they would prefer beef.
Their claims of packers profiting hugely just doesn't hold water, either, with market reports the past few days indicating pretty hefty losses for packers.
mrj
They just want someone else to do the hard and expensive work of labeling for them. Wonder what their answer if for people who get a poor quality piece of beef with that 'made in the USA' label on it, since they imply that all beef produced here is of the best quality.
That label is just more cost to consumers at a time when prices are already high enough to cause consumers to choose other meats when they would prefer beef.
Their claims of packers profiting hugely just doesn't hold water, either, with market reports the past few days indicating pretty hefty losses for packers.
mrj
Welfare Queens in Cowboy Hats
Apr 18, 2014 8:31 AM EDT
By James Greiff
The tale of Cliven Bundy, a Nevada cattle rancher, had all the elements of a certain type of political theater, making it inevitable that he would become a hero in the conservative blogosphere and a fixture on Fox News.
The story line, as told in those forums, went something like this: Heavy-handed federal bureaucrats, having seized Bundy's cattle, were forced to back down after being confronted by cowboys on horseback toting nothing more than their side arms and an unshakable faith in the U.S. Constitution. (A little-told detail: A sniper or two were concurrently taking aim at the federal agents.)
Bundy was painted as a man being "squeezed" by the federal government, and deserving of our sympathy. Or, more profoundly, he was cast in the same mold as Mohandas Gandhi and George Washington, men who disobeyed unjust laws to bring about revolutionary change. The word "tyranny" was used so often it became background noise in the news coverage.
Let's dispense with niceties: Bundy is a freeloading scofflaw, a welfare queen in a Stetson who claimed what wasn't his. He took subsidies from U.S. taxpayers and refused to pay the $1.2 million he owed for using federal -- make that our -- land.
Bundy has neither history nor law on his side in his long-running dispute with the U.S. government. He asserts that his grazing rights were established in 1880 when his ancestors settled the land where his ranch sits. By some reasoning understood only by him and his range-war sympathizers, the federal government has no constitutional right to interfere with his grazing cattle.There is a gaping flaw with this argument. As several writers have noted, the Nevada constitution, adopted in 1864 as a condition of statehood, trumps Bundy's right to graze on public land. It says:
That the people inhabiting said territory do agree and declare, that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within said territory, and that the same shall be and remain at the sole and entire disposition of the United States.
Bundy no doubt is pining for the days, which he never actually experienced, when cattlemen could let their herds roam at will on public lands. That changed in 1934 when federal control of grazing was formalized under a law designed to prevent overuse and degradation of the range. The legislation was backed by ranchers (it was drafted by a rancher turned congressman), in part because it made it that much harder for newcomers to get into the business.
The law, the Taylor Grazing Act, gave existing ranchers permits allowing them to run their herds on federal land. In turn, ranchers paid user fees, which were lower than what most private landowners would have charged. Because those fees capture only a bit of the costs of the grazing program, it amounts to a taxpayer subsidy to ranchers of as much as $1 billion a year. Subsequent court rulings clearly established that the law didn't grant ownership rights to ranchers who used federal land.
Bundy's specific complaint dates to 1993, when regulators began a program to protect the endangered desert tortoise. They placed certain grasslands off-limits for grazing, and the government bought out the permits of some ranchers. Among others, Bundy refused to sell and kept grazing his cattle on restricted federal land without a permit.
The fees and fines kept mounting, and Bundy kept losing in court. In 1998, a federal judge permanently barred him from letting his cattle graze on protected federal land.
Finally, agents of the Bureau of Land Management, which oversees grazing rights, began rounding up Bundy's cattle to remove them from federal property a few weeks ago. Things got hot when Bundy's family and other ranchers confronted the agents. Wary of the standoff escalating into another Ruby Ridge or Waco -- totemic events for some Americans -- federal officials backed down and released Bundy's cattle.
Where it goes from here is unclear. But what shouldn't be in dispute is the nature of the conflict. This wasn't a matter of capricious enforcement on the part of the federal government but the steady ratcheting up of pressure on a defiant lawbreaker. There is no grand principle here, just the ill-judgment of a man who has helped himself at the public trough while believing he has a right to pick and choose which laws to obey.
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-04-18/welfare-queens-in-cowboy-hats
Wed Apr 16, 2014 at 02:03 PM PDT.
An Idahoan shows Bundy what a real Western rancher is
byJoan McCarter
Being a Westerner and the daughter and granddaughter of cattle ranchers, I think it's about time that the non-crazy Western ranchers get some equal national media time. Because they're not all federal government-hating, "wise use," sagebrush rebelling, gun-toting crazies—even in a state like Idaho. One of Idaho's most influential cattle ranchers and conservationists is proof of that. His name was Bud Purdy, and in his 96 years, he became sort of a legend in the state. Unfortunately, he passed away this week, but this remembrance from the Idaho Stateman's Rocky Barker tells the story.
Purdy, 96, led the ranching industry into rest and rotation grazing on public lands that both protected the range and improved cattle production. He duck-hunted and skied with Ernest Hemingway and hosted Jimmy Stewart and Gary Cooper at his Picabo Ranch.
He helped start the Idaho Cattle Association, led the University of Idaho Foundation as president and was chairman of the Idaho Association of Commerce and Industry. In addition to the ranch, he and his late wife Ruth owned the Picabo Store, the Picabo Elevator and Silver Creek Supply, a seed business. […]
Purdy donated a 3,500-acre conservation easement on all of the ranch along Silver Creek in the 1990s to the Nature Conservancy, adjacent to its own Silver Creek Preserve. Purdy didn't even take the tax break on the easement valued at $7 million. […]
He loved the cattle business, he explained to writer, producer and author Steve Stuebner in an article in 2012 for the Idaho Rangeland Commission (which he co-founded). "Every morning, you get up and do something different," he said. "You turn out on the range and ride a horse every day. Even now, I go out and make sure the water is OK, check the fences and make sure the gates are closed.
"It's just a constant going out there and doing it," Purdy said. "I was never a cowboy, but I've ridden a million miles."
As one of my good friends here in Idaho wrote on Facebook, "He loved his land so much he owned it and when owning it wasn't enough to preserve it for future generations, he figured out a way to do that."
Cliven Bundy doesn't represent the West. He doesn't represent cattle ranchers. He represents a minority of right-wing cranks who are good at making a lot of noise through threats of violence. He's also nothing more than a common crook.
If you're looking for an emblematic man of the West, it's not Bundy. It's Bud Purdy.
Story and video:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/04/16/1292565/-An-Idahoan-shows-Bundy-what-a-real-Western-rancher-is#
Watch: Jon Stewart Blasts FOX's Hannity for Bundy Hypocrisy, 'Who the hell is on this guy's side?'
April 22, 2014 7:28 am by: Omar Rivero Category: Politics, Videos
Monday night, Jon Stewart took on the the Cliven Bundy, or as he described him, "a classic boy has cow, boy breaks law for 20 years, boy loses cow story", ripping into FOXNews's Sean Hannity and his cohorts' monumental hypocrisy regarding "people scamming off the taxpayers".
Stewart questioned how anyone can see Bundy as an American hero when he's exposing the nonsensical claim that "the federal government is overreaching by saying it exists." Stewart also took Bundy to task for detesting the entire federal government while hypocritically displaying and holding the American flag everywhere, saying, "At least have the decency to create your own damn flag!"
Stewart then focused on Hannity, correctly pointing out that the FOXNews host becomes "mad with rage" when others supposedly scam the taxpayers and "pick and choose what laws to follow", but loves it when this corrupt cowboy engages in shameless tax evasion.
Please watch the video below, via Comedy Central:
http://www.demonews.org/watch-john-stewart-blasts-foxs-hannity-for-bundy-hypocrisy-who-the-hell-is-on-this-guys-side/
Apr 18, 2014 8:31 AM EDT
By James Greiff
The tale of Cliven Bundy, a Nevada cattle rancher, had all the elements of a certain type of political theater, making it inevitable that he would become a hero in the conservative blogosphere and a fixture on Fox News.
The story line, as told in those forums, went something like this: Heavy-handed federal bureaucrats, having seized Bundy's cattle, were forced to back down after being confronted by cowboys on horseback toting nothing more than their side arms and an unshakable faith in the U.S. Constitution. (A little-told detail: A sniper or two were concurrently taking aim at the federal agents.)
Bundy was painted as a man being "squeezed" by the federal government, and deserving of our sympathy. Or, more profoundly, he was cast in the same mold as Mohandas Gandhi and George Washington, men who disobeyed unjust laws to bring about revolutionary change. The word "tyranny" was used so often it became background noise in the news coverage.
Let's dispense with niceties: Bundy is a freeloading scofflaw, a welfare queen in a Stetson who claimed what wasn't his. He took subsidies from U.S. taxpayers and refused to pay the $1.2 million he owed for using federal -- make that our -- land.
Bundy has neither history nor law on his side in his long-running dispute with the U.S. government. He asserts that his grazing rights were established in 1880 when his ancestors settled the land where his ranch sits. By some reasoning understood only by him and his range-war sympathizers, the federal government has no constitutional right to interfere with his grazing cattle.There is a gaping flaw with this argument. As several writers have noted, the Nevada constitution, adopted in 1864 as a condition of statehood, trumps Bundy's right to graze on public land. It says:
That the people inhabiting said territory do agree and declare, that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within said territory, and that the same shall be and remain at the sole and entire disposition of the United States.
Bundy no doubt is pining for the days, which he never actually experienced, when cattlemen could let their herds roam at will on public lands. That changed in 1934 when federal control of grazing was formalized under a law designed to prevent overuse and degradation of the range. The legislation was backed by ranchers (it was drafted by a rancher turned congressman), in part because it made it that much harder for newcomers to get into the business.
The law, the Taylor Grazing Act, gave existing ranchers permits allowing them to run their herds on federal land. In turn, ranchers paid user fees, which were lower than what most private landowners would have charged. Because those fees capture only a bit of the costs of the grazing program, it amounts to a taxpayer subsidy to ranchers of as much as $1 billion a year. Subsequent court rulings clearly established that the law didn't grant ownership rights to ranchers who used federal land.
Bundy's specific complaint dates to 1993, when regulators began a program to protect the endangered desert tortoise. They placed certain grasslands off-limits for grazing, and the government bought out the permits of some ranchers. Among others, Bundy refused to sell and kept grazing his cattle on restricted federal land without a permit.
The fees and fines kept mounting, and Bundy kept losing in court. In 1998, a federal judge permanently barred him from letting his cattle graze on protected federal land.
Finally, agents of the Bureau of Land Management, which oversees grazing rights, began rounding up Bundy's cattle to remove them from federal property a few weeks ago. Things got hot when Bundy's family and other ranchers confronted the agents. Wary of the standoff escalating into another Ruby Ridge or Waco -- totemic events for some Americans -- federal officials backed down and released Bundy's cattle.
Where it goes from here is unclear. But what shouldn't be in dispute is the nature of the conflict. This wasn't a matter of capricious enforcement on the part of the federal government but the steady ratcheting up of pressure on a defiant lawbreaker. There is no grand principle here, just the ill-judgment of a man who has helped himself at the public trough while believing he has a right to pick and choose which laws to obey.
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-04-18/welfare-queens-in-cowboy-hats
Wed Apr 16, 2014 at 02:03 PM PDT.
An Idahoan shows Bundy what a real Western rancher is
byJoan McCarter
Being a Westerner and the daughter and granddaughter of cattle ranchers, I think it's about time that the non-crazy Western ranchers get some equal national media time. Because they're not all federal government-hating, "wise use," sagebrush rebelling, gun-toting crazies—even in a state like Idaho. One of Idaho's most influential cattle ranchers and conservationists is proof of that. His name was Bud Purdy, and in his 96 years, he became sort of a legend in the state. Unfortunately, he passed away this week, but this remembrance from the Idaho Stateman's Rocky Barker tells the story.
Purdy, 96, led the ranching industry into rest and rotation grazing on public lands that both protected the range and improved cattle production. He duck-hunted and skied with Ernest Hemingway and hosted Jimmy Stewart and Gary Cooper at his Picabo Ranch.
He helped start the Idaho Cattle Association, led the University of Idaho Foundation as president and was chairman of the Idaho Association of Commerce and Industry. In addition to the ranch, he and his late wife Ruth owned the Picabo Store, the Picabo Elevator and Silver Creek Supply, a seed business. […]
Purdy donated a 3,500-acre conservation easement on all of the ranch along Silver Creek in the 1990s to the Nature Conservancy, adjacent to its own Silver Creek Preserve. Purdy didn't even take the tax break on the easement valued at $7 million. […]
He loved the cattle business, he explained to writer, producer and author Steve Stuebner in an article in 2012 for the Idaho Rangeland Commission (which he co-founded). "Every morning, you get up and do something different," he said. "You turn out on the range and ride a horse every day. Even now, I go out and make sure the water is OK, check the fences and make sure the gates are closed.
"It's just a constant going out there and doing it," Purdy said. "I was never a cowboy, but I've ridden a million miles."
As one of my good friends here in Idaho wrote on Facebook, "He loved his land so much he owned it and when owning it wasn't enough to preserve it for future generations, he figured out a way to do that."
Cliven Bundy doesn't represent the West. He doesn't represent cattle ranchers. He represents a minority of right-wing cranks who are good at making a lot of noise through threats of violence. He's also nothing more than a common crook.
If you're looking for an emblematic man of the West, it's not Bundy. It's Bud Purdy.
Story and video:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/04/16/1292565/-An-Idahoan-shows-Bundy-what-a-real-Western-rancher-is#
Watch: Jon Stewart Blasts FOX's Hannity for Bundy Hypocrisy, 'Who the hell is on this guy's side?'
April 22, 2014 7:28 am by: Omar Rivero Category: Politics, Videos
Monday night, Jon Stewart took on the the Cliven Bundy, or as he described him, "a classic boy has cow, boy breaks law for 20 years, boy loses cow story", ripping into FOXNews's Sean Hannity and his cohorts' monumental hypocrisy regarding "people scamming off the taxpayers".
Stewart questioned how anyone can see Bundy as an American hero when he's exposing the nonsensical claim that "the federal government is overreaching by saying it exists." Stewart also took Bundy to task for detesting the entire federal government while hypocritically displaying and holding the American flag everywhere, saying, "At least have the decency to create your own damn flag!"
Stewart then focused on Hannity, correctly pointing out that the FOXNews host becomes "mad with rage" when others supposedly scam the taxpayers and "pick and choose what laws to follow", but loves it when this corrupt cowboy engages in shameless tax evasion.
Please watch the video below, via Comedy Central:
http://www.demonews.org/watch-john-stewart-blasts-foxs-hannity-for-bundy-hypocrisy-who-the-hell-is-on-this-guys-side/
Being a rancher and a westerner who has been also involved in the timber industry in the past I can feel a certain amount of sympathy for this guy but their is a limit, As far as his claims go about grazing on that ground for the last 100 years or so no doubt someone did it, but, I read also that his own family bought the land they own and started ranching in that area only around 1948. They say he owns about 350 base acres , being from Montana I am not familiar with the typical Nevada ranch but I thought that for that part of the country It sounded like a pretty small piece of actually deeded land to have and that no wonder he would be in trouble if he lost the grazing lease because with that amount of deeded land he would probably be done for in ranching. However, here's the catch, after this incident If he immediately framed the whole debate around the real scource of the problem, the endangered species act, he might have gained some ground and sympathy from the public, however instead he has used it to expound on a number of far right issues which have no pertinence to it whatsoever, his problem was the desert tortoise and a permit, not if federal agencies have armed officers, and in case you missed it in another interview you can see for your selves on the internet he then go's into a ramble about whether blacks are better off now than when under slavery and he makes some pretty disparaging comments about the social conditions in the black community as well, causing a number of conservative commentators whom has supported him to now quickly back off and giving a gleefull harry reid who jumped on this like hogs on mash a ton of ammo to use against him when instead if he chose his words and issue rightly the damn fool could have Reid still backing on the defensive. I would caution anybody or ag group to be pretty carefull about giving this man too much support after this because he has shown it is just like picking up a hitchhiker , he looked all right, but you really don't yet know just what the hell you got sitting next to you in the pickup going down the road. :roll: :???:
