Jeff Danziger by Jeff Danziger

Jeff Danziger

Comments (19) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Respectful Troll

    Respectful Troll said, about 1 year ago

    CBS showed video of men with assault rifles on a bridge and in the brush surrounding the Land Management officials. The law enforcement agents had their standard issue 9 mm and shotguns. If men were aiming guns at law officers in any given city of the USA, they would be arrested for obstruction of justice and other issues. The Land Management people backed down rather than die, or kill. The militia people say they won. What did they win?
    Perhaps the way land is managed in Nevada is wrong, but using guns on police and rangers is, in my opinion, sedition at least, and perhaps even treason. Mr. Bundy should have gone through the court system and/or through his senators and congressmen to change the system. Those who pointed guns and threatened the law officers should be arrested.
    Fox news did seem disappointed that no one died.
    Respectfully,
    C.

  2. retpost

    retpost said, about 1 year ago

    Just send in the IRS; they will get the money owed the USA.

  3. sierra60

    sierra60 said, about 1 year ago

    Guess if you wear a cowboy hat and cheat the government Hanity will be on your side.

  4. Silmenume

    Silmenume said, about 1 year ago

    @Respectful Troll

    @Respectful Troll – just go to Youtube and watch all the uploaded videos that came from the people not “CBS” or FoxNews and you will see federal agents who arrived with ASSAULT RIFLES and SNIPER GUNS and lots of them. Sure there were standard issue 9mm pistols and shotguns as sidearms and secondary weapons but put down that pipe your smoking if you believe for an instant that those smaller weapons were the primary weapons of the law enforcement office. Don’t play down or ignore the fact that the police came in with military armaments and overwhelming numbers. 200 officers armed like the military to force a small family to execute a court order to seize assets.

    Note also that the government did NOT make an attempt to follow standard procedure and put a lien on the property or their assets as is STANDARD PROCEDURE. The government went straight to lethal force. Kinda skipped those 2 parts in your piece there didn’t you.

    NOTE – that the pesky constitution CLEARY notes that land that isn’t privately owned defaults to the state NOT the Federal Government. The Federal government in this case, unlike say the federal parks, made no effort to acquire the title to the land – IOW it had no right to the lands or the authority to collect rents for its use. It’s the LAW! So on one hand you bitterly complain about how the locals “broke the law” protecting their property from theft (for the federal government had no authority to seize what it was after – land for Dirty Harry) but you seem to have no problem about the federal government breaking the law in an illegal land grab. So which is it – are you for the law being enforced (equally) or not?

    NOTE – in October 2012 Reuters had an article about Dirty Harry and his son going into business with that chinese solar power company. Just a few months ago there was another news story of Dirty Harry at a groundbreaking ceremony with about 15 or so other people with shovels in hand around 25 or so miles from Bundy’s ranch. The Reid’s were up to their bottom lip with the company that needed the Bundy’s off their ancestral land.

    Didn’t hear that on CBS? You can find both news stories on the net if you look. I know, that rag Reuters can’t be trusted but what can you do?

    NOTE – the federal authorities destroyed a great deal of the infrastructure on the part of the ranch they were occupying during the siege. The federal representative claimed that they had a court order to remove said infrastructure. That LIE was so egregious that the court felt compelled to clarify its own work and state that it had ONLY given the fed authority to collect property for debt purposes it did NOT give authority to the feds to destroy Bundy’s infrastructure. ANOTHER LIE.

    Since the Federal Government was operating outside the law, and a federal agent (Harry Reid) was employing the power of the federal government to use lethal authority in an illegal land grab against its own citizenry what is a citizen to do when looking down sniper barrels and assault rifles (the 9mm’s and shotguns were not the primary arms – note also 200 men were sent in to deal with a family and work force of under 20)

    So what does one do when the federal government comes in illegally and in overwhelming force using military firepower – exactly as the founding fathers felt should be done – resist a tyrannical government. It was SO important to the founding fathers that they made sure that the government could always be resisted making sure that the people (whom the government is supposed to be working for – not the enslavement to the government we have now) had a means to resist said overreaching government.

    You have problems with what the Bundy’s and others did at the ranch in Nevada fending off the unconstitutional actions of the federal government then you have problems with the ideals of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison et al.

    NOTE – we can disagree with each other about how the federal government acted because the founding fathers felt that freedom of speech was absolutely pivotal to keeping a check on the powers of the federal government – they felt so strongly about freedom of speech that an amendment was added to the constitution clarifying what was already implicit in the constitution – that people be free to say that the government is doing bad things to its citizenry. And if speaking about the misdeeds of the federal government isn’t enough to keep it inline there there was a backup provision written into the Bill of Rights – the 2nd Amendment.

    I know all this information which wasn’t on CBS and probably wasn’t taught when you went to public school or college so its allot to take in, but it is all there for the reading should you make the effort.

    BTW – you’re the one who seems disappointed that no one died. You brought up that meme – not the news channel. And given your ignorance of history, the constitution and the facts of the current event maybe you should slake your blood lust somewhere outside the political arena….

  5. Respectful Troll

    Respectful Troll said, about 1 year ago

    @Silmenume

    Thank you for the additional information, Silmenume. I confess to having a limited number of sources and had not been aware of the extra law enforcement personnel or their weapons. CBS only showed the group of police under the bridge.
    If, as you say, the federal gov’t failed to give appropriate time for Mr. Bundy to respond in the courts, and if they acted in haste to seize Mr. Bundy’s cattle in an effort to have the land used for other purposed without proper public discussion or discourse on the matter, then a judge should have been found who would have filed an injunction blocking these actions. The federal gov’t, if your info is correct, is in the wrong and needs to stand back and continue using the courts.
    That said…
    If the IRS seizes my property because of an error, I do not have the right to kill anyone. I can take them to court, and if found to be in the right, I can sue for damages and harm done, and perhaps even file a civil suit against the individuals who failed to do their job properly.
    There seems to be an opinion that had the police/rangers moved in to take the cattle, the private citizens with weapons would have had a right to kill people. The people who were protesting had the right to do so and to be arrested for civil disobedience just as people protesting in other venues have done. As private citizens, they had the right to go to jail for their convictions and be heard in court and let public opinion and the courts decide who was right.
    Harry Reid is an idiot and a cancer in the Senate. I have said from the first days I began posting that Pelosi, Reid, Boehnor, and McConnell are the leaders of the two party oligarchy ruining our nation. If he is indeed part of what you claim, I hope there is a hearing on his behavior and whether h e should be censured.
    Once again, I do appreciate you expanding on this story and I will look for the video you suggest. I still believe that those who aimed guns at Federal and state agents were criminal, but I believe that if you are right, those agents may have been following unlawful orders.
    Except for your point of my not knowing enough about the gov’t and Mr. Bundy’s conflict, I do take issue with your final paragraph. I have no blood lust, and we’d have to debate further for you to make an informed decision about my knowledge of history and the Constitution.
    You presented a well reasoned and respectfully presented argument from which I learned some things. I wish you had ended it as well. I based my comment about some in the media seeing to be disappointed there wasn’t bloodshed based on the tone of some reporters I heard and comments made on news shows. I wish they had spent more time covering the full story instead of sensationalizing the drama.
    Thank you again for the reply. I benefited from most of it.
    Respectfully,
    C.

  6. Respectful Troll

    Respectful Troll said, about 1 year ago

    The Daily Show is satire based on real news, Tigger.
    The sequence of which Truist speaks has Mr. Hannity defending Mr. Bundy’s rights to disobey the police, a right he may actually have if Silmenume is right, but is then shown attacking people with whom Mr. Hannity doesn’t agree for their own acts of law breaking. Mr. Stewart is at his best when he shows his targets, conservatives and liberals alike, saying one thing now, when in the past, they said the exact opposite. For instance, Mr. Obama speaking against the NSA surveillance program in 2008, but talking in support of it now. It would be better to compare The Daily Show to the editorial cartoons to which we comment. Satire addressing the current events of our time. And just as these cartoons call out the hypocrisy of our public figures, Mr. Stewart does the same.
    He may be a comedian, but that doesn’t mean he’s not telling the truth about some things.
    Respectfully,
    C.

  7. Respectful Troll

    Respectful Troll said, about 1 year ago

    Thank you, Masterkrain. I found your submission to these topic very informative.
    Sincerely,
    C.

  8. louieglutz

    louieglutz said, about 1 year ago

    what got lost in the solar thing, is the number of test wells for oil and gas around gold butte recently. for twenty years nobody cared, now they do. hmmm…

  9. ARodney

    ARodney said, about 1 year ago

    The reason that Jon Stewart’s riffs on the news are so funny is that he’s got the facts on his side, and Hannity doesn’t. When did Fox News ever care about truth? It’s about messaging, not truth.

  10. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    Been dealing with these Nevada idiots and others of the “sagebrush rebel” and other movements since the 1960’s. They’ve never bothered to read the Constitution, or the grants for their states from when they joined the union. Bundy is just another in a long line of thieves, liars, and crazies. Which, the true crazies include that Bundy backer on the bridge with a rifle and body armor, it was the “protestors” who were heavily armed, not the BLM rangers who only used tasers.


    Ted Bundy was a better example of these guys “morality base”. Tim McVeigh was a perfect representation of their “patriotism”. Fox News has taken on the role of being their publicist, and even many of the “right wingers” in the media have recognized the law, and lies they tell, it IS interesting.

  11. braindead08

    braindead08 GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    Boy, the Fox “news” “journalists” sure know a lot about the “constitution”.

  12. seybernetx

    seybernetx GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    Of course, having the Constitution on your side is really not all that much help under Obama.

    The only part most of them like is the Fifth Amendment, for some odd reason.

  13. mdavis4183

    mdavis4183 GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    The BLM shot two bulls and destroyed infrastructure.

  14. cjr53

    cjr53 said, about 1 year ago

    National Guard, US Army, United States Marines? Any chance any one or all of our military personnel could round up these guys without killing them too much?

  15. cjr53

    cjr53 said, about 1 year ago

    Navy Seals?

  16. Load the rest of the comments (4).