Recent posts by karmakoolkid on Kongregate

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / GOP and DNC

Errrrrrrrr… CROW, ya kinda have that backwards.
That shit is what the bullshiter conservative crowd wants the hard workers to believe.

“Liberals” are the ones who promote something more along the lines of “socialism”. Ya know, that thing that America already has a lot of …. and the “conservatives” think they should hate …. even while sucking it up like it was hot pancakes on a cold morning.

And, damn few ppl “get rich” through their OWN hard work.
And, I’m certainly not talking about the rich of the small business owner who has 10 or 20 employees that allow him to live in a nice house and drive a new car every 2 years. I’m talking about the rich who wouldn’t be shit w/out the 100 employees who have far less than the “boss” does.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / GOP and DNC

Turlog, exceptions (such as Oprah) don’t prove a damn thing. Such isn’t mainstream and therefore can’t solve mainstream issues.

The huge thing that you are missing in your assumptions is that it isn’t the rich, who got that way via the GOOD kind of capitalism, who are the real and danger (to a decent, moral society); it is those Robber Baron types that bombcog so aptly describes as being “Sultans” (something I think that ya just aren’t aware of how much wealth that is—I find that few actually do).

Do YOU seriously think something as immoral as the below is what our Founding Fathers intended? Do you think it is what most common ppl are willing to operate under …. esp. if it means they are going to be poor all of their lives? Ya know, the antithesis of the American Dream thing. We may not have a real caste system here; but the poorer (less money one has) one is—the less likely they are to be upwardly mobile. THAT is a simple fact of life. No amount of hard work and improved education is much at all some kind of guarantee that one is going to be catching many brass rings on the merry-go-round ride in a life where most all of the great odds are stacked in favor of those who are in charge of making those odds. Ya know, the Captains of Industry …. Industry as in what most of us work for/in.

""Robber baron" is a derogatory term of social criticism originally applied to certain wealthy and powerful 19th-century American businessmen. The term appeared as early as the August 1870 issue of The Atlantic Monthly1 magazine. By the late 19th century, the term was typically applied to businessmen who used exploitative practices to amass their wealth.2 These practices included exerting control over natural resources, influencing high levels of government, paying subsistence wages, squashing competition by acquiring their competitors to create monopolies and raise prices, and schemes to sell stock at inflated prices to unsuspecting investors.2 The term combines the sense of criminal (“robber”) and illegitimate aristocracy (a baron is an illegitimate role in a republic).3
We hear now on all sides the term “robber barons” applied to some of the great capitalists. … The old robber barons of the Middle Ages who plundered sword in hand and lance in rest were more honest than this new aristocracy of swindling millionaires.1
—Lida F. Baldwin, quoting the August 1870 issue of The Atlantic Monthly, writing in 1907 about how little business had changed in 35 years."

I don’t know why YOU want to say: " If you want to completely close the wealth gap you say something like “Everybody should have the same amount of money”."

It’s almost like ya’re trolling us.
How difficult can it be to understand that “CLOSING” the wealth gap doesn’t meant to COMPLETELY CLOSE it? But, you do make a good point via your “mistake”. Perhaps those of us SJW’s should change “close” to “narrow to sensible margins”?

I just assumed that most intelligent ppl would understand that “closing” to the point of everyone having the same amounts (how in the hell would that happen anyway?) just isn’t at all realistic.

Yet, I often do encounter a host of UN-intelligent ppl. who are grossly imbued—likely feed by Fox News,—w/ the concept that “closing” the wealth gap does mean that “all students will be given the same grades”. Yes, I’ve actually had that one “explained” to me.

Oddly enough, explained by ppl that would be oh-so much better off were all of the nation’s wealth to be spread around on a basis that reflects fairness in how it was earned and by who.

Recently, here in Wichita, we had a guy running for Fed Representative. He is a millionaire and would often remind us of how he employs 400 hundred and those 400 families DEPEND on him for their livelihood ….. meaning that this makes him qualified to be their and the his districts Representative.

What fucking gall. What this asshole isn’t able to grasp—all because he is the typical BAD capitalist—is that it is HE that is dependent on those 400 employees to make and keep him his money. It is attitudes like his that enables him to cheat his employees out of their fair share of the profits of THEIR labors.

Please …. OH PLEASE do not give me any of this shit about how the “capitalist” is the one who takes “ALL” of the risks. All one needs do is have a good look around and see how much an employee risks and can lose by what is called NO job security ….. all too often simply because of capricious and callous decisions by the capitalists.

Laws and regulations tend to protect the capitalist rather than the employees in a lot of these kinds of situations. I’ll let bombcog and kasic supply the links to show this. I don’t have the time and they certainly have the better ability to do so.

But, final point: Turlog … ya’re waaaaaaay off base in your understanding of the enormous wealth gap PROBLEM in America today. Perhaps ya’re not aware of this

Something that you, and I think MOST ppl in Ameica, don’t understand about the WEALTH gap is that a huge number of ppl at the bottom don’t even HAVE wealth of any nature …. even miniscule for them to even be considered as a bona fide participant in the gap “war”. They are too busy just trying to survive to do any “fighting” in this war. That is why they don’t even feel their vote matters …. esp. when Citizens United has pretty much made it worthless anyway. Money is king and poor ppl don’t have any of it.

If one doesn’t have a portfolio, a hefty IRA or 401K …. or even a paid-for house and decent car they could sell and live off the proceeds for 10 years, then they have near-NOTHING in the way of what most ppl in America would even call rich … let alone wealthy.

Remember what Chris Rock says about the difference between rich and wealthy:
shaquille o’neal is rich; the guy that writes his check is wealthy.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / GOP and DNC

Damn, I’m not able to edit my posts again. It comes and goes for some reason.
But, I wanted to add that when my wife managed a fancy restaurant many years back, an anethesiologist would come in w/ another couple several nights a week and treat them to to lavish meals and usually buy a $50 bottle of wine to go w/ the meals.

I didn’t know such doctoring was so profitable.
My cardiologist was remodeling his house in a very upscale neighborhood and was complaining because some marble from Italy for the steps up to his special little office was taking a long time. He thinks Brownback is doing a fine job for Kansas. I wonder it that could be because he might not now be paying any income taxes?

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / GOP and DNC

Pete, would you consider a lot of the money being spent (and safe-guarded from taxes) by those making over a $1,000,000 NET a year as being a fiscal conservative.

I’m sure they have “conserved” a tidy nest egg in a portfolio.
But, I’m betting that were they to be a weeeeebit more conservative w/ spending on a lot of things, they could do a lot more things something along the lines of “Christian” (which I’m fairly sure they pat themselves on the back as being).

As you point out, such evaluations is going to be highly based on perspective.

What I mean by my being a fiscal conservative was to show that I’m not a total liberal just because my social views tend to fall in that category. Some ppl just don’t seem to be able to separate a person’s political stance into fiscal and social.

Yes, I think money should be spent on NEEDED social programs.
BUT, I think it should be spent very wisely and w/ tenacious oversight.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / GOP and DNC

Pete, whole-heartedly agree …. eps.

Those tax-deductions that benefit the wealthy (at the expense of the poor) should be eliminated REGARDLESS of the overall tax plan being considered… yet the GOP entire candidate pool is advocating for greater tax breaks for the wealthy. What the hell?!

As an economic conservative, I am totally on board w/: If we waste our tax dollars on wasteful programs, it doesn’t matter HOW low our taxes are.

We simply have to spend out tax dollars the way a middle class family budgets for their expenses …. damn little-2-no waste. We need to eliminate bloat, worthless programs (in the military?), and insane bureaucracy.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Even Egypt knows Democrats and Obama are total jokes.

Originally posted by Bobneson:
Originally posted by petesahooligan:

Well, at least the economy is improving, unemployment as at an all-time low, gas is below $3 a gallon, and we’re getting healthcare to people. Thanks, Obama!

Good things and bad things happen when a man is President. I’ve found too many people just blame or thank the President for it. Just because a man is in office, doesn’t mean he had the full hand in it.

Example : Gay Marriage gets Legalized. People start thanking Obama for taking a huge effort towards making it happen.
Another Example : Mt McKinley gets renamed to “Denali”. People start blaming and trashing Obama for stripping this iconic Mountain of it’s name.

Bob, you definitely are correct in saying: Just because a man is in office [Pres.], doesn’t mean he had the full hand in it.

I hope you do understand that Obama had NOTHING to do w/ legalization—actually a recognizing of citizen’s rights—of Gay Marriage. It was SCOTUS that did that.

Things get renamed all the time. Lawrence-Dumont Stadium, Spangles, the “canal route” is now MKL Memorial Hgwy (and, I wish more ppl would call it King’s Highway).

Pete, where is your gasoline below $3 a gal?
Here in Wichita, reg is $1.47.
By using a particular food mart, we earn points towards getting a $1.00 (sometimes/someways a bit more) off a gal at their stations. Wife and I filled our vehicles the other day (35 gal limit) for $0.33 a gal.

Happy days are here again.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / GOP and DNC

Bob, your approach to solving our current economic crises is very short-sighted and limited. Focusing on strengthening the dollar is woefully inadequate.

I’m afraid that your bias against socialism and lack of understanding about how it isn’t GOOD capitalism in the U.S. that is the problem … that it is the BAD kind that is where the wealth gap is being created.

As I’ve already suggested, you really, REALLY need to get a handle on the premises Sanders is touting. It does away w/ bad capitalism … mostly by taking away their machinations for unfairly grabbing the working classes’ fair share of the GNP. Bernie is saying: let’s FINALLY appropriately tax the wealthy and reduce that of the middle and lower classes.

THAT is the way to increase the value of your spending money.
You won’t be taxed so much …. esp. the part that subsidizes the poor’s wages;
they will now have enough to decently live on.
Public services will be addressed and improved.
Roads, schools, etc. will get what they now so desperately need.

Your understanding of how capitalism worked in the 18th, 19th, and early 20th centuries is woefully lacking. Do a bit of studying what Robber Barons are. Try to understand that FDR’s programs were the fix for the shit that the wealthy did in the early 1900’s. Understand that such programs are what is now needed …. for the same reasons.

And, if the govt. dropped quite a bit of taxes, we might keep more of our own money. BUT, simply math has to show that the very services that our taxes pay for would then disappear. Can you imagine what the Interstate Highway system would look like …. for just one example.

It isn’t so much a matter of JUST tax relief for us 99%; it is a matter of the 1% being taxed in order to continue govt. programs and enhance them.

Don’t get me wrong on this. As I’ve pointed out before, I’m an economic conservative. I believe govt. expenditures MUST BE sensible, accountable (no bloat and waste), and unnecessary ones shit-canned. Our govt. MUST spend money the way most of us working ppl would.

I think Sanders is the man to do that for us.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / GOP and DNC

CROW, a I deeply believe that a huge bulk of govt. “welfare” programs would cease to be needed if we can do something significant about wealth inequity. The “low end” working ppl being paid a decent LIVING wage would no long need to have their income SUBSIDIZED by the taxing the middle class.

This means more money for the middle class and/or money to be spent on improvements-in-living standards for all of the 99%. This includes a huge host of very needed things …. such a infrastructure which means safe roads and drinking water.

But, one of the biggest boons to our society from it having money to spend on betterment would be the investment in our children’s future by a much improved funding of education in America. I find it very odd that some many “good” Americans think Bernie to be some wild-eyed socialist, in part, because he wants to extend the concept of FREE public education beyond K-12 …. in a time when a collage degree is equivalent to a high school diploma 100 years ago.

What parallels this “voting against their own best interests” on this free collage thing is how at one time, ONLY the rich could afford to go to collage. Why must the “little” ppl seem hell bent on perpetuating such snobbery? Well, could it be because “the wealth-establishment” is doing a damn fine job—on two fronts—of manifesting this attitude in them?

One: By vilifying Sanders for his concept because it reeks of socialism, the establishment latches onto one of the best control studs it has developed in the American mind …. FEAR of being a commie even if it means that they are being denied their fair share of the communal rewards of their labor.

Two: By continually driving down the middle class’ ability to pay for collage education, the “establishment” is once again making such a luxury to be enjoyed and benefited by only the wealthy. One of the major perks of this is that it doubles down in that an uneducated population is one that is much easier to control.

Kool, huh?

And, NO … CROW.
Despotism, hate, and violence has caused the refugee crisis in Europe.
If Europe, and the rest of the Christian & good Muslim world, had done something worthy in the Middle East to stop that shit, those ppl would still be living there and doing so in a decent fashion.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / GOP and DNC

Originally posted by issendorf:
It should be noted that the independent organization responsible for that one-sheet advocates for tax reform and casually equate lower taxes with economic growth…

It’s pretty well established that lower, flatter tax rates are more favorable than higher, more progressive tax rates.

“Established” by who?
Conservatives that want to maintain the status quo of believing they can somehow maintain middle class “wealth” that way?

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / GOP and DNC

Originally posted by petesahooligan:

Wait, let’s back up a second. What is your point?

LOL, ya mean: what’s your bias?
Isn’t fair and balanced what Fox News tries to push?
Thought so.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / GOP and DNC

Originally posted by Bobneson:

Karma Kool, I once made a joke to someone I know that when Bernie was a baby he was kissed on the forehead by FDR, in reference to all of Bernie’s Liberal ideologies. Bernie was born in 1941, so that isn’t all far off for an possibility.

Just so we are clear on this, if you will read what Kasic said (in the quote box), you will see that he was largely talking about the programs FDR stood for during most of his years in the OF.

Bob, well before ya go off the deep end w/ a knee-jerk reaction to the fact that FDR & Bern are socialist democrats, liberals, progressives, Democrats, or whatever other name ya’ve been told to (by “you know who”) identify w/ the Evil People that you are supposed to see as being YOUR enemy, I HIGHLY suggest you do a massive study on FDR and what he stood for.

I think you will find that you are much closer aligned w/ that ideology than that of most of the GOP. Of course, I’m largely talking about economics here. And, after all, isn’t this where the main problem America is having comes from …. all because of the enormous, insanely ugly wealth gap.

Once properly funded (mostly by taxing the “rich”), most social programs will simply come down to falling within Constitutional dictates.

Here is a little something from Rants & Raves in Tulsa OK via craigslist.
It gives a bit of an insight about what I’m saying here.
Of course, if YOU are truly interested in this entire issue, ya can always do some independent research into the topic on your own. The information is there and a lot of it is unbiased.

Enacting Sanders Agenda Would Catapult Economy
“Enacting Sanders Agenda Would Catapult Economy, Shatter Inequality”, by Lauren McCauley
“First comprehensive, independent analysis shows that incomes would rise, job markets would grow, and prosperity would be more widely shared if Sanders’ proposals were put into practice”

“With so many bold proposals, what might a Bernie Sanders presidency do to the national economy?

It turns out, great things.

In fact, according to the economist who performed the first independent, comprehensive analysis of the candidate’s economic agenda, a Sanders win could usher in a modern-day “New Deal,” [FDR’s work] under which Americans would see incomes rise, job markets grow, and an overall budget surplus by his second term.

“Like the New Deal of the 1930s, Senator Sanders’ program is designed to do more than merely increase economic activity,” said University of Massachusetts Amherst economics professor Gerald Friedman, who conducted the study, which was given exclusively to CNNMoney.

And keeping in line with Sanders’ promises to work towards a more “moral” distribution of wealth and create an economy for the 99 percent, Friedman added that the candidate’s plan will “promote a more just prosperity, broadly-based with a narrowing of economy inequality.”

Assuming the Vermont senator was able to push his ambitious spending and tax proposals through Congress, the analysis found that median household income would reach $82,200 by 2026, which CNN notes is “far higher than the $59,300 projected by the Congressional Budget Office.”"

Read More At:

The average American is to stupid to try something that would help them. They would rather watch the rich man continue to fuck them over.
Bob, that part about “median household income would reach $82,200 by 2026” should be all ya need to generate interest for a good study into what Bernie is proposing. Forget what labels are being used; they are just covers for a book. The important thing is to look at the intended results that are the text between the covers.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / GOP and DNC

We’re going to have to go through another trust-busting phase, worker’s rights movement, and eliminate the corruption in our political system before this gets any better. The big first step is reversing the decision that money = speech and then making it ILLEGAL (why the hell it wasn’t before who knows) to give money to politicians other than a salary THEY DON’T DETERMINE FOR THEMSELVES.

I’ve been saying this all along

Bernie is just FDR reincarnated.

Feel the Bern;
or, just get burned by those greedy bastards in power we trust.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / GOP and DNC

I don’t understand how Kasic can say: “The differences [of the two parties] are almost entirely social, not economic.”

Esp. when the GOP is so in bed w/ the wealthy …. which is what is causing the huge economic divide … which is directly responsible for most all of the shortcomings involved in social programs. I would include infrastructure in “social” programs. A large amount of society is drinking lead in Flint due to pipes that need to be replaced.

Am I missing something here?
Doesn’t follow the money still have impact?

BTW, this is a great thread. We’ve long-time have kicked around the various positions of the political spectrum … just never a side-by-side comparison like this.

Quick, tell me who this is.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / turkey call russia "non-seuorsly country"

A really great reply, Frosty.
Just know that we’re dealing w/ an OT alt.
Check out most any of his 85 posts since less than 24 hr “joining”.
Several of them deleted.
Others should be.
All of them just stupid, short, nonsense quips.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The first plasma: the Wendelstein 7-X fusion device is now in operation

Wheels for evil

I’d venture to guess that the light bulb idea for the wheel happened when man used round logs to roll something along. Just take out matter in the middle to create an axle and there ya go.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Gay Marriage: A Great Loss for Moralism

Originally posted by vadermon:

Originally posted by n8crow:

II support gay marriage. But oppose gay adoption. I don’t like them, but if they can marry they’ll stop whining. But gay adoption is wrong. Its a 90% chance the child will grow up gay and also imagine the humiliation they have to face when the kids at school find out they have 2 gay dads? It seems unfair.

I’ve adopted 5 kids. All straight. Doing great in school.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm….. your profile says you are 22 y.o.
I didn’t realize it was that easy to adopt FIVE kids.
In fact, I had always heard the process to be lengthy and difficult.
And, why “straight”?
Is there any significance to that?
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / King Barack HUSSEIN Obama FURIOUS after armed revolutionaries take over government building

jhco is a bit myopic when it comes to seeing the true source of manipulation of our society. He believes it is the “gumment” doing it when, in truth, the govt. is only a tool of the wealthy to enhance their control over others. A very few corporations hold tremendous control over our food supply & processing.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / if there was another world war would you fight in it?

Originally posted by jhco50:
Originally posted by Kasic:
.This is exactly why our countries let in the muslims, hoping no harm will befall themselves…

I rather think the reason we “let the muslims in” is because a majority of us (slim majority) don’t wish to be bigots and hypocrites.

Then you will be a victim.

“We” are already “victims” of radicalized, far-right wackos who think the American flag should be flown upside-down daily.

Why is the US Flag diplayed [sic] Upside Down?
“The upside down U.S. flag is an official signal of distress. It is not meant to be, and is not officially recognized as any type of disrespect when so displayed for the right reasons. To the contrary, here is the relevant part of the US Code of Laws regarding how to fly the flag when in distress:
Title 36, U.S.C., Chapter 10
As amended by P.L. 344, 94th Congress
Approved July 7, 1976

§ 176. Respect for flag: No disrespect should be shown to the flag of the United States of America; the flag should not be dipped to any person or thing. Regimental colors, State flags, and organization or institutional flags are to be dipped as a mark of honor.

(a) The flag should never be displayed with the union down, except as a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property.

Most individuals who have served in the military service of our nation will (or should) recognize this signal.

As a result of the many traitors and enemies we as a free people have, both foreign and domestic, as a result of the many unconstitutional acts, legislation and atrocities passed and/or committed against US citizens and their life, liberty and property, and as a result of policies that have allowed (and continue to allow) enemies of this nation to enter in large numbers through a porous border policy, I believe the life, liberty and property of US Citizens are in dire danger and distress."

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Any good Book suggestions?

I think it says a lot about a man that is attracted to strong women … as opposed to guys that want to be controlling; in whatever degrees.

I’m not talking about a dude that wants a strong woman to fight his battles for him
My wife, my friend has my back (and I hers) to form a team that is formidable.

It’s a bit like the song “16 Tons”: one fist made of iron; the other made of steel. If the left one don’t get you, the right one will.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Black Students: "Give us separate but equal segregated dorms!!"

If a person has little serious knowledge of their “enemy”, their reactions to it are likewise limited. Refusal to entertain a good observation is foolishly self-imposed bias of some nature. Listening to objectional ideology is, at the worst, a waste of your time. At best, well …. isn’t that one obvious?

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Black Students: "Give us separate but equal segregated dorms!!"

Originally posted by petesahooligan:

The schism, as I see it, on college campuses in regards to race is the variance between hostile environments that make a person feel ostracized and the subjugation of free expression.

When those two co-exist — and they co-exist all the time — it can be a vibrant, intellectually charged environment.

The resistance, onlineidiot, is not overt white supremacy but rather inert white indifference.

Nicely stated.
However, I’d say it goes much further than just college campuses.
Look at our election process.
Look at how we allow ourselves to be enslaved by the wealty.
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / King Barack HUSSEIN Obama FURIOUS after armed revolutionaries take over government building

Damn, I forgot that Oregon is a part of Texas.
Bomb, if your parents can successfully burn, who is to say those ranchers in that area can’t?

and, c’mon … “burned out federal land”
Bomb, you’ve made a decent rebuttal.
You don’t need to pull a vika on me w/ that shit.

Shit, I wasn’t aware that EVERYONE who writes a blog is a liar.
I also didn’t know that the Harney County District Attorney wasn’t a part of the judicial system and wasn’t authorized to refuse to prosecute.
Hmmmmmm… I like how sometimes this and sometimes that about actual criminals is sufficient to smear any and all actions and issues those ranchers have. I really like how you inductively rationalize these things.

But, I do challenge your information on “Domestic terrorists tend to come from that area. Secessionist militants come from that area. Covered up murders, crony politics, nepotistic petty crime all come from that area.”

And, “It is my opinion that small town flyover folk have no perspective. They’re overeager to flex muscles they don’t really have and make demands of the majority of the country with all the vindictiveness you can only muster up when you believe you’re the “true” heart of something as big as the United States.”

There’s no need for hyperbole: " That level of pride and routine small-mindedness is what caused this debacle, not some secret and vast conspiracy from the Federal government of the United States."

The link I gave reported ONLY that it was a very localized bullying by the BLM & FWS of those ranchers. But I do appreciate the tutorial on those other govt. agencies. It helped the focus on this singular issue …. a bunch. lol
Overkill support of a point doesn’t really help all that much.

I’m unable to fathom this shit about these ppl being terrorists.
But then, I don’t know them as well as you apparently do.

Bear in mind that I am in agreement about this whole militia thing that developed recently. My focus is on what precipitated it.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / King Barack HUSSEIN Obama FURIOUS after armed revolutionaries take over government building

vika, it’s become very obvious that all you want to do is argue … and do it from a very stupid position since your information isn’t at all relevant in a common sense way.

One: scrub brush doesn’t burn hot enough to create a sucking wind.

Two: and this is the kicker in how you won’t read, think about, and adjust your position when it is pointed out that you don’t know shit about what ya’re talking. I suspect that all you did (as usual?) was Google fire management and paraphrase it. But, thanks for the science lesson … it was a hoot. lol

Until you ACTUALLY experience such a controlled burn, ya probably ought to just STFU about it …. eh?

Three: A square mile has 640 acres.
127 acres is NOT “over a square mile of land”
Didn’t do your “homework” …. eh?
It’s now obvious that you aren’t reading much of what I write.
I made that very clear in at least one post.
Kinda getting hardheaded on this …. aren’t you?
Oooopps, I best not be fanning the flames here….
Sorry, couldn’t resist. lol

Four: NO, there isn’t “always landmarks”.
Please, don’t assume shit that ya know absolutely nothing about.
The western plains in the U.S. are NOTHING like what I’ve seen in movies showing Scotland and England w/ their marking of rural areas.
And, your insinuation that they might have been “so plum drunk” is making you look very pathetic at this point. How desperate to be right can one get? vika, it’s okay to be wrong every now and then. Why your need to be victim blaming (yeah, I’m now “mostly” on their side) here? Well, I pretty much know the reason for that.


Doing a ‘controlled’ burn with absolutely no control. The fire got out of hand, that is self-evident. Thus they were recklessly endangering land it was not their right to decide how to manage.
For the luv of gawd, give it a rest, vika.

If the very state this happened in felt this way, it would have ended there except of the craziness of the BLM & FWS. “Both Dwight and Steven were booked and on multiple Oregon State charges. The Harney County District Attorney reviewed the accusation, evidence and charges, and determined the accusations against Dwight & Steven Hammond did not warrant prosecution and dropped all the charges.”

That the Fed govt. tried this father & son under a Terrorism law is as ridiculous as you are being in this discussion.

The Malheur reserve has 187,747 acres.
A scant 127 acres—that WERE NOT permanently damaged—burned, which is actually beneficial. certainly IS NOT “recklessly endangering land”.

At the very least, read the full report on the history of the harassment of that family by the Feds. BEFORE you go shooting your mouth off any more about this issue. YOU say you like to balance your intake of information …. WELL THEN, DO IT.

At the very least, look DEEP into your soul and see if there isn’t any COMPASSION for these ppl, who very likely, have suffered mightily at the hands of a faction of the govt. that has become the very thing it is supposed to protect us from.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / King Barack HUSSEIN Obama FURIOUS after armed revolutionaries take over government building

“(i) In the early fall of 2001, Steven Hammond (Son) called the fire department, informing them that he was going to be performing a routine prescribed burn on their ranch. Later that day he started a prescribed fire on their private property. The fire went onto public land and burned 127 acres of grass. The Hammonds put the fire out themselves. There was no communication about the burn from the federal government to the Hammonds at that time. Prescribed fires are a common method that Native Americans and ranchers have used in the area to increase the health & productivity of the land for many centuries.

(j) In 2006 a massive lightning storm started multiple fires that joined together inflaming the countryside. To prevent the fire from destroying their winter range and possibly their home, Steven Hammond (Son) started a backfire on their private property. The backfire was successful in putting out the lightning fires that had covered thousands of acres within a short period of time. The backfire saved much of the range and vegetation needed to feed the cattle through the winter. Steven’s mother, Susan Hammond said: “The backfire worked perfectly, it put out the fire, saved the range and possibly our home”.

(j1) The next day federal agents went to the Harney County Sheriff’s office and filled a police report making accusation against Dwight and Steven Hammond for starting the backfire. A few days after the backfire a Range-Con from the Burns District BLM office asked Steven if he would meet him in town (Frenchglen) for coffee. Steven accepted. When leaving he was arrested by the Harney County Sheriff Dave Glerup and BLM Ranger Orr. Sheriff Glerup then ordered him to go to the ranch and bring back his father. Both Dwight and Steven were booked and on multiple Oregon State charges. The Harney County District Attorney reviewed the accusation, evidence and charges, and determined the accusations against Dwight & Steven Hammond did not warrant prosecution and dropped all the charges.

(k) In 2011, 5 years after the police report was taken, the U.S. Attorney Office accused Dwight and Steven Hammond of completely different charges; they accused them of being “Terrorists” under the Federal Anti terrorism Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. This act carries a minimum sentence of five years in prison and a maximum sentence of death. Dwight & Steven’s mug shots were all over the news the next week posing them as “Arsonists”. Susan Hammond (Wife & Mother) said: “I would walk down the street or go in a store, people I had known for years would take extreme measures to avoid me”.

(q) June 22, 2012, Dwight and Steven were found guilty of starting both the 2001 and the 2006 fires by the jury. However, the federal courts convicted them both as “Terrorists” under the 1996 Anti terrorism Act. Judge Hogan sentenced Dwight (Father) to 3 months in prison and Steven (son) to 12 months in federal prison. Both were also stipulated to pay $400,000 to the BLM. Judge Hogan overruling the minimum terrorist sentence, commented if the full five years were required it would be a violation of the 8th amendment (cruel and unusual punishment). The day of the sentencing Judge Hogan retired as a federal judge. In his honor the staff served chocolate cake in the courtroom.

® On January 4, 2013, Dwight and Steven reported to prison. They fulfilled their sentences, (Dwight 3 months, Steven 12 months). Dwight was released in March 2013 and Steven, January 2014.

(s) Sometime in June 2014, Rhonda Karges, Field Manager for the BLM, and her husband Chad Karges, Refuge Manager for the Malheur Wildlife Refuge (which surrounds the Hammond ranch), along with attorney Frank Papagni exemplified further vindictive behavior by filing an appeal with the 9th District Federal Court seeking Dwight’s and Steven’s return to federal prison for the entire 5 years.

(t) In October 2015, the 9th District Court “re-sentenced” Dwight and Steven, requiring them to return to prison for several more years. Steven (46) has a wife and 3 children. Dwight (74) will leave Susan (74) to be alone after 55 years of marriage. If he survives, he will be 79 when he is released."

I highlighted the timeline to show just how long vindictive hatred can last …. esp. when it is in the hands of petty bureaucrats.

Shameful ….. shameful and ugly and sickening.
Hopefully, Pres. Obama will pardon anyone involved in all of this;
and will straighten out the whole mess w/ the BLM & FWS;
and pay some $eriou$ reparations to ALL of the families wronged in any of this very likely shit that has been going on there and elsewhere.

Here is a “report” from someone that got into the compound for a short period. It shows the ppl. to be rational & reasonable. I can well understand their frustrations w/ faraway Fed govt. (as opposed to more involved state govt.) that has likely treated them in the manner described above.

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / King Barack HUSSEIN Obama FURIOUS after armed revolutionaries take over government building

Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

Jailing two ppl for an accidental burning of 127 acres in a scrub-brush area is hardly a major crime. 160 acres is only a quarter mile by a quarter mile square. Good grief, I don’t blame those ranchers for being major pissed at the Fer overreach on this.

It’s not that hard to place windbreaks and other guiding measures before starting a fire, You should be able to control its direction and to prevent it spilling onto land that you don’t own. Not bothering to do this is reckless endangerment at the very least.

Windbreak …. eh?
vika, I didn’t know that you were such an expert in this area.
One DOES NOT burn when it is windy.
How do YOU know they didn’t have appropriate means for controlling the fire?
Reports say that they put the fire out themselves.
Such burn-offs are called CONTROLLED burns for a reason.
I’m not sure if there was any means marking the boundary (fence), but I doubt there were chalk lines drawn out there.

What is the shit of “at the very least” & “reckless endangerment”?
Endangerment to what/who?
Reports say it was a PRESCRIBED burn and that the county sheriff had been notified of it.

vika, I well know why YOU are so adamant about bloating your position on this.
I haven’t a clue why BombCog is. He is off a mile about INTENT. And, his armchair lawyer bloviation was therefore unnecessary to the discussion. The real intent here, as reported in the below link, is what the Fed govt. has been doing to the ranchers there for the past 30 years.

I’m guessing that neither one of you have EVER been involved in or seen such a controlled burn? I have, I know what is involved. It is one thing to “defend” a position; it is another to look the fool by standing on scant data.

As Bombcog said, it is a very dangerous tool, and the more dangerous a tool is, the more precautions you should be taking with its use.

Here we go again … assuming the fire in these PRESCRIBED burn-offs is a “dangerous” TOOL. And, (likely?) assuming that the ranchers didn’t know how to use this TOOL.

AGAIN, 127 acres is NOTHING.
It is a quarter mile by a quarter mile square.
Athletes RUN near full-out for a quarter mile.
I’ve plowed many a quarter.

Add in as others have said, that the State is currently a tinderbox because of the drought, and the recklessness of their action becomes much more damning.

What “others”?
The only one I see on the con side of this is you and Bomb.
Stan weighed in and didn’t really back it up. I addressed his “question”.
And yes, I am from a state that has two distinct annual rainfall zones.
Eastern Kansas is lush w/ vegetation from frequent rains; western Kansas is much like eastern Oregon. The moisture from the Gulf of Mexico just doesn’t usually curve that far to the west in Kansas and clouds from the Pacific don’t make it over the Rockies and what little that comes from Baja area cuts across Arizona and aims for eastern Kansas.

The west sides of Oregon & Washington state get plenty of rain from the coast. The east sides don’t … the clouds just don’t get over the Cascade mountains. The east sides are in a near-permanent state of “drought” …. at least by comparison to the west sides and most any area that isn’t semi-arid. The map in this link explains it.

I’m not going to offer this link as being the God’s Truth; but it certainly smacks of it.

I just couldn’t figure out why the ranchers in that area—supported by ranchers from other areas (with similar problems?)—would have such strong grievances. While I still think an ARMED takeover of a Fed facility is extreeeemly foolhardy, perhaps a lesser dramatic action was necessary to get the nation’s attention as to what the Fed govt. is up to out there.

I can’t believe the ACLU or some “Watergate” style reporter didn’t get involved.

Here are a few excerpts from that link. If no one cares to read the entire link (about 10 min.), then I don’t want to hear any thing more from them on this issue. It reveals a very ugly picture of the U.S. govt.

“(a3) By 1980 a conflict was well on its way over water allocations on the adjacent privately owned Silvies Plain. The FWS wanted to acquire the ranch lands on the Silvies Plain to add to their already vast holdings. Refuge personnel intentionally diverted the water bypassing the vast meadow lands, directing the water into the rising Malheur Lakes. Within a few short years the surface area of the lakes doubled. Thirty-one ranches on the Silvies plains were flooded. Homes, corrals, barns and graze-land were washed a way and destroyed. The ranchers who once fought to keep the FWS from taking their land, now broke and destroyed, begged the FWS to acquire their useless ranches. In 1989 the waters began to recede; now the once thriving privately owned Silvies plains are a proud part of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge claimed by the FWS (Fish & Wildlife Services).

(a2) During the 1970’s the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), in conjunction with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), took a different approach to get the ranchers to sell. Ranchers were told: “grazing was detrimental to wildlife and must be reduced”; 32 out of 53 permits were revoked and many ranchers were forced to leave. Grazing fees were raised significantly for those who were allowed to remain. Refuge personnel took over the irrigation system claiming it as their own.


(a4) By the 1990’s the Hammonds were one of the very few ranchers who still owned private property adjacent to the refuge. Susie Hammond in an effort to make sense of what was going on began compiling facts about the refuge. In a hidden public record she found a study done by the FWS in 1975. The study showed the “no use” policies of the FWS on the refuge were causing the wildlife to leave the refuge and move to private property. The study showed the private property adjacent to the Malheur Wildlife Refuge produced four times more ducks and geese than the refuge. The study also showed the migrating birds were 13 times more likely to land on private property than on the refuge. When Susie brought this to the attention of the FWS and refuge personnel, she and her family became the subjects of a long train of abuses and corruptions.

(g) The Hammonds experienced many years of financial hardship due to the ranch being diminished. The Hammonds had to sell their ranch and home in order to purchase another property that had enough grass to feed their cattle. This property included two grazing rights on public land. Those were also arbitrarily revoked later.

I’m going to break this post to two posts. A long post messes w/ linking.