I think that most local stations did not consider this newsworthy. This was on cable news and internet news. Our local stations, never report anything that they think will not be interesting to local viewers. Things like this are so commonplace, just like the wolves being slaughtered, that most ordinary people don't care.
Did the killing of three Jewish people by a former KKK leader make your local news yesterday? It was less than 100 miles from here and yet only rated a few seconds on local news.
There is always some right-wing individual/group challenging the government out west. Not particularly a new story.
My local station has something it calls newsreel and reports things from all over, such as shootings, bus wrecks and Lindsey Lohan capers, but not this. Wasn't on ABC national news either. I don't get FOX or any cable news. It is important to me for the reasons I stated and is more interesting than the blade runner's trial (and closer to home). I guess the politics of newsroom personnel enter the mix, but if an assault(?) weapon had been fired the libs would have been all over it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddie_T
I restated my original comment as the thread was getting off base trending toward who was right or wrong rather than addressing my original comment.
This whole situation is both interesting and newsworthy and not nearly as simple as Sam might believe. The government is of course right by definition since it makes the laws. Once a government is given the right to exist it can own land and manage the use thereof with impunity. It will grow and continue to do these things whether morally right or not until it oversteps and the citizens revolt. After a revolt the process merely begins again from a new start point. At the present the government has far exceded the situation presented by King George and his minions.
There are some that think the government pushed for this standoff to learn how the various militia groups might respond (or not), how they communicated, how many showed up and how organized they appeared to be. After that data was gathered the government simply backed off, mission accomplished.
Whether or not this is true doesn't matter, the outcome is the same. At this point it is much like an army armored division sand table exercise and both sides are evaluating the results and planning for the future, which should concern us all.
My local station has something it calls newsreel and reports things from all over, such as shootings, bus wrecks and Lindsey Lohan capers, but not this. Wasn't on ABC national news either. I don't get FOX or any cable news. It is important to me for the reasons I stated and is more interesting than the blade runner's trial (and closer to home). I guess the politics of newsroom personnel enter the mix, but if an assault(?) weapon had been fired the libs would have been all over it.
If they even thought he had a gun, it would have been all over the news. It would have added to the "dangerous gun" crap.
You know, I leave some guns home alone all the time and they never get into trouble.
A militia leader en-route to Nevada called into the talk show while I was listening, he wouldn't give his location but the NSA was probably tracking him. I saw a documentary on Netflix "Track Me if You Can" I think I'll watch it just for kicks. I think I'll try to hide my face if I see a camera or cover my plate before entering a parking garage just to give them something to think about.
A militia leader en-route to Nevada called into the talk show while I was listening, he wouldn't give his location but the NSA was probably tracking him. I saw a documentary on Netflix "Track Me if You Can" I think I'll watch it just for kicks. I think I'll try to hide my face if I see a camera or cover my plate before entering a parking garage just to give them something to think about.
It's too bad they weren't tracking Benghazi a little better than they actually did. Maybe we wouldn't have heroes coming home in body bags?
Something I'm surprised that has never come up about that. Just before Benghazi happened, there was a bill in congress to provide more money for embassy security and the Republicans in the house blocked it.
Maybe we should have cut embassies rather than security funding. After all, we don't have the money, something in the order of 41 cents of every dollar spent is borrowed. Even the BLM SS troops are spending borrowed money to harass Bundy. Maybe Obama should just call Bundy's cattle undocumented cattle and choose not to enforce the law like he does for illegal Mexicans.
These links offer more information on what is a complex situation in which Bundy may be just the tip of the iceberg. The federal government owns(?) 0ver 80% of the land in Nevada and some 52% of the land in western states. The feds can be quite arrogant and spend a lot of borrowed money to harass those who dare cross them (why does the BLM have snipers, or are they contracted with borrowed money?).
Linear Mode
