Help! Conservative Talk Radio Station?
Hi! I'm new to NJ & the area. Would someone please tell me the specific dial numbers of the conservative talk radio stations that can be heard here? I can't find them! :-) Thanks much!
RWR They all used to be on WABC, which is 770 but I seem to recall hearing that WOR 710 signed Rush and Hannity away. Not that I listen to terrestrial radio, let alone AM radio, but I'm pretty sure that was the scuttlebutt around Xmas time.
iPhone-imal 
CMON 710 am wor, 12 - 3pm rush; then 3 - 6 pm hannity;
but at 6:00 pm flip it over to 770 am wabc for 3 hours of Mark Levin
strong 50k watt stations both of them, they come in good most of this area
for Laura Ingram you can only get her 10 am -- 1 pm on a little station out of new brunswick 1450 am (wctc), that station hardly comes in up here, you have to be on top of a south east facing hill, otherwise forget about it
yes, i spend a lot of time in the car on the road, too much maybe
BrotherDog 
pmnsk 
oldredthere is a smart phone app.."tune in radio" that has wabc and wor as well as others..some smart phones can connect to car radios via blu tooth and is an excellent way to listen to conservative radio
WOR unless there is a Mets games on that afternoon . Then you are SOOL as they take the crotchety angry old white men off for baseball . Something that matters more than their cranky old foaming at the mouth blather !
Zombo 
fitter Does a LIBERAL talk radio station even EXIST? lol I guess maybe NPR, but the liberals tried to compete with Rush,Sean,Glenn, et al.... and failed miserably. No ratings- nobody wanted to listen to it.
JeffersonRepub Whatever you do, don't listen to this station. Conservatives are bashed 24/7. The "majority" of ALL the posters (yes including mg) are good people, but as you can see from a couple of posts already. There are some very nasty, bitter, dark souls. Don't pay them any mind, misery comes in all walks of life. Welcome to our little corner of NJ.
auntiel I was happy when I heard there would be a liberal am radio station syndicated nationally. Unfortunately, I soon learned it was about as credible as all the conservative stations. That is to say, it wasn't.
Gadfly "Conservative" talk show hosts are usually shills for the Republican party, in much the same way that "liberal" hosts shill for the Dems.
Getting caught up in the staged pissing match between two parties who are both bent on destroying the idea of America is, at best, a total waste of time.
Get acquainted with podcasts. There are some good ones out there.
jjmonth4 LMAO ! No one listens to politics on the radio except for entertainment and a laugh . It's either time warping back to the 1950s or going forward into some politically correct nightmare . Me I'd rather listen to my Mets lose !
"No one listens to politics on the radio except for entertainment and a laugh "
Yes, PLEASE keep thinking that. :)
JR you have many times here proved yourself a prude and a fool and I'm sure those with open minds here will keep on thinking THAT !
if you're near a computer you can stream 1450 wctc station, that's how i get to hear Laura Ingrahm, who has a good way about her, imho.
I would imagine that liberal talk shows would constantly be telling you how everyone else is much worse off than you and that you aren't doing enough to help them. Who the hell wants to listen to that constantly, even if you are inclined to agree with it on principle?
Conservative talk shows that tell you how everyone else is lazy and that the government is stealing your money and giving it to them undeservedly? There's a whole army of people who buy into that and can't hear it nearly enough to ever tire of it, lol.
yeah, i was wondering when the atheists who set up all the posters next to the Easter displays that Jesus was a false prophet who was not really resurrected were going to set up their posters outside the mosques stating that Mohamed was also a false prophet?
still waiting . . . .
My feeling would be it's not good for anyone to listen (or watch) too much of that stuff.
By "that stuff" I mean news, and opinions about the news, whether conservative, liberal, whatever. Maybe one to two hours a day, tops, would be okay?
NPR and PBS have a lot of fair-minded programming, despite what some of the regulars here say. Some of it can be quite boring too, which must mean they are genuinely trying hard to get at what the facts are!
jd2 BD, Muslims make up 0.8% of the American population. Wondering why atheists don't waste their time on Islam in the US is kind of like wondering why more people aren't writing viruses to attack iOS instead of Windows. It's fairly easy to understand if you think about it.
If the "liberals" ... "tried to compete" ... and "failed miserably," how did Obama win two presidential elections?
Just asking.
Andy Loigu " I guess maybe NPR, but the liberals tried to compete with Rush,Sean,Glenn, et al.... and failed miserably. No ratings- nobody wanted to listen to it."
Or maybe it's that liberals are more advanced and gave up on an ancient technology like radio in favor of other alternatives...
:)
eperot Andy-
It "failed" - it went off the air. They called it "Air America", and it went off the air due to lack of funds, which came from not selling enough ad time, which came from no one listening. It has nothing to do with Obama- he already had ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, and CNN pulling for him.
eperot-
Of course. Right. Again, keep thinking that. That's helpful. Thank you.
No need to listen to the radio i can give you the latest conservative conspiracies making the rounds on the airwaves. The shoe throwing incident with Hillary Clinton staged. And now Chelsea Clinton's pregnancy was done to boost Hillary Clinton's popularity. You just can't make this stuff up
I like conservative radio; it lets me know what the far right is not thinking.
And every once in a very long while, the pop a real story.
mistergoogle I'm a registered Republican myself, so I'm familiar with the GOP ideology ... they believe in capitalism, but complain about the money the ballplayers make.
They also want big government out of your life. But feel it's perfectly ok to get between a woman and her doctor. In the great state of Oklahoma the Republican governor has signed a law making it illegal for municipalities to raise the minimum wage. And last night the Oklahoma Gov. signed a new law findings people who use solar energy in your home. Republicans may say they want small government but they really don't
What ALEC and the Koch Bro's want....... Arizona has a surcharge as well. Isn't there a lot of sun there?
They are actively pursuing this policy in at least seven other states.
Strange that Republicans want to charge us for going off the grid.
I don't think they're charging for going OFF the grid; I think they're charging for a net surplus; i.e. a tax on selling electricity back to the electric company. At least that's what I think I've read on the subject. And if you're making a profit on it, why shouldn't you pay taxes just like every other energy supply corporation?
wow, talk about judgemental "bitter dark souls"? just because someone disagrees with your perspective and says so? my my...
Arizona's is a $5 per month surcharge; sure it's a tax but it's not volume sensitive.
Oklahoma's charges have not been set and I have not seen the process; but I doubt it is for a net surplus.
Fact is no matter what they charge and how they charge it, the math is going to be funny. Arizona claims it's for reimbursement for grid equipment needed to safely handle distributed power generation systems (i.e. solar and wind). However, solar generates peak returns when it's sunny and hot; this is the same time that power companies suffer the most usage, need the most additional power, and therefore solar distributed generation provides the most benefit just at the perfect time when the grid system is under the most stress which actually can save equipment. Think about this. It's sunny out, I have solar, you my neighbor are running AC like mad, and my extra power is basically going next door to your house. See where the power company might actually save purchasing extra power for this peak period and also saves wear and tear on equipment by not have to send power all the way from the station instead.
Love to see how they factor all that in.
And making a profit? First page I googled quoted a 4-6 year breakeven on a household solar investment and that's from an equipment seller. The second said 18-20 years which I see as probably closer to the truth. It's not a short payback interval on investment and real profit will not be recognized for quite some time.
So we desperately need to get to greener energy, reduce green house gases and are incenting the heck out of it with our tax dollars, and now ALEC, Koch, Norquist, and the other oil boys want to raise the solar payback bar using funky math to derive the surcharges.
Like I said, would love to see the math behind the existing and proposed surcharges.
The ROI period numbers you quote might be accurate for New Jersey, but I would think it would be much shorter in Arizona. Lower labor costs, more sunshine and higher average electric bills would, IMO, cut that time to break even drastically.
But, you're right in that it's too early to tell what the overall impacts will be and how onerous the Oklahoma legislation will be relative to wind power. If it's in the neighborhood of $5 a month, who cares? Are they just trying to make up regulatory fees they would have gotten from power companies if they were the ones generating the power? Or are they really trying to dissuade any attempts at alternative energy on the individual level? I have a hard time believing that... primarily because I don't want to, not because I'm naive enough to believe that it *couldnt* be true.
whether you're liberal or conservative, listening to both sides of every argument is what makes you educated on current events.
I listen to 770 and occasionally 710. Some conservative talk show hosts are actually intelligent and enjoyable to listen to, some, like Michael Savage on 770 are idiots.
PenningsLandscaping I think no matter how you slice it, the costs for alternative energy sources may never be as good as fossil fuels unless/until their power and energy densities approach that of conventional fossil fuels.
justintime "listening to both sides of every argument is what makes you educated on current events." Amen to that, from someone who majored in journalism in college.
My dad (R.I.P.) used to give his hard earned money to the Republican Party to support guys like Nixon and Agnew and I grew up believing everything he said. With each passing year my views have "moderated" (I still hesitate to call myself a liberal) but I'll tell you ... with each passing year I like the Republicans less and less.
Comes down to this, Ebenezer Scrooge and Jacob Marley probably were Republicans. Me? I don't have enough money to be a Republican anymore, and I've listened to Rush, Glenn, Sean ... those are hours of my life I'll never get back ... I'm better off with baseball.
PART 1 since HL has a length code?
The first breakeven, the short one, was NY. The second one, the long one, was Phoenix. Go figure. Point is it's a long payback no matter where you are before you turn profit.
Knock on wood, my hot water solar is over 40 year olds; I have replaced the solar hot water tank, a few sensors, and done routine maintenance. I would expect a quieter, longer lifespan for solar. They say 30 years on the panels and the end is a more slow degradation than here today, gone tomorrow (so you can measure and perhaps replace slowly????), but the panels are warranted for 25 years (although I bet you get zippo replacement cost in the later years) so I would expect a long, long time.
My pellets stoves are 4 - 8 years; new furnace more like 8 or more so not exactly unusual.
Are they trying to dissuade? Yes, only because it's not just the power companies, there are outsiders like ALEC and Koch and Norquist playing about. Also, we only know what they got, not what they asked for. But $5 per month does not sound all that evil either. Then again, do you think the power companies charge their suppliers to provide power to them? So, certainly interesting to discover the process and the math that concludes they need more money to buy cheap electricity provided in abundance at the point when the power companies need it the most and are paying the most (when they are at or beyond normal capacity ----- i.e. sunny hot days).
PART 2 (or do we have a stuttering code too?)
JIT: Once again, no one can argue with your statement. It's safe by the glory of wordsmithing. I remember once, as a young man, hearing a wise, experienced, oft quoted, man of the industry saying "they'll never get more than 64Kbps across copper in this network." You wouldn't take 64K for free today. My hybrid car costs the price ------- of a car. Yes, I did give up some power, handling, and other things even a Prius has, but point made ---- it is the price of a car, no real uplift for the hybrid. My gas cost half of what many non-hybriders pay and because I paid the price of a car, for my handling etc. sacrifice I pocket that savings from day ONE of ownership. And that beat will continue to march on.
So JIT you used the word MAY (and other buffers) which covers you, but I will say it clearly. Alternative fuels will be more cost effective at some point in the future. Why can I be so brave? Because when you factor in the alternative costs for killing ourselves, not killing ourselves saves money. Plus, if we always need more versus less (even with greater efficiency I think most can see that as true); then at some point the sun and the wind and the waves and the water provides the more and lasts longer, oil does not. Did I mention it does not kill us either?
When it comes to hard cost for residential infrastructure, that too will fall. DOE says pricing fell by 7% tween 98 and 2001 and 12% in 2011 alone, 7% more in California in fix six months of 2012. http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy13osti/56776.pdf There are other funny numbers out there but all head in the same negative direction of lower prices which is positive for us. If we extrapolate those decreases out a few years, then at some point a liberal President will be paying us to install solar :>)
Point is, for residential, who cares whether the price is as good as oil? To me the real questions are:
1. can you afford it versus other things you might want to buy
2. is it profitable over it's lifespan
3. will you be there to recognize the breakeven or can you add it's value to the selling price of the home
Obviously question 1 will be looming for most, it's a pretty big nut to swallow. For me that answer is NO. I have other things to do with my money right now and the payback on this one is just too damn long. Plus, I may be moving to Montana soon, just to be a Dental Floss tycoon.
Question 2, depending on sun availability, is a yes. You can turn a profit on this stuff and when you look at the low operating costs, the incredibly long usable lifespan ----- it's a good investment (given you have the money and don't want to do something else with it).
And question 3 is yes and debatable. If you are going to live there, and you can afford the upfront costs (over other things you want to buy or borrow to buy), then it makes dollars and sense today even at the current prices JIT. And the prices only get better ever day for now while oil prices will never go down and will only go up and up and up and then gone.
But I have no idea whether you can add the cost to the selling price of the house which is the other bugaboo for me. Because I may be moving to Montana soon and you can't take it with you.
So there you go, food for thought, bacon for brains. Went through the same process on hot water solar. Bit the bullet, ended up living hear a long, long, long time, and it worked out swell. Price never really came down but I profited nonetheless. But I would never suggest it to anyone else unless some very special criteria is met ---- much more stringent than those for solar electric.
you never know where you'll end up when you start at the title of a thread, do you?
5catmom MG, You may be moving to Montana, a very conservative state with guns on every belt. You better stay in this very progressive state that's more to your liking. Why be miserable.
Old Gent Surprised nobody suggested it yet, but Sirius XM has a pretty good lineup on their conservative talk channel... Bonus is you can listen for the entire duration of the commute!
Brendan They have one conservative channel (Patriot) and one liberal channel (Progress) as far as "political talk radio". There is also a catch-all channel called P(olitics) OTUS where I presume people call in and argue with each other, lol.
I think Fox News and CNN have their own news channels as well, which are each obviously slanted in their own political direction.
Oh old gent, I have always lived in very conservative areas. Most people hold their politics to their chest in public as do I. Believe it or not, I fit in just fine.
There's a reason they say two things you never should talk about in a bar are religion and politics.
It's a visceral thing for most people.
I get a feeling I'm the only person in this county who splits his ticket, it's a one-party county ... there are counties south of here that are one-party the other way.
Slanted media outlets, either way, are upsetting to me ... whatever happened to just reporting the facts and seeking the truth? The way things are right now, people just watch the station that tells them what they want to hear. They disbelieve the other station, whether they have the facts right or not. The old joke ... don't bother me with facts, my mind is made up!
My brother-in-law is a Brown Grad, an atheist and progressive from up state NY. His son settled in Montana and his daughter settled in Wyoming. They are now conservative and go the church regularly. That's why I was concerned about your well being.
My care radio is set at 101.5 mostly for the traffic and some times entertaining talk.
I like 101.5 on the weekends, "when the music comes out to play."
Big Joe Henry tells some funny jokes. He's got a big, jolly personality.
Jim Gearhart would disagree, Andy. No one makes Jim Gearhart laugh like Jim Gearhart does...
101.5 fm covers NJ from a conservative perspective, questioning the trentonians at every turn. good for them
Andy, I watch FOX all the time; Hannity is as funny as John Stewart. During the Bundy escapade he was especially good tossing softballs to Bundy to hit out of the park, boldly accepting lies as fact, and doing his best to get as many guns out there as possible. "Yes, Mr. 20-year welfare farmer, you don't have to follow the rule of law in the United States of Bundy Land....."
And then I could watch Stewart skewer him the next day. Twas a beautiful piece of ultra conservative mind. Just catch this piece "Apocalypse Cow!" and you will see why I love Conservative Talk Radio and TV: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/22/jon-stewart-rips-hannity_n_5189684.html
But I have no problem with a true old fashioned Republican conservative, agree with many of their fiscal agendas. Democrats have math issues and somehow think we can spend our way out of debt without any sacrifice. While to spend to make profit makes cents, no way will we buy our way out of this debt and to think so is detrimental to getting er done.
But this new breed of Tea Partier though is not a true conservative in my book and different kettle of fish all together. Luckily they are as disruptive to the party as they are to the country allowing us Dems to win things, like Obama's second term, with their antics.
I am more like a Rand Paul, republican most of my life long before he came on the scene. There are many Republicans that I have not voted for, or left blank. That's why I loose so much but I am not satisfied with the lessor of two evils. I read a lot on line now that I have time and always go as far as I can in to the links to see what was really said.
I watched Megan Kelly in the afternoon a lot because she asked the question's that I would ask of guest. It's not the same in prime time. I gave up on Hannity, Rush and that gang years ago after listen to them defend Republican's that were just a liberal as the Democrats. Now there all holler that thou conservative's. I have seen Rachael Maddow do some really good research. I listen to Hardball the see what there thoughts are on matters.
In my view winning is not everything, but I sleep well.
Just to be clear, "conservative" does not necessarily mean Republican/GOP.
And "Tea Party" is made up of all political "denominations", from what I have seen.
Go ahead, rant on....
On the other side, "liberal" does not necessarily mean Democrat, either, because I see Republicans spending money all the time.... special elections a month before the regular election, etc. etc.
Often, it just comes down to, which side is spending the $$$ on something that's useful and important, depending on one's interpretation of what spending is worthwhile or not.
I never care for candidates who stick strictly "to the party line." I like the ones who think for themselves. Unfortunately, I thought Christie was such a candidate, above the usual party politics. I was fooled.
I liked Romney for what he did for the people of Massachusetts regarding healthcare.
Obamacare should really be called Romneycare, because Romney's legislation is what it was modeled after. Wish New Jersey had it.
What are you talking about? The entire COUNTRY has it.... the Affordable Healthcare Act, remember?
And I would have no problem voting for a democrat, or independent, or Tea Party candidate, or anyone, so long as they are pro-2A, want to cut spending, lower taxes, control immigration/the borders, and actually try to get the economy back on it's feet again- through capitalistic principals rather than socialistic ones. Smaller govt, individual liberty, and letting us keep more of what we earn- those are the principals I want to hear out of a candidate... if they have that philosophy, most of the other stuff will fall in line.
There are other issues, of course, but we need to pay attention to the important ones first- the ship is sinking fast.
JR isn't there like 20 something Republican controlled states that refuse to let her citizens sign up for the affordable care act
Each state still has an insurance commissioner and still handles insurance differently ... whenever I retire, I'm going to Massachusetts.
Whether they have a insurance Commissioner are not the fact is those Republican controlled states will not allow their citizens to sign up. All the doom and gloom we heard from Republicans has not come to pass
Massachusetts? I think you picked the only state on the east coast worse for retirees than NJ, Andy. If not worse, certainly not much better.
oldred,
If they haven't already, the govt is setting up a federal exchange for people to use (in those states that refuse to set up a state exchange).
I'm on to something other people don't know about (hee, hee) ... HEY, I don't want everybody to move to Mass and overcrowd the place ... go research it for yourself and make your own decisions ... don't matter to me ...
and this is from a guy who has loved visiting Maryland all his life.
JR, I think your rant may be wrong --- I never said all conservatives are Republican so who is you talkin about? But I like what you stand for, who could fault those principles: guess you must be an Obama man.
And yeah Old Gent, I passed on the last NJ gov vote. Neither candidate passed muster.
Saying that the Tea Party is made up of all denominations is like saying blacks have power in the Republican party. Tea Party in overwhelmingly Republican followed by Independent (probably leaning right) making up over 90% of the demographic and a light smattering of any other party.
But who cares, they are waning as a force anyway
iPhone-imal - Connecticut and Rhode Island are right there with Mass and NJ. NY has areas as bad or worse, but there are also areas with a much lower cost of living even if the tax burden is bad. So that depends on whether you're a rich retiree or a poor one.
GC mg,
If they ever legalize weed, you can rest easy knowing you won't be breaking the law anymore.
Since I could not move out of NJ, I am happy to have found my kind of politicians that get elected here in Warren County. It's is hard to believe I am in NJ.
Try 970 on AM the Answer WNYM or www.am970theanswer.com.... John Gambling has returned to the air mid day, but also has Mike Gallagher, Joe Walsh etc...
accurate news That segment of "Grazed and Confused" on The Daily Show was priceless. Hannity is a grade A tool, lol.
That segment was really funny and I see today if you let idiots like the welfare rancher talk long enough their true feelings come out. He basically said the only thing wrong with Negroes today is that they never learn to pick cotton. And are better off slaves then to be on a government program just a guess but I bet he will not be a guest on Hannity anymore
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. They got less freedom CLIVEN BUNDY WELFARE RANCHER
"mg,
If they ever legalize weed, you can rest easy knowing you won't be breaking the law anymore."
You can add oldred
By the way oldred you still have not answered my questions about Vietnam, it's over a year now. ???????
Ignatz That's just abusive JR and Ignatz, you shold be on Conservative Talk Radio. And funny too since JR is the one all toked up with paranoid hallucinations about all conservatives being Republican on this thread and much more else-thread. And Ignatz has been "pinning in the fjords" for over a year waiting for his answer.
Split Bundy's Pledge of Allegiance:
I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the Individual States in America and to each State for which it stands, one group of mostly co-located states, under my God, easily divisible, with liberty and justice for all except black people. And free grazing for me.
JR on Bundy: "This is exactly the kind of stuff revolutions are made of."
"Former director of BLM was Sen. Harry Reid's adviser, Documents purged from website, Harry Reid's son heavily involved in representing Chinese Solar Farm to be built on grazing land....it's all coming together now"
"Maybe because they feel he has a case against an over-intrusive over-controlling govt, and if some of the stuff I posted is true (in the link above), then it's total corruption- all about the MONEY. Which makes it even more wrong."
"It is a symptom of a growing problem. It's going to happen more often in the future. Govt vs the people. Even when ALOT of the people show up to support the people. This is a symptom. Get used it, and be prepared for the disease that follows."
Yeah, and Oldred and I are the ones burning the late night spliffs...... Wonder how long it will take to find out that Bundy hires illegals as well; I hear they're cheaper and all you have to do is not recognize the border lines and voilà, they is legal again!
" And Ignatz has been "pinning in the fjords" for over a year waiting for his answer"
Might want to look that one up Monty.
Also spell check is a good aid.
WAEB 790 out of Allentown-- Bobby Gunther Walsh 5-9; Glenn Beck with Pat and Stu 9-12…news, guests, opinion/commentary and entertainment
mg,
I made the "weed" comment because half the time, I don't know what the hell you're talking about (and I think you don't either, lol)
Bundy's racism has no bearing on what happened at the ranch. Those using his racism as a reason that "Bundy was wrong and the govt was right" are just playing the racism card, as they usually do. You guys can't seem to separate the issues- and they ARE separate issues.
If it's discovered, for example, Bundy was hiring illegals, I hope he is prosecuted to the full extent of the law. BUT- that has no bearing on what was happening at the "Standoff". Separate issues.
JR sorta has a point. Bundy is clearly in the wrong and breaking the law either way. The racist comments just show what a despicable person he is to boot. I wonder if there's still time to join is "militia" of heavily armed anarchists.
heavily armed anarchists. riiiiiight........
(heavily armed is constitutionally protected, btw)
Gee, why don't you just go ahead and call them domestic terrorists, like Harry Reid does?
Interesting... when BOTH sides are heavily armed, there are no casualties. When ONE side is heavily armed, many people die. Gee, what a surprise....
Uh oh --- spelling police. This one was on purpose: oblique for sure.
Gadfly hit the point I painted: Bundy is not only a scofflaw welfare farmer who issued violent threats against those charged to enforce the law, but a despicable human as well. This is who Hannity, the militia's, JR and other HLers decided to tout and protect as their patriot.
Who are the jack-booted thugs now?
To his credit, JR did, amongst his Bundy is great, evil government tirades, civil unrest is coming. etc. rants, did say IF Bundy broke the law, he should be held accountable. Given his Bundy support this just puts him a step above Hannity as he covered himself versus condemning Bundy and the militia's who rose to support him with the force of arms. (Some of these yo-hos were even willing to "put the unarmed women on the front line to make a point.) Freedom fighters my sweet patooties.
Meanwhile, Hannity decided to take on Stewart, did score a grazing shot (should I explain the pun JR?), but basically went down in flames, hoisted on his own verbal petard (look it up JR). Poor Arby's. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/04/24/jon_stewart_responds_to_sean_hannity_youre_the_arbys_of_news.html
What else would you call a group of armed thugs, using the the threat of violence to disrupt a legal government activity, BASED upon their leader's belief that the United States Government does not exist, and has no authority in the state of Nevada?
"armed thugs"..... clearly you have mistaken them for gangbangers or muslim terrorists...instead of law-abiding citizens exercising their 2nd Amendment rights. But that's what I expect from you. SOP.
Tell me, WHEN, exactly, does an govt official become an "armed thug"?
More words of wisdom from JR. they are domestic terrorists this Cliven Bundy makes Al Bundy look like road scholar. He is un-American he said he does not recognize the federal government but yet it's he rides around on his horse with an American flag. Obviously he never served under it he complains about people getting subsidies when he gets them himself. And by the way JR the founding fathers who you say you respect so much also crushed the rebellion over money owed the government. Do yourself a favor and read about it it was called the whiskey rebellion. George Washington took his federal Army and crushed a rebellion of whiskey makers who refuse to pay their taxes. I see now that his true feelings have come out Republicans and conservatives cannot run away fast enough from this nut job. And Fox news could not get enough of him now will not even mention his name
Not in this case JR. Quite the opposite, Bundy and his supporters were the armed thugs in this case using the right thing (the second amendment) in the wrong way.
I mean Bundy has had years to make restitution on fees enacted all the way back to Reagan. The fees are not excessive; they are a deal. His fellow neighbors pay them. He has had all this time to try to change the law which I don't think he even bothered to try. He has openly and publically threatened violence. His wife has threatened violence. I don't think that having armed protection for the unarmed cowboys chartered to gather up the cows illegally grazing on federal lands, neighbors lands, etc. is overkill.
Exercising 2nd amendment rights is OK; using guns to protect criminals is not. We don't condone it when gangbangers do it; we shouldn't condone it when welfare farmers who don't respect the laws of the land and openly threaten law enforcement and unarmed government workers do it either.
I think the militia's motives would be correct if they were protecting actual patriots. In this case, they were not. And suggesting they would put their wives in the front line to be first blood is cowardly to boot.
Are you really supporting their actions as a remedy?
He doesn't recognize the existence of the federal government, making him a USA-theist, according to Jon Stewart. I thought that was funny enough to share.
It's comical the whackjobs that the far-right choose to support.
Anyone besides me sick and tired of the never ending know-it-all rants from the three or four guys who post most of the comments on this (and many other threads) Why don't you people just exchange emails and keep your endless and often ill-informed blather to yourselves.
iPhone-imal - Actually by failing to recognize the government he's renounced his citizenship. According to all the rants and raves he needs to be immediately deported without trial...
Jon Stewart should pay Bundy's back fees. The lines Bundy has given him are just so priceless the millions are worth it. ;-)
Sometimes when I stop at places for a meal on the run, total strangers start conversation with me, just because they see me watching FOX News on the TV ... believe me, I'd rather change it to ESPN anytime if I could ... but, since it's on, might as well hear what the right wingers are saying these days ..
anyway, this one guy started ranting to me about how he's 'anti-government,' so I just asked, I'm curious, do you have healthcare? He said, yeah, I get it from the VA.
Well, I said, "isn't that government?"
I mean, it really gets ridiculous sometimes.
Some good advice to everybody, even if you're eating by yourself, ask for a table or a booth, so people don't start talking to you. Sports I'm happy to discuss with strangers, but please, no politics.
For me, the Bundy thing has nothing to do with his crimes. I freely admit supporting a criminal (altho his criminality is somewhat arguable) is the wrong thing to do. I'll talk about the criminality of Bundy with anyone who would like to discuss the corrupt Reid land-grab that is also involved in this issue. BOTH sides were wrong to a degree- I have already said that.
The Bundy thing, for me, was about Americans standing up - with their 2A rights- when they see what they perceive to be an injustice being done. As was intended.
Again- TWO armed sides... not one (just the govt)... TWO armed sides.... no shots fired, no injuries, no deaths. Balance of power. As was intended. How do you think the BLM would have handled the protestors had they been UNarmed? With riot gear and tear gas, no doubt. I hope not with bullets, but it only takes one arrogant SOB with a chip on his shoulder (badge) to pull the trigger one time, and all hell breaks loose. (and the same could be said for a citizen who also wrongly pulls the trigger.)
In the end, this went down exactly as it should have... Bundy will be further prosecuted as is lawful, and the feds don't roll over someone in the name of a land grab. Reid's conflict of interest and corruption was uncovered. 2A was used and exercised properly, with no shots fired. Win-win.
Those of you who think this is a "simple matter of someone who broke the law", have an awful lot of political science study and research to do. Things are rarely that simple, and it has been widely shown that this situation certainly was NOT.
Won't be able to continue debate, going away for the weekend... enjoy your crucifixion of Bundy, me, and anyone who thinks exercising 2A rights makes them "thugs".
Is Harry Reid also a racist?
Senate majority leader Harry Reid has said that President Obama is very clean and that he is "light skinned and has no Negro dialect".
not giving bundy a pass on this, bundy's statements are racist, wrong and clearly reprehensible, and unacceptable, shouldn't we conclude that Harry ('dirty harry') Reid is a racist?
Reid has found himself in a media firestorm over racial comments before. In 2010, the book “Game Change” reported that Reid had praised President Obama, before he was elected, as someone who is “light skinned” and has “no Negro dialect.”
Following an uproar over those comments, Reid apologized.
“I deeply regret using such a poor choice of words,” Reid said then. “I sincerely apologize for offending any and all Americans, especially African-Americans for my improper comments.”
http://dailycaller.com/2014/04/24/reid-once-under-fire-for-saying-negro-condemns-rancher-for-comments/#ixzz2zuDcQ362
There was no Reid land grab, that was pretty clearly debunked.
"Criminality arguable" ---- aye, there's the rub.
Where was the injustice? The BLM just wanted to follow the laws, protect their workers and after multiple court cases (Bundy lost), multiple attempts to have Bundy provide restitution (he did not) ---- confiscate the scofflaw's property infringing on citizens rights.
No shot would have been fired had Budny followed the law in a land with the rule of law. Instead he flaunted all and the militia's used the second amendment to protect a convicted thief. I guess you should be proud?
And OldTownie --- it's pretty ez to avoid the conversation if it bothers you; the threads are pretty obvious. Myself, as much as I rant, repeat-repeat myself, and disagree even in that I learn things like how flakey Harry Reid's creation of personal wealth has been. Not to mention all the financial things JIT has either shown me or lead me to which has been an education and eye opener at the same time. I honestly think JR could say the same thing in the opposite direction. At least he is much more careful, and often fact-based, than he used to be. Now Ianimal, no, sorry, than man can never be fixed :>)
Have a good WE JR, hope your drive is a straight shot (heh heh :>)
So, when a drug dealer pulls a gun on a cop trying to arrest him, he's "exercising his 2A rights" as long as he believes that the government has no right to make drugs illegal in the first place? That's pretty much what you're saying... and pretty much as ridiculous as you have to be in order to defend this guy.
oldtownie - I love the give and take - even if it does get a little heated at times - very intelligent and differing perspectives - I want to hear it all!! These guys know a lot more than I do about these things - do a lot more research than I do - and I LOVE that there are differing perspectives guiding the research and talking points - to me, this is what it's all about!! I learn so much from these posters. (and what you can't easily get through news stations anymore)
it depends imal, is the drug dealer a white old man carrying an american flag as he is being arrested? if so then yes he is exercising his 2A right :)
darwin "ll talk about the criminality of Bundy with anyone who would like to discuss the corrupt Reid land-grab that is also involved in this issue"
The funny part is the "new" Federal grazing fees Bundy is so against was actually put in place by Regan thru an executive order so he could by pass Congress. That damn liberal!! Hannity must be going crazy after he learned his hero was behind this the whole time
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=36873
So Bundy has to pay $1.35/mo per cattle to use goverment land, but private land it costs closer to $16/mo per cattle. so i guess that makes Bundy a Welfare rancher with all the goverment discounts he is getting.
OK Darwin, the "white old man" one caused a coffee clean up on aisle nine.
All I can say JR is if this is what you are hearing on HL, you should head for the lifeboats and look for higher ground to make your stand.
"So, when a drug dealer pulls a gun on a cop trying to arrest him, he's "exercising his 2A rights "
Depending on the circumstances, yes:
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/02/08/texas-grand-jury-refuses-murder-indictment-on-man-who-killed-deputy-on-no-knock-raid/
Mark Mc. @ mrg,
Oh so now you intentionally spell incorrectly, how silly of me not to remember that you are the" Infallible One"
My question was for oldred, not you. What I ask from him should be of no concern to you. Unless of course you are one in the same.
I now give you permission to continue to Ramble on.
The best thing is to get XM Radio. I have it in the car and at home. You can listen to anything you want. Been a customer for 10 years and have loved every minute
singlemaleinnj Commenting is no longer available.