User Profile: MoDem


Member Since: September 30, 2011

CommentsDisplaying comments newest to oldest.

  • April 15, 2014 at 9:13am

    Bundy has no legal right to use the public land for private gain. However, the BLM’s actions here were insanely stupid. Judge Napalitano was correct, BLM has court rulings saying that Bundy owes 1.1 million in grazing fees… they should have taken a civil judgment against Bundy for the amount, put a lien on his property, then execute the lien and put Bundy’s land up for sale. I imagine if BLM would have done that Bundy would have come to the table instead of just thumbing his nose.

    However, after hearing the statements of one of the militia men, (that former Arizona sheriff), who said that if a fight broke out they were going to put unarmed people in the front lines as human shields for publicity, all I can say is screw that guy and I will never be on the side of any argument that would align itself with such cowardly tactics.

    In short, everyone is wrong. We just have to decide who is wronger.

    Responses (1) +
  • April 10, 2014 at 3:02pm

    Addie: I had longer responses but The Blaze website is causing my browser to reload every so often thereby wiping out my comment. In the end, your anology is faulty because Interstate Highway use is permissive, you have to obey speed limits, weight limits, traffic laws, have a driver’s license, have the car licensed and have insurance. without those acts you no longer have permission to use the roadway and you can be arrested for trying. also, if you commit to many infractions on this permissive use, your license can be suspended and you would no longer have the permission to drive at all!

  • April 10, 2014 at 2:15pm

    Mrs. Girl (great handle by the way), I will admit that I do not generally look at larger issues. I look at the issue in front of me and decide based on the facts I am presented with.

    This causes me to miss connections but also allows me to take each story on its own facts rather than having the conclusions of the other possibly related issues influence my opinion on the issue in front of me.

    I am not educated on the history of the federal take over of state’s lands enough to form opinions on that.

    All I do know is that this land was never in this rancher’s “chain of title”. Whether it was federal/state/local government land is irrelevant to the issue of whether this man has the right to use the land for his cattle. What is relevant is that in no event was it his and use of land is not sufficient to gain a right to it when it is owned by a government entity.

    We can question whether it is wise for the government to not allow people to use this land for cattle grazing for the sake of the desert tortoise, but we cannot question that this person has no right to the continued use of the land. It was always permissive use, that permission has been withdrawn, therefore he has to leave.

    Enjoy the rest of your day. And remember, its only 10 days from Easter and you can start doing the things you gave up for Lent. So, happy thoughts!

  • April 10, 2014 at 12:07pm

    Law professor had the best quote in this story. “You don’t get to use public land for personal gain, otherwise I would drill for oil in Yosemeti national park.” Hilarious. The land is not his, he has no right to it, you don’t get a right to trespass by trespassing for a really long time. And no one better say “adverse possession” because federal/state/local government land is immune from adverse possession claims.

    Responses (4) +
  • April 2, 2014 at 10:18am

    I could really go without The Blaze bragging about how they got it out first. Reporting on something 8 months after it happened (April – December) instead of 10 months (April – Feb.) is not something to brag about.

  • April 1, 2014 at 10:14am

    The last statement is incorrect in the article. If jail time is an option, you have a constitutional right to a jury trial. If there is no jail time as a possible punishment, then you do not have a constitutional right to jury trial nor do you have a right to a public defender.

    The option here are: 1. Mr. Witaschek waived his right to a jury trial at some point (hopefully he had an attorney and wouldn’t have done this); or 2. The prosecutor stated that they were not seeking jail time thus taking the right to a jury trial out of the picture.

    Given this case it seems more likely that the option 2 is what happened. If a prosecutor’s office was trying to shield itself from a civil lawsuit, it needed a conviction for something. By waiving jail time and getting it to a judge tried matter as opposed to a jury trial it gives the prosecutor a better chance at a conviction depending on the judge.

    Responses (1) +
  • February 13, 2014 at 12:48pm

    Legal Difference: Congressional attendance is voluntary and if a Congressman doesn’t want to be a part of the prayer, they can come in afterwards. School attendance, while technically voluntary, in practice is effectively mandatory. Also, when you are in school, you can’t leave the classroom if you don’t like the subject matter. Not saying what’s right and what’s wrong, just saying that the comparison of Congressional Prayer and School Prayer is not “apples to apples”.

    Responses (1) +
  • February 4, 2014 at 4:45pm

    Hey Blaze, just finished my first day of high school journalism. They taught me that every story should satisfy the following questions “Who, What, Where, When, Why”. You barely have a “Who”, “What” is satisfactory, No “Where”, No “When”, and barely a “Why”. Maybe tidy this up a bit, if you get the police report you could fill in the rest with minimal effort.

  • January 23, 2014 at 10:41am

    Nice name. One of my favorite SNL skits.

  • January 17, 2014 at 4:54pm

    Grandma, I’m not entirely sure the punishment for careless and imprudent driving is death. I’ll have to double check that.

  • January 17, 2014 at 4:45pm

    Not so fast soybomb. A search on google showed that the average birth between twins is 17 minutes which would lead to that the probability of twins being born on different days to be 17/1440. So the odds of this event happening would be [(1/365*1423/1440)*(1/365)] = 1423/191,844,000 or 1/134,816.58. Whew, I’m done. If I’m wrong, I no longer care. Have a good weekend everyone!

  • January 17, 2014 at 2:49pm

    Tzion, you are correct on calculating the likelihood of two subsequent events occurring on the same date as the original event. But I think the small probability that twins could have born on different days would alter the overall probability of this particular event occurring. So your both right and both wrong. Yay!

    Responses (7) +
  • December 18, 2013 at 8:54am

    “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” I would not want someone to push Islam on me so I will not push Christianity on others. If I do not know what religion a person is, I will say the inclusive “Happy Holidays”. When I am at Church or with fellow believers, I say “Merry Christmas”.

  • December 4, 2013 at 11:55am

    So it seems to be the position of most of the commenters here that I need to have the permission of the government to decide how to raise my daughter and with whom I allow her to accompany her on a trip and whether I allow her to go on a trip. We are supposed to be conservatives and small government, yet you want popular opinion and police officers to decide how I raise my child. Hypocrites, all of you. Once the notarized letter, birth certificate and phone call with mother were had, it should have been over. It is her parents decision whether to trust these men, not the cops and not yours. You don’t get to have intrusive government when you agree with their action and limited government when you disagree. Its one or the other, unless your a hypocrite.

    Responses (1) +
  • October 11, 2013 at 2:09pm

    The picture shows like 8 trucks. Where’s the mass support?

    I didn’t realize they were birther nutcases.

    Responses (2) +
  • October 10, 2013 at 8:59am

    Yes, definitely a “coup”. You know a forceful military ouster of a government body. That, or a vote by a board of directors of a private company to change presidents and fire employees, you know, whatever.

  • October 8, 2013 at 5:33pm

    How dare those Nazi ba$tards actually teach our students to think critically. How dare a school actually foster debate. We must demolish our schools and make sure our children to blindly follow and obey the written the bill of rights. What? We already added 17 amendments to the original bill of rights so everyone should at least agree that they weren’t exhaustive and could and were improved on? Son of a b!tch.

    Responses (1) +
  • October 8, 2013 at 9:16am

    Whatever guys, why have the protest after 10 p.m.? Because then it would be after curfew when the memorial is closed and they would be arrested. They did this demonstration in this way for the purpose of getting arrested so they could be on T.V. or the web and increase the sympathy for their message. When your message is so weak that you have to resort to obvious law breaking to get attention, you have a problem. Stop getting played people.

  • October 5, 2013 at 9:58am

    Mommy, Mommy, Mommy, they called me a bad name and used naughty words. WAAAAA!!!!

  • October 3, 2013 at 3:51pm

    Wow Keaton, I wish that were the case for me. I’m a lawyer, I make 50K a year and my monthly student loans are $750/month.