Get ready for a really safe summer in Toledo

I woke up this morning (feeling a little stiff from doing yard work--but then I read "Treatments to Ease Morning Stiffness" at http://www.consumerhealthdigest.com) and saw on The Blade website (not a paying member) about Toledo City Council approving money to open another pool. I don't have any idea--nor do I care--where the pool is located; but I do know that opening a pool should be near the bottom of the list of Toledo expenditures.

Government should not be in the business of maintaining pools. It should be employing as many police as are necessary to keep the City safe--pools don't stop crime!

Toledo isn't becoming Detroit--it's already there.

No votes yet

I agree. It's a barely justifiable expenditure in the best of times. So it's ludicrous in our times of clear economic calamity.

I hear that stupid park they're installing at Madison and 20th (across from the LC Dem HQ) will have all sorts of fountains. I guess it's a place for all those bozo hobos to wash up at. Another silly exercise in wasting public funds.

That's why we need the pools, because it’s an economic calamity without them, according to some on city council.

"DTOM" {1776} " We The People" {1791}

The pools are a distraction from the real issue affecting Toledo, urban blight. However, if Toledoans would visit http://www.consumerhealthdigest.com/ and look at all the various remedies available, they may feel better about themselves and the city...

I'm not trying to brag, but I have some of the smoothest skin in Toledo after reading the "Best Natural Organic Skin Care Tips" at http://www.consumerhealthdigest.com.

There are many things that people can disagree with on this site, but all of us will agree that "Treatments to Ease Morning Stiffness" from the spammers our friends at ConsumerHealthDigest is a web page with few rivals for its attention to morning stiffness.

Why, some of my friends think that "Treatments to Ease Morning Stiffness" from the delusional asshats the good folks at ConsumerHealthDigest might be one of the top ten web pages they have ever viewed on the topic of morning stiffness.

You can't enjoy safety without the "Best Natural Organic Skin Care Tips" at http://www.consumerhealthdigest.com. That is a no brainer. Take care of your skin my friends, take care.

Pools can dry out your skin, so another reason governments should stay out of this! Send them to they Y. I wonder if the city totals all costs, how much it would be and if it would be cheaper to send everyone to the Y. Win-win

"Government should not be in the business of maintaining pools. It should be employing as many police as are necessary to keep the City safe--pools don't stop crime!"

RINO! RINNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!111!!!11oneone1!!

Government should not be employing police. If you want security you should get it on the Almighty Free Market! Why should you pay for police when all you need is a gun?!? If that's not enough, you should be able to hire private security!! Ditto for fire and ambulance services, pay for what you think you need!

Normally, I might give a scathing response to one of your comments, but I've been reading so many good health tips at www.consumerhealthdigest.com I'm feeling conciliatory. In fact, in the spirit of healthiness, I even found an article on that site that I think might be right up your alley http://www.consumerhealthdigest.com/male-sexual-health/penis-enlargement...

Most of the people in Toledo should be swimming in ponds anyway. As Carl Spackler once said "Yeah, it's more natural."

MikeyA

I think rascally kids uncorking fire hydrants is a Toledo tradition that should be embraced and celebrated. What motorist doesn't smile and recall his own mischievious youth when he sees happy children romping in a small lake created in a roadway intersection?

Patience is a great virtue.

While I do not condone the unauthorized opening of fire hydrants, I must admit that as a kid in Detroit in the 1970s I ran through my share of free-flowing hydrants. No pools in my 'hood, except for the Swimmobile that showed up once a year or so on some nearby street.

This was a vehicle that was like a semi trailer with the top cut off, and 200 kids would stand in line while a lucky 15 or 20 got to swim for a few minutes:

Must have been an insurance adjustor's nightmare.

Notice anything about those kids? Perhaps one is slightly overweight while all the others appear to be in great shape. Nothing like a photo from the recent past to remind us of how many little porkers we're raising today.

Patience is a great virtue.

What do you expect in a society where the middle class needs two to four incomes to raise a kid, the kids are fed fast food and junk food because the parents are too tired to cook anything after working their shit jobs to make ends meet, and the kids are pretty much ordered to stay inside to keep them safe from that big scary world outside where they might encounter all those very scary things the media blasts all over their papers and airwaves and websites in order to keep Americans afraid and keep them ponying up money to the corporations and political powers?

I would venture it's because parents don't kick their kids outside and instead are just happy with their kids being distracted with phones, t.v., internet, and video games. It's not a class issue or a financial issue. Just look at the people in a resteraunt. It doesn't matter if they are rich or poor. At every table there is someone if not all on their phones. And you can be in the ghetto or Ottawa Hills and you'll see the same thing.

MikeyA

If the parents kicked their kids outside you'd be screaming about how the parents aren't taking responsibility for and supervising their little shits.

No I'd want more police patrols. Which I already want.

MikeyA

The man who bitches about the government and its "heavy-handed" police tactics wants more cops.

RINO! SOCIALIST!

Why does it not surprise me that you would attempt to misconstrue my views.

I hav eno problem with police carrying out enforcement of laws. I think being a police officer and upholding the law is both commendable and honorable.

I do not favor arming the Bureau of Land Management, that is the job of the Justice Dept, nor am I in favor of them collecting upon debts, that is the job of the Treasury Dept.

I favor a limited government because when you make the government larger it become inefficient. Like the example I gave above. If the Justice Dept can't handle enforcement of Justice why do we have a Justice Dept? If the Treasury cannot handle bill collection why do we have a Treasury Dept. If the BLM is doing these functions who is managing the land resources maintained by the Federal Gov't? Your government is an inefficient mess.

I also favor delegating responsibilities downward. Basic law enforcement, which the case of kids playing is, is the responsibility of local law enforcement. I have always supported more police on the streets of Toledo and it's surrounding areas. Why do you not?

MikeyA

Cops with nightsticks chasing children -- for no reason other than to scare the hell out of them -- would be great exercise for everybody involved. Maybe the first lady could include this in her fitness campaign.

Patience is a great virtue.

I think your ignorant Teabagging ass forgot that it is the business of the BLM to round up that welfare queen Bundy's cows, as neither the FBI (Justice Dept.) or Secret Service (Treasury Dept.) have that duty, and that is exactly what the BLM set out to do until your Tea-tarded friends continued their threats of domestic terrorism. So why don't you stop with your attempts to misconstrue the entire Bundy situation as being the wrong people sent out to collect a TWENTY YEARS OVERDUE BILL and being the right people to confiscate his walking steaks from the government land they are trespassing on?

Obviously in MikeyA's Tea-Tard World the government should send out 500 FBI agents in suits and ties to attempt to round up cows, instead of BLM agents who we can presume actually know something about riding horses and rounding up cattle. Which was made kind of hard when Cliven "KKK" Bundy cried for help from his fellow Tea-Tards to grab their guns and come armed and threatening violence if the BLM so much as made one of his Welfare Mooching Moocows take one step.

What should the BLM do?

Exactly what they are doing. To quote them "Bureau of Land Management spokesman Craig Leff said the agency would continue to try to resolve the matter involving rancher Cliven Bundy "administratively and judicially." http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cliven-bundy-nevada-rancher-standoff-turns-o...

There is an active court case. While I believe the law is on the BLM's side acting while the court case was/is wrong. Additionally arming, in that fashion, of the BLM is equally wrong.

If a USDJ wants to intervene there is yet ANOTHER arm of the government who could do so. The US Marshal's Service. A judge, if they so choose, can compel the Marshal's to uphold a federal court ruling. Once again, not done in this case.

How am I a tea-tard? I have never been to a tea party rally. I have never donated to a tea party organization. In fact, GZ likes to refer to me as a neocon, hardly a tea party member.

MikeyA

There is no active court case. THERE IS NO ACTIVE COURT CASE. STOP LYING.

"1998: A federal judge issues a permanent injunction against Bundy, ordering him to remove his cattle from the federal lands. He lost an appeal to the San Francisco 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. He represented himself.

He had his day in court. HE LOST. STOP WITH THE LIES, YOU MORON. You were told this at least TWICE BEFORE on this site and yet you persist with your lies.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/04/15/everything-you...

He's been ordered to remove his cows since 1998. What year is it? 2014. So he's given the finger to the government for SIXTEEN YEARS.

Here's another court decision for your ignorant self to read: http://www.thewildlifenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Order-US-v.-Bu...
... in which the court cites THEIR 1998 DECISION that permanently enjoins Bundy from grazing his hamburgers-on-the-hoof from government property.

So, Mikey A Teabagger, are you going to persist in your lies about the Bundy situation or are you going to admit that you've been backing someone who has defied lawful court order right on through losing all appeals right up to the Ninth Circuit and stolen from the government and that you believed the government has NO right to move Cliven McWelfareMooch Bundy's cows off the land where the court has prohibited the cows from being? What's it going to be, ya big old LIAR?

The case was refiled in 2012 with the injunction the feds used as their authority written in Oct 2013.

So... yes, the case is still active. The problem is Bundy does not recognize the Feds jurisdiction in the matter. If the case was not active why did this action occur in 2014 and not in 1998. As I said a judge can compel the injunction to be enforced.

Additionally from your link. "One Elko County rancher, Cliff Gardner, has decided to take his case to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing that states' rights mean the federal government has no authority over the land where his cattle graze." No active court case? Sounds to me like the local ranchers don't consider the matter finished until it goes to the Supreme Court.

But once again. I do not support Bundy's rationale for his actions. The feds had his cattle and could have sold enough to collect on the fines they wanted (minus the fees and the penalties but could have gotten the original balance) the feds didn't do that.

Additionally, you still have not provided a reason for the BLM to be armed the way they are. Once again, there are entities already in place to do what the BLM did. Yet it is/was highly inappropriate. If it wasn't why didn't they take Bundy into custody? They did his son? Had they arrested the whole family they could have taken as much of the cattle they wanted and released the Bundy family. Probably because this is not a criminal action. It is a civil one which does not require a BLM SWAT team.

MikeyA

Oh yeah? What case was refiled? Citation please.

The GOVERNMENT filed ANOTHER case against him for MORE trespassing, and the case cited the PERMANENT INJUNCTION from the PREVIOUS case (which ran out of appeals) and was granted SUMMARY JUDGEMENT.

"Additionally from your link. "One Elko County rancher, Cliff Gardner, has decided to take his case to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing that states' rights mean the federal government has no authority over the land where his cattle graze." No active court case? Sounds to me like the local ranchers don't consider the matter finished until it goes to the Supreme Court."

Um, yeah that was in the section labeled 1996. Which is another FACT you CONVENIENTLY IGNORED in your haste to cover up your lies and defend your idiocy.

Let's see how that case played out, since your are incapable of using Google (probably because you'd have to admit to lying and distorting).

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1061959.html

"Defendants-appellants Clifford and Bertha Gardner (“Gardners”) appeal the summary judgment granted in favor of plaintiff-appellee United States.   Gardners claim that the state of Nevada, not the United States, is the rightful owner of the public lands within Nevada.   The district court granted the United States' request for an injunction against Gardners' unauthorized grazing of livestock upon federal forest land, and also ordered Gardners to pay a fee for the unauthorized grazing.   We affirm."

Same ruling as in Bundy's case.

Neither Bundy nor the Gardners deny grazing their cows on the land in question, they decided to argue that the Federal government doesn't own it, and the Ninth Circuit has repeatedly upheld that the Feds do in fact own it.

"Additionally, you still have not provided a reason for the BLM to be armed the way they are."

MikeyA, you need to call a medic to evaluate you for amnesia as I have repeatedly, in reply to your continued completely retarded assertions in the Bundy case, pointed out that Bundy and his supporters have repeatedly made threats against BLM personnel, bombed Forest Service offices, etc. and in fact when the BLM told Bundy they were going to come round up his cattle (in full compliance with the repeated COURT RULINGS THAT SAID THEY WERE EMPOWERED TO ROUND UP AND IMPOUND SAID CATTLE), Bundy immediately went ape-shit and called all his gun-toting friends in and sent out his "Range War" notice.

March 15, 2014: After nearly 20 years, the Bureau of Land Management sends Bundy a letter informing him that they plan to impound his "trespass cattle," which have been roaming on 90 miles of federal land. BLM averages four livestock impoundments a year, usually involving a few dozen animals.

March 27, 2014: The BLM has closed off 322,000 acres of public land, and is preparing to collect Bundy's cattle. Bundy files a notice with the county sheriff department, titled “Range War Emergency Notice and Demand for Protection." Bundy also says he has a virtual army of supporters from all over the country ready to protect him. He also has Gardner.

BLM: "We're coming to enforce these LEGAL AND VALID COURT ORDERS including the one from 1998 that you've run out of appeals on."
Bundy: HELP HELP I'M BEING OPPRESSED! EVERYONE GRAB YOUR GUNS AND GET TO THE RANCH RIGHT AWAY!
BLM: Oh for fuck's sake.

You are either actually fucking stupid and unable to comprehend the timeline and rulings in this case or you are being deliberately obtuse in order to troll or otherwise try to defend your ignorant stance since the actual reality happens to not fit the right-wing narrative you wrote for it.

Why do they need a BLM "SWAT Team"? For when the racist TeaTard cow owners threaten violence against BLM agents acting lawfully in response to a LEGAL COURT ORDER.

If this was Mike A. Teabagger living in the City of Toledo, who has a valid legal judgement against him for unpaid back taxes on his house granting the sheriff to seize said property, and Mike A. Teabagger refused to recognize the authority of the sheriff and called a pile of his gun-toting buddies to come over and camp out at his house after the sheriff sent Mike A. Teabagger his final notice to GTFO, you can bet the sheriff is coming with the SWAT Team when he comes to seize the property.

Why didn't the BLM finish what they started? You could have actually read all the article instead of ignoring the parts that disagree with you contrived Tea-Tard narrative:

BLM decides not to enforce their court order: "Based on information about conditions on the ground, and in consultation with law enforcement, we have made a decision to conclude the cattle gather because of our serious concern about the safety of employees and members of the public."

In other words, they backed down because a large number of armed, crackpot Tea-Tards were running around with guns. Which is why they hadn't enforced anything before, as Bundy and others of his ilk refused to recognize jurisdiction and made it plain they'd go down fighting.

Hey Mikey, since you're out to defend people who disregard lawful orders and argue that SWAT tactics are inappropriate etc., let's hear you defend all the #occupy protests against the government bailing out the banks. OH WAIT YOU TAKE THE SIDE OF THE GOVERNMENT ON THAT CAUSE THEY'RE GODDAMN FILTHY COMMIE HIPPIES AND NOT PROUD PATRIOTIC AMERICANS! (oh wait Bundy refuses to recognize Federal authority, so much for that argument!)

You already cited it. US v Bundy. And yes the court issued an injunction. But Bundy didn't comply. So what do you do then?

Do you storm his ranch with snipers? OR, do you do one of two things. 1) request the Judge for him to compel the injucntion OR 2) Start using the Dept of Treasury to get the money that you're owed from Bundy.

This is not a criminal case. You keep mentioning threats but they weren't there to arrest Bundy for threats. So once again, no reason for the SWAT team.

And SWAT teams didn't break up occupy. Regular police officers did. And they didn't storm the occupy protests they first coordoned them off to 1) ensure safety 2) ensure others could still move around them.

The difference between Occupy and Bundy is there was actual crimes committed in the occupy. There are several cases of rapes and theft that were reported in the occupy camps. Best they have produced with Bundy is his son being arrested for assault on a police dog.

MikeyA

Again with the "Treasury Dept." derp, Mikey?

He owes BLM, not the IRS. His cows are trespassing on BLM land. His fines are to be paid to the BLM and not the fucking Treasury Department. What planet of stupid are you from that when you get behind on your water bill that you owe the City Tax Department instead of the Water Department? "HI I'M MIKEYA AND I FAIL TO UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT OF JURISDICTION!"

Again, dumbass, the BLM was duly authorized by DECIDED COURT CASE (CLOSED CASE! GAME OVER, ASSHOLE!) to go collect the welfare-moocher's welfare cows. The BLM warned him again and again to move his cows and he refused. They got another injunction against him and the second court order to go take all the rest of his trespassing cows and sell them off to collect SOMETHING on the over $1M the BLM is owed. That's right, MikeyA Dumbfuck, the BLM gets to seize and sell the cows off, NOT THE FUCKING TREASURY DEPARTMENT, you ignorant ass. So the BLM sent Bundy notice they were coming for his trespassing cows and the first thing Bundy did when he opened and read the letter was call all his like-minded gun-toting asshole buddies to come over and made a pile of threats as to what he was gonna do if any of those evil gubmint BLM Gestapo agents so much as farted in the general direction of his cows.

Bundy threatened "Range War" against the BLM.
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/nevada-rancher-threatens-range-war-feds/s...

"Bundy posted a statement on the Bundy Ranch website on Sunday night saying: "They have my cattle and now they have one of my boys. Range War begins tomorrow." "

" Bundy disputes the federal government's authority to take such action. The Nevada Sheriff's Office, he contends, is the only entity empowered to impound his cattle. The Bundy Ranch website calls the federal agents "cattle thieves."

Cattle thieves, says the website, "Should be hung!" It urges supporters to "hang them with words of disapproval." "

" According to station KSNY MyNews in Las Vegas, Bundy compared his situation to citizens' confrontations with the federal government at Ruby Ridge and at Waco, Texas.

The station quoted him as saying, "They are the same agents who killed that kid over at Red Rocks," referring to the fatal shooting of a 20-year-old man by two BLM rangers on Feb. 14, near Red Rock Canyon, outside Las Vegas. "

"The BLM has described Bundy's use of the phrase "range war" inflammatory. "We support everyone's right to exercise their freedom of expression," Cannon said. But when threats are made, she said, federal authorities have an obligation to ensure safety. She estimated the number of Bundy supporters as being closer to 100. "

So MikeyA, want to lie to us again about how the Secret Service should be out rounding up Bundy's cows and how Bundy is completely non-threatening?

Keep on supporting and defending the seditious racist!

In 1791, George Washington called out the militia to put down a rebellion against a federal tax on whiskey. The farmers who rebelled, like the Bundy crowd, claimed that the Federal Government had no jurisdiction and no authority to collect the tax. George Washington thought otherwise...and that was 223 years ago!
Might I remind everyone that George Washington is almost always at the top of the list of "Greatest Presidents." And one thing he's most admired for is his decisiveness when he felt he was in the right. So, if you don't like the supremacy of the Federal Government, place the blame squarely where it belongs...blame George Washington!
Here's a link to a short, accurate article.
http://www.earlyamerica.com/earlyamerica/milestones/whiskey/

You convinced me, Dale. I will never, EVER vote for George Washington again.

Patience is a great virtue.

Washington was nothing but a big government, socialist pig!

Why, because of the Militia Act.

"DTOM" {1776} " We The People" {1791}

Yup. That act which required Americans to purchase third-party products (GUNS NO LESS!). Oh shit there goes an anti-Obamacare talking point!

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.