- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: BLM vs. Nevada Rancher
Posted on 4/22/14 at 4:29 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
Posted on 4/22/14 at 4:29 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
but if he's not, the feds didn't overreact, imo.
So you support sending in SWAT for all people who owe back taxes/fees?
Geitner, etc?
1
Posted on 4/22/14 at 4:48 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
That's pretty fricking straight forward, and yet I've gotten no end of people running around me in circles with their hair on fire.
Quit pretending like your only point in the thread is about the Fed's response with force.
You've made multiple comments on the legitimacy of the position of the BLM. It's not unreasonable for people to respond to your comments even if you believe it's secondary to your main point.
Posted on 4/22/14 at 5:32 pm to moneyg
quote:Because you dont know what you are talking about in regards to Bundy and the history of the property and you refuse to look it up so yet again you bring nothing to the thread and you act like a tool
What's so fricking hard to understand? And why, based on that post, would you need to get me to look up Bundy's motivations? I mean, wtf? And you think I didn't contribute substance to the thread?
Posted on 4/22/14 at 6:00 pm to S.E.C. Crazy
quote:
Pollard's Lessee vs. Hagan ( 1845 ) when Alabama became a state in 1819. The question presented was concerning a clause where it was stated “ that all navigable waters within said state shall remain public highways, free to citizens of said state, and of the United States without any tax, duty, impost, or toll therefor imposed by said state.”
U.S vs. Gardner (1988)
In summary states that Pollard's Lessee vs Hagan does not apply to Federal Land in Nevada or other Western states.
LINK
Also it should be noted that the US gov't pays the States PILT for every acre of federal land
This post was edited on 4/22/14 at 6:04 pm
Posted on 4/22/14 at 6:18 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
Nothing ever happens until things get challenged.
The feds are like a bully and people and states fear challenging them because the feds can hit you with the IRS, OSHA, FBI etc. etc. like they did the Tea Paety groups
States can be cut off from federal dollars etc et.
The SCOTUS is clear.
The feds are like a bully and people and states fear challenging them because the feds can hit you with the IRS, OSHA, FBI etc. etc. like they did the Tea Paety groups
States can be cut off from federal dollars etc et.
The SCOTUS is clear.
Posted on 4/22/14 at 6:30 pm to S.E.C. Crazy
Posted on 4/22/14 at 7:32 pm to CptBengal
quote:
So you support sending in SWAT for all people...
This is why we can't have nice things...
Posted on 4/22/14 at 7:42 pm to moneyg
quote:
Quit pretending like your only point in the thread is about the Fed's response with force.
You mean like when I said:
quote:
There could be something to his claim of watering/forage rights in perpetuity at the granting of the original claim. Bundy may not be breaking the law.
?
quote:
You've made multiple comments on the legitimacy of the position of the BLM
Wrong, I've commented on their response - always in the context of Bundy being wrong - which seems to be a premise in the OP with which I disagree that we can assume.
quote:
It's not unreasonable for people to respond to your comments
I object to the assumptions being made in the responses. If people would address the actual statements I'm making instead of attacking invalid assumptions on their part, I wouldn't have to post so much explicative text.
Posted on 4/22/14 at 7:50 pm to ninthward
quote:
Because you dont know what you are talking about in regards to Bundy and the history of the property and you refuse to look it up
What's your point? I've admitted that he may have a valid claim to a conveyance of servitude for watering rights. I've mentioned that the culprits here could be the courts in refusing to acknowledge that.
But no one seems to want to address anything I've posted besides my support of using overwhelming force if the situation calls for it. You don't go in half-assed if you have rightousness on your side. I don't believe they had rightousness on their side, the OP assumes they did.
Why don't you be more specific in your criticisms of what I'm actually typing on this message board? I think that might help.
Page 7 of 7
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News