Sidebar

Harry Reid's Connection To The Nevada Ranch Incident

TIDE-HSV

TIDE-HSV

Senior Administrator
Staff member
Oct 13, 1999
84,625
39,853
437
Huntsville, AL,USA
Tidewater said:
I am as happy as anybody whenever the Federal government gets told to go commit an unnatural act in itself, but Bundy's case is a bad one. The ownership of the land is in Federal hands. Just because Bundy believes that the BLM should spend more money improving that land (which I take to mean, maintaining/repairing roads, culverts, etc.) does not give him the right to not pay rent to the owner.
This is not a State's Rights issue, in my book. It is simple law enforcement issue.

Now, if Nevada seceded, I believe the land would go to the Nevada government, and the Nevada government would have a moral obligation to pay the Federal government for the formerly Federal land. Absent that payment, the Federal government would be justified in going to war for the money, as long as the Federal government was willing to kill people for money.
They've done it before.
Click to expand...
I believe the right of a state to secede has been settled forever. However, because of the concessions the Nevada made to get into the Union - a constitution affirming the right of the central government to put down armed rebellions, etc. (isn't this what's happening?), they have just about the weakest position of any state I can think of...
 
Tidewater

Tidewater

Hall of Fame
Mar 15, 2003
22,480
13,327
287
Hooterville, Vir.
TIDE-HSV said:
I believe the right of a state to secede has been settled forever. However, because of the concessions the Nevada made to get into the Union - a constitution affirming the right of the central government to put down armed rebellions, etc. (isn't this what's happening?), they have just about the weakest position of any state I can think of...
Click to expand...
We will have to disagree. I believe every rational person is a conditional unionist.
And Nevada's rights are exactly the same as every other state's rights.

That said, Bundy's case is as weak as can be. In essence, he is arguing that if a landlord does not spend as much money on keeping up a piece of property as the renter thinks is proper, then the renter has the right to occupy the property without payment. People of good conscience would do well to steer clear of him and any support of his argument.
 
92tide

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
58,311
45,164
287
54
East Point, Ga, USA
and then there is this

linkage

He said he would continue holding a daily news conference; on Saturday, it drew one reporter and one photographer, so Mr. Bundy used the time to officiate at what was in effect a town meeting with supporters, discussing, in a long, loping discourse, the prevalence of abortion, the abuses of welfare and his views on race.

“I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro,” he said. Mr. Bundy recalled driving past a public-housing project in North Las Vegas, “and in front of that government house the door was usually open and the older people and the kids — and there is always at least a half a dozen people sitting on the porch — they didn’t have nothing to do. They didn’t have nothing for their kids to do. They didn’t have nothing for their young girls to do.

“And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do?” he asked. “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.”
Click to expand...
maybe he can parlay this into a reality show
 
bamacon

bamacon

Hall of Fame
Apr 11, 2008
17,181
4,360
187
College Football's Mecca, Tuscaloosa
TIDE-HSV

TIDE-HSV

Senior Administrator
Staff member
Oct 13, 1999
84,625
39,853
437
Huntsville, AL,USA
Tidewater said:
We will have to disagree. I believe every rational person is a conditional unionist.
And Nevada's rights are exactly the same as every other state's rights.

That said, Bundy's case is as weak as can be. In essence, he is arguing that if a landlord does not spend as much money on keeping up a piece of property as the renter thinks is proper, then the renter has the right to occupy the property without payment. People of good conscience would do well to steer clear of him and any support of his argument.
Click to expand...
Yes, we disagree. My opinion is based on the law and SCOTUS holdings - not on wishful thinking...
 
S

swoop10

Hall of Fame
Feb 10, 2001
5,007
0
45
62
Valdosta, GA
Bamaro said:
Classic
Click to expand...
You're right it's classic Stewart. He is setting out to prove Hannity a hypocrite all the while showing his hypocricy. He made a huge point that Bundy was breaking the law and showing the difference in Hannity's stance with illegal immigrants and occupy Wall Street. Where is his rant on those people breaking the law? Where is his rant on the Obama Administration choosing which laws the will inforce? Surely if it's the breaking of the law that he claims is the problem then he would have the same problem with these other law breakers. Sorry but Stewart is every bit the hypocrite he claims others of being.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Posts

Latest threads

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a> <br /> <!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \--> <p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.

Top Bottom