Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="gst" data-source="post: 153047" data-attributes="member: 373">Ha good one Plains here is one of those "please show mes" again. Please show me by copying and pasting the links to where the black emboldened statement you made above occurred. You may be a bit confused on who provided whom that information. You mention Nevada. Nevada is unique in a couple of ways. It remains the state with the most Federal land at 85% of it's total acres remaining under Federal ownership and control. It also was a bit different than other states under how it came to be a state. At the time slavery was being abolished, the territory of Nevada was seeking to become a state. The idea of Federal land ownership at the time was not completely settled as this nation expanded westward and the intent of the Equal Footing doctrine was being interpreted thru the courts and legislatures of the time. The politicians that were seeking to pass the 13th amendment thought they may need the three votes Nevada would bring to the table so there was a rush to enter Nevada into the union as a state. The Territorial govt of Nevada understanding this chip they held, had decided not to cede lands back to the Federal and thru the politics that existed at the time, a deal was struck by those in power in both cases to allow Nevada into the union and they would cede those lands back to the Federal govt under promises of considerations for business ventures held by those in power in Nevada and a promise of the Federal govt to sell those lands they held in Nevada back to those private individuals within the state and use those funds to pay war debts incurred during the Civil war. Ironically Nevada was not needed to pass the thirteenth Amendment and the promises to dispose of those lands were never kept. So your example of Nevada is actually an example of how the Federal govt broke promises to the states thru out history. As to your claim emboldened in red, how long did you deny that tobethe case until the " Sites with the information, sites with the Nevada constitution, and videos explaining it" to you were provided beyond dispute? As to your statement emboldened in blue, you have the cart before the horse. It is the Federal govt that is not honoring their promises tothe states and as such the states have the obligation to change their Constitutions if the Feds will not honor what was promised to the states. You do understand the Founders agreed upon states rights importance right? But thank you for showing your willingess to once again distract and divert from aa discussion to try and fix the broken Federal system under which these lands are managed and promises are being broken. I think most on here now  know why,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,it is much like those green decoys in the video I shared you always quote on here.- - - Updated - - -There it is folks in black and white. Plainsman does not want to "open this can of worms" to return grazing and logging and mining and the promised multiple uses to the table becasue he knows what I have been telling him is true. That these green decoys he quotes all the time will target hunting next. So instead of opening this can of worms to fix the system he wants the status quo to remain. It is not grazing he is concerned about, that is already ending by a slow death, it is HIS usage of these Federal lands he only cares about. What he is foolish enough to believe in his ow mind is that hunting will not follow the other multiple uses once those that seek to end them are successful. As kurt said above we either all stand together or we will each hang seperately. So why does plainsman try to distract from the truth of these facts and the information shared? Why does he try to distract from supporting actions that not only would bea step in fixing the broken system such as the bill I shared would do but also embrace ideals of the conservative to bring fiscal responsibility and accountability back to govt? Why does he try to divide with his hateful and foolish rhetoric? plainsman will you contact your legislators to support the bill I shared in that link? - - - Updated - - -Here is an interesting article. https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/do-the-feds-really-own-the-land-in-nevada-nope/While historically correct, the changing of the Court thru political appointments tied to ideologies has changed what was once accepted law of the time concerning these Federal lands in how the Court has more recently ruled. Butitgives some insight into how the Federal govt promised things that have now been broken. The Acts that Congress passed back in those times that gave these states and individuals thigs like water rights and mining and logging a and grazing rights have now all been dismantled by the green decoy orgs plainsman likes to share information from. He does not want to "open this can of worms" to fix those broken promises. And just like those green decoys in the video he will obstruct any attempt to do so. Luckily most find his rhetoric tiring.That is why after a few years of it on both Nodak Outdoors and FBO people simply quit posting on those sites. It is why we can not have nice things here, Plainsman lets get back to discussing fixing the broken system. Lets be part of Trumps solution to Make America Great again. Leave the fools bullshit out of these discussions and bring something positive for once.</blockquote>

Verification: What is the most common fish caught on this site?

Reply to thread

Recent Posts

Friends of NDA