Prove her wrong

[Rune]

I'm still not getting the connection. Did the federal government annex for a federal park the land abutting the ranch without the consent of the Oregon state legislature?

OR did the Oregon state legislature withdraw its consent?

Neither.
Your instincts are correct.

 

[Rune]

This portion restricts the ownership of the property to those pieces which they have been given permission by the legislature of the states, the portions you post talk about the power they can use in regulating property they own. In order to own the property Article 1 Section 8 Clause 17 must be followed first.

You ignore the restriction because it is inconvenient to your political cause.

Incorrect.
Why do you deny the existence and verity of the Property Clause?

You are coming off like a nutbag here.

 

[Rune]

And again, Desh. In order to actually be constitutional and be "public lands" they would need to follow Article 1 Section 8 Clause 17.

Again Damo why do you deny the validity of the Property Clause?

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

you dont like this part of the constitution huh damo

He has already answered you on this... YOU KEEP IGNORING HIM

 

[evince]

sad huh

 

[Rune]

So far every post by Desh is simply examples cited by the woman of government overreach. Bad decisions by the SCOTUS notwithstanding, the woman is right and nothing Desh posted proves otherwise.

Ah, now we claim the mantle of expert and simply declare Desh to be incorrect?

LMFAO@Damo

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17


To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of Particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--

If the state had not given permission through their legislature they would, if you read the limitation in Article 1 Section 8 Clause 17, be unconstitutional.

She states that permission can be withdrawn as well, at which point the Federal government would have to return the property to the State.

It is always easy to read only the portions you want to believe and ignore the restrictions. We do it often.

This portion restricts the ownership of the property to those pieces which they have been given permission by the legislature of the states, the portions you post talk about the power they can use in regulating property they own. In order to own the property Article 1 Section 8 Clause 17 must be followed first.

You ignore the restriction because it is inconvenient to your political cause.

And again, Desh. In order to actually be constitutional and be "public lands" they would need to follow Article 1 Section 8 Clause 17.

So far every post by Desh is simply examples cited by the woman of government overreach. Bad decisions by the SCOTUS notwithstanding, the woman is right and nothing Desh posted proves otherwise.

go get where in the constitution it gives you people that power?



no where huh


you are all just lying to protect your failed ideas

ROFLMAO

 

[evince]

Why are you intent upin trolling up this thread?
You are beside yourself that Evince is correct.

they never admit when I'm correct


they have done his to me for over a decade



they even had the dems here calling me names for discussing facts by just claiming I was wrong and crazy

 

[evince]

if you don't like the scotus decisions you do not have a right to force your opinion on others

 

[Rune]

And is the lady's point in the video that the Oregon lands in question do *NOT* meet this standard?

If the Oregon state legislature sanctioned the federal wildlife refuge, does that then pass Constitutional muster?

I still don't understand this conversation. Admittedly I have Desh on ignore, but I can't see how that can do anything but help the situation.

In this instance Desh us correct but since you have both of us ignore you may never learn the truth you fool.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

if you don't like the scotus decisions you do not have a right to force your opinion on others

So you agree with the SCOTUS decision in Bush/Gore and Citizens United?

 

[evince]

its why they have people on ignore


so they can keep believing lies

 

[Jarod]

And again, Desh. In order to actually be constitutional and be "public lands" they would need to follow Article 1 Section 8 Clause 17.

FALSE

"To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;..."

This section deals with the idea of creating Washington D.C., clearly the Fed cannot purchase land without the Consent of the Legislature of a State... but that is an existing state. Most of the Western Federal lands were attained prior to the creation of the States and thus did not have to be purchased from the States to be owned. The very next clause, the Necessary and Proper Clause...

"To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof..."

Is a catch all which clearly allows for federal ownership of land within states, as long as it is tangentially related to of any of the enumerated powers.

Finally the Constitutions of almost all Western States acknowledge the federal ownership of such lands and unnecessarily acknowledges and permits such ownership.

 

[Rune]

I wonder about that, has Oregon's legislature voted against Cession or for it for these lands? Did they vote at all?

Pull your head way up out of your ass.

 

[evince]

Its why I dont think hes really the old Damo we used to know back in the day

that man had honor and would bow to facts

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

if you don't like the scotus decisions you do not have a right to force your opinion on others

So you agree with the SCOTUS decision in Bush/Gore and Citizens United?

Desh???

 

[Rune]

sad huh

Pretty much Desh.

 

[evince]

Desh???

do I run around claiming that the scotus doesn't matter like you people?

 

[Rune]

Desh???

Lets keep this on topic and not about Desh.
Why do you think the Property Clause miraculously doesn't apply to states created from Federal territories any more?

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

do I run around claiming that the scotus doesn't matter like you people?

Do you agree with the two decisions? Yes or No?

Also... care to show us who said SCOTUS doesn't matter?

I posted where Damo has addressed your nonsense time and again and YOU IGNORED IT.