Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

catnhatnh

(8,976 posts)
Sun Apr 20, 2014, 09:37 PM Apr 2014

Didn't the Bundy Family acknowledge the legitimacy...

...of the Federal government when they accepted their first Federal welfare in 1877 in the form of 160 acres of free land?Can they later recant their acknowledgement without renouncing any claim to their homestead?

3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Didn't the Bundy Family acknowledge the legitimacy... (Original Post) catnhatnh Apr 2014 OP
I think they acknowledged the government Politicalboi Apr 2014 #1
+1 I don't think this is quite how it's worked for Bundy but you have a point. snappyturtle Apr 2014 #2
I suppose the answer is yes. You have to remember that there was about a snappyturtle Apr 2014 #3
 

Politicalboi

(15,189 posts)
1. I think they acknowledged the government
Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:19 PM
Apr 2014

When they paid before. That's how some old bill collectors get you. You make a small payment once, and then they got you back. You acknowledge your debt.

snappyturtle

(14,656 posts)
2. +1 I don't think this is quite how it's worked for Bundy but you have a point.
Sun Apr 20, 2014, 10:50 PM
Apr 2014

I tried days ago to get the point across about the years, decades actually, that the Bundys did pay....I got nothing but grief back. Obviously, folks just don't think. imho

snappyturtle

(14,656 posts)
3. I suppose the answer is yes. You have to remember that there was about a
Sun Apr 20, 2014, 11:09 PM
Apr 2014

hundred years between the homesteading of the 160 acres and the beginning of fees for grazing. If you listen closely to what Bundy says, I think what he is saying is that the federal gov't (BLM) isn't the best steward of the land. That point is on point, imho, of what the group of western lawmakers was saying in a meeting held last week in Utah.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/57836973-90/utah-federal-lands-states.html.csp

Western lawmakers gather in Utah to talk federal land takeover

It’s time for Western states to take control of federal lands within their borders, lawmakers and county commissioners from Western states said at Utah’s Capitol on Friday.

More than 50 political leaders from nine states convened for the first time to talk about their joint goal: wresting control of oil-, timber -and mineral-rich lands away from the feds.


"It’s simply time," said Rep. Ken Ivory, R-West Jordan, who organized the Legislative Summit on the Transfer for Public Lands along with Montana state Sen. Jennifer Fielder. "The urgency is now."

Utah House Speaker Becky Lockhart, R-Provo, was flanked by a dozen participants, including her counterparts from Idaho and Montana, during a press conference after the daylong closed-door summit. U.S. Sen. Mike Lee addressed the group over lunch, Ivory said. New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Wyoming, Oregon and Washington also were represented
.

More...........
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Didn't the Bundy Family a...