Snit wrote:
Big Crotch on a Small Fish stated in post
on 12/3/10 2:52 PM:
Ok, Steve, even you know you have completely humiliated yourself
on the current topics:
* You claiming I am "lying" to believe your comments about your
motorcycle accidents - given that you lie so much only an idiot
would believe you.
* The fact that you have been trying, and failing, since 2003 to
refute my argument about Bush, stated he
http://csma.gallopinginsanity.com/bush/
* Your accusations of my being like you - dishonest. You know I
am right that you lie more in one day than I do in a decade.
* Your confusion between absolute proof / proof beyond a
reasonable doubt
* Your insistence that legal opinions written by Supreme Court
justices are not written in a legal context
* Your insistence that if A = B and B = C then A C
Etc. You just repeatedly made a complete fool of yourself. Your
reaction... wave your white flag and hope you can get more
attention (through your socks) by bringing up a debate from *2006*
where you cannot figure out that this law exists:
-----
Section 31 U.S.C. 5103. Legal Tender
United States coins and currency (including Federal Reserve Notes
and circulating notes of Federal Reserve banks and national banks)
are
legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues.
Foreign
gold or silver coins are not legal tender for debts.
-----
Snit proves he doesn't know the difference between "lawful money"
and "legal tender". LOL!
LOL!
First, Steve, let us not forget that the reason you are trying,
though your sock, to revive a debate from, I kid you not, *2006* is
because you know you have completely humiliated yourself on the
current debates *and* you are desperate to get my attention.
But, hey, I am in a charitable mood... so please, Steve, try to dig
yourself out of your pathetic hole and explain the difference between
"lawful money" and "legal tender" *and* explain why, contrary to the
view of the US courts, that the bills and coins in my pocket should
not be considered both.
Now, of course, even though you have had since *2006* to try to build
a case so you can actually, finally, for once actually make a point,
we both know you will fail. Worth my laughing at you for another
couple of posts... but, I warn you, if you do not actually try to
support your claims then you will simply bore me and I will ignore
not just your main name but also your new primary sock.
...
You are the one who always brings up the ancient debates. I am just doing
to you what you do to others. Don't whine like a baby.
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/lawfulmoney.asp
Oddly enough, the dollar bills that we carry around in our wallets are not
considered lawful money. The notation on the bottom of a U.S. dollar bill
reads "Legal Tender for All Debts, Public and Private", and is issued by the
U.S. Federal Reserve, not the U.S. Treasury. Legal tender can be exchanged
for an equivalent amount of lawful money, but effects such as inflation can
change the value of fiat money. Lawful money is said to be the most direct
form of ownership, but for purposes of practicality it has little use in
direct transactions between parties anymore.
If you even look at your "money" you will see it says it is legal tender and
not lawful money. Think this does not make a difference? We only have to
pay taxes on lawful money. You and most Americans are stupid enough to buy
what the IRS tells you and pay taxes on your lawful money (as you have to)
and your legal tender _which_you_do_not_have_to_.
Now who is the idiot? Me who understands the difference and my rights or
you who would be paying taxes if you stopped trolling long enough to earn
some money?
--
You Ain't the Biggest Fish in the Crotch