Texas Possession Form

My view on this is that this is very common.She had lore of Native blood, and spun it into a self-fabricated identity. She went from self-conceptualizing as part-Native American, to being ostensibly Native American when it suited her notion of identity or when she had to box-check forms.Do you all have any idea how common this is??Ask people that work at school or college admissions or in the Child Welfare spheres.People with no real affiliation, and usually no actual ancestry for that matter, will frequently mark these Native American boxes under race or self-identify as such on various forms.And in some cases, it causes real bureaucratic headaches! You basically have to waste time verifying if this is legitimate Native status or ancestry or if it is “lore”-based rubbish.In the Child Welfare system, state workers and Cherokee Nation employees get bombarded with forms that have to be verified (as to tribal status). Simply because someone under race marked the child as “Native American/Cherokee.”I’ll show you a random thing I just came across today. Here’s a random White dude - in this case a moderately well-known rapper - that is talking about being “Cherokee.”Skip to 1:33.Notice how he talks about this status because there is no cache in being White?“It gave me something more than just ‘Whiteboy.’”That’s very common! In other interviews he says he is half Cherokee, or his dad is Cherokee. But, it’s all about an internalized identity based on lore. He said “Cherokee-Blackfoot” and that is an automatic red flag for bogus lore. No tribal affiliation or verified lineages are at play here.Or, why did Jimi Hendrix say his grandmother was a Cherokee? She wasn’t.Why did Burt Reynolds claim his dad was “half Cherokee?” He wasn’t.See: Sam Morningstar's answer to Did Burt Reynolds want to make a picture about Native Americans comparable to Dances with Wolves but Hollywood wouldn’t fund it?Or, why is there a new documentary of Native Americans in music and they’ve got Link Wray as one of the primary figures being profiled?RUMBLE: The Indians Who Rocked the WorldNotice, even the name of the documentary is taken from a Link Wray song, Rumble.But, did anyone even bother to ask if this dude was actually Native? I mean, he said he was Shawnee. Did he ever say who his Shawnee family was? Well, no. Because, he wasn’t Native. He has no Shawnee ancestors at all.That’s just the modern era we live in, and this lore of Native blood and self-constructed identity is ubiquitous.Long way of saying, Elizabeth Warren is pretty much a standard reflection of this phenomenon. She’s simply putting it out there in the public eye.

You can renew your Texas driver license either online or in-person.Obviously, if you can renew online, you should do that option (as opposed to going in person), however, not everyone can renew online. It depends on a variety of factors, such as if you renewed online last time, age, citizenship, etc.If you want to renew, this page at YoGov will do it automatically for you.It will check your renewal eligibilityIf you can renew online, it will process the renewal for you and send you a confirmation emailIf you cannot renew online, it will send you the filled-out form you’ll need to take in person.This is my preferred method. I tried the State of Texas Government website but it is more confusing and I had to go to a bunch of different pages to find out the information I needed and never actually got a confirmation from them.If you know another way to renew easily, please leave a comment. Otherwise, here’s the YoGov Texas Driver License Renewal page.

The things I’m taking into consideration are the following: -Access to military hardware stationed within a state-Access to oil and oil refineries-Access to ports on defensible waterways for supplies coming from abroad (I’m assuming the lack of foreign intervention is limited to military action; trade is still constant, as in previous US domestic wars)-Domestic agriculture and water supplies-Natural barriers After all of this, a matter of prime importance I take from Alexander Hamilton is the ability to borrow money.  Credit is of prime importance to a war effort.  Fiat currency would collapse overnight, and the ability to establish new capital and monetary markets to get lending moving again would be of major importance. I’ll start from my own home state of WA.  The first thing to do would be for WA to hit AK. They're the only state in position to do so, and they would need to get a hold of the oil resources to remain standing. WA is home to three supercarriers, while CA only has one now. So taking Alaska would be fairly straight forward, especially given the reliance of Alaska on shipping to survive and the high proportion of the population near the coasts. This would put WA in position to quickly seize HI and its naval resources--an onslaught that HI could not resist--and thus put WA in position to gain control of all naval assets in the Pacific, including the supercarrier George Washington based in Japan. Controlling Oregon would only be valuable insofar as it was necessary to take control of the Columbia River, but Idaho is a second consideration after the short-term goal of domination of naval fleets. Idaho expands arable land, and covers a border with a major population center on it. California's biggest first concern would be controlling its water supply, so the bulk of its immediate effort in the outset should be directed to the Colorado river, with strategic interest in taking nuclear and petrochemical resources in NV, UT, and CO, with Arizona subdued to protect the Colorado River access. The big power that I feel is underestimated is Virginia. It has massive naval resources, including the best shipyards and the Pentagon with all of its resources. Their navy would very quickly subdue the massive coastal exposure of MD, and WV would be an obvious and relatively easy way to secure coal--those would both go quickly. It would then turn its attention to control of the Delaware river, where it would easily put the squeeze on Philly. Taking PA would be a good access of manpower, agriculture, industrial capacity, and natural gas. All would be important. Expansion to the south includes the tough nuts of NC and SC (with Fort Bragg, Camp Lejune, and the Naval Weapons Station). Fighting inland means trying to trek across the Appalachian Mtns. But most signNowly, no VA military would choose to fight southerners over shooting Yankees. So north it is. Meanwhile, NY, for all its strengths, is very, very vulnerable. NYC is a huge indefensible liability. Their interest would rapidly turn to two thinks: taking the low-hanging fruit of Vermont to secure the Hudson/Lake Champlain before Mass does, and getting the oil refineries of New Jersey. They may cross with MA a bit taking CT and RI to make sure Long Island is less exposed, but they'd win if Mass tried. MA may be better off taking the short-term gains of NH and ME (ME was once a part of MA, after all). But NY could not defend the shipping lanes to NJ very long. VA would move up the Delaware and perhaps the Susquehanna, and with PA secure, would put the squeeze on NJ by first striking the Capitol on the Delaware. NY would hit NJ from across the sound. NY would start sending children and seniors upstate out of NYC, and use its massive manpower for a land strike against VA by invading PA from the north. NY would also be able to use its massive gold deposits for collateral to get international financing. At about this point, VA would start sending its navy up the coast and begin a blockade of NY Harbor. NY would not last long. Further inland, Kentucky has two great resources (Ft Campbell and Ft Knox) but two huge liabilities (low population and landlocked). First they’d sucker-punch Tennessee to swell their ranks, then they’d go after Ohio to get access to shipping and lending from abroad. It would be brutal, but when Kentucky won, they’d be ready to start hammering at Indiana and Michigan immediately. Texas would consolidate by first hitting NOLA (as described by others). Succeeding there, they’d use their air force and conventional army forces in a grand march north to pick up all of those square states that always go red. With oil and oil refineries and both a solid harbor and international border, when the US currency collapsed under the scenario (a guarantee), few would be able to get financing from abroad. Texas would be an early favorite and have solid credit. So they’d push all the way up, seeking to secure both grain and the grand prize of the northern plains: the Bakken formation of oil in the MT/ND region. Bakken would also be Colorado’s goal. With NORAD, air force strength, and mountain seclusion, oil would be one of its biggest concerns. TX wouldn’t strike straight into the Rockies, because it would be a waste of resource. So as Colorado succeeds in taking WY and UT (also having petroleum plus cattle and copper and coal), they’d try to hit MT and ND before TX could. That’d be hard, because TX would be surging up the plains. WA would hit California in its Achilles Heel, with control of the sea making an inability for CA to draw credit or protect its shipping lanes. Though they’d take NV and AZ fairly easily, and though they have some oil and many refineries, if WA took AK and HI, WA would be in the cat bird seat to secure US military resources in Japan and S. Korea, much of which they’d bring home. By putting pressure on CA, their oil would run dry and their military would come to a grinding halt. Knowing that trying to wait out a siege would waste valuable time while Texas was growing stronger and stronger, their resolve would wane. For the sake of avoiding a fall to Texas, CA would instead fall to WA. NM would be the no-man’s-land that everyone wouldn’t bother to touch. All liability, not much advantage. Given that we’re assuming a conventional war, the nuke resources wouldn’t be worth all that much. Illinois would strike first at Wisconsin and then at Indiana. They’d be at a point of fighting the Kentucky forces in the middle of Indiana when Texas would take them by storm—first securing MN, then taking WI from IL, and then moving low draft boats to Lake Michigan to start shelling Chicago. It wouldn’t take long for them to fall. Not yet mentioned is Florida, which is also far stronger than is properly appreciated: air force, lots of navy, open supply lines, ability to drill in the Gulf. They’d be the only ones in a position to try to strangle TX at NOLA, but there’d be no point in the early rounds. First they’d bypass Georgia and hit the Carolinas for their military capacities, then hit the boggy Mississippi and Alabama (more difficult for Texas than its worth this early), and Georgia would be crushed easily by encirclement. So consolidating: WA takes basically everything west of the Rockies, Texas takes the full plains and Mississippi river, CO has the northern Rockies with WY and UT with skirmishes against TX in MT and ND, KY takes OH, TN, IN, and MI, FL takes MI, AL, GE, NC, and SC, and Virginia subdues NY to take everything else. Texas now loses its main advantage by having borders exposed to all major players except VA. They fight WA for CO, WY, and MT, with WA quickly taking UT from CO once they begin to press inland. Texas also fights KY for control of the Ohio River Valley, and they’ve been drained by their first major fight in subduing IL. KY and FL strike a détente (because FL has all the strength and knows VA will take care of KY for them), and while KY puts pressure on IL (now controlled by TX), FL strikes at MO to cut the Mississippi and disrupt the flow of control, all while finally launching its blockade of NOLA. Now VA is ready to press inland, and they start in OH. KY is overextended already, and VA’s northern block presses east, quickly consuming the remnants of KY. TX briefly makes headway in Indiana, but can’t consolidate—FL and WA are increasing the pressure. At about the time that TX makes a major victory and secures most of CO, they lose NOLA to FL, and MO falls shortly afterward. It’s a devastating blow. But it isn’t long before VA antagonizes FL and draws them into a full naval confrontation. TX rapidly regains what it had, and starts the long overland push through the Deep South. WA has good consolidation, but can’t make inroads past the Rockies. TX makes headway in WY and MT, while dog fighting occurs over NM between the rival air forces of CA (controlled by WA) and TX. As VA manages supremacy over FL (the battle to take Florida becomes among the bloodiest and most devastating of any in the war), the remainder of the South quickly falls under its control. It now has the full eastern seaboard. Final result: VA. Both WA and VA hammer TX, and once weakened, only VA has the clear route to subdue TX completely and regain the states. After that, the WA Pacific theater is doomed. The East has control of more money, more forces, more oil, more everything. It’s a long and bitter war of attrition, but the peaceniks on the West Coast don’t have the fight in them. VA wins. And so ironically we see that the battle was won when Jefferson sat Hamilton and Madison down to dinner to negotiate an agreement to help resolve the impasse in Hamilton’s move to have the Federal government assume all Revolutionary War debt held by the states, with Hamilton agreeing to bargain the nation’s capital for the sake of the funding scheme.  It was agreed that night that the capital should have a temporary home in Philadelphia for 10 years, then move to a permanent site on the Potomac.  Madison would free up some votes to pass the assumption initiative. The Virginians had the goal that the southern sensibilities of the region should dominate the Federal government and shape its character—a stark reversal of what the nation seemed to be developing into under Hamilton’s vigorous administration in which he essentially assumed the role of a Prime Minister under the generally aloof Washington.  And for the next half century and some change, the Federal Government did fall under the sway of the South.  The Bank that Hamilton had founded did not see its charter renewed, and the Jackson Democrats became the major drivers of the early 19th century.  But in time, the direction of influence reversed. Today, rather than VA imparting a Southern perspective on DC, DC asserts a Federal character and national sensibilities to the Old Dominion.  It is now the natural seat of power for the nation.

When you say “commercial residential real estate” do you mean apartment buildings?Get in touch with a commercial real estate agent who has listings for apartment buildings in your area. Tell him your plans and also ask for a referral for a good Loan Officer who does commercial and apartment financing.This Loan Officer will probably ask all three of you to fill out loan applications to verify the amount of down payment funds you have available, your incomes, etc. With this information this Loan Officer will be able to tell you how much financing you would qualify for, what down payment would be required and estimated closing costs.Commercial property and apartment buildings usually require a 25% down payment.I would also recommend that you have a formal Partnership Agreement among the three of you to outline how managing the property will be handled, who will do what and how one or more of you may exit the partnership and how you would then divide any assets you have acquired. It might be a good idea to have this partnership for an initial period of at least five years, and if one or more of you wants to exit, he could buy out the other two partners.I have friends who did this and they started out buying one duplex in San Francisco, painted it inside and outside, plus other minor improvements, then sold it at a tidy profit and bought another building. They turned over several properties and ended up owning multiple apartment buildings worth millions on the hilltops in Tiburon in Marin County, just across the Bay from San Francisco.

It depends on the answer of a single, very vital question.Who are we killing?No, this is a genuine question. That one world order, who will we be killing when we set up that supranational Earth government?The critical factor is that humans, as a species, are greatly predisposed towards violence. When we see a bunch of other people, the first reaction has always been ‘Hmm, I wonder whether we can go kill them and take their stuff…’. The human species' constant states of warfare, our predisposition to racism, hatred, and extreme violence, are not a bug but a feature of humanity.We are merely bastard coated bastards with bastard filling. The entire human species thrives on war: that is just how we all are. It isn't war that humans need a reason for: we make our own reasons, and kill and be killed over even the most trivial subjects. It is peace that needs a raison d'etre.In this world, there are merely four forms of peace.Peace during the recovery period following a war.Peace waiting for an opportunity to wage a profitable war.Peace enforced through the military might of a superior force.Peace enforced through the threat of mutual devastation.There are other, lesser conditions for peace: vital trade links, exceptional relations, sympathetic leaders, lack of a casus belli: but these all apply in the case of groups of two or three states. On a broad scale, there will always be someone who hates another, always someone with a casus belli, always someone willing to trample trade with soldiers' boots. In fact, there most likely will be many. To ensure peace on a broad scale of dozens of scales on a regional or continental level, every state we talk about must fit one of the four criteria listed above for peace to reign.Under a supranational, one world government, the scale is so massive that things as individual as good relations simply do not matter: it might prevent a conflict between A and B, but there is A and C, A and D, F and G, B and C, C and R, K and J… there will be, no, there are today, innumerable pairs of states or blocs of states that would eagerly rip each other apart.But the existence of a supranational one world government as a single Earth state necessitates global peace: if the new Earth cannot stop its own provinces from fighting it is not much of an One World Order, is it?So, of the four major conditions, which can apply?The first is right out: if the necessity of the One World Order is to stop conflict, then it cannot stop conflict via the damage of the previous conflict. No wars mean no interlude to wars.The fourth is next to go: no central government can give its provinces the power to enforce mutual devastation with a rival and still exist. This would be tantamount to California and Texas being in a standoff with their own nuclear arsenals: just how much of a power do you think the federal regime in Washington would have over these two states then?Likewise, the second also has to go. Because if you wish to make that state of peace perpetual, you must render a profitable war an impossibility: this requires either that every single sub-unit of this One World Order be a military might that can deter all others, which ties into 4, or enforce the unprofitability through a central military force, tying into 3.Thus, we are rendered with only one option.If we are to enforce peace upon this One World Order, if we are to put an end to conflicts of profit, or grudge, or hatred, or honor, then we must do so by an extremely rigid construct that threatens utter death and destruction to anyone who does not toe the line.Order at all, and any cost.The ‘One World Order’ doesn’t look that good now, does it?Luckily, we have an alternative. If we aren’t able to exist in peace, without putting guns at each other’s heads… then we must have war.There are two ways we can do this. One of them is even viler than the iron hand of a supranational tyranny: we must sacrifice on the altar a portion of the human race. We must write them off, exclude them from the New Order any given part of Earth, and exist in a perpetual state of war with them we knowingly lengthen. We must fight guerilla warfare, we must fight what we call terror, we must permit the occasional attack shake up the citizens and we must never actually end the war: for that brings us back to square one.We must sacrifice on the altar of unity hundreds of millions of humans. I’ll rather have a supranational tyranny over that.The third outcome? That is the only option that gives us a measure of good.If the Earth is to be one, and if mankind is to war, then we must find someone else to wage war upon.If humanity is to cease waging war unto itself truly, without being held at gunpoint, giving up its grudges and threats, its hatred of each other, it can only hope to do so under threat of a foe greater than us. It can only hope to do so when given something else to kill, to conquer and eradicate, to strike at with sword and flame and ash. Earth can only truly unite itself without a monstrous toll of blood when given a greater foe to unite against.The only healthy One World Order Earth can exist under, will be the one forged to wage our wars now among the stars.

In the USA our crime rates skew WAY up because Americans have seen fit to neglect the rusting cities across the country. Infrastructure, policing, schooling, roads, etc. have all been allowed to decay in key areas where there happens to be a lot of poverty. This has resulted in unbelievably high crime rates that exceed those found in many third world nations. It's a horrible situation, but the one ray of light in all this is that you're unlikely to ever visit those areas. There's very little to see or do in those parts of our cities. Those areas have caused the crime statistics for the nation as a whole to spike incredibly high, but once removed, the crime statistics of the rest of the USA look positively European.The point in this is not some massive social commentary (but, what would an answer from me be without a dash of that). It's about explaining why you hear what you do about my country. Random shootings are so statistically rare that you're exponentially more likely to die of the common cold than to be shot by a random crazy person (despite the high profile those stories get). Adding to our “death by guns rate” is that between 1/2 and 2/3 of all our gun deaths are from suicide (which is statistically on par with Europe)Some Americans do carry guns and Texas epitomizes this. But Texas, on the whole, is pretty peaceful. And besides some classic Texan snobbery (the belief that Texas is just the greatest place in the universe . . . who knew that they were French!), the locals are kind, generous, ethical, and welcoming. Texas has a lot of great things to see and do. And Texans will be some of the best people to help show you those things when you get there!

Only 6 US states require registration ,and you guessed it, most of the states are Democrat ruined states . DC, Oregon, Illinois and NY to name a few. It is curious that those states with the most regulation also have the highest gun violence. Texas requires no firearm registration at the moment. If you purchase a firearm from an individual get documentation of the sellers ID and get a receipt for your purchase. The receipt protects you from the accusation of theft . Copy the sellers drivers license # or other photo ID to protect yourself from crooks trying to sell stolen firearms. If the deal seems too good to be true it probably is .

In legal terms, custody is called conservatorship and visitation is referred to as periods of possession. In Texas, the law presumes that parents will be \u201cjoint man- aging conservators, \u201d meaning they will share parental rights and duties.

Minimum time requirements \u2013 Before any adverse possession application can be considered you must have been using (or in possession of the land) for at least ten years. If the land is registered with someone else then the minimum time is extended to twelve years.

Generally speaking, if you have been occupying lands that you do not own, rent or otherwise have permission to use in excess of 12 years (or in the case of Crown lands 30 years), without any objection from the registered owner, you can claim what is known as \u201cadverse possession\u201d.

In order to claim ownership of land by adverse possession the squatter must be in \u201cfactual possession\u201d for the entire limitation period.

If the record owner of the property is paying property taxes, you have no claim of adverse possession. Your possession of the property would not be considered exclusive or uninterrupted, since the owner is paying property taxes. Paying property taxes is no guarantee.