Posted on 08/13/2007 10:27:22 PM PDT by BnBlFlag
I am just pointing out that that resolution speaks of additional terms and agreements which are not contained in there. I don't know if they exist or not, but that resolution that you posted does speak of additional terms and agreements. That we can agree on.
The terms and agreements, I believe are spelled out in their final form in the annexation ordinance that the Texas voters approved subsequent to the US resolution, and in which there is no mention of details yet to be worked out, but does detail how Texas military bases and equipment go to the US, but Texas keeps its unsettled lands. Texas can break up into four states if they want, they get to keep their money but they also are responsible for their existing debts and they get some cash. But I have yet to find one source that provides documentation for the assertion that Texas is allowed to secede at any time and many sources that say such a claim is a myth, including, as I showed, the Texas State Library and Archive.
Maybe the time period we are looking at is off regarding being able to secede. Texas broke from the USA and joined the Confederate States and then joined back with the USA. Perhaps that is when this secede issue came about?
"SECTION XXXIII. The ordinance of the Convention passed on the first day of February, A. D. 1861, commonly know as the Ordinance of Secession, was in contravention of the Constitution and laws of the United States, and therefore, null and void from the beginning; and all laws, and parts of laws, founded upon said ordinance, were also null and void from the date of their passage. The Legislatures which sat in the State of Texas, from the 18th day of March, A. D. 1861, until the 6th day of August, A. D. 1866, had no constitutional authority to make laws binding upon the people of the State of Texas"It hardly seems likely that the federal government would readmit a state if it had just passed a constitution that claimed the right to secede at any time, seeing as how they'd just fought a war over that very matter. The 1869 constitution was replaced by another one in 1876, but I don't think you'll find it there either.
On the other hand, Texas does indisputably (as far as I know) still have the power to break up into multiple states, something that no other state has.
Good research! See my post #104. You have been correct from the start.
The democratic party of the old south was not as monolithic as many around here would like to believe. Within that party you did have segregationists, but you also had common, salt of the earth southern folk who had no interest in slavery, segregation, or racism. Problem was that both of these groups perceived an electoral threat from the northern states, which tended to have higher populations and thus more seats in congress. So rather than let one region of the country dictate policy, the factions in southern politics came together under one party. It's easy to associate southerners with racism because of this, but that don't make it so.
That's also a deceptive view of history. You can't separate out a few segregationists from a mass "who had no interest in slavery, segregation, or racism."
Sure, a lot of Southerners were just "voting Southern" or voting against the "Yankees," but the problem is that "Our Southern Way of Life" or "Our Civilization" covered a lot of ground, very much including (depending on the era) slavery, segregation, and White supremacy.
However, things change. The segregationists are largely gone, and fiscal conservatives have moved to the republican party while social liberals have moved to the dem party. Southerners quickly saw that the republicans were far more amenable to their ideas and joined the R's in great numbers, now unencumbered by any segregationists. It's too bad that most of the population is too damned stupid to see that, however. [Emphasis added]
What are you talking about? I really doubt a majority of the United States population has serious prejudices or preconceptions concerning today's South or about Southern Republicans. I'd hope they'd take exception to kooks and fringe elements lying about history, but I doubt our fellow citizens deserve to be called "stupid."
1. WHEN are you going to stop trying (the longer this goes on, the more DESPERATE you sound.) to "change the subject" away from your obvious DISHONESTY, HATRED of & PREJUDICE against the south & the southern people???
2. WHEN are you going to LEAVE the freerepublic.com forum FOREVER???
those are the ONLY answers i'm interested in hearing from you. (every time you post yet another DUMB-bunny, arrogant, dishonest, post on FR, i'll be right here to remind everyone of the FACT that you're a LIAR, whose "word of honor" is an oxymoron.)
otherwise, as i said earlier, i'm just RIDICULING you for being whoever you REALLY used to be, before you were BANNED from FR.
laughing AT you.
free dixie,sw
So, where did that massacre take place? You've placed it in two different states (and three different time frames). It's looking a lot like it's as much a fiction as the El Paso Thanksgiving, the Alexandria synagogue burning, and "Yachts Against Subs."
I thought you claimed you could find out who I was in five minutes.
WHEN are you going to admit how many times you've LIED to everyone on these threads???
AND
WHEN are you leaving FR forever??? (your buddies on DU are waiting for you to return. FOOLS, HATERS & LIARS are WELL-liked on DU & the A.N.S.W.E.R. websites.)
laughing AT you.
free dixie,sw
laughing AT you.
free dixie,sw
Show the lies I’ve told like I’ve showed the ones you’ve told.
i'm interested in nothing else from you but those answers.
laughing AT you.
free dixie,sw
FReepers, who laugh AT you "behind your back" in PMs & in emails, don't count.
free dixie,sw
Not without consent of Congress, and any state can do that if Congress approves.
Logically, there was no other way the Court could rule. The idea that the constitution supports unilateral secession is ridiculous.
Look at my posting history if you want that information. It’s right there.
Alexandria synagogue
El Paso Thanksgiving
92 of your relatives massacred in two different states
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.