Posted on 07/15/2012 3:46:27 PM PDT by cap10mike
Could Texas once again become the Republic of Texas?
Without question, the Nov. 6 election will be a do-or-die, make-or-break, Rubicon-crossing event. If the presidential election goes one way, we get a “do-over.” We’ll be given the opportunity to take the first step on a long, arduous journey back to our political and economic roots. If it goes the other way, federalism and balance of power will continue to be edged out by an overreaching federal government and an imperial presidency. Socialism will have an unbreakable hold on the economy, and a centralized government, rather than a free market, will determine business’ winners and losers.
(Excerpt) Read more at bizpacreview.com ...
.”And I’m glad I’m a Texan”
And I’m glad for you. But if came to that it wouldn’t be geograph-
ical. It would be ideological. Your allies would be in Boston, St Paul,
Fresno, and Houston. So would your enemies.
FedGov is an anachronism that needs euthanized.
/johnny
So, hero, the 18th AMENDMENT (ie... change) is still effective?
/johnny
It's a tool the Lord uses that teaches one's hands to war and fingers to fight. Especially if you are bootlegging it.
Best part, of course, is the BBQ later.
/johnny
Why do you think the US would use nukes on Texas? Didn’t use them in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan. any one of which would had gotten more support than nuking fellow North Americans.Another thing to think about is the fact that most of the strategic petroleum reserves are in the salt domes here in Texas. The US wouldn’t want to blow that up, for a number of reasons. My personal opinion, there wouldn’t be a war at all. Lots of people running their mouth,and in the end they’d give Texas it’s sovereignty. For one thing, it isn’t like the whole rest of the country would be against us. What about Oklahoma, Kansas, Arizona, Wyoming, and several others? They might stay in the US for the time being, but they’d be mostly sympathetic with Texas. It would be a real mess for awhile, but freedom is always worth it.I’m getting a little old, but if I knew that this could be a better place for my daughter, and she wouldn’t have to pay half her earnings to support some welfare momma squirtin’ out 2 kids a year, or giving special benefits to some dude who wants to make love to another dude’s exhaust pipe, it just might be all worth it.
It did have power, though.
It wound up being enforced in blood.
/johnny
That’s what we are afraid of, too
“All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State.”
I am not a lawyer but have several years of contract administration experience and interpret this ruling to mean that the State of Texas IS indeed tied, in perpetuity, to a REPUBLICAN GOVERNMENT.
A case could be made that Obama,in using executive orders and regulations to bypass congress (will of the people), has directly “transformed” the US from a republic to an imperial entity not defined by by either the constitution or this ruling, freeing Texas to proceed with succession if so desired.
Yeah, its weak but you could even use Obama’s own speeches to build a stronger case for this “transformation” in order to weaken White vs TX.
...until the Texas legislature declares all people, documented or not, within the borders of Texas on the date of her independence are full citizens of the Republic of Texas. Those millions will swell the ranks of passionately independent and patriotic Texans. If the Texas legislature is equally clear that all forms of redistribution of wealth immediately end on her independence, those “immigrants” here only for the free ride will run screaming from the Republic back to the Union that they “love.”
My state (North Dakota) is the largest producer of wheat in the country.
We get over $1 Billion a year from the federal government in agricultural subsidies.
So why would the people of the major agricultural states (North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Oklahoma, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, etc) side with Texas?
All of these states are getting agricultural subsidies from the federal government.
No, I am saying that there are legal procedures for leaving the Union. If you can use those, the fence is very high, if you can use those, you can write, or change just about any legislation you find useful or offensive, respectively.
If you attempt illegal secession, then you are committing treason. If you attack US forces performing their duty, as happened at Ft. Sumter, you are attacking a nuclear power, and that is not smart. Now mind you, I don’t think you are terribly clever based on your previous posts, but still, attacking a nuclear power would be really really stupid.
“If Obama wins, it’s too late for secession.
Obama will instantly declare “Administrative Amnesty” for illegal immigrants.
And Texas will instantly become a “Blue State.””
Step back for a moment and think about what you’ve just said.
You’ve acknowledged that there is a huge number of Hispanic illegals in Texas NOW. Of course, they can’t vote today.
But the fact that they are there dooms Texas to “become a Blue State” by default. Obama doesn’t have to declare an amnesty, it’s going to happen anyway.
What’s the birthrate of Hispanics and illegals in Texas, vis-a-vis the birthrate for the “gringos”? Who’s having the lion’s share of babies?
The inescapable reality is that Hispanic illegals in Texas (and everywhere else) are going to “self-legalize” in 15-20 years, even if amnesty never happens. Because each and every baby that the illegal women bear on American soil is an American citizen.
No, they can’t vote today.
But wait eighteen years.
What’s going to happen to Texas’ political demographics 20-30 years from now?
Actually, you can also be confined in a home for the insane.
Advocating murder?
Would Obama's attacks in Pakistan count as attacking a nuclear power?
If not, why not?
/johnny
“If it ever gets done, the state government is going to act and then dare the U.S. to do anything about it. Does Washington *really* want to shoot at “fellow Americans”? It’s not 1861 anymore.”
Indeed not.
How would an incident like that look splattered across all the networks?
Who amongst the democrats in the Congress will step forward and claim credit for such actions?
How many of the left would be willing to join up and fight to “preserve the Union” this time around?
“They would nuke us before we ever got control of them. That
is if Obama doesn’t destroy them first. If there are any
nukes left in Texas anyway.”
If whomever was in control of the federal government ever used nuclear weapons on American soil -against- their own citizens, that would be the end of America, in any case.
That would do more to precipitate the collapse of the nation, than would the act of secession by one or more states itself...
The declaration of independence laid out the reasons, and then the US won a war, and got a treaty. ,
That is a tough road, and unlikely to achieved by the knuckleheads in Texas who wrongly favor secession.
It’s a good thing Obama doesn’t want to destroy America, eh?
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.