Free Republic

Norton, don't know why it says Ditter up there. I am replying to Norton and his mention of Texian and Texican. As a native Texan, I would like to give you MY definition of the two terms as we understand them. Both terms are correct, but they have slightly different meanings. A Texian was anybody who had migrated here and sided with/hoped to see it become Texan rather than Mexican territory. So Texian was more of a political affiliation term. Texican referred more to heritage and ancestry. It meant that your heritage was of both Texan AND Mexican people, and that you were a native of the area. As a native born Texican, you likely had some hispanic ancestry as well as caucasian ancestry.

I live in Texarkana and have visited Washington Arkansas numerous times. I am not aware of this Crockett story but if you got it from somebody from Washington arkansas it is most likely accurate. See there is very little TO Washington Arkansas BUT history. Since history is about 90% of Washington's importance, most people there are pretty familiar with it.

Probably the reason I'm not familiar with the Crockett story is because there is another man, also of Alamo fame, who is far more a significant man of history to this area than Crockett, and that is James Bowie. He is supposed to have built his famous "Bowie knife" in Washington Ar. which is just a short drive northeast of Texarkana and was the site of a ferry (which is still there, but no longer used). In fact the Texas side of Texarkana resides in the extreme northeastern portion of texas in the county of Bowie, named for James Bowie.

As to the "toothpick" fable; I've heard both stories, that it was the bone of a raccoon penis and that it was the Bowie knife. Early on I just decided to believe it was the Bowie knife and am unaware of whether a raccoon has a bone in it's penis. I would point out though, one poster mentioned that bears have bones in their penis. Well raccoons are related to bears, supposedly, so maybe it does have a bone also.

As to the violence and crime that existed around the Texarkana area from the mid 1800's all the way through the early to mid 1900's; This is true. In fact Texarkana for most of those years had a nick-name, it was also called Little Chicago. In fact, I can't remember what year it was, but there is supposed to be a time magazine that was written which listed the top 10 most dangerous cities in the country, and Texarkana was one of them. It was home to many criminal gangs, and most notably the dixieland mafia. This was due to texarkanas' strategic location both as a crossing point of 4 or 5 (memory vague on that one) railroads, and as the gateway to the southwest, a trail having been travelled for hundreds of years, even before white settlement it had been the way into what is now Texas. The criminal gangs preyed on travellers and settlers, so IMO your Crockett story could easily be true. There were several different ferry crossings along the red river at that time.

I am pleased to be able to report that things have changed though. Texarkana these days is a very friendly city with a below average crime rate compared to other cites around the country. Why that is I don't know, but it's now a city where I rarely lock my door, things I leave in my yard stay in my yard, and I leave my keys in the car even at the mall. Texarkana and the metropolitan area around it has around 200,000 in population now and we have an average of 1 - 2 murders a year, with many years in which there is no murder or rape or anything like that. Our schools still don't have guards or metal detectors, if that tells you anything. The principal is still the "security" in our schools.

I don't know if I'm doing this right, I think it's only my 2nd time ever posting here. In case I'm royally messing it up, I am attempting to reply to the article Lando Lincoln posted by Adam.

I can see it now how any liberals would react to this. They will basically ignore the content of the post and the simple logic, and focus on the wording. They will attack it for hate rhetoric and compare it to McCarthyism. Which is why I would recommend Adam tone it down. It's not that I don't agree with his essay 100%, I do; however, as eloquent as he is I believe he could write this same article in words that would leave the liberals nothing to attack BUT the content and logic. There, as you know, they would fail miserably.

By the way, I usually post on another forum and I've heard SOME (haven't read the manual yet) of the lesser indoctrinated liberals actually come out and say they believe the answer to world peace is to weaken (Clinton closed HOW many military bases, and sold WHAT to China?) America till it is no longer a superpower (Kerry has voted HOW often AGAINST intelligence spending and FOR intelligence cuts?). They also want America to become no richer than any other nation, they believe we should be taxed as much as European nations. (is that 50% on average?). Does it take a rocket scientist to realize they want to tax us so heavily so they can send all our money to other countries?