http://www.statesman.com/news/conten...Tea_Party.html

Apparently Gov. Perry isn't a student of history. He might want to ask, Virgina, W. Virgina, the Carolinas, Tennessee, Kentucky, Missouri, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Arakansas and Texas how that worked out for them about 150 years ago. I for one say let them go, the US is better off without them.

 

"Later, answering news reporters' questions, Perry suggested Texans might at some point get so fed up they would want to secede from the union, though he said he sees no reason why Texas should do that."

"He said when Texas entered the union in 1845 it was with the understanding it could pull out. However, according to the Texas State Library and Archives Commission, Texas negotiated the power to divide into four additional states at some point if it wanted to but not the right to secede."

So he's wrong about their 'right' to secede. He didn't say he was trying to get them to do so. Texas can become more states! Wow, how exciting. No. Not really.

 

Yes, he is wrong. He was proven wrong in 1865 after the end of the Civil War. Although this time, if they try it again, I say either nuke Texas, or just let Mexico absorb it.

 

I would think it'd be the GOP who would throw the biggest fit if Texas really wanted to threaten secession. I can't imagine the Democrats being too upset to see the largest red state in the nation (34 electoral votes) pack it up.

Pretty pointless posturing on Perry's part though. I'm sure he'd miss the $50B in federal funds his state receives every year.

 

ding ding ding!!!!!!!!!

hence the reason why if a state wants to raise it's speed limit... guess why it gets shot down FAST...

 

See ya!

 

Not a student of history? And you are???

"...Next comes the union created by the Declaration of Independence. The most notable fact in this context is that the Declaration announces a lawful secession by the colonies from Great Britain based on the right of the people to alter or abolish their form of government. It is thus apparent that the Declaration of Independence establishes that the right of secession is among the inalienable rights of men... "
http://www.lewrockwell.com/ostrowski/ostrowski31.html

The 13 Colonies seceeded from Great Britain. Not because British law said they could, because it most certainly didn't, but because it is a natural right. Natural rights are things like life, liberty and private property. Governments don't give you those rights. If you are a human, you possess them. Governments merely recognize these rights and restrict/suspend these rights when you violate those of others. The Southern states had every right to seceed both legally and morally. It was only Lincoln's tyrranical and desperate resort to violence that put an end to their attempted secession.



As for the US being better off without Texas, that's a laugh:

"A recent study by the Center for Budget & Policy Priorities found that at least 41 states have recently faced, or are facing, budget deficits. Today 13 states are staring at budget shortfalls in excess of $1 billion in fiscal year 2009, with California ($31 billion) and New York ($6.4 billion) leading the pack...Texas is currently the envy of the nation with an $11 billion budget surplus. "
http://www.reason.com/news/show/130290.html

Does Texas need the US or does the US need Texas? It won't be Texas begging and threatening to stay a part of this failed marriage should a break-up start to occur.

And the argument that Texas would miss the $50B in Federal funds it receives? Clear evidence here that people have NO understanding of how things work. That money came FROM Texas! So by severing ties with the U.S., that's $50B+ that Texans won't have to pay Washington and then beg for it back. Texans keep their money and they don't have to dance D.C.'s tune. WIN/WIN.

 

1) Show me where in the Declaration of Independence it says states have the right to secede. Those states never seceded, the United States of America never recognized the sovreignty of the Confederacy, what you call Lincoln's tyrannical resirt to violence, I call the Presidents attempt to maintain the Union formed by the original 13 colonies. Last I checked, those states who "seceded" are still members of the Union. What the decleration of independence states is that it is the right of the citizens to violently overthrow their government in order to spark change, not to secede from the union and claim their own sovreignty.

2) I was mostly referring to the extreme right wing christian vote that Texas brings to the Union, remeber, no Texas, no Bush. Not to mention I was joking about us being better off without Texas.

 

You obviously didn't read the article I quoted earlier, but I'll spell it out for you - the onus is on YOU to prove that the Fed has the power to stop a state from seceeding. Good luck finding that power. It doesn't exist!:

"Worst of all in my view, Sandefur tries to show that there was no "right to secede" built into the original constitution; there was no explicitly recognized "permission" to secede. Sandefur here appears to miss the entire concept of enumerated and limited powers, i.e., the idea that the federal government has power to do only that which is authorized by the Constitution (see ninth and tenth amendments). It does not matter whether the Constitution explicitly provides for the right to secede. What matters is whether the Constitution empowers the federal government to go to war against a seceding state. This power is not granted. (Just take a look.) Therefore, the right to secede is implicit in the very structure of the Constitution. […] The Constitution nowhere authorizes or empowers any branch of the federal government to prevent a state from seceding. We do not need to find "permission" for States to secede; rather, the federal government has to find "permission" (authorization) in the Constitution, to stop secession."
http://www.lewrockwell.com/kinsella/kinsella10.html


2) I was mostly referring to the extreme right wing christian vote that Texas brings to the Union, remeber, no Texas, no Bush. Not to mention I was joking about us being better off without Texas.[/QUOTE]

I agree with you that extremists are no good. Sadly, extremists exist in many places and on many levels. And what most people now perceive as 'extremist' is oftentimes normal and what is thought of as 'normal' is now extremist. No wonder Americans are so confused.

 

http://www.ushistory.org/Declaration/document/index.htm

That is the text of the Declaration of Independence. You have the right to over throw your government if it strays from its founding principles. You do not have the right to secede from said government.

 

I say ****in let em,

 

/facepalm

Why are you quoting the Declaration of Independence? That is just a notice telling King George that the colonies seceeded and why. The Constitution establishes the framework of our government and lays out the rules the Fed must follow. So that is the document you need to read. Look in there and find for us where it empowers the Fed to halt states from seceeding. Good luck!

 

Secede? I don't think it's out of the question anymore. What you have to realize is that in the next 5 or less years, something pretty historical is going to happen. Why would Homeland Security (which is actually National Security) talk about something domestic when it is built for foreign affairs? They recently stated to all police enforcement that "Homeland Security Warns for Right Wing Extremist" to prepare for riots, anti-government talk, etc. Now that's great, they are turning the law enforcement on its own citizens (because now they know the anti-government and T.E.A. Party, etc. is gaining huge ground and influence) This is where our civil liberties are going to be in jeopardy. The government doesn't want you to talk about anti-government stuff, or what the government is doing or proposing, or talking about auditing the Fed, our 2nd amendment getting stripped and torn down, or the 16th amendment (tax law) that wasn't even ratified legally.

There are so many things that the government has outright done wrong and wronged it's citizens and more and more people are beginning to see all these things that the government is getting without even a discussion. Ron Paul speaks about having your values, and the values are supposed to be strictly from the constitution (IE not having any war unless declared by congress, etc.) The time is coming, and coming soon for a revolution in this country. I hope you have some guns in hand because that might be the only thing protecting you from the Revolution that is unraveling before your eyes.

www.campaignforliberty.com

 

Why don't you closely read your post #7. See the document you are referring to in that post. I understand how government works, I understand how our government works and where our rule of law comes from. Succession is not mention anywhere in the constitution. You might be able to make some argument regarding the states rights clause in the 10th ammendment, but I dont think there would be a favorable ruling in the Supreme Court in regards to succession. Texas might claim succession, but its soverignty will not be recognized by the Federal government and if Texas would continue to resist, I would like to see a militia from the State of Texas defeat the United States Army. Gov. Perry can make any absurd claims he wants, but when it comes down to it, which I ever doubt it will, Texas will not be allowed to succeed. You are right, the Constitution does not explicitly empower the fed to prevent a state from succeeding, however on the flip side, it also does not explicitly state that a state is permitted to succeed either. Its an intentionally ambiguous document for a reason and there is a precedent for not allowing states to succeed so I would highly doubt there would be a court ruling in favor of succession.

 

I agree with most of what you have to say but I have to point something out here. The US government is a government of the people, by the people and for the people. It is a representative form of government, meaning that it is a reflection of the citizenry. Yesterday I read someone say that we need to kick every single politician out of Washington. I had to laugh. Who are we going to replace them with? More people like us of course! And since we are the problem, the politicians will keep doing the same things and making the same mistakes.

Yes, the politicians and bureaucrats have done wrong but they are merely a symptom of a much larger problem. We, the people, have to change the way we think first of all. What are our rights? Where do they come from? What are our responsibilities? What is government and what should its role in our lives be? Until we can answer these questions properly, we haven't learned anything and will simply continue to repeat the same mistakes over and over. Seceeding will get us nowhere if we just create a smaller version of the (current) USA.

Nothing personal against Jewpac but you can see that he doesn't know the answers to the questions above. And neither do I! At least, not all of them. I'm learning though. I used to think like he and most of Americans do these days. And look where that has gotten us. This country is a mess right now and headed downhill fast in a number of ways. Hopefully we can change that.