View Full Version : GOVERNOR SAYS TEXAS CAN LEAVE THE UNION IF IT WANTS
variablebinary
04-15-09, 20:26
Getting ever closer. There will be a new Crispus Attucks born at some point...
Perry fires up anti-tax crowd
By KELLEY SHANNON
Associated Press Writer
AUSTIN, Texas — Texas Gov. Rick Perry fired up an anti-tax "tea party" Wednesday with his stance against the federal government and for states' rights as some in his U.S. flag-waving audience shouted, "Secede!"
An animated Perry told the crowd at Austin City Hall — one of three tea parties he was attending across the state — that officials in Washington have abandoned the country's founding principles of limited government. He said the federal government is strangling Americans with taxation, spending and debt.
Perry repeated his running theme that Texas' economy is in relatively good shape compared with other states and with the "federal budget mess." Many in the crowd held signs deriding President Barack Obama and the $786 billion federal economic stimulus package.
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.
"There's a lot of different scenarios," Perry said. "We've got a great union. There's absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, you know, who knows what might come out of that. But Texas is a very unique place, and we're a pretty independent lot to boot."
Perry is running for re-election against U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, a fellow Republican. His anti-Washington remarks have become more strident the past few weeks as that 2010 race gets going and since Perry rejected $550 million in federal economic stimulus money slated to help Texas' unemployment trust fund.
Perry said the stimulus money would come with strings attached that would leave Texas paying the bill once the federal money ran out.
He said he believes he could be at the center of a national movement that is coordinated and focused in its opposition to the actions of the federal government.
"It's a very organic thing," he said. "It is a very powerful moment, I think, in American history."
South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, also Republicans, have been outspoken against the federal economic stimulus spending and were supportive of tea parties in their states.
The protests, organized throughout the country by conservative groups and talk show hosts, were held on the federal income tax deadline day to imitate the original Boston Tea Party of American revolutionary times.
Conservative syndicated talk show host Glenn Beck broadcast live in San Antonio from outside the Alamo, a legendary symbol of Texas independence, with crowds packing the small plaza. Many waved signs or carried little yellow flags that read, "Don't tread on me." A local barbecue chain gave away free cups of iced tea.
Mike Smart, a 51-year-old oil field worker from West Texas, held up a white handwritten sign that said, "I'll keep my freedom, my $ and my guns. You keep the change."
"I just want the government to stay out of my way. I won't get in their way if they don't get in mine," said Smart, who described himself as conservative but not a Republican.
Government spending, going back multiple administrations, has reached a boiling point with the latest rounds of stimulus spending, he said. While the Bush administration spent heavily before he left office, the Obama administration has fast-tracked big spending, he said.
"Ol' George was going to the same destination. He just didn't want to tell anyone," said Smart.
Another protester, 38-year-old Melva Fried, said the forced ouster of General Motors Corp. CEO Rick Wagoner was the last straw for her — a symbol the federal government was moving toward socialism.
"When a president can fire the head of a company, that's too much," she said, holding a sign that read "Stop Rewarding Failure."
The sales associate, who considers herself a disaffected Republican, said she doesn't believe the government should bail anyone out, including banks and individual homeowners.
The crowd at the Austin tea party appeared decidedly anti-Democrat. Many of the speakers were Republicans and Libertarians.
One placard said, "Stop Obama's Socialism." Another read, "Some Pirates Are in America," and it showed photographs of Obama, U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid wearing pirate hats.
Rebecca Knowlton, 45, of Smithville, said she took the day off of home-schooling her three children and brought them to the rally to teach them about civic duty. She felt camaraderie at the demonstration.
"The movement is growing stronger," she said. "You're not alone."
___
Associated Press Writer Michelle Roberts contributed to this report from San Antonio.
My Texas pride is swelling!! Just wish I could have been there to participate.
Do believe there are MANY people who are seriously upset with the direction our country is heading. And I must add that ist's not just the Dems as the previous Republican administrations were also completely out of control.
Thanks for posting this as I wouldn't have known about it otherwise.
The_War_Wagon
04-15-09, 21:26
As a displaced TARHEEL personage myself (behind enemy lines currently :p), I once spent a year in Galveston. May have to go BACK if we start talking independence again! :D
Gutshot John
04-15-09, 21:34
Article XIII. Every State shall abide by the determination of the United States in Congress assembled, on all questions which by this confederation are submitted to them. And the Articles of this Confederation shall be inviolably observed by every State, and the Union shall be perpetual; nor shall any alteration at any time hereafter be made in any of them; unless such alteration be agreed to in a Congress of the United States, and be afterwards confirmed by the legislatures of every State.
From our first Constitution, precedent dictates that the Union is "perpetual", read indivisible. Once established the Union cannot be dissolved by secession. It would require a Constitutional Amendment, repealing the Union, for the Union to be dissolved.
Perhaps, Gutshot. But it is rumored - I have not found it in writing or don't have it in front of me - that Texas reserved the right to secede upon joining and has the authority (for lack of better terminology) to separate into five separate "statelets" or republics. I'll look for the documents I once had.
I think that we have been denied access to a lot of information. This information can put to rest much of the rumors, innuendoes and errant claims by all sides.
One thing I find odd is that these nation states would have accepted tyranny in the guise of a constitution that essentially robs them of all independence. This is not what was intended and despite the errors of the South (siding with the Crowned Heads of EUrope) they were correct in their right to secede (though it would have been horrid had they been successful).
I'm just saying. I recognize what you stated but there IS more to it than that. Much more.
P.S.
I STILL would not wish to see secession of individual states as it would severely weaken these united States of America. Just my two cents.
Hey, wasn't the previous President from Texas? :D
The only good politician is a blank politician.
You fill in the blank
Personally, the only politician I ever thought was really woth voting for (i.e. me not just voting for the lesser of evils) was Alan Keyes.
I am glad to live in and be a resident of the state of Texas and consider myself a Texan after living the elder half of my life here. I grew up in AZ, but I'm loyal to Texas now.
Perhaps, Gutshot. But it is rumored - I have not found it in writing or don't have it in front of me - that Texas reserved the right to secede upon joining and has the authority (for lack of better terminology) to separate into five separate "statelets" or republics. I'll look for the documents I once had.
I think that we have been denied access to a lot of information. This information can put to rest much of the rumors, innuendoes and errant claims by all sides.
One thing I find odd is that these nation states would have accepted tyranny in the guise of a constitution that essentially robs them of all independence. This is not what was intended and despite the errors of the South (siding with the Crowned Heads of EUrope) they were correct in their right to secede (though it would have been horrid had they been successful).
I'm just saying. I recognize what you stated but there IS more to it than that. Much more.
P.S.
I STILL would not wish to see secession of individual states as it would severely weaken these united States of America. Just my two cents.
With a quick google search I found
http://www.texassecede.com
from their home page
"Texas is a free and independent State ... All political power is inherent in the people ... they have at all times the inalienable right to alter their government in such manner as they might think proper."
— Texas Constitution (1876)
"Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed... Whenever government becomes destructive to life, liberty, or property [i.e., the pursuit of happiness], it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it... It is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security."
— American Declaration of Independence (1776)
If the Federal Gov't does not follow the constitution, like a contract, why wouldn't the states have the right to walk away?
Gutshot John
04-15-09, 22:01
If the Federal Gov't does not follow the constitution, like a contract, why wouldn't the states have the right to walk away?
It's not a "contract", it's a Constitution, HUGE difference. From the first days of this Nation, the Union was designed to be "perpetual". The meaning of the word means the same today as it did then.
The Civil War settled this 144 years ago.
The Union CAN be dissolved, by repealing the Constitution. Texas can secede if it gains the consent of 34 other states.
That's what the Constitution means. "Body" the arm can't cut itself off and survive.
"I'll keep my freedom, my $ and my guns. You keep the change."
brilliant :)
Being a southerner I seem to remember some of the same ideas surfacing in the past. Did not end up making the south stronger, it weakened it to the point of total collapse. Someone enlighten this governor about the Civil War, apparently he slept through all his high school and college history classes.
I have been seeing a lot the tea party coverages on the news. I watched some on Beck & Hannity today. On one side it is nice to see people coming together for a common cause on the flip side I imagine most of them will just go home thinking they're job is done. Since loosing my job not to long ago I have had quite a bit of time to think about stuff like this. Sure I'm angry but now what call senators who don't listen, write letters that will probably never see the light of day. If I come across as depressing I appolise. I am just tired of every where I look seeing news that pisses me off. Government to me just does not seem to care. Sure these rallies are great for the media (both sides) but I wonder what else can be done. I hope Texas tries to leave the union at least that would be a big show of F U to the federal & maybe that would be enough to get other states thinking. Don't get me wrong I think The United States of America is great but I think we long forgot about the State in a world that seems only concerned with world views.
One last thought does it bother anyone else that they were waiver Union flags yelling Secede!"?
Being a southerner I seem to remember some of the same ideas surfacing in the past. Did not end up making the south stronger, it weakened it to the point of total collapse. Someone enlighten this governor about the Civil War, apparently he slept through all his high school and college history classes.
Its obvious most of this is solely symbolism. However, times and circumstances are quite different than a century and a half ago. The south was fighting a war at the time. Had the south been able to perseve those resources instead of spending them on war, our history books would be a tad different.
You really think if Texas or any other state sucessfully secedes we would go to war with eachother again? Nah.
Frankly if all this accomplishes is to shake some Americans out of their sleep, ill consider it a sucess.
Gutshot John
04-15-09, 23:22
You really think if Texas or any other state sucessfully secedes we would go to war with eachother again? Nah.
Perhaps you're right, perhaps not, but it's a vastly different issue.
Success is defined by whether they can sustain it. Texas failed to successfully secede the last time it tried.
The_War_Wagon
04-15-09, 23:41
Living here in Pittsburgh the past 6 years - after being born & raised (9th generation) in NC, and as an adult living & working in NC, SC, MS, TX, & KY (as well as IN & PA), I can see, that it is NOT the South that 'needs' the Union; it's the Union that NEEDS the South! :eek:
Do the ol' red county/blue county map search of the '08 election, and see how HELPLESS (i.e. - urban) the blue counties ARE. They GROW nothing; they BUILD nothing; they PRODUCE nothing. They are strictly CONSUMERS, consuming MOSTLY the largesse of the red counties. :mad:
That's QUITE a turnabout, from 1861...
variablebinary
04-16-09, 00:14
deleted. wrong thread
thopkins22
04-16-09, 01:17
As has been stated Texas reserved the right to secede from the Union when we ceased to be a sovereign nation and joined the US.
From our first Constitution, precedent dictates that the Union is "perpetual", read indivisible. Once established the Union cannot be dissolved by secession. It would require a Constitutional Amendment, repealing the Union, for the Union to be dissolved.
Exactly what I expect to hear from someone living on the wrong side of the Mason Dixon Line.:p
Not to get too far off track, but it's quite clear who the aggressor was during the Civil War, and it's quite clear who's violations of the constitution were worse. Even if we decide to go with your version, at what point to we draw the line? Surely we aren't required to remain part of the union due to the constitution, when nearly every other part of the constitution isn't taken word for word either? I don't think any state would have voluntarily joined if they knew it was a one way road.
Texas failed to successfully secede the last time it tried.
Too much dead weight last time....
Perhaps you're right, perhaps not, but it's a vastly different issue.
Success is defined by whether they can sustain it. Texas failed to successfully secede the last time it tried.
However, times and circumstances are quite different than a century and a half ago. The south was fighting a war at the time. Had the south been able to preserve those resources instead of spending them on war, our history books would be a tad different.
Your argument over the definition of success hinges on semantics.
Lastly, if America goes to war with a seceded state I'll eat ostrich feces. :rolleyes:
And then there's this which is fairly accurate.
Living here in Pittsburgh the past 6 years - after being born & raised (9th generation) in NC, and as an adult living & working in NC, SC, MS, TX, & KY (as well as IN & PA), I can see, that it is NOT the South that 'needs' the Union; it's the Union that NEEDS the South!
Do the ol' red county/blue county map search of the '08 election, and see how HELPLESS (i.e. - urban) the blue counties ARE. They GROW nothing; they BUILD nothing; they PRODUCE nothing. They are strictly CONSUMERS, consuming MOSTLY the largesse of the red counties.
That's QUITE a turnabout, from 1861...
Bottom line, doubt Texas would ever do it. Like I said, symbolism. Let's see if it's effective.
You really think if Texas or any other state sucessfully secedes we would go to war with each other again? Nah.
If you're wrong, I'm moving to Texas.
variablebinary
04-16-09, 06:47
If you're wrong, I'm moving to Texas.
I bet the Texas border would close overnight if they did leave the union :D
Furthermore, if one Pred drone were to drop ordinance on Houston, bet your ass 20 states would leave the union and coalesce against federal aggression. It doesn't take a genius to know which states they would be either.
Also, do the mostly liberal, coastal states have the fortitude to get Texas and other free states in line by force. I seriously doubt it
VooDoo6Actual
04-16-09, 07:00
interesting times.
ZDL, yes the southern states were fighting a war at the time but what i was getting at was his dangerous rhetoric. Right now we need to be united and this is not what we need. I do not agree with our Federal Government right now or for that matter I do not feel like they represent the interest of the people. According to John Locke the Federal Gov has violated the Social Contract and as a united people we have the right to take elected leaders out of office and start over. I think that the Tea Parties are just the beginning of a movement to clean house in government.
Mr.Goodtimes
04-16-09, 07:34
i think we need to clean up our government. i think the only way to fix this is to throw em all outta office, president, congress, republican, democrat, everyone. and start fresh with freshly elected officials that have no political agenda. and also get rid of this congress being able to vote them selves pay raises. and get rid of life congressmen. make it like it used to be, where if you wanted to be a congressman/senator, or any high ranking gov. official, you did it because you were a patriot, not because you had a political agenda.
ZDL, yes the southern states were fighting a war at the time but what i was getting at was his dangerous rhetoric. Right now we need to be united and this is not what we need. I do not agree with our Federal Government right now or for that matter I do not feel like they represent the interest of the people. According to John Locke the Federal Gov has violated the Social Contract and as a united people we have the right to take elected leaders out of office and start over. I think that the Tea Parties are just the beginning of a movement to clean house in government.
I think saying it is dangerous rhetoric is a matter of opinion. It is my understanding that we were intended to seperate states that wer only united as a mutal benifit such as commerce, military & the like. However the whole does not hold the best interests of the members then the member ie states have an obligation to voice their concerns & if needed take action. If other states took the same mentality as Texas perhaps the federal might think twice about their own actions. In short the states be came a union as a matter of comfort so to speak. If they are no longer comfortable then perhaps it is time for a change.
I bet the Texas border would close overnight if they did leave the union :D
I'll find a way in. :cool:
George_Hayduke
04-16-09, 08:47
If the Federal Gov't does not follow the constitution, like a contract, why wouldn't the states have the right to walk away?
As a history buff for many years I couldn't for the life of me understand why Lincoln comes out on the "good" side of history, but you know, the victors write the "history".
Don't believe it?
Just take a gander at how the the so called mainstream' respectable media portrays the current events and how they seem to work directly for the powers to be. Any doubt in anyone's mind how any act towards succession will be played out in the media?
This "Fairness Doctrine" issue of silencing conservative (and they ain't that conservative) talk radio is IMO actually bigger than the 2nd Amendment issues.
Take care,
thopkins22
04-16-09, 09:22
As a history buff for many years I couldn't for the life of me understand why Lincoln comes out on the "good" side of history, but you know, the victors write the "history".
Agreed. Lincoln was the one president in American history that truly qualifies as a tyrant.
CarlosDJackal
04-16-09, 09:43
I'm moving to Texas if it secedes!! :D
Iraq Ninja
04-16-09, 10:04
They Iraqis often asked me where I am from, and I always tell them "Texas". They always know where Texas is, even the kids. "Ah, cowboys" is often their reply with big smiles.
We are one of the most popular States around the world for sure...
psdiver102
04-16-09, 11:58
I see it's a somming up story on CNN. Should be interesting to see
George_Hayduke
04-16-09, 12:46
ZDL, yes the southern states were fighting a war at the time but what i was getting at was his dangerous rhetoric. Right now we need to be united and this is not what we need. I do not agree with our Federal Government right now or for that matter I do not feel like they represent the interest of the people. According to John Locke the Federal Gov has violated the Social Contract and as a united people we have the right to take elected leaders out of office and start over. I think that the Tea Parties are just the beginning of a movement to clean house in government.
It absolutely is "dangerous" as was intended to be as one of the checks and balances that's suppose to keep the "tyranny of the majority" from squelshing our constitutional republic.
I really think we need to get the original concept of three separate branches of federal government back on track. I think the reason we have talk of succession being bandied about is based on the frustration stemming from a lack of checks and balances on a federal level. The system at the fed level is just a zoo with the pres dumping billions of OUR $$$$ into the hands of ACORN a group responsible for wide spread voter fraud.
The response to an actual attempt at succession would be interesting and I would pack up instantly and move to the first state that try's just as a matter of principle.
The problems we have at the fed level aren't going to fix easily.
variablebinary
04-16-09, 19:06
In other recent Rick Perry news
http://governor.state.tx.us/news/press-release/12227/
AUSTIN – Gov. Rick Perry today joined state Rep. Brandon Creighton and sponsors of House Concurrent Resolution (HCR) 50 in support of states’ rights under the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
“I believe that our federal government has become oppressive in its size, its intrusion into the lives of our citizens, and its interference with the affairs of our state,” Gov. Perry said. “That is why I am here today to express my unwavering support for efforts all across our country to reaffirm the states’ rights affirmed by the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I believe that returning to the letter and spirit of the U.S. Constitution and its essential 10th Amendment will free our state from undue regulations, and ultimately strengthen our Union.”
A number of recent federal proposals are not within the scope of the federal government’s constitutionally designated powers and impede the states’ right to govern themselves. HCR 50 affirms that Texas claims sovereignty under the 10th Amendment over all powers not otherwise granted to the federal government.
It also designates that all compulsory federal legislation that requires states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties, or that requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding, be prohibited or repealed.
HCR 50 is authored by Representatives Brandon Creighton, Leo Berman, Bryan Hughes, Dan Gattis and Ryan Guillen.
To view the full text of the resolution, please visit:
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/81R/billtext/html/HC00050I.htm.
BuckeyeBOSS
04-16-09, 19:21
Maybe they should let Texas leave. I'm sure the population would skyrocket and the rest of the 49 states would be left with their liberal utopia. Seems like a win-win.
The biggest news in this whole thing is the fact that a sitting Governor actually talked about such a thing in a public forum.
I don't recall such a thing ever before in my lifetime, ever.
We're not talking about some kook on a short wave radio here, but the Governor of a state.
Interesting times, indeed.
Gov. Perry deserves a free round of his favorite beverage for having the stones to mention it publicly. Hats off!
kaiservontexas
04-17-09, 01:25
I am glad I voted Perry for the second time.
In other recent Rick Perry news
http://governor.state.tx.us/news/press-release/12227/
I'm liking this guy more and more every day.
madisonsfinest
04-17-09, 05:59
If Texas attempted to go it alone, you could see quite the upswing in problems with MEXICO for sure.
I don't think the cartels are worried about the Texas govt. Coming after them.
variablebinary
04-17-09, 06:30
If Texas attempted to go it alone, you could see quite the upswing in problems with MEXICO for sure.
I don't think the cartels are worried about the Texas govt. Coming after them.
I wouldnt be so sure. Texas wouldnt be bound by federal ineptitude in managing border affairs if they split from the union.
You'd have a few thousand keen to kill, armed Texans just waiting to pick someone off.
Not to mention if Mexico got aggresive with an independent Texas, I can almost promise you millions of United States citizens would grab their guns and head to Texas to help the cause.
George_Hayduke
04-17-09, 07:17
The biggest news in this whole thing is the fact that a sitting Governor actually talked about such a thing in a public forum.
I don't recall such a thing ever before in my lifetime, ever.
We're not talking about some kook on a short wave radio here, but the Governor of a state.
Interesting times, indeed.
Wyoming and Montana rattle the chains once in a while, but it's never been this timely to get such press :D
Texas is interesting because they don't want a broke federal gov dragging them down as well. I heard the same sort of talk from our Wyoming State Reps at our Tea Party April 15. Wyoming runs a 4 billion dollar surplus in the form of bonds and is very good about about balancing the state budget.
In WY we also have the issue of unpaid fed royalties on BLM minerals that's a very hot topic.
Most folks here have little use for the feds, stemming back to the cavalry stealing folks land for the railroads, shooting coalmine strikers, stirring up problems with the indian's and backing the huge european absentee ranch companies that forced folks off homesteads.
Now days it's land use issues relating to oil/gas/coal development (why we have a surplus) that get folks panties in a bind and the issue of highway taxes to keep Highway 80 in good repair. Governors in the past have threated to shut down I-80 :p
You will find no love of the nanny state and their thugs here!
Take Care,
George_Hayduke
04-17-09, 07:25
My broadband is a bouncing!
Just curious. I read the article and saw the interview with the Governor the other day. Exactly where did he say that Texas could leave the union if it wanted to?
Mr.Goodtimes
04-17-09, 09:11
If Texas attempted to go it alone, you could see quite the upswing in problems with MEXICO for sure.
I don't think the cartels are worried about the Texas govt. Coming after them.
they sure as hell shold be, i know i would be if i was them!
I see some fairly decent arguments for Texas' ability to secede at texassecede.com (http://www.texassecede.com/faq.htm).
From our first Constitution, precedent dictates that the Union is "perpetual", read indivisible. Once established the Union cannot be dissolved by secession. It would require a Constitutional Amendment, repealing the Union, for the Union to be dissolved.
What you're quoting here is from the Articles of Confederation, which are no longer in effect. The Articles of Confederation have been null since the US Constitution went into effect. There is no such provision in the US Constitution.
All the "authority" necessary is contained right here:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.
(emphasis added)
Those principles are no less valid, or self-evident, today than they were on July 4, 1776.
The seccession of Texas..
If such a thing were to happen, and so many of you moved here, I see a whole new take on the "Minuteman" thing. Borderwall my ass! Border closed off, free fire zone!
My Hispanic wife does not go against this... She is a US, by God, Republican citizen! She hates illegal immigration too!
But, what would the US do? And would she (my wife) be shot on sight by some well meaning (not from this website here, of course..!) "good citizens"?
And my Amerindian descended self and relatives?
I stand ready to defend our nation (Again, US Army Vet). Then, my state. But first and foremost, my God, family, friends.
But what of the overzealous crowd? Who is to stop them? How far would it go? My sweet 10 year old son? I don't care what your color or political affiliation. You aim a weapon towards my Barry hating kid, whose skin is brown, AmerIndian/Latino/White? I'll bury you right there!
In other words, don't get caught up on the race thing. I know many are avoiding saying it. But I did. Don't judge for that. Good comes in all colors.But Barry is bad, no matter the affiliation.
Hope I haven't killed the thread and myself here. Just be good. To everyone. Until you have reason to be otherwise. Then, do what is right anyway!
dog
TX secession would be interesting. TX has alot of military here, IIRC Ft. Hood is one of the (if not the) largest Army bases. Lots of USAF here too.
If TX were to secede, what the military does would be telling. If the bases go with TX, then the feds lose alot of the ability to fight.
What do you .mil guys think?
montanadave
04-20-09, 07:43
From what I have read and heard in recent days, the Republic of Texas DID NOT reserve the right to secede from the union and talk of secession is nothing more than rhetorical saber rattling to drum up populist support.
What Texas apparently DID reserve was the future right to break up the territory which comprised Texas into the state of Texas and four additional states (Article 2, Joint Resolution for Annexing Texas to the United States, 1845). Should Texas ever exercise that option, it could significantly alter the balance of power within the United States Senate, affording eight additional senators to what has been a largely Republican constituency in recent years. Consequently, this would also impact the electoral college.
Another interesting aside which was illuminated in these recent discussions--Texas reserved all mineral rights to the state. There are apparently no federal oil and gas leases in the state of Texas, unlike much of the country, particularly the western states, where federal lands and federal minerals are significant. All oil and gas production in Texas is regulated by the Texas Railroad Commission, which could effectively "set" the price of oil by regulating the "allowable" production from Texas oil fields. OPEC used the Texas Railroad Commission as its model when it was founded in the early 1960s. The Texas Railroad Commission effectively ceded its pricing authority to OPEC in 1972, when it declared Texas producers could produce at 100% of their capacity, tacitly acknowledging that Texas' oil production was no longer sufficient to act as the "swing" producer against the combined production of OPEC members.
How many states signed the Texas Amicus brief in support of Heller?
How many states backed the gun-grabbers in the same case?
;)
Hint: The pathetic losers are hopelessly out-numbered.
It's interesting that some folks think / believe that states do NOT have the right to leave the Union. Refer back to the Declaration - although not a binding document, it's important nonetheless since it's essentially outlines our justification for becoming a nation to begin with.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; ..."
To me, this passage says a few things. Namely, that when the People feel that the government is no longer securing their right to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness, they have the right to do away with said government.
Furthermore, if the government derives its power from the consent of the governed, than certainly it's reasonable to assume that the governed could choose to check out of the hotel if they wanted to.
Granted, Lincoln and the Civil War seemed to dictate otherwise. Regardless of anyone's feelings about slavery (I would think / hope most would agree that is/was wrong) the South should have been allowed to leave the Union IMO.
In the spirit of the Declaration, we don't need to ask the government's permission to leave the club. The People have the Right to alter or abolish it - and rights are not granted by the government. It's the duty of the government to SECURE the rights we have.
In relalty, any talk of a state leaving the Union is indeed pure rhetoric. It'll never happen.
Unrelated to this thread - the other line I love in the Declaration is this:
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes
Some folks should write that line on the blackboard 100 times.
losbronces
04-20-09, 12:20
You will find no love of the nanny state and their thugs here!
Take Care,
I think thats because most people in Wyoming work for a living.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.