• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Democrats: Texas gov should disavow secession talk

What, if anything, did that add to the conversation except to prove that your perceptions are hysterical, warped, mega-super-jumbo-hyperpartisan, and uncalled for? ;)
Did you watch CNN? Derrrr! :doh
 
The entire text of the second amendment reads:


Any interpretation of this sentence to justify secession or revolution is a figment of your imagination.
No, it justifies a free State.
 
Maybe we`ll all join them this time. The second ammendment insists on it. That ammendment isn`t at all about guns, its about dealing withg tyranny.

The amendment is about guns. But I do think that a reason behind it was to have the populace capable of fighting an oppressive government. The second amendment doesn't insist that we join Texas, not every rebellion/revolution is justified. For example secession of the Southern states in the early 1860s.
 
T some important matter that our black muslim president is all to willing to ignore.

Seriously, every OUNCE that this dumbass democrat makes his side of the isle look with his idiotic comments, you make everyone arguing agaisnt him look equally stupid with this ignorant, unfactual, pointless for any reason but to be bigoted claim you made there.
 
The entire text of the second amendment reads:


Any interpretation of this sentence to justify secession or revolution is a figment of your imagination.

Erroneous and disproven. There are any number of Founder quotes indicating that the right of the citizenry to keep and bear arms was in part to prevent tyranny from their own government, by force as a last resort. (The Founders themselves did exactly this in breaking with Britain, you might have noticed.) I've posted many of those quotes in other threads... must I do so again?

G.
 
There was something else about a ..."sovereign nation", some important matter that our black muslim president is all to willing to ignore. Well, if it comes to mind, I`ll get back with you there democRAT.... Darn, I`ve gotta get this hard drive looked at.

One, our presdient is NOT Muslim. Secondly, your obviously racist. Thirdly, last time I checked, Texas wasn't a sovereign nation, it's a territory of the US. And fourthly, don't call me a rat because I'm willing to bet that your sleezy then Blagojevich.
 
One, our presdient is NOT Muslim. Secondly, your obviously racist. Thirdly, last time I checked, Texas wasn't a sovereign nation, it's a territory of the US. And fourthly, don't call me a rat because I'm willing to bet that your sleezy then Blagojevich.

Actually we were a Nation before we became a State. Prior to being an independent nation Texas was a part of Mexico, remember the Alamo?
 
Last edited:
Actually we were a Nation before we became a State. Prior to being an independent nation Texas was a part of Mexico, remember the Alamo?

Every state in the nation was part of something else before conquered in the name of the United States. No state was uninhabited.
 
Every clump of dirt on the planet was "owned' by someone else before the current residents owned it.


So your basically hating the "world" and everyone in it.....oh my!
 
Every state in the nation was part of something else before conquered in the name of the United States. No state was uninhabited.

Yep there were Six Flags over Texas one of them being the Nation of Texas. You might have heard of the amusement park Six Flags.
 
Every state in the nation was part of something else before conquered in the name of the United States. No state was uninhabited.

If you want to grossly oversimplify things, sure. Most of us are not so daft as to indulge such nonsense, however.
 
If you want to grossly oversimplify things, sure. Most of us are not so daft as to indulge such nonsense, however.

It's not an oversimplification. My comment wasn't directed at generalizations.

Texas was part of Mexico, the majority of the Great Plain states were part of France, the west states and Florida were part of Spain and Mexico, and Alaska was part of Russia.
 
Last edited:
The same "it's anti-American" crap the Democrats mentioned in the article are spewing is the same thing they probably got called by Republicans on other issues they were standing up for.

Its funny and sad at the same time how the tables turn.

The problem is that it has ignited a segment of the party and the country which won't be dissuaded by a disavowal. He opened Pandora's Box and left it open long enough for some people to be energized by this dangerous idea.

It was a reckless statement and nothing good will come from it.

I've lost any faith and respect I may have had for Perry.

It was like shouting "FIRE" in a crowded theater.

Not everyone will rush out in a panic and maybe no one will be trampled to death, but the utterance has that potential in these unsettled times.
 
The problem is that it has ignited a segment of the party and the country which won't be dissuaded by a disavowal. He opened Pandora's Box and left it open long enough for some people to be energized by this dangerous idea.

It was a reckless statement and nothing good will come from it.

I've lost any faith and respect I may have had for Perry.

It was like shouting "FIRE" in a crowded theater.

Not everyone will rush out in a panic and maybe no one will be trampled to death, but the utterance has that potential in these unsettled times.

It is a Texas thing from Texas folklore.
 
It is a Texas thing from Texas folklore.

I think Texans and Alaskans get on well because they have similar folklores, as you put it.

It stems from a great pride in their states having kept their cultures somewhat intact and unique from the rest of the Union along with a can-do attitude and a belief that the people of the state could sustain themselves without the rest of the country.
 
It is a Texas thing from Texas folklore.

The power of folklore, or fantasy ideology, can't be overlooked. It was the common, unspoken, desire of Italians to regain the dominance of their ancient Roman Empire which fueled Italy's war with Ethiopia in the 1930's.

In all fantasy ideologies, there is a point at which the make-believe becomes an end in itself. This fact is nowhere more clearly exhibited than in the Italian conquest of Ethiopia.

Any attempt to see this adventure in Clausewitzian terms is doomed to fail: There was no political or economic advantage whatsoever to be gained from the invasion of Ethiopia. Indeed, the diplomatic disadvantages to Italy in consequence of this action were tremendous, and they were in no way to be compensated for by anything that Italy could hope to gain from possessing Ethiopia as a colony.

Why invade, then? The answer is quite simple. Ethiopia was a prop — a prop in the fantasy pageant of the new Italian Empire — that and nothing else. And the war waged in order to win Ethiopia as a colony was not a war in the Clausewitzian sense — that is to say, it was not an instrument of political policy designed to induce concessions from Ethiopia, or to get Ethiopia to alter its policies, or even to get Ethiopia to surrender.

Ethiopia had to be conquered not because it was worth conquering, but because the fascist fantasy ideology required Italy to conquer something — and Ethiopia fit the bill. The conquest was not the means to an end, as in Clausewitzian war; it was an end in itself. Or, more correctly, its true purpose was to bolster the fascist collective fantasy that insisted on casting the Italians as a conquering race, the heirs of Imperial Rome.

Hoover Institution - Policy Review - Al Qaeda's Fantasy Ideology

Secession, for most of those hoisting it's banner, is nothing but a prop for arguing states rights.

I get it.

But what is the cost of fueling this fantasy now?

Those who stnd under this flimsy looking banner think there is no cost other than to gain attention. Only in the years to come will we see the true cost.

This is a terrible ploy to use to make the point about state's rights.
 
Texas doesn't have the truck nuts to seceed. Half it's population will flee if it were to try, it can't compete on a global level with its oil by itself and other than that I don't see what resources it's going to use to drive it's economy as an autonomous country. They are going to be landlocked and cut off from the national grid, so without taxes to support solar heating and hydroelectricity it's not going to have running electricity or useful domestic defenses. The taxation it will require to sustain itself will be higher than it already is now.
 
Last edited:
Texas doesn't have the truck nuts to seceed. Half it's population will flee if it were to try, it can't compete on a global level with its oil by itself and other than that I don't see what resources it's going to use to drive it's economy as an autonomous country. They are going to be landlocked and cut off from the national grid, so without taxes to support solar heating and hydroelectricity it's not going to have running electricity or useful domestic defenses. The taxation it will require to sustain itself will be higher than it already is now.

Since when was Texas landlocked? :confused:
 
Since when was Texas landlocked? :confused:

Oh nevermind I take that one back lol I am obviously a northerner, I thought from memory that mexico surrounded the gulf or something.
 
Oh nevermind I take that one back lol I am obviously a northerner, I thought from memory that mexico surrounded the gulf or something.

No problem. It wasn't the worst mistake made around here today. Some brainchild tried to convince me that the Civil War was singularly about slavery earlier. :lol:
 
No problem. It wasn't the worst mistake made around here today. Some brainchild tried to convince me that the Civil War was singularly about slavery earlier. :lol:

I was never conditioned to see texas as relates outside the US, I thought for minute that texas' southern boarder jutted completely into mexico and louisianna cornered the gulf :doh
 
Actually we were a Nation before we became a State. Prior to being an independent nation Texas was a part of Mexico, remember the Alamo?

I never denied that, but as of April 17th 2009 Texas is an official territory of the United States of America. It has NO international soveriegnty, so the federal government is well within its borders to do as it pleases.
 
Back
Top Bottom