• 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!

Nullification for Texas? Will it work?

samsmart said:
Well, since Mexico has taken over much of the manufacturing jobs from Michigan and New York and Texas benefits the most from free trade to Mexico, it's no wonder that Texas is able to build up a surplus from sweat shop labor at the expense of the rest of the country. California's economy has just been mismanaged and they have to deal with their illegal immigration problem.

However, I still don't see where that gives Texas the right to nullify federal laws. Everything you've mentioned is based on what the state governments have done - not the federal government.
Click to expand...

I guess one could say that Article I. Sec. 10 infers that the States may not secede, by virtue of the fact that they aren't allowed to do "Nation stuff" :lol:. But then again if they secede, they don't have to abide by the U.S. Constitution....
 
samsmart said:
So as soon as we get a Democrat as President, the South is allowed to argue secession?

Can the East Coast and West Coast do that when we get a Republican in as President next time?
Click to expand...

As far as I am concerned. It would be addition by subtraction. Go for it. But I would settle for only California as it's eviction would go a long way to clean up the corruption in Washington. It wields entirely too much liberal lockstep power that it totally distorts the political process. California is a metastasizing cancer on the rest of the nation in my view. It was stolen from Mexico anyway, so let's give it back to them. They would be perfect for one another. Totally corrupt; both of them.

If Texas left, we would undoubtedly get many other states to join us such as Oklahoma, for example. Wyoming, Idaho, Nebraska, North and South Dakota all would want out of the dysfunctional U.S. controlled by the corrupt Democrats. I'm sure a good many others would want out as well. We have a shoreline for access to trade so we are not landlocked. It's going to happen sooner or later anyway because we have entirely too much division today. We will inevitably have a second "Civil War" if necessary but this one will be just in order to defend the Constitution; not a corrupt society based on slavery. The "slavers" today are primarily centered in the U.S. Congress and White House.
 
Last edited:
Missouri Mule said:
As far as I am concerned. It would be addition by subtraction. Go for it. But I would settle for only California as it's eviction would go a long way to clean up the corruption in Washington. It wields entirely too much liberal lockstep power that it totally distorts the political process. California is a metastasizing cancer on the rest of the nation in my view. It was stolen from Mexico anyway, so let's give it back to them. They would be perfect for one another. Totally corrupt; both of them.
Click to expand...

Ronald Reagan is from California.

Missouri Mule said:
If Texas left, we would undoubtedly get many other states to join us such as Oklahoma, for example. Wyoming, Idaho, Nebraska, North and South Dakota all would want out of the dysfunctional U.S. controlled by the corrupt Democrats.
Click to expand...

Yeah, good luck with those states operating without any federal funding. Texas won't have that high of a budget surplus when it has to prop up all those states.

Missouri Mule said:
I'm sure a good many others would want out as well. We have a shoreline for access to trade so we are not landlocked. It's going to happen sooner or later anyway because we have entirely too much division today. We will inevitably have a second "Civil War" if necessary but this one will be just in order to defend the Constitution; not a corrupt society based on slavery. The "slavers" today are primarily centered in the U.S. Congress and White House.
Click to expand...

Yeah, because collective bargaining, child labor laws, work safety laws, 40-hour work weeks, and minimum wages are sure signs of a country using slave labor.
 
Texas will probably look like pre-1989 Berlin if it succeeds from the Union. They'll have a border fence around the whole state to keep Mexicans and "Yankees" out. They will probably also stop people from leaving the state to keep there economy from collapsing.

Don't forget you'll look like racists too since you succeeded while a black guy was president :lol:

EDIT: Take a look at this conspiracy: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kT00j-aa_7k"]YouTube- Would the USA Split[/ame]

:eek:
 
Last edited:
Phantom said:
I'm just saying some people will get that impression.
Click to expand...

That they were successful in secession because we had a black President? Some might see that as a racist black President saying "Good Riddance" to whitey!
 
Moderator's Warning:
YouTube account and first person transcribing of a radio show. Belongs in News 2.0
 
samsmart said:
Ronald Reagan is from California.

Yeah, good luck with those states operating without any federal funding. Texas won't have that high of a budget surplus when it has to prop up all those states.

Yeah, because collective bargaining, child labor laws, work safety laws, 40-hour work weeks, and minimum wages are sure signs of a country using slave labor.
Click to expand...

Why do you think we need federal funding? Texas is economically self sufficient. All of this other static is silly. No one is going back to slave labor. The difference between the big government types and regular 'mericans like me is that we believe big government in Washington, D.C. are largely a bunch of buffoons and political prostitutes who live high on the hog while the rest of us peons in "fly-over" country are ignored. They can take a flying leap. We don't need them. But they sure as hell need us.

I don't know where you get the idea that Texas would have to prop up any of those other states. None of them are wards of the federal government. But most of the Democratic states are. Just look at Michigan to name one example. That is the result of Democratic policies. Union thugs and corrupt politicians.

As for California it has gone straight into the toilet since the days of Ronald Reagan. It is bankrupt, ungovernable and a blight on the rest of the nation. I say give it back to Mexico. They deserve one another.
 
SgtRock said:
Here is something to ponder. The rest of the states are broke and Texas is running a budget surplus that exceeded 8 billion dollors in 2008.
Click to expand...
Calling it a 'budget surplus' is kinda misleading. It's a rainy day fund established in 1988 for special emergencies with natural gas and oil tax revenues being the main source of funding.

Yeah, there's money there but it's not available for general use, not that it hasn't been immune from lack of legislators trying to get at it - think raiding of SS funds from the Federal general budget. The good thing - it requires a three-fifths vote to transfer money away from the fund.

Texas does have budget problems, like everyone else, but they're getting by with a little help from their friends, even though most of Texas representatives voted against the stimulus bill. Kay Bailey Hutchison even describes her opposition to the stimulus bill as vehement in her current governer campaign ads.


Billions of dollars in federal economic stimulus money let lawmakers traipse past tough decisions.
[...]
Stimulus money "allowed us to buy time and to push the problem a little farther out," said Craymer [Dale, chief economist for the business-backed Texas Taxpayers and Research Association] , who served as budget chief for the late Gov. Ann Richards. "Next session, we're going to have severe challenges."

Texas Senate approves $182.3 billion budget | News for Dallas, Texas | Dallas Morning News | Latest News
Click to expand...
This year, Washington has really beefed up its share. The Senate budget proposal has the feds kicking in about $13 billion more than they did for Texas' previous two-year budget, the one that will wrap up in September.

That includes stimulus money. Lots of it. The Senate budget contains a long list of items the feds will finance through President Obama's stimulus package. In several cases, that money will take the place of state money.

Editorial: Texas should invest from Rainy Day Fund | News for Dallas, Texas | Dallas Morning News | Opinion: Editorials
Click to expand...
 
BWG said:
Calling it a 'budget surplus' is kinda misleading. It's a rainy day fund established in 1988 for special emergencies with natural gas and oil tax revenues being the main source of funding.

Yeah, there's money there but it's not available for general use, not that it hasn't been immune from lack of legislators trying to get at it - think raiding of SS funds from the Federal general budget. The good thing - it requires a three-fifths vote to transfer money away from the fund.

Texas does have budget problems, like everyone else, but they're getting by with a little help from their friends, even though most of Texas representatives voted against the stimulus bill. Kay Bailey Hutchison even describes her opposition to the stimulus bill as vehement in her current governer campaign ads.
Click to expand...

The fact is that Texas does not having funding problems. We have plenty of natural resources, plenty of gas and oil; plenty of windpower. We don't need the other 49 states to be self-sufficient and are not land locked. I resent greatly having the likes of Nancy Pelosi telling me how to live my life. As far as I am concerned she needs to take a long walk off a short pier. Her and the rest of those political prostitutes taking bribes to extend the reach of the federal government to rule our very lives. We will have to fill out a form to go to the backroom before long. In triplicate.
 
samsmart said:
Well, since Mexico has taken over much of the manufacturing jobs from Michigan and New York and Texas benefits the most from free trade to Mexico, it's no wonder that Texas is able to build up a surplus from sweat shop labor at the expense of the rest of the country. California's economy has just been mismanaged and they have to deal with their illegal immigration problem.

However, I still don't see where that gives Texas the right to nullify federal laws. Everything you've mentioned is based on what the state governments have done - not the federal government.
Click to expand...

My point is Texas is a business friendly red state. Corporations are moving to Texas. We are also a right to work state. We are in the middle of a recession and doing allright while the socialist blue states are suffer. Texas is running a budget surplus and we do not have a state income tax.
 
RyrineaHaruno said:
Hello, their are Liberals here in Texas... We aren't going to succeed.



Last time I check, Bush Jr was the one that threw our constitution out the window. Were the hell have you been the last eight freaking years?
Click to expand...

Of course, you won't succeed. Texas is a Conservative state.

Actually, I know what you meant, but I just couldn't resist busting your chops a little over spelling. :mrgreen:
 
danarhea said:
Of course, you won't succeed. Texas is a Conservative state.

Actually, I know what you meant, but I just couldn't resist busting your chops a little over spelling. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Lulz My spelling sucks, and I don't mine that you point it out to me.
 
Last edited:
SgtRock said:
My point is Texas is a business friendly red state. Corporations are moving to Texas. We are also a right to work state. We are in the middle of a recession and doing allright while the socialist blue states are suffer. Texas is running a budget surplus and we do not have a state income tax.
Click to expand...

Along these lines, the proof is to be found in the "pudding." The numbers don't lie.

Texas Population Grew Most in 2008-09, Census Says (Update1) - BusinessWeek

National Journal Online - Census Data Shows 11 House Seats Could Shift
 
Missouri Mule said:
Works for me. I would vote to secede from this alleged union of socialist republics. Their values are not mine nor of most Texans. We didn't know that the Bolsheviks would control the government. It is time to just pack up and get out.
Click to expand...

If you don't like Socialism, you're in the wrong country, my friend. Americans love Socialism. That's why we have Social Security.
 
Whip Comes Down said:
If you don't like Socialism, you're in the wrong country, my friend. Americans love Socialism. That's why we have Social Security.
Click to expand...
You mean lazy bums who won't get off their sorry asses and get a job! Real Americans are repulsed at Socialism.
 
Missouri Mule said:
Along these lines, the proof is to be found in the "pudding." The numbers don't lie.

Texas Population Grew Most in 2008-09, Census Says (Update1) - BusinessWeek

National Journal Online - Census Data Shows 11 House Seats Could Shift
Click to expand...
Median Income, by state, Three year average 2006-2008

2nd New Jersey $67,508
4th Connecticut $65,618
15th Massachusetts $60,038
21st California $57,988

38th Texas $46,853

Texas's median income is 20% less than California's, 31% less than New Jersey's.

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/statemedfaminc.html
 
Rassales said:
Median Income, by state, Three year average 2006-2008

2nd New Jersey $67,508
4th Connecticut $65,618
15th Massachusetts $60,038
21st California $57,988

38th Texas $46,853

Texas's median income is 20% less than California's, 31% less than New Jersey's.
Click to expand...

Perhaps Texans live within their means. Is there a list for that?
 
Rassales said:
Median Income, by state, Three year average 2006-2008

2nd New Jersey $67,508
4th Connecticut $65,618
15th Massachusetts $60,038
21st California $57,988

38th Texas $46,853

Texas's median income is 20% less than California's, 31% less than New Jersey's.

Income - State Median Income
Click to expand...

It's all relative. I would venture to say that a 150,000.00 home in Texas would cost over 340,000.00 in NJ and upwards towards a million in CA. So really, what does it all mean?

But I'm just guessing and pulling figures out of the air. I know that if I sold my modest home here in Wisconsin, even now, I would have enough money to buy one twice as good and twice as big with 40 acres of land, in Texas.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom