RezaMikhaeil Posted August 19, 2011 Posted August 19, 2011 [quote name='USAirwaysIHS' timestamp='1313725269' post='2291119'] You're right, I forgot how we've devolved into a state of anarchy where the druglords are the de facto rulers. [/quote] That's such a simplistic view... and not remotely true of the whole country.
Vincent Vega Posted August 19, 2011 Posted August 19, 2011 [quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1313725390' post='2291123'] That's such a simplistic view... and not remotely true of the whole country. [/quote] Yes, my view is simplistic, but yours that our situation and Mexico's are even remotely similar is completely realistic.
Amppax Posted August 19, 2011 Posted August 19, 2011 [quote name='RezaMikhaeil' timestamp='1313725390' post='2291123'] That's such a simplistic view... and not remotely true of the whole country. [/quote] nor is it remotely true of any sizeable area of the US, unlike Mexico, which is kinda the point.
vee Posted August 19, 2011 Posted August 19, 2011 (edited) [quote name='dominicansoul' timestamp='1313721710' post='2291068'] and loaded with Dos Equis :D so can we Texans, so i call it a draw .... [/quote] Im like the poster child of lazy, so I agree with this draw and pass the Dos HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, you remember me giving dust a hard time huh? [mod]public criticism of mods[/mod] Nope I dont remember that. I was just being silly I do have a lot more posts than you though so I think the mods know Im joking by now and that I dont hate Mexicans. Canadians on the other hand... BLECK! Edited August 19, 2011 by Lil Red
Mr.Cat Posted August 31, 2011 Posted August 31, 2011 (edited) As a former political science student in Texas... the United States Supreme Court, the Texas Constitution, and public opinion of Texans are against "[i]succession[/i]". After the civil war, where Texas was on the loosing side, Texas sued once again to succeed from the union under treaty and the United States Constitution, the Supreme Court rejected it commenting, [i]"When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. [u][b]And it was final.[/b][/u] [b]The union between Texas and the other States was as [u]complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble[/u] as the union between the original States. There was [u]no place for reconsideration or revocation[/u], except through revolution or through consent of the States.[/b]"[/i] Article 3 Section 56 of the Texas Constitution prohibits the legislature from "[i]changing the law of descent or succession[/i]" and Article 1 Section 1 guarantees Texas is "[i]subject only to the Constitution of the United States; and the maintenance of our institutions and the perpetuity of the Union[/i]". In a general polling of from the [b][url="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/17/texas-secession-poll-75-o_n_188145.html"]huffingtonpost[/url][/b] shows 75% of Texans oppose succession and only 18% of Texans opted for succession. More starkly only 31% of Texans surveyed believed Texas had a right to succeed. A super-majority of Texans oppose succession and when Governor Rick Perry hinted at succession during a public address he received wide and harsh criticism. So simply put... Texas can't leave and isn't going to leave. Even if the 7% of Texans surveyed who were not sure changed their mind in favor of succession it would still lack even a plural majority. Edited August 31, 2011 by Mr.Cat
Winchester Posted August 31, 2011 Posted August 31, 2011 The word "secede" isn't in it, but other words are. Really, people. [url="http://theoatmeal.com/comics/misspelling"]http://theoatmeal.com/comics/misspelling[/url] You're welcome.
add Posted September 1, 2011 Posted September 1, 2011 Yes Seams like most of the working class is Mexican
Amppax Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 [quote name='Mr.Cat' timestamp='1314827571' post='2298299'] As a former political science student in Texas... the United States Supreme Court, the Texas Constitution, and public opinion of Texans are against "[i]succession[/i]". After the civil war, where Texas was on the loosing side, Texas sued once again to succeed from the union under treaty and the United States Constitution, the Supreme Court rejected it commenting, [i]"When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. [u][b]And it was final.[/b][/u] [b]The union between Texas and the other States was as [u]complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble[/u] as the union between the original States. There was [u]no place for reconsideration or revocation[/u], except through revolution or through consent of the States.[/b]"[/i] Article 3 Section 56 of the Texas Constitution prohibits the legislature from "[i]changing the law of descent or succession[/i]" and Article 1 Section 1 guarantees Texas is "[i]subject only to the Constitution of the United States; and the maintenance of our institutions and the perpetuity of the Union[/i]". In a general polling of from the [b][url="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/17/texas-secession-poll-75-o_n_188145.html"]huffingtonpost[/url][/b] shows 75% of Texans oppose succession and only 18% of Texans opted for succession. More starkly only 31% of Texans surveyed believed Texas had a right to succeed. A super-majority of Texans oppose succession and when Governor Rick Perry hinted at succession during a public address he received wide and harsh criticism. So simply put... Texas can't leave and isn't going to leave. Even if the 7% of Texans surveyed who were not sure changed their mind in favor of succession it would still lack even a plural majority. [/quote] you sited the huffington post. That's funny.
Mr.Cat Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 [quote name='Amppax' timestamp='1314981701' post='2299232']you sited the huffington post. That's funny.[/quote]Why? Rasmussen Reports (75% opposing) and the Washington Post (60% opposing) found almost the same. There are not many surveys of this kind out there, but the bottom line is that in every survey done, a super majority of Texans oppose succession... and only a small minority support it.
Winchester Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 (edited) I'm pretty sure most Texans favor succession. I think a few anarchists might oppose it, though. Edited September 2, 2011 by Winchester
Laudate_Dominum Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 [quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1315004637' post='2299360'] I'm pretty sure most Texans favor succession. I think a few anarchists might oppose it, though. [/quote] Supporting evidence please. [url="http://tinyurl.com/68ngmw5"]Why most Texans favor draconian central planning.[/url]
Winchester Posted September 2, 2011 Posted September 2, 2011 [img]http://farm1.static.flickr.com/30/39115703_ffc4dab263_o.jpg[/img]
Mr.Cat Posted September 3, 2011 Posted September 3, 2011 [quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1315004637' post='2299360']I'm pretty sure most Texans favor succession. I think a few anarchists might oppose it, though.[/quote]Well, it would violate the United States and Texas constitutions. So it doesn't matter even if hypothetically a majority of Texans did. But factually, a super majority opposes [i]secession[/i]. Winchester, are you a member of the RoT? A fanatical terrorist organization in Texas working for Texas independence?
Winchester Posted September 3, 2011 Posted September 3, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Mr.Cat' timestamp='1315009146' post='2299385'] Well, it would violate the United States and Texas constitutions. So it doesn't matter even if hypothetically a majority of Texans did. But factually, a super majority opposes [i]secession[/i]. Winchester, are you a member of the RoT? A fanatical terrorist organization in Texas working for Texas independence? [/quote] [quote name='Mr.Cat' timestamp='1315009146' post='2299385'] Well, it would violate the United States and Texas constitutions. So it doesn't matter even if hypothetically a majority of Texans did. But factually, a super majority opposes [i]secession[/i]. Winchester, are you a member of the RoT? A fanatical terrorist organization in Texas working for Texas independence? [/quote] [s]So we can't have our next governor, according to the Constitution?[/s] Oh...[i]secession![/i] Well, I don't know how many actually favor it--no one ever asked me, so your stats are either from many years ago, or are based upon a partial poll of residents. I actually don't care how many people are (remember, for me democracy is an ends, not a means), nor am I really that worried about those who do, although I understand they are frustrated with something or other and think secession will be a change. I am not a nationalist, but I understand you and many others are. While I disagree with your nationalism, I don't think it means you are uninterested in justice. In fact, your nationalism is probably motivated by some desire for justice. There is more than one interpretation of the right of secession, of course. Nothing in human government is ever really settled, I think. I am not familiar with the RoT (and so obviously not a member)--what terrorist attacks did they undertake? The acronym is intriguing, though. Is it related to the ROTC? Edited September 3, 2011 by Winchester
Mr.Cat Posted September 3, 2011 Posted September 3, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1315011778' post='2299400'][s]So we can't have our next governor, according to the Constitution?[/s][/quote]You must of not understood the topic or have serious issues with pedantry.[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1315011778' post='2299400']Oh...[i]secession![/i] Well, I don't know how many actually favor it--no one ever asked me, so your stats are either from many years ago, or are based upon a partial poll of residents.[/quote]You don't know, okay.[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1315011778' post='2299400']I actually don't care how many people are (remember, for me democracy is an ends, not a means), nor am I really that worried about those who do, although I understand they are frustrated with something or other and think secession will be a change.[/quote]You don't care, okay.[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1315011778' post='2299400']I am not a nationalist, but I understand you and many others are.[/quote]I am not a nationalist. [quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1315011778' post='2299400']While I disagree with your nationalism, I don't think it means you are uninterested in justice.[/quote]I am not a nationalist. You disagree with my non-existent nationalism.[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1315011778' post='2299400']In fact, your nationalism is probably motivated by some desire for justice.[/quote]But I'm not a nationalist... At this point, I am willing to say you are an extremely presumptuous person. Which isn't bad, except you always presume or assume incorrectly. [quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1315011778' post='2299400']There is more than one interpretation of the right of secession, of course. Nothing in human government is ever really settled, I think.[/quote]What right?[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1315011778' post='2299400']I am not familiar with the RoT (and so obviously not a member)--what terrorist attacks did they undertake? The acronym is intriguing, though. Is it related to the ROTC?[/quote]Kidnapping, death threats, assassination threats, possible arson, and many other acts undermining the state ([i]such as issuing fraudulent passports or currency[/i]). No, not related to the ROTC. Edited September 3, 2011 by Mr.Cat
Winchester Posted September 3, 2011 Posted September 3, 2011 [quote name='Mr.Cat' timestamp='1315019004' post='2299459'] You must of not understood the topic or have serious issues with pedantry.[/quote] I thought the issue was secession, However, when you came in and commented on succession from the perspective of a former political science student, I assumed that, being an expert on political matters, you would not use succession in place of secession. I now realize you were probably exhausted from your deep research into the matter and in your haste to illuminate us, continued with the OP's bizarre spelling habits. [quote]You don't know, okay.You don't care, okay.[/quote] Okay. [quote]I am not a nationalist. I am not a nationalist. You disagree with my non-existent nationalism.But I'm not a nationalist... At this point, I am willing to say you are an extremely presumptuous person. Which isn't bad, except you always presume or assume incorrectly.[/quote] Is there a different term you like better that conforms to your belief? Since you are an expert in the science of politics, you probably know way more terms than the rest of us. [quote]What right?[/quote] Because you are a [s]nationalist[/s] person who identifies our country as a single entity and anyone who questions that (or seems unconcerned with national identity) as a potential ROTC member who kidnaps and possibly arsons, you do not identify the United States as a bunch of united states, but instead as a single body ruled by the Federal government, with which we all must identify or be viewed as wild indians and maniacs. [quote]Kidnapping, death threats, assassination threats, possible arson, and many other acts undermining the state ([i]such as issuing fraudulent passports or currency[/i]).[/quote] I thought all they did was dress up like Boy Scouts at school. They sound weird. You seem to have the belief that anyone who is not a defender of omnipotent government is likely to be a member of a terrorist organization. This is not my experience, but I respect your anecdotal experience, and/or paranoid assumptions. [quote]No, not related to the ROTC. [/quote] Oh. Well then disregard my previous comment about them dressing up like Boy Scouts at school. Why would you think I was a member of RAT? Oh, because of your [s]nationalism[/s] strong identification with a single national identity.
Mr.Cat Posted September 3, 2011 Posted September 3, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1315043703' post='2299544']I thought the issue was secession, However, when you came in and commented on succession from the perspective of a former political science student, I assumed that, being an expert on political matters, you would not use succession in place of secession. I now realize you were probably exhausted from your deep research into the matter and in your haste to illuminate us, continued with the OP's bizarre spelling habits.[/quote]So yes, serious issues with pedantry.[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1315043703' post='2299544']Okay.[/quote]Okay! I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, that you don't care and don't know, but if you keep replying like this... you will make it hard to believe you don't care.[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1315043703' post='2299544']Is there a different term you like better that conforms to your belief? Since you are an expert in the science of politics, you probably know way more terms than the rest of us.[/quote]I am not an expert in political science, I have never claimed to be. Once again you assume incorrectly.[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1315043703' post='2299544']Because you are a [s]nationalist[/s] person who identifies our country as a single entity and anyone who questions that (or seems unconcerned with national identity) as a potential ROTC member who kidnaps and possibly arsons, you do not identify the United States as a bunch of united states, but instead as a single body ruled by the Federal government, with which we all must identify or be viewed as wild indians and maniacs.[/quote]You seemed to be suggesting Texas independence, even against the majority of Texans, and that somehow it was in the state's best interest. But I was sarcastically asking if you were a member of the "Republic of Texas" group ([i]not ROTC[/i]). Perhaps you missed the subtle comparison of platforms? You seem concerned about Texan independence, which would suggest support for Texas nationalism... by making Texas a nation. I don't identify any country/nation as a single entity or the United States as a single body ruled strictly by the federal government. Once again you assume incorrectly... [quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1315043703' post='2299544']I thought all they did was dress up like Boy Scouts at school. They sound weird. You seem to have the belief that anyone who is not a defender of omnipotent government is likely to be a member of a terrorist organization. This is not my experience, but I respect your anecdotal experience, and/or paranoid assumptions.[/quote]Once again you yield to personal attacks... accusing me of paranoia? Really? But the forceful kidnapping of an innocent family by the "Republic of Texas" (RoT) group to negotiate the release of some of their members is an anecdotal experience to you? That can be shown to be true and a decision that the organization made as a whole. This is anecdotal to you? Do you understand what anecdotal means? The "Republic of Texas" group is a terrorist organization because they use terror to promote their goals. Maybe you have reason why that shouldn't be reason to consider them a terrorist organization? But I dislike unitary state models. So... I disapprove of the idea of an omnipotent government. Once again you assume incorrectly.[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1315043703' post='2299544']Oh. Well then disregard my previous comment about them dressing up like Boy Scouts at school. Why would you think I was a member of RAT? Oh, because of your [s]nationalism[/s] strong identification with a single national identity.[/quote]I don't have an identification with a single national identity. Once again you assume incorrectly... Why would I think you were a RAT? I don't know, I didn't say you were. Edited September 3, 2011 by Mr.Cat
Recommended Posts