I don't know if this is B.S. or not. But it is a dot gov web site.

[Snatch Napkin]

Ask yourself if you're really supporting our troops over-seas by perpetuating a great divide on the home front.

The "great divide" is perpetuated by the givers and the takers.

I do suppose, though, that I could quit working, go on the gov't tit, and unify America. Good point

[Forever_frost]

Just about sums it up.
We are the United States of America. Too many good men and women have fought and died to keep us the UNITED States of America. Wake up everyone, get it together, and face the big issues as a country united. The whining needs to stop now. I've been reading posts for three days to support our troops who sacrifice and defend our freedoms (including the right to vote). Ask yourself if you're really supporting our troops over-seas by perpetuating a great divide on the home front.
The results of the election may or may not have been what we wanted as individuals. The time for individuals has passed (I hope you voted). Now we move on as one Nation

The time is never passed for individuals. And I point you to this "When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."

['90Vert]

The time is never passed for individuals. And I point you to this "When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."

that's just the beginning. See red part of my signature- should we create a list of grievances.

[Forever_frost]

that's just the beginning. See red part of my signature- should we create a list of grievances.

We already have.

[YALE]

So, are you guys that want to secede going to convene some form of congress or something? You do realize that at some point, you'll have to start organizing a legitimate political body, or get the current congress to enact secession.

[Forever_frost]

If this was to go anywhere, it'd have to be done.

[Snatch Napkin]

So, are you guys that want to secede going to convene some form of congress or something? You do realize that at some point, you'll have to start organizing a legitimate political body, or get the current congress to enact secession.

Thus is the reasoning behind riding the fence pole like a distraught daddy's girl. I wish I had the means to make this wish have validity.

[Sgt Beavis]

A writer at Slate has an article about the Annexation Treaty that is MUCH more interesting than succession. The treaty basically says that Texas has the right to divide itself into FIVE STATES without any need of approval from Congress.

If we did that, Texas would go from being one state with 2 Senators to FIVE STATES with TEN SENATORS. Now that would be a true kick in Obama's political balls.

But while it may not enjoy any such right, Texas can legitimately claim to be holding an unusual ace up its sleeve, which—should it ever be played—could end up altering the face of the U.S. map even more significantly than secession would. And were it to be played deftly, that ace could even set the stage for the very secession scenario that Micah H. and his separatist compatriots so passionately envision.
A few years ago, while conducting research for a novel I was writing about Lone Star politics, I discovered a short clause in the state's 1845 annexation agreement that's well known to any serious state historian, though far less well known to the average Texan. Buried beneath some highly boring details about how the republic's resources were to be transferred to the federal government in Washington is language stipulating that "[n]ew States, of convenient size, not exceeding four in number, in addition to said State of Texas, and having sufficient population, may hereafter, by the consent of said State, be formed out of the territory thereof, which shall be entitled to admission under the provisions of the federal constitution."
Put plainly, Texas agreed to join the union in 1845 on the condition that it be allowed to split itself into as many as five separate states whenever it wanted to, and contingent only on the approval of its own state legislature. For more than 150 years, this right to divide—unilaterally, which is to say without the approval of the U.S. Congress—has been packed away in the state's legislative attic, like a forgotten family heirloom that only gets dusted off every now and then by some politician who has mistaken it for a beautiful beacon of hope.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history/2012/11/texas_secession_how_the_lone_star_state_could_mess_with_the_rest_of_us.html

[Forever_frost]

Let's cut the infected part away. South Texas has to go, along with Austin

[GhostTX]

A writer at Slate has an article about the Annexation Treaty that is MUCH more interesting than succession. The treaty basically says that Texas has the right to divide itself into FIVE STATES without any need of approval from Congress.

If we did that, Texas would go from being one state with 2 Senators to FIVE STATES with TEN SENATORS. Now that would be a true kick in Obama's political balls.



http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...est_of_us.html

Yes, but the possibility of going blue now increased. If the surrounding counties population of a metropolitan area isn't greater, the city can turn the whole state red. Look at Nevada, Iowa, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Virginia by county. A whole lotta red in there, but the state still went blue.

http://freedomslighthouse.net/2012-presidential-election-electoral-vote-map/

And look at Texas. Dallas, San Antonio, El Paso, Austin and Houston are blue. Texas may could split into 5 states, but perhaps 2 or 3 of the 5 could go blue because of the large cities.

[Spritle]

Let's cut the infected part away. South Texas has to go, along with Austin

Not so fast, all the good hunting is in South TX.

[mikec]

Not so fast, all the good hunting is in South TX.

This is true. I'm pretty sure the record bucks in Texas came from down south...

[Vertnut]

Yes, but the possibility of going blue now increased. If the surrounding counties population of a metropolitan area isn't greater, the city can turn the whole state red. Look at Nevada, Iowa, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Virginia by county. A whole lotta red in there, but the state still went blue.

http://freedomslighthouse.net/2012-presidential-election-electoral-vote-map/

And look at Texas. Dallas, San Antonio, El Paso, Austin and Houston are blue. Texas may could split into 5 states, but perhaps 2 or 3 of the 5 could go blue because of the large cities.

For what it's worth, If I remember correctly, Harris County (Houston) just barely carried Obama (like .2 or .3%). I was surprised it was so close.

[Forever_frost]

It'll still be good hunting. It'll just be shooting illegals. I wonder if we will have to pay per head or get a license for a dozen