- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: TEXIT Referendum Bill Is Now Official
Posted on 1/26/21 at 6:40 pm to Indefatigable
Posted on 1/26/21 at 6:40 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
Yes. The United States will defend its ownership of all federal property in that instance. To the inch.
I feel like you haven't read up on how the Civil War started if you have this question.
Texas (in this hypo) would have zero right to anything owned, built, supported, or maintained by the federal government or with federal dollars. Which by the way would include all assets of the Texas National Guard as well as all US Army, Navy, AF assets as well.
All you wrote is understandable under your original infrastructure point. I noticed you said nothing about the legality of doing it though.
Also, TX has very little federal land considering. Shipping back equipment is different than the US digging up bldgs etc.
And thinking the US will come to blows with TX like the Civil War isn't very realistic. TX would have a lot more supporters than biden would think. He'll probably go as far as having china come assist, which would prove the need.
The current govt is moving away from the foundation of the country, and breaking it's contract. If parents can change the sex of their child as a "basic human right"...then the citizens of a state can decide to depart from the country as a "basic human right".
0
Posted on 1/26/21 at 7:01 pm to EKG
That’s awesome.
Posted on 1/26/21 at 7:24 pm to EKG
Once Texas secedes from the US, their first order of business should be taking over La., then they can take over Miss, AL, FL.
Sorry GA, you will have to recall Kemp, the SOS, and your 2 new Senators.
Sorry GA, you will have to recall Kemp, the SOS, and your 2 new Senators.
Posted on 1/26/21 at 7:41 pm to 00 Tech Grad
I mean if you ignore various pieces of the soviet union having their own identities before forcibly being smashed together for 50-70 years. Yeah it's the same.
Posted on 1/26/21 at 8:03 pm to obdobd918
quote:
Once Texas secedes from the US, their first order of business should be taking over La., then they can take over Miss, AL, FL.
Sorry GA, you will have to recall Kemp, the SOS, and your 2 new Senators.
Not sure it can be the first thing, but other states are going to have hard decisions to make. First few yrs will be needed to deal with solidifying the foundation.
States will need to look into things like how to build out their grids as TX won't be able to handle it right after it goes down.
One thing I want to see are strict laws on govt leeches. Those need to be purged from TX. If you live on the govt dime then that gets cut, and force them to leave. Problem with many southern states.
Lots of little things need hard decisions made on, and done to start not later. All the things we bitch about or not worth the fight imo. Ie English as primary language, no multiple language documents, heterosexual marriage only, no long term death penalty stints, and lots of protections for traditional conservative Christian values. Etc etc If anything this kind of line is what will prevent all of this from happening. Just not worth the fight if not doing it right...well what I think is right. Ha.
Posted on 1/26/21 at 9:01 pm to TOSOV
I think a texit would be very interesting.
But the entire premise is based on this bill passing, a referendum being put on a ballot, a committee being formed to “explore” the process of TEXIT...and then what?
I think #1 and #2 have a chance of happening. But under no circumstances would the US allow it to gain traction.
If you choose to (wrongly) believe the Civil War was about states rights, then the only logical conclusion is that States do NOT have the right to secede (or pass laws allowing the ownership of people, but I digress).
Even allowing #3 to go forward, how much GDP would Texas lose from corporations like BP, Exxon, etc. moving their headquarters away? What about population decline accounting for those talented execs leaving with their companies? Not even to mention the influx of trailer trash from OK & LA you’d get.
All that being said, and not a word about what the US GOVT would do to protect their military assets, federal roads, $1 Billion investment in TX universities, I would very much enjoy seeing it go as far as possible. It won’t happen unless you try though!
But the entire premise is based on this bill passing, a referendum being put on a ballot, a committee being formed to “explore” the process of TEXIT...and then what?
I think #1 and #2 have a chance of happening. But under no circumstances would the US allow it to gain traction.
If you choose to (wrongly) believe the Civil War was about states rights, then the only logical conclusion is that States do NOT have the right to secede (or pass laws allowing the ownership of people, but I digress).
Even allowing #3 to go forward, how much GDP would Texas lose from corporations like BP, Exxon, etc. moving their headquarters away? What about population decline accounting for those talented execs leaving with their companies? Not even to mention the influx of trailer trash from OK & LA you’d get.
All that being said, and not a word about what the US GOVT would do to protect their military assets, federal roads, $1 Billion investment in TX universities, I would very much enjoy seeing it go as far as possible. It won’t happen unless you try though!
Posted on 1/26/21 at 9:07 pm to EKG
Few people know, but the Georgia state senate passed a resolution by a vote of 43-1 in 2009 declaring any future unconstitutional laws or actions by the federal legislative or executive branch to be a violation of the compact of states, thereby rendering those compacts null and requiring a convention of states to return to the union. Interesting argument.
GA SR632
GA SR632
This post was edited on 1/26/21 at 9:12 pm
Posted on 1/26/21 at 9:19 pm to GhostOfFreedom
quote:
If they pull it off, they need to make sure they get control of some nuclear weapons. Maybe, a trident sub or two to keep the wacko Democrats from going to war with them.
They need a deterrence to preserve peace.
Precedent has been set long ago. US has been the sole arbiter of who does and doesn't get nukes.
It's why I never cared that non signatories pursued them.
Posted on 1/26/21 at 9:32 pm to JJJimmyJimJames
Finally, someone said it out loud!
Posted on 1/26/21 at 9:36 pm to Roger Klarvin
The colonist held no cards either. Worked out ok. It just takes men with grit.
Posted on 1/26/21 at 9:59 pm to Sneauxghost
quote:
The colonist held no cards either. Worked out ok. It just takes men with grit.
Yeah, and because of that they fought a prolonged and bloody war that only ended because the British got bored, were running out of money and their populace no longer cared about keeping the colonies.
How exactly is Texas going to fight, and win, a war with the United States?
Posted on 1/26/21 at 10:29 pm to Roger Klarvin
Texans aren’t looking to fight, Roger.
Such a development would be wholly counterproductive to the movement.
This is about the basic principle of self-governance, not fomenting an insurrection.
Any violence, were it to materialize, would come from the US.
If a tyrannical US government became set on the actual use of military force against millions of Texans—whose sole crime was voting for self-determination in a fair, free, and open referendum and in the absence of any kind of morally reprehensible act—swift condemnation from the international community would befall the US.
International relations would be immeasurably damaged for years to come.
Such a development would be wholly counterproductive to the movement.
This is about the basic principle of self-governance, not fomenting an insurrection.
Any violence, were it to materialize, would come from the US.
If a tyrannical US government became set on the actual use of military force against millions of Texans—whose sole crime was voting for self-determination in a fair, free, and open referendum and in the absence of any kind of morally reprehensible act—swift condemnation from the international community would befall the US.
International relations would be immeasurably damaged for years to come.
Posted on 1/26/21 at 11:22 pm to EKG
I own property in TX, and I am totally going to cash in on letting you guys from outside TX get a mailing address that comes to my place, so you can claim TX citizenship.
Posted on 1/26/21 at 11:31 pm to GhostOfFreedom
quote:
If they pull it off, they need to make sure they get control of some nuclear weapons. Maybe, a trident sub or two
Impossible. All nuclear weapons have an encrypted activation code that can only be retrieved from central command after authorization from the US president. Good luck disassembling the device without rendering it useless and having to basically rebuild most of it which would take over a year which is too late.
Posted on 1/26/21 at 11:34 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
As always, Congress, SCOTUS, and the entire executive branch applaud this cute effort and offer a pat on the head with a slight chuckle.
Yup yup
Posted on 1/26/21 at 11:38 pm to EKG
The best chance this has of passing is if it were timed immediately after a drastic action taken by the democrat controlled federal government like gun confiscation or massive tax hikes. Otherwise only the most ardent on the right will vote yes.
Posted on 1/27/21 at 3:57 am to EKG
quote:
Slow your roll, mate.
Many women are proud patriots who work as hard as--if not harder than--many men to live and maintain freedom loving and respecting lives.
Your comment is so silly it doesn't deserve a response.
But sometimes I just can't help my poor little histrionic self.
I'm sure it's those pesky female hormones and whatnot.
Posted on 1/27/21 at 9:26 am to EKG
** Texans, please email your legislators **
———-
Dear Senator Whitmire,
On Jan. 26, 2021 Rep. Kyle Biedermann filed HB1359 in the house. I am a registered voter in your Senate district and I do vote. I expect you to, with all the haste that can be mustered, file the identical bill in the senate and seek out coauthors for such. If another senator files before you can do so, I expect you to sign onto it as coauthor. I will be watching the process and your participation in it, and expect every one of those who represents me to allow me a direct voice in my own governance.
More to the point, I expect those who represent me to NOT deny me such a say, and anyone who would hinder, actively or passively, this bill's passage and signing is denying me a say on November 2, 2021.
This issue has made me, for the time being, a single-issue voter, as it touches on ALL the important issues facing Texans.
In Liberty and Freedom,
[EKG, address, phone number]
———-
Dear Senator Whitmire,
On Jan. 26, 2021 Rep. Kyle Biedermann filed HB1359 in the house. I am a registered voter in your Senate district and I do vote. I expect you to, with all the haste that can be mustered, file the identical bill in the senate and seek out coauthors for such. If another senator files before you can do so, I expect you to sign onto it as coauthor. I will be watching the process and your participation in it, and expect every one of those who represents me to allow me a direct voice in my own governance.
More to the point, I expect those who represent me to NOT deny me such a say, and anyone who would hinder, actively or passively, this bill's passage and signing is denying me a say on November 2, 2021.
This issue has made me, for the time being, a single-issue voter, as it touches on ALL the important issues facing Texans.
In Liberty and Freedom,
[EKG, address, phone number]
Posted on 1/30/21 at 11:04 am to EKG
That is a lot of wishful thinking. It is very unlikely that negotiations between the United States and this hypothetical Texas would go this smoothly because the US, like every proper nation, places its interests first. There is also the fact that even a six out of ten support still means that there is a significant population of American patriots not happy with the idea of Texas leaving the Union. That would like cause problems and an opportunity for the US, the strongest entity, for concessions to it's benefit. The US wants complete control over the resources like every other nation.
This post was edited on 1/30/21 at 11:05 am
Posted on 1/30/21 at 11:11 am to SmileyVamp
The federal government will not move to stop TEXIT once it’s been decided by the people of Texas; they most certainly won’t use the military. It’s just too impractical.
With a negotiated separation, the federal government has the opportunity to show that it believes in the principles that it has espoused around the world for the last 70 years. It is better to keep goods and services flowing than to have them come to a dead stop. Forced integration into the Union at the point of a gun invites international condemnation and the loss of credibility on the international stage for generations to come.
With a negotiated separation, the federal government has the opportunity to show that it believes in the principles that it has espoused around the world for the last 70 years. It is better to keep goods and services flowing than to have them come to a dead stop. Forced integration into the Union at the point of a gun invites international condemnation and the loss of credibility on the international stage for generations to come.
Page 11 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News