Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
where is this coming from? i'm just asking the OP of that statement to explain himself. i'm not bothered by it. defensive much?
Defensive about what? Where did that come from? I gave my input and didn't address you at all (other than to answer the question about special rights). Testy much?
I wonder if under this scenario, Texas can allow the area south of the Nueces River to go back to Mexico. I've never seen anything like it before. The only way I knew I was in the U.S. was that there were post offices occasionally that indicated to me as such. That's the wonder of Texas. Other than possibly New York, it's about the hardest area to define. Some areas are south, some southwest, others great plains, and like I said, the far south doesn't even feel like the U.S. at all.
LOL From what I hear of South Texas these days, it is probably going to happen one day, anyway. Go back to Mexico that is. Good point!
As to the Great Plains thing, I would respectfully disagree with that one. Mainly because the Great Plains is a physical, not cultural region. Other than the topography of parts of north and west Texas (praries, plains, etc) -- and wheat being a crop -- there is nothing in common with Kansas, Nebraska, Dakota's etc in terms of settlement, history, dialect, etc. True that the latter states could be some sort of cultural sub-region of the greater Midwest (Plains midwest?) though. But any similarity with Texas ends with the landscape.
I wonder if under this scenario, Texas can allow the area south of the Nueces River to go back to Mexico. I've never seen anything like it before. The only way I knew I was in the U.S. was that there were post offices occasionally that indicated to me as such. That's the wonder of Texas. Other than possibly New York, it's about the hardest area to define. Some areas are south, some southwest, others great plains, and like I said, the far south doesn't even feel like the U.S. at all.
Nah, it won't happen anytime soon. It feels even less like Mexico than it does America. There's even a word for the culture: Tejano.
Defensive about what? Where did that come from? I gave my input and didn't address you at all (other than to answer the question about special rights). Testy much?
please explain this then:
"I don't think anyone was doing anything other than making an observation in a somewhat proudly humorous vein. Why should that bother anyone? And why should it matter if it DOES matter to others it was once a seperate nation?"
and what does that had to do with my question to the stephen in san diego? if there's something i'm missing in translation, i'd like to know.
"I don't think anyone was doing anything other than making an observation in a somewhat proudly humorous vein. Why should that bother anyone? And why should it matter if it DOES matter to others it was once a seperate nation?"
and what does that had to do with my question to the stephen in san diego? if there's something i'm missing in translation, i'd like to know.
What is there to explain? The original question was: i don't understand this. how is it more than a state? does it yield more power than another state in the union? does it get any special treatment or privledges? why does it matter that it was once a country over 150 years ago?
My reply was in response to the last part. It wasn't directly addressed to you so much as to anyone who might have the same question about why should it matter. Which is, it probably doesn't, except as an interesting little fact that many Texans take a bit of pride in, usually in a humorous way. And a follow up asking why it should matter that it might matter! In the same sort of rhetorical way.
The second part of my reply was to your question about whether or not there were special rights involved. I mentioned that yep, in one way, there actually was (the right to sub-divide).
Now then, clear enough? If so, I hope this little exchange can die the natural death trivial ones should. Agreed?
To JDinBalt and Louisville (hey, ain't seen you in a while!).
If I may here, I think that y'all are actually arguing on the same side of the question!
If I read it right, although perhaps the wording may have been just a bit confusing, JDinBalt was saying that few would argue AGAINST Kentucky being in the South, even though it didn't join officially join the Confederacy. However, yes, the way it is worded "which few would argue is in the South" could be taken to mean few would argue it IS.
Anyway, this post is only valid if I am right!
Hey what's up Texreb, But yeah this is a good explantion as to why we probably miscommunicated.
What is there to explain? The original question was: i don't understand this. how is it more than a state? does it yield more power than another state in the union? does it get any special treatment or privledges? why does it matter that it was once a country over 150 years ago?
My reply was in response to the last part. It wasn't directly addressed to you so much as to anyone who might have the same question about why should it matter. Which is, it probably doesn't, except as an interesting little fact that many Texans take a bit of pride in, usually in a humorous way. And a follow up asking why it should matter that it might matter! In the same sort of rhetorical way.
The second part of my reply was to your question about whether or not there were special rights involved. I mentioned that yep, in one way, there actually was (the right to sub-divide).
Now then, clear enough? If so, I hope this little exchange can die the natural death trivial ones should. Agreed?
WTF is your problem? now, i'll wait for the person who my post was directed to originally to answer, if that's ok with you. if it's not..well, too bad.
To JDinBalt and Louisville (hey, ain't seen you in a while!).
If I may here, I think that y'all are actually arguing on the same side of the question!
If I read it right, although perhaps the wording may have been just a bit confusing, JDinBalt was saying that few would argue AGAINST Kentucky being in the South, even though it didn't join officially join the Confederacy. However, yes, the way it is worded "which few would argue is in the South" could be taken to mean few would argue it IS.
Anyway, this post is only valid if I am right!
TexasReb, your post is valid! That's exactly what I was saying - most people (myself included) would say that Kentucky is indeed a Southern state, not Northern or Midwestern. Sorry that things weren't clear Louisville: I thought you were actually saying it wasn't in the South, or that most people were saying that. That's where the misunderstanding was. Glad that was cleared up.
As far as speech patterns go, the Telsur Project at the U-Penn places most of WV and Kentucky in the South. South Regional Map The northern panhandle has always been an anomaly to Virginia, and now West Virginia. Wheeling is not the largest city in the state, that is Charleston.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's interesting. I didn't realize parts of Pennsylvania are in the South Midland area, along with 1/3 of WV.
I guess it takes someone who grew up there, but my impression of West Virginia is that is a transition state. Not wholly northern or southern. Like a mixture of the two. Most of the people I know from West Virginia seem have speech patterns of the north and south. And the map is about where (starting in Clarksburg) where I saw a more resemblance to western PA.
WTF is your problem? now, i'll wait for the person who my post was directed to originally to answer, if that's ok with you. if it's not..well, too bad.
I don't have the problem, although the tone of your answers seem to indicate you do. I answered your question the best way I knew how. Then suggested this little stupid exchange be put to rest. What was the "problem" with that? Was it the curt question "Clear enough"? Perhaps it could be taken that way. Maybe I should have said, "does that make sense?" So if I worded it too brusquely, then I apologize for that. Offense wasn't intended. On the other hand, I hope the reason for your "WTF is (my problem)" remark is not indicitive of a "chip on the shoulder" attitude. Because quite frankly, such neither impresses nor intimidates me in the slightest.
So far as waiting for the person to whom the post was directed? Well, a word to the wise is usually sufficient. If you post in a public forum and don't want any input from anyone else, you should make it clear. Otherwise, expect other replies. Seems like common sense. (if indeed, that is what you are saying).
Now then, I am usually not one to waste time with "flames." And try to be friendly, courteous and civil to everyone, so long as they reciprocate. So I am hoping this nitpicky little bunch of BS of ours can be put to bed. I have better things to do. Hopefully, you do too. Fair enough?
Last edited by TexasReb; 09-21-2007 at 06:31 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Louisville: I thought you were actually saying it wasn't in the South, or that most people were saying that. That's where the misunderstanding was. Glad that was cleared up.
