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.
Short answer: no. The author of that linked article is completely, utterly wrong.
Texas never had the right to secede from the United States. It did, after entering the Union in 1845, have a provision that it could divide itself into several states. However, with 're-admittance' into the Union after the Civil War, even that provision was discarded.
They can try. Texas v White didn't rule in their favor last time, but nothing stopping them from giving it the ol' college try again, convincing others that it should be done.
State politicians are almost entirely nutless ******* who have their cojones checked in their wives purses, and though they may occasionally try to make the secession bluff, the sad (in my opinion) reality is that even their bluffs are half-hearted milquetoast efforts, nevermind having the balls to actually try.
Short answer: no. The author of that linked article is completely, utterly wrong.
Texas never had the right to secede from the United States. It did, after entering the Union in 1845, have a provision that it could divide itself into several states. However, with 're-admittance' into the Union after the Civil War, even that provision was discarded.
You sure? Don't they still have the Alamo or is that now just a car rental company?
That may well be the only way they can keep from being run by a hand picked Super Congress and its dictator. Time will tell but I am concerned about what this is all leading to.
Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul (Texas) indicated on Thursday that he might challenge the creation of a new "supercommittee" in Congress aimed at finding $1.5 trillion in spending cuts over the next decade.
"I would challenge it in the courts and say that it is not a constitutional function," Paul said on CNBC Thursday. "There's no authority to have a super-Congress who takes over for what the House and Senate are supposed to do."
When asked specifically if he believes the committee is unconstitutional, Paul said, "I don't think there's any doubt about it.
"Where does it say that we can set up a program like this and then … pop something back into the House and Senate and say you have a vote, you can't take it to a subcommittee or full committee?" he asked. "So no, that is not what was set up by the Constitution. That was so far removed that it almost becomes a silly notion."
That Super Congress will be so extra-constitutional that they may find enforcing the Constitution that they killed by their very formation a little hard. I am not so sure you are right. I think that the entire Great Plains area may go along with them.
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.
