Posted on 09/11/2011 5:50:36 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Can you hear it?
The sound of President Obama’s political advisors licking their chops in anticipation of running against Rick Perry and reminding the rest of us a thousand different ways that the Texas governor knows his Texas history, that is.
As The Washington Examiner’s Haley Peterson reports in today’s print edition, Perry told a Tea Party audience in 2009 that “Texas is a unique place. When we came into the union in 1845, one of the issues was that we would be able to leave it if we decided to do that.”
Perry was simply pointing out what most Texans know from infancy, and are known to boast modestly about from time to time when talking to folks from foreign lands like New York and California.
But you would think the former Al Gore supporter from Austin had read Jonathan Swift’s modest proposal for ending the Irish potato famine and cried “Eureaka!” in admiring response.
Former White House press secretary Robert Gibbs – an Alabaman who undoubtedly knows Perry was just indulging a familiar Texas past time of boasting about the state’s uniqueness – offered this glimpse of what will surely be a standard Democratic attack theme.
“Rick Perry is the governor who two years ago who two years ago openly talked about whether Texas should leave the union,” Gibbs said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”
Here’s something else Gibbs also must certainly have known long before he uttered those words on the Jeffrey Immelt’s propaganda network: In the same statement in which Perry reminded everybody of one of the unique conditions of Texas’ entry into the federal union, he also said “we’ve got a great union. There is absolutely no reason to dissolve it.”
So Perry said the exact opposite of what Gibbs would like everybody in America to think he said. But, hey, what’s a little outright lie among friends (Gibbs and his liberal mainstream media buddies asking him questions)?
Here’s another story that is often heard when a Texan comes into friendly contact with one or more Yankees:
In the Spring of 1863, General Robert E. Lee was conducting a military review of his Army of Northern Virginia for the benefit of an English military observer, Col Arthur Fremantle.
When members of Hood’s Texas Brigade “marched” past the reviewing stand, Fremantle, who knew of the unit’s amazing effectiveness as shock troops, was puzzled by what he saw and exclaimed: “Why General Lee, these men hardly have shirts on their backs.”
To which Lee replied: “That’s okay, Colonel. The enemy never sees the backs of my Texans.”
Hearing such a story and being from the state after which the heroes of the tale were named, it’s simply too tempting not to remind visitors from up North that Texas is just about the most unique place in the whole universe.
Too bad some people just can’t tell the difference between pulling Yankee legs and plotting political strategy.
Just because a whole bunch of dumb Texans think that they can do it doesn't mean they can. Any more that if a bunch of dumb Texans thought the world was flat would turn it into a board-shaped planet.
If the talk over in DU is nifty then apparently you know that better than me.
I certainly didn't expect to be called a troll merely for asking questions. I take it that 'troll' is a bad thing?
You think Texans are dumb?
Where are you located?
A couple of states north of you. But let me point out that I was quoting Proud-Texan, who used the term 'dumb Texan', and using the same words that poster had used.
Yes. I saw that. You seemed to enjoy the turn of phrase and eagerly employed it in your reply.
Yeah...The S word is SUCKERS!!!...to all you delusional Perrybots!!
Are you suggesting that the shoe does fit?
Cute.
Keep practicing and someday you too can match allsouthern’s wit and wisdom.
Thanks!
I listened to that speech, and secession was never mentioned. He was talking more about states’ rights than anything else. He also said he and fellow Texans are fed up with DC tax and spend policies.
To protect Obama, they’ll use the race card against anyone including Herman Cain.
Don't worry, if it ever came down to that, no Supreme Court ruling will be a deterrent. No Liberal is going to tell Texas what to do for long. Don't Mess With Texas, is a lot more than just a slogan, its a state of mind.
From the sounds heard here on FR, it wouldn't be just Texas.
I don't know one Texan that doesn't consider America first, but with the likes of liberal north trying to turn us into Sweden, that love is for the more original America. Being ill-prepared in 1860 doomed the fight, but the spirit and will damn near overcame the industrial might. That spirit still flourishes along with the ability, these days.
Better put than by me! Thanks.
“Perhaps...the point isn’t whether Texans think they can actually legally do it, perhaps the point is a whole bunch of dumb Texans think thay can do it.”
Hear hear. We would all be a little poorer without a Texas. Her history is unique worth studying.
Her orignal constitution did provide for succession and for splitting the Republic into 5 parts if the people so voted (they didn’t). The civil war changed all that. I think the state has had something like 4 or 5 constitutions over her history.
That said, every dang fool Texan I have ever met believes Texans have this right and I say good for them! Remember:
“I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.”
—Goldwater
Some rights are unalienable.
And you will no doubt be there complaining as I do.
Tascott needs to study spelling, history, and literature. (Please tell me he's a lib.)
Dean Swift wrote "A Modest Proposal For Preventing the Children of Poor People in Ireland, from Being a Burden on Their Parents or Country, and for Making Them Beneficial to the Publick" in 1729. He died in 1745.
The Potato Famine began in 1845, one hundred years after Swift's death.
Oh, and Talcott misspelled "Eureka." That's a lot of ignorance to put on exhibit in a single sentence.
And I guess I should add that he either can't use a spell-check or believes he doesn't make mistakes.
The "Editorial Page Editor" apparently altered the original article to remove a repeated phrase ("who two years ago who two years ago"). However, the editor missed "when we came into the union in 1845" ("Union" should have been capitalized there and later). And "Perry was just indulging a familiar Texas past time of boasting" should have been edited to "indulging in" and "pastime."
From there, the article -- and the editing -- continued downhill (mostly funky capitalization and punctuation). Please tell me Talcott and his editor are libs.
TPH, whose grandfather, many long years ago, edited the Fresno Bee
“Such a doctrine would not, till of late, have been palatable anywhere, on nowhere less so than where it is not most contended for.”
I can’t understand this sentence. Can someone translate?
You obviously don't know the court case that you referenced. If you did you would know that there are two paths for secession:
"except through revolution or through consent of the States." from Texas-v-White
Neither one of the above paths need take years or decades. As a matter of fact, if pressed, I'm sure that most of the yankee states would happily consent to let the Southern conservative states go their own way so that the yankee states could chuck that antiquated old Constitution and embrace their long sought after socialist utopia.
It was an awesome sounding speech. Then he backtracked a day or two later.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.