I WANT TEXAS TO SECEDE FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. THERE IS NO PROOF WE CAN'T DO IT.

Cooking With Chef Carlo ^ | Carlo3b

[central_va]

And there are quite a few military analysists who would feel that the quickest, most humane, shortest and most definite solution to those requirements would result from some very large smoking holes that glow in the dark. That's reality.

If I get what you are saying: The USA didn't nuke North Korea or China in 1950, It didn't nuke Vietnam on 1966, It didn't nuke Iraq or Afghanistan in 2003, BUT IT WOULD NUKE Dallas Texas in a secession movement. You are insane.

My message to the FedGov™-bring it.

[central_va]

As corrupted as the process has become, if you really want to change things, you educate yourself and go to the voting booth. The Constitution is meant to be invoked and used, not thrown aside for shooting war that would usher in an age of martial law. That's just national suicide.

Are you a comedian?

[BuckeyeTexan]

Texas may have been able to do that once the republic signed the treaty with the U.S. and before Texas became a state but that ship has long since sailed.

Texas did not join the Union by treaty. Texas was annexed by a joint resolution of Congress. Texas still has the right to form new states. The JR and Order of Annexation says:

New 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.

Texas has no more powers under the Constitution than any other state has.

The key phrase being under the Constitution. I haven't said otherwise.

[DoodleDawg]

Texas did not join the Union by treaty. Texas was annexed by a joint resolution of Congress.

And was admitted as a state by Congress as well. And once admitted Texas falls under the same Article IV restrictions as any other state. It may split into two, or five or ten or however many, states only with the consent of Congress and the state legislature. For that matter, any other state can split into 5 states under the same guidelines.

[Talisker]

Perhaps I am an insane comedian. But as far as I can see, you have no idea how the real world works. The USA would nuke Dallas, Texas if TX seriously pursued an armed rebellion of secession and started attacking FedGov installations and sealing off its border precisely because it is Dallas, Texas and not North Korea, China or Vietnam.

Look at the horror of the Civil War. Look at was done in Sherman's March, in the prison camps, during Reconstruction. These monstrosities were not repeated until the Nazis and Communists came along.

You laugh at the present system, you want to discard it because it is "broken" - but you don't even understand what you want to discard. For example, it isn't broken - it's not being used. It's been replaced by a completely different system, and that switcharoo works because people like you would rather fight than learn.

Many people, including my family members, fought and died for this country and its Constitutional protections. To not use them, to let them be ignored and then fight an impossible battle rather than use the enormously valuable gift that is already here simply because people are too lazy to read how their inheritance works, is what is really insane.

But for far too many Americans, dying it preferable to learning. And that is the damn shame of it all - as in shameful.

[central_va]

The USA would nuke Dallas, Texas if TX seriously pursued an armed rebellion of secession and started attacking FedGov installations and sealing off its border precisely because it is Dallas, Texas and not North Korea, China or Vietnam.

No it wouldn't. Nobody has the balls to do that. Change your attitude, nobody is following the Constitution anymore, the fear of being nuked is not a good reason to remain part of an empire.

[BuckeyeTexan]

For that matter, any other state can split into 5 states under the same guidelines.

Although it's never been tested, the JR and order of annexation stipulate that Texas can form new states with only the approval of its state legislature. Congress' approval is not required for the division. Under the agreement, those new states are legally "entitled" to admission to the Union.

To formally admit those new states to the Union, Congress would have to follow Article IV. It seems like a distinction without a difference, but the difference, theoretically anyway, is that other states require Congress' approval before they divide and new states are not automatically entitled to admission.

In the end, it matters not. Texas is not going to divide.

[DoodleDawg]

Although it's never been tested, the JR and order of annexation stipulate that Texas can form new states with only the approval of its state legislature. Congress' approval is not required for the division. Under the agreement, those new states are legally "entitled" to admission to the Union.

If that treaty can trump the Constitution then all treaties can trump the Constitution. And if that is true then Texas has rights under the Constitution denied to other states. I don't agree with that.

[BuckeyeTexan]

No, it doesn’t mean that Texas has rights under the Constitution that other states don’t have. The admission of any new states formed from Texas must be admitted according to the Constitution. There is no doubt about that.

There was/is no treaty. There was a joint resolution and order of annexation, neither of which trumps or conflicts with the Constitution.

[deport]

Just for info I’ll publish the Joint Resolution so those that care to can read it in its entirety.

Joint Resolution for Annexing Texas to the United States
Approved March 1, 1845

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
That Congress doth consent that the territory properly included within and rightfully belonging to the
Republic of Texas, may be erected into a new State to be called the State of Texas, with a republican form
of government adopted by the people of said Republic, by deputies in convention assembled, with the consent
of the existing Government in order that the same may by admitted as one of the States of this Union.

2. And be it further resolved, That the foregoing consent of Congress is given upon the following conditions,
to wit: First, said state to be formed, subject to the adjustment by this government of all questions of
boundary that may arise with other government, —and the Constitution thereof, with the proper evidence of
its adoption by the people of said Republic of Texas, shall be transmitted to the President of the United States,
to be laid before Congress for its final action on, or before the first day of January, one thousand eight
hundred and forty-six. Second, said state when admitted into the Union, after ceding to the United States all
public edifices, fortifications, barracks, ports and harbors, navy and navy yards, docks, magazines and
armaments, and all other means pertaining to the public defense, belonging to the said Republic of Texas,
shall retain funds, debts, taxes and dues of every kind which may belong to, or be due and owing to the said
Republic; and shall also retain all the vacant and unappropriated lands lying within its limits, to be
applied to the payment of the debts and liabilities of said Republic of Texas, and the residue of said lands,
after discharging said debts and liabilities, to be disposed of as said State may direct; but in no
event are said debts and liabilities to become a charge upon the Government of the United States. Third
— New 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; and such states as may
be formed out of the territory lying south of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes north latitude, commonly
known as the Missouri Compromise Line, shall be admitted into the Union, with or without slavery, as the
people of each State, asking admission shall desire; and in such State or States as shall be formed out of said territory, north of said Missouri Compromise Line,
slavery, or involuntary servitude (except for crime) shall be prohibited.

3. And be it further resolved, That if the President of the United States shall in his judgment and discretion
deem it most advisable, instead of proceeding to submit the foregoing resolution of the Republic of Texas, as an
overture on the part of the United States for admission, to negotiate with the Republic; then,

Be it resolved, That a State, to be formed out of the present Republic of Texas, with suitable extent and
boundaries, and with two representatives in Congress, until the next appointment of representation, shall be
admitted into the Union, by virtue of this act, on an equal footing with the existing States, as soon as the terms and conditions of such admission, and the cession of the
remaining Texian territory to the United States shall be agreed upon by the governments of Texas and the United
States: And that the sum of one hundred thousand dollars be, and the same is hereby, appropriated to defray the
expenses of missions and negotiations, to agree upon the terms of said admission and cession, either by treaty
to be submitted to the Senate, or by articles to be submitted to the two houses of Congress, as the President may direct.

Approved, March 1, 1845.

https://www.tsl.state.tx.us/ref/abouttx/annexation/march1845.html

[Talisker]

No it wouldn't. Nobody has the balls to do that. Change your attitude, nobody is following the Constitution anymore, the fear of being nuked is not a good reason to remain part of an empire.

I am following the Constitution, and I'd like to see you try to stop me.

What YOU are promoting is not an "attitude," it's treason.

You're on the wrong website, liberal.

[central_va]

What YOU are promoting is not an "attitude," it's treason.

I won't go down with the ship. If you think nuking a seceding state is the right thing to do then you are a fascist statist thug. Consume my man parts.

[Talisker]

I won't go down with the ship. If you think nuking a seceding state is the right thing to do then you are a fascist statist thug. Consume my man parts.

I don't "think nuking a seceding state is the right thing to do" and I never said so - I said that if it came right down to it, and the Feds were faced with losing a seceding state, that I thought that's what they'd do. So right there, you're lying about what I said.

YOU, on the other hand, are referencing sticking to the Constitution as something that's "not done anymore" (what a limousine liberal thing to say), and now you are referring those who stick to the Constitution as "fascist statist thugs."

You're over the line - way, way, way over the line. And I'm not seeing any "man parts" in you - just a traitorous stink. Or the smell of a liberal - same thing.

[central_va]

Keep licking those Federal Boots and quaking in fear of the bomb. Hopefully we’ll see a state try to escape thru secession, and I will come running to their aid. I will be your enemy, and gladly so.

[Talisker]

Keep licking those Federal Boots and quaking in fear of the bomb. Hopefully we’ll see a state try to escape thru secession, and I will come running to their aid. I will be your enemy, and gladly so.

Get in line, liberal. Get in line.

[Partisan Gunslinger]

Every time someone brings up the subject of the Yankee War of Agression. Instead of piling on, please consider the following: a) there is NO slavery anymore; b) the South is the new manufacturing center of the country; c) the South is more heavily armed than the Yankee north and d) Acirema is too damn big and divided to be governed efficiently.

I think you're not considering the rural areas. Our struggle is rural vs urban, not north and south.