Posted on 04/21/2014 1:37:28 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
And when you elect someone who SAYS they’re all gungho on states rights, they turn as soon as they get about one week’s worth of power and perks. In Texas they don’t get paid much, but they get perks and power. I’m thinking of a fraud who’s running for Lt. Governor. So, there is no real choice.
You figure with armadillos invading much of the Southland now, if you could get enough Lone Star Beer, you could train the giant ones to tear apart those federal MRAPs.
http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2013/mar/12/armadillos-arrive-in-east-tennessee/
And then you could unleash the army of wild hogs, which would push the federal lines back to Washington.
Y'all talk big, but when the rubber hits the road . . . hey, thanks for the panhandle and Greer County!
Okay, bad jokes aside, Oklahomans are much more willing to accept big government decisions. Look at the difference in state laws. Texans have accepted far more than they should and most of what they think of themselves isn't borne out in legislation. However, myths and self-perceptions can be extremely powerful and can be self-fulfilling.
The argument between Texas and Oklahoma was not just over borders, but water. See Tarrant Regional Water District v. Herrmann. Dallas/Fort Worth exploded and they need Oklahoma water to keep growing. Oklahoma and Texas disagreed on some of the definitions in a water sharing compact (i.e., Texas tried to bully away Oklahoma water way upstream and way beyond their rights). Texas lost by a unanimous decision from SCOTUS.
Since Texas couldn't bully their way into the water, they (gasp!) negotiated with Oklahoma and are now getting the water they need. Not only did the agreement do that, but it resolved (or at least calmed) the primary border dispute between Oklahoma and Texas. Oklahoma and Texas have an agreement on their borders that was approved by Congress.
Apparently the BLM didn't think Oklahoma and Texas could resolve their differences and were preparing to step in to solve a crisis, which never came. Now that there isn't a crisis, they want to step in anyway. Oh yeah, and grab some “disputed” land in Texas. Notice it's not being disputed by Oklahoma, but by the BLM. Why? Because the BLM opposed the compact between Oklahoma and Texas (because they wanted to grab more land and blame Okies).
So, the SCOTUS ruled what the border was, Texas and Oklahoma agree to what the border is, Congress agreed with Oklahoma and Texas, but the BLM wants to take the land anyway.
You'll find a large number of Okies standing with you Texicans, even if y'all can't shoot.
funny thing...Okies and Texans....we would stand elbow to elbow and fell every single federal bastard....every one of em.....once convinced the work was done....we’d square off and attempt to whip each other
oh and cute story bout the barn....but you don’t believe it
As long as Texas and Oklahoma can reach an equitable agreement over water rights by themselves, we sure don’t need some outside party barging in and dictating terms and confiscating ranchers lands. There is little use fighting over a 1-mile strip of land. You can’t usually control where a river is going to flow. Nowadays, a property boundary could be fixed to absolute coordinates by a GPS survey, regardless where the river flowed. A rancher in that area might Texan one year and a Sooner the next, depending on the river. So what, as long as he keeps his land? Are the taxes that different?
“funny thing...Okies and Texans....we would stand elbow to elbow and fell every single federal bastard....every one of em.....once convinced the work was done....we’d square off and attempt to whip each other”
Seeing as I’m in the Texas Army National Guard (proud of it and won’t IST) and live in and am from Oklahoma, that’d be a neat trick for me.
“oh and cute story bout the barn....but you don’t believe it”
Well, I noticed my groups got a little tighter when I moved back to Oklahoma.
The Texas ranchers need to remain in Texas. The regulations are different and that would just be ridiculous to ask ranchers to cope with. Honestly, the river is a pretty good marker, which is why they use it. The problem is that the BLM wants to ignore where the river is today and push the border back south of the river.
I can’t see Oklahoma and Oklahomans trying for a land grab. I think some of the Texas ranchers need to take a short drive across the border and get to know their neighbors on the other side of the river.
The reason they won’t use GPS is water. Oklahoma got the river and they won’t (and shouldn’t) give up the water. If they did, it would all head to DFW and the Oklahoma farmers and ranchers that live on the river would get nothing fast. That’s the main reason Oklahoma has been so careful about the border.
As long as Texas and Oklahoma can reach an equitable agreement over water rights by themselves,
**********
http://www.owrb.ok.gov/rrccommission/rrccommission.html
and
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/WA/htm/WA.46.htm
The position of governor in Texas isn’t as strong, on purpose, as the AG. Though, Perry has made some pretty big waves in DC because he stood his ground in Texas!
It’s time for Perry to pull the trigger on demanding the return of Texas’ gold from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
THAT could be costly to the feds! Hit ‘em where they live!
This could have an effect on the gold rig.
Perry and Abbott and both Republican candidates for Attorney General can all be counted upon in this instance.
Texas ain't gonna stand for any hi-jinx from the BLM.
I think they might just have met their Battle of San Jacinto of the Northern border!
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.