What Do You Think of Texas?
the future of divisiveness needs to change, does it not?
What Do You Think? -- j
.
What Do You Think? -- j
.
- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
Are "Texans" less politically correct than "NYers" ? Yes, but if Texans had the love for liberty of Sam Houston's soldiers (and possibly the author) then Texas would have seceeded again, and this time would have made it stick.
Secession is not an option for any American state, nor should it be. What started as a War Between the States, ended as a compact between all the people of the Union and the federal government. The federal union is not a compact among states. States are simply prefectures or provinces: they have nice local cultures and histories, but all are subsumed by the federal union. That radical shift of 1865 still took almost 100 years to play out. Along the way, Freedom of Religion was forced on the state governments. Before 1935, states allowed police the power to torture people for confessions. Then, the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments were forced on the states. When you read about political news and court cases over local gun control laws, like New York City and Washington DC, realize that the issue is whether the Federal Second Amendment is incorporated to the states.
While I am indeed proud to be a "Texan serving Texans" in the state guard, as a member of the Maritime Regiment, I am fully cognizant of Sam Houston's complex personality. I cannot say whether he was bipolar, or suffered an obsessive disorder, or was attention deficit, or a small man caught in great events, or something more or something else. I do know that Sam Houston cheated the soldiers of Texas and reneged on his promises to the sailors of Texas. Houston said that maritime people are shiftless and untrustworthy. He was angry when the Texas Navy forced his hand in the continuing war with Mexico. Houston wanted Texas to appear weak and in need of annexation to the USA, while the Texas Navy continued to win battles. So don't talk to a member of the Texas State Guard Maritime Regiment about Sam Houston's love of Texas. Jesus said to love yourself first, and Sam Houston was apparently a good Christian.
Soldiers and sailors aside, Sam Houston demonetized an entire series of state paper money, thereby cheating the people of Texas. The guy is not someone you want to endorse without reservation.
I like Texas. I really love living in Austin. But first and foremost, I am an American.
Texas embodies the spirit and thoughts of freedom. They (the state government) have shown that they are willing to speak out against, if not outright defy, the hacks in Washington D.C. and their "one size fits all" way of regulating us out of existence.
Remember, Texas is considered to be part of the "fly-over" by the pseudo-intellectuals of the East and West coasts.
Just my .02 cents.
I could not disagree with you more on secession.
Secession is only prevented by force of a central government that has greatly exceeded the limited powers allowed in the constitution. Lincoln and the GOP enslaved the nation and pretended to free the black slaves. There was no compact between the people and the union. The people were superior to the servant government and without indiividual consent to the contrary, every person still is superior to the federal government. The south was conquered by force, all their rights were taken by force, and they have never been regained.
Dictatorial extra-constitutional acts by central power are unacceptable regardless of the level of government that imposes them. Free markets solve problems. Government makes problems worse.
"The South" was not an entity. Some people seized the governments of some southern states and declared themselves the rulers. Again, here in Texas, they arrested the great Sam Houston because he was opposed to secession, as very many people were. The secessionists just made more noise.
Ideally, all of Earth will have one government. I recommend that you read Ayn Rand's essay on "Balkanization." We have seen this time and again: when the central government fails, the little secessors go to war against each other.
Sometimes the little tyrants co-operate when they can share in the shearing of the sheep.
"The State of Louisiana does not allow an exemption from the Louisiana Motor Fuel tax on automotive gasoline or undyed diesel fuel exported from Louisiana to another state unless the position holder (seller) at the Louisiana terminal collected the destination state’s motor fuel tax. Also, Louisiana requires terminal position holders to collect Mississippi’s tax on aviation gasoline, dyed diesel and jet fuel. This means that Mississippi tax should be collected on gasoline, aviation gasoline, undyed diesel fuel, dyed diesel fuel and jet fuel imported into Mississippi from Louisiana." -- https://www.dor.ms.gov/Business/Docum...
... 50 little governments...
It appears that you will get what you want for a while. Then there will be a war because the elite and their fearful, naive, looting supporters can not suppress individual liberty.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhIzB...
We have had some discussions here on the contradictions in the Constitution. Resolving those by objective legal theory would lay the groundwork for a world government based on individual rights.
See also in the Gulch, Wolf Devoon's "Constitution for Government in Galt's Gulch" (here: https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post...
Contradictions in the Constitution here:
https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post...
An Objectivist Constitution discussion here:
https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post...
'One ring to rule them all'
One people, one God, one religion, one prophet,
but 100 blooming flowers and 100 genders.
(Like the above, this comment may not be serious).
Do you have an objection to that?
One Nation, one People, one Führer!
For those who prefer to argue other than by poetry, MM's post has an interesting idea- one world government, so does not deserve a downvote.
The idea needs discussing, we are heading that way. My view is it is bad and must be stopped.
Competing is an obvious measure to ensure performance and integrity. I am ok with coordination and cooperation but not merging. A better example for one world government would be Switzerland, the 'exception that proves the rule'.
Rhetorical technique- to ask if there is an objection to 'that'. The 'that' is framed to be unobjectionable, but it cannot exist. Power always expands, the justifications follow.
However, secession would be met with Obama sending in the army to stop the process, just as in the civil war years ago. The economy would have to collapse much more before the federal government wouldnt be able to really stop states from leaving the union.
I don't like its over-use of the death penalty, its Border Patrol checkpoints, its ongoing punitive fines for those who've had traffic tickets years ago, its abortion restrictions, or its "abstinence only" sex education (which causes higher teen pregnancy rates).
In sum, the negatives slightly outweigh the positives if I were to move there. But if unemployment here gets much worse I'd consider it.
Let's hope he's right and the political blandness of recent history is put aside as the true spirit of what it is to be an American and a Texan comes to the fore. Personally, I'm fed-up with the crap and would like nothing better than to see a tough, no excuses attitude put forth, no matter what stupid restrictions are put on them from Washington. It is about time that someone stood up to the Obama Milktoasts and said that they won't obey that crap.
Go, Mr. Cory, go.
I'd be very tempted to move to any state that seceeded and established a constitution similar to the Articles of Confederation with a Bill of Rights and sovereignty to the individual. I'd fight to defend it if necessary. Life, fortune, and sacred honor.
First the seceded and were the only one of the Civil War States that had the right to do so.
But then they joined the CSA and participated in a war against the USA. Of all those states they were brought into the union as a defeated foreign aggressor and then given standard Statehood. So the notion of secede at will is a dream long over since 1865.
However...like any State they can ask to become multiple States. certainly qualify in terms of population, land area, and economic ability. Other areas are Upper Peninsula of Michigan, the panhandle of Florida and the State of Jefferson. Southern from Northern California with real northern meaning above Sacramento and San Francisco. This revives the State of Jefferson Plan with Southern Oregon south of the Willamette Valley.
Would they want to do that? Who knows that's their business.
That is perfectly legal or was under the Constitution. Who knows with this batch and their endless wars. We may end up welcoming Baja/Sonora into the USSA but then I would move again.
If your thinking on it is similar to mine, the entire list of options contracts year by year.
People should take the time to get their facts straight, before they start making historical connections to incidents they hear about (yes, I know, I'm guilty of this, as well).
I have lived in high humidity warm climate most of my life by choice and I would not choose Houston based on climate.
I recall living in Oregon once upon a time a joke where a Texan and Alaskan were bragging about being number one. An Oregonian said "You forget water but Texas if you run a garden hose from here to there that should help." "But water wouldn't flow through that small a hose all that distance." "Whereupon the Alaskan pointed out if they coudl suck as hard as they blow no problem." Texan says, "Alaska are you calling us blowhards?" "Not at all that's why we're number one." A Californian ended the discussion with the comment. "It would have to go through my State and we're taking half. You mahy be the largest States but we've got more swimming pools."
I read somewhere a foreign visitor asked the difference between Texas Barbecue and Southern barbecue.
We of course answered: 'One is good and the other is burnt. Kind of like the difference in your part of the world between Cafe Turkos and Cafe Greco.'
'But there is no difference between Turkish and Greek Coffee!'
'Exactly one is good the other is from Texas.'
One of the best I ever was a Burnt Ends Barbecue. It came from right ont he border with Louisiana.
The shooter was from Texas. He was a veteran.
.
That was the reason why I caution that you step back and let things unfold. There's a lot to come out of this. Just being able to identify it as a "tragedy" versus a "horror" is hard enough.
The wider problem - those other tragedies and horrors - wrap all the chatter here. As I understand the news, in one case, the victim was wrestling with police. In another, he was sitting in his car, reaching for his wallet. Simple labels are not going to serve here.