You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “What do you think of THE COUNTRY of TEXOARKLA?”.
What do you think of THE COUNTRY of TEXOARKLA?
8 Responses to What do you think of THE COUNTRY of TEXOARKLA?
Three of those states tried to secede in 1865. It won’t work any better if Oklahoma joins them.
Report Spam/Abuse
I think it will work and I pray it will happen. I would finally have a place to go where it would be safe. I already have more than six guns including an AR-15 (Civilian version of the M-16 used by US troops).
I may move there just on the hopes it could happen.
Report Spam/Abuse
Count me in!
Report Spam/Abuse
I’m there, but you may consider Ron Paul as opposed to GW. He actually believes in and follows the Constitution, and is equally strong on national defense.
Report Spam/Abuse
Okay!! That sounds like a plan!
Report Spam/Abuse
Yup , works for me…
watching Obama in action and the Democrates falling for his retoric…
Report Spam/Abuse
Neither the Texas Constitution, nor the Constitution of the united States, explicitly or implicitly disallows the secession of Texas (or any other “free and independent State”) from the United States. Joining the “Union” was ever and always voluntary, rendering voluntary withdrawal an equally lawful and viable option (regardless of what any self-appointed academic, media, or government “experts”—including Abraham Lincoln himself—may have ever said).
No. For space considerations, here are the relevant portions of the Supreme Court’s decision in Texas v. White:
“When Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States.
“…The obligations of the State, as a member of the Union …remained perfect and unimpaired. …the State did not cease to be a State, nor her citizens to be citizens of the Union.
“…Our conclusion therefore is, that Texas continued to be a State, and a State of the Union.”
— Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700, 703 (1868)
It is noteworthy that two years after that decision, President Grant signed an act entitling Texas to U.S. Congressional representation, readmitting Texas to the Union.
What’s wrong with this picture? Either the Supreme Court was wrong in claiming Texas never actually left the Union (they were — see below), or the Executive (President Grant) was wrong in “readmitting” a state that, according to the Supreme Court, had never left. Both can’t be logically or legally true.
http://www.texassecede.com/faq.htm
Report Spam/Abuse
we’ll just cut off your water supply. heard you texans like sucking cactus anyways.
http://www.texassecede.com/faq.htm
Report Spam/Abuse