PDA

View Full Version : Oklahoma - leading the way..



brandywinelabs
12-09-2009, 01:12 PM
Received from a good friend.

Verification at bottom.

An update from Oklahoma :



Oklahoma law passed, 37 to 9, had a few liberals in the mix, an amendment to place the Ten Commandments on the front entrance to the state capitol. The feds in D.C., along with the ACLU, said it would be a mistake. Hey this is a conservative state, based on Christian values...! HB 1330



Guess what.......... Oklahoma did it anyway.



Oklahoma recently passed a law in the state to incarcerate all illegal immigrants, and ship them back to where they came from unless they want to get a green card and become an American citizen. They all scattered. HB 1804. Hope we didn't send any of them to your state. This was against the advice of the Federal Government, and the ACLU, they said it would be a mistake.



Guess what.......... Oklahoma did it anyway.



Recently we passed a law to include DNA samples from any and all illegals to the Oklahoma database, for criminal investigative purposes. Pelosi said it was unconstitutional. SB 1102



Guess what........ Oklahoma did it anyway.



Several weeks ago, we passed a law, declaring Oklahoma as a Sovereign state, not under the Federal Government directives. Joining Texas , Montana and Utah as the only states to do so. More states are likely to follow: Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, the Carolina's, Tennessee, Kentucky, Missouri, Arkansas, West Virginia, Mississippi, Florida. Save your confederate money, it appears the South is about to rise up once again. HJR 1003



The federal Government has made bold steps to take away our guns. Oklahoma, a week ago, passed a law confirming people in this state have the right to bear arms and transport them in their vehicles. I'm sure that was a set back for the criminals (and Obamaites). Liberals didn't like it -- But ...



Guess what........... Oklahoma did it anyway.



Just this month, my state has voted and passed a law that ALL driver's license exams will be printed in English, and only English, and no other language. We have been called racist for doing this, but the fact is that ALL of our road signs are in English only. If you want to drive in Oklahoma , you must read and write English. Really simple.



By the way, Obama does not like any of this. Guess what....who cares... Oklahoma is doing it anyway.



To Verify: http://newsok.com/oklahoma-state-capitol-to-display-ten-commandments/article/3370730 http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-01-09-immigcover_N.htm

Mike W.
12-09-2009, 01:27 PM
Bravo Oklahoma!, Bravo!

Goose
12-09-2009, 01:34 PM
Once Texas secedes from the United States of Obama I hope our good friends in Oklahoma and Louisiana will join us in forming a great, new country.

We live in Cuba now.

ducknwork
12-09-2009, 02:11 PM
Two thumbs up!

dnf777
12-09-2009, 02:18 PM
Once Texas secedes from the United States of Obama I hope our good friends in Oklahoma and Louisiana will join us in forming a great, new country.

We live in Cuba now.

That's funny. First, Texas would forfeit its federal aid, and go bankrupt. Second, Mexico would re-claim the territory, and with Ft. Hood and Ft. Bliss mothballed, they would have no resistance.

Besides, that was tried already about 150 years ago and did nothing but to temporarily weaken the whole nation.

I really don't like such treasonous talk in the first place.

Franco
12-09-2009, 04:45 PM
Oklahoma has balls and good for them!

Just imagine how rich our new country would be. Texas, Oklahoma and Louisiana keeping all of thier oil production revenue! I think Alaska would be more than happy to join us.

We could adopt the U S Constitution and actually use it!

Treason is what we have in Washington DC.

Goose
12-09-2009, 05:27 PM
That's funny. First, Texas would forfeit its federal aid, and go bankrupt. Second, Mexico would re-claim the territory, and with Ft. Hood and Ft. Bliss mothballed, they would have no resistance.

Besides, that was tried already about 150 years ago and did nothing but to temporarily weaken the whole nation.

I really don't like such treasonous talk in the first place.

Now don't get your panties in a bunch! Once we've formed our new and excellent country we'll still trade with you. You can buy our oil, our natural gas, our cotton and even our corn. Maybe even play a football game or two! But we'll trade with you only in gold or silver...no stinkin' greenbacks:)

We live in Cuba now.

dnf777
12-09-2009, 06:54 PM
Now don't get your panties in a bunch! Once we've formed our new and excellent country we'll still trade with you. You can buy our oil, our natural gas, our cotton and even our corn. Maybe even play a football game or two! But we'll trade with you only in gold or silver...no stinkin' greenbacks:)

We live in Cuba now.

I hope you're planning on PAYING the people picking your cotton this time. When you do, you'll find it's not quite as profitable as it used to be.

We won't need your natural gas. We have more of it in our Marcellus shale than you can shake a dead armadillo at!

As for the stinkin' greenbacks....when did you decide you don't want the billions in federal aid you've been historically receiving? All the sudden your federal teet's milk has soured??

As for football, I'll give you t.u. has done well this year. As for NFL, "got six?" We do.


By now, I'm sure your head is ready to explode, but relax. I'm only matching your ridiculous notions with a little dose of reality for amusement purposes only. I grew up in Baytown, Tx, and love the Lone Star State with all my heart. But it is one of 50 states within the United States of America, And I love all 50 of them. (well, I wouldn't put NJ is the same category as Tx or Pa) Besides if it weren't for a yankee from Titusville, Pa, ya'll wouldn't even know how to drill for oil!

Bob Gutermuth
12-10-2009, 11:10 AM
We need some of the OK legislators moved into Congress. Congress needs the infusion of some conservative brain power.

sweepthelegnate
12-10-2009, 12:07 PM
when did you decide you don't want the billions in federal aid you've been historically receiving?

Feel free to point it out if it's incorrect, but doesn't Texas pay more in federal tax than they receive in federal spending?


Not terribly political, just a guy from Texas - regards,

Nathan

dnf777
12-10-2009, 01:20 PM
Feel free to point it out if it's incorrect, but doesn't Texas pay more in federal tax than they receive in federal spending?


Not terribly political, just a guy from Texas - regards,

Nathan

Don't know the answer to your question offhand. Those statistics aren't readily available. I do know Texas leads the nation in asking for federal disaster aid in total events and total dollars. Those stats are available at FEMA.

Don't take me wrong, I love the great state of Texas, but it irks me to no end to hear the traitorous, treasonous talk of secession. It's an insult to our ancestors who died to preserve the Union, and the Texans who are serving our nation in the Armed Forces.

Hew
12-10-2009, 02:04 PM
Feel free to point it out if it's incorrect, but doesn't Texas pay more in federal tax than they receive in federal spending?
There you go gettin' all factual and stuff. :rolleyes:

dback
12-10-2009, 02:20 PM
There you go gettin' all factual and stuff. :rolleyes:

And...let's not forget that the Feds take their cut before it is returned.

Goose
12-10-2009, 03:12 PM
We'll need a capital once we secede...or do we. Maybe not. We could just keep our state capitals and rotate meetings. That way we avoid all the greed, tyranny, perversion, taxation and fraud that always comes with a national capital.

And for some of you boys up north with relatives in the new country please feel free to come and visit. Hell, I'll even buy you a fried shrimp dinner with the shrimp coming from our excellent Gulf of Mexico. Maybe even a Lone Star beer! But you can't stay:) You have to go back to your home.

We live in Cuba now.

YardleyLabs
12-10-2009, 03:41 PM
Interesting that many of those who speak in this fashion are outraged when someone refuses to say the Pledge of Allegiance or to suggest modifications in its language. Long before Eisenhower inserted the words "under God" into the pledge, the core principle behind it was "one nation, indivisible" reflecting the fact that the Pledge largely grew out of the shadows of the Civil War. The word I normally associate with secession is treason. The last time we seriously "discussed" the issue was 150 years ago and tens of thousands paid with their lives. If we decide to repeat that "discussion" again, I have no doubt the price will be much higher.

pat addis
12-10-2009, 03:56 PM
this will not work you would have too many people moving there from occupied states like mine, illinois

Franco
12-10-2009, 05:16 PM
The Treason is with those career politicians in Washington DC that are undermining The Constitution. The same folks that don not want to secure our boarders. The same politicians that are leading us to a financial ruin. The same folks that want an over-sized dysfunctional government and want to tax us into submisssion.

Lets face it, our politicians have lost thier way and need to be redirected. The American people have been sold out to special interest and that interest is not for the betterment of the American citizen!

YardleyLabs
12-10-2009, 05:27 PM
The Treason is with those career politicians in Washington DC that are undermining The Constitution. The same folks that don not want to secure our boarders. The same politicians that are leading us to a financial ruin. The same folks that want an over-sized dysfunctional government and want to tax us into submisssion.

Lets face it, our politicians have lost thier way and need to be redirected. The American people have been sold out to special interest and that interest is not for the betterment of the American citizen!
You mean the same people elected by the voters of their respective districts to represent us as provided in the Constitution?

Hew
12-10-2009, 05:27 PM
The last time we seriously "discussed" the issue was 150 years ago and tens of thousands paid with their lives. If we decide to repeat that "discussion" again, I have no doubt the price will be much higher.
Let's play what if...

I don't think Texas (or any state) will leave the Union in our lifetimes, but what if the people of Texas voted tomorrow to do just that? Do you honestly think the other 49 states would go to war over it? I say no way, no how. I don't know the answer to the question, but is membership in the Union a legal requirement that can never expire and is enforced at the risk of war?

Captain Mike D
12-10-2009, 05:33 PM
The word I normally associate with secession is treason. The last time we seriously "discussed" the issue was 150 years ago and tens of thousands paid with their lives. If we decide to repeat that "discussion" again, I have no doubt the price will be much higher.

If it happens I am sure revisionists will rewrite the reasons 100 years after the fact to be about freeing the oppressed masses that could not compete in a capitolist society.
I'm with Franco-- the Moonbats are in control and need to be stopped in order to preserve our country. Our politicians are selfish in they're individual desires to remain in power and the beaurocracy they have created is just as bad if not worse.

YardleyLabs
12-10-2009, 05:33 PM
Let's play what if...

I don't think Texas (or any state) will leave the Union in our lifetimes, but what if the people of Texas voted tomorrow to do just that? Do you honestly think the other 49 states would go to war over it? I say no way, no how. I don't know the answer to the question, but is membership in the Union a legal requirement that can never expire and is enforced at the risk of war?
Actually, I believe any President who permitted that to happen would deserve impeachment. The Constitution authorizes the President to take some pretty extraordinary actions in the event of insurrection, which is what you are describing. I don't believe that a majority of voters in any state would actually vote to secede, but I also do not believe that secession is a state right.

Hew
12-10-2009, 05:55 PM
Actually, I believe any President who permitted that to happen would deserve impeachment.
So your answers are yes, you think the other 49 states would go to war and yes, you think the other 49 states should go to war (two distinctly different questions) to preserve the Union?

Beyond thinking that there's no way in hell that Obama or any other president in the forseeable future would declare war on any state that wanted out, I think that we would most assuredly peacefully work out all the kinks involved with cutting a state loose.

Cody Covey
12-10-2009, 06:36 PM
Actually, I believe any President who permitted that to happen would deserve impeachment. The Constitution authorizes the President to take some pretty extraordinary actions in the event of insurrection, which is what you are describing. I don't believe that a majority of voters in any state would actually vote to secede, but I also do not believe that secession is a state right.

So then you also don't believe states are sovereign?

YardleyLabs
12-10-2009, 07:19 PM
So then you also don't believe states are sovereign?
Not in the sense of having the right to separate themselves from the rest of the country or to usurp those powers reserved to the federal government or those powers reserved to the people.

The rights of the states are defined by the Constitution and subsequent amendments and case law. In cases involving most civil rights of the people and in cases involving dealings with the world outside the boundaries of the state, state powers are heavily constrained.

There were times in our history when states were much more independent than they are now. However,"states' rights" were never as great as argued by many states on issues of segregation. The 14th amendment extended most protections of individual rights to the states as a constraint on government action at that level. The 16th amendment eliminated requirements for apportionment of taxes by state. Supreme Court decisions have routinely interpreted the commerce clause to provide very broad powers of regulation over anything that crosses state lines even if only as part of a class of linked activities. In conjunction with the commerce clause and the 16th amendment, the federal government has been essentially free to tax on one hand and then use the promise of aid or the threat of withheld aid to compel state action economically that it could not compel directly.

The Civil War itself addressed the right of secession in a pretty definitive manner by treating it as insurrection. We have a much more decentralized form of government than such unitary countries as France and Italy, and a more centralized government than countries such as Switzerland. Any effort to dissolve our country would undoubtedly be welcomed by our enemies outside the country who might be willing to finance secessionists much as they did the Confederacy 150 years ago. In fact, al Qaeda would probably be eager to be the first to recognize a new confederacy knowing that America's power in the world would be destroyed for decades and possibly forever. Personally, I would view a fight to save the union as vital to the future of our country and important to the world.

dnf777
12-10-2009, 08:11 PM
There you go gettin' all factual and stuff. :rolleyes:

Let's hear the factual stuff. What are the numbers?

Franco
12-10-2009, 08:50 PM
You mean the same people elected by the voters of their respective districts to represent us as provided in the Constitution?



You mean the same voters that entered this country illegally, then became citizens? How about the people that have immigrated here, hate everything about our culture but want to live here and vote? How about all the people that think that it is the government's responsibility to provide for them and vote that way?

Those are the folks that made the difference in the last election. And that is the voting group that is growing disproportionitly and would be happy to vote for anything that destroys our heritage.

It is these voters that have elected the idiots we have running the country today!

If several states wanted to leave the union, no one is going to make them stay! Again, the Treasonist are in Washington DC.

Goose
12-10-2009, 09:16 PM
Let's say my two respected friends from Pennsylvania wake up on Christmas morning and run down the stairs to find a big Wayback machine under their tree from Santa. They excitedly get in their new Wayback machine, press the wayback button and they're sent back in time to 10 April 1912...and they're on a boat. Which boat you ask? The RMS Titanic and it's steaming towards catastrophe.

What will they do? Obviously they'll try like hell to convince the Captain of the Titanic that his big boat is gonna hit an iceberg and everybody's going to die. They will try and try and try again but the Captain won't listen because he think's they're crazy. And none of the passengers will listen, either. What will they do?

And that's where we are today. We've had so many crappy Captains I can't keep count. There's Skipper Clinton, Skipper Bush and Skipper Obama...all three stupidly steaming full speed ahead. And this country WILL hit an iceberg soon. Make no mistake.

Unlike the lying scientists in the global warming scam the math doesn't lie. We're BROKE! Flat ass broke! And the only thing the democrats want to do is raise the debt ceiling so they can borrow some more and I'm tired of this crap because IT WILL NEVER END. We're broke.

So some of us just want off this boat. I'm tired of living in Cuba.

YardleyLabs
12-10-2009, 09:19 PM
You mean the same voters that entered this country illegally, then became citizens? Actually, I think Reagan was the only president who let that happen. All you had to do was prove you had been in the country for more than a decade, had earned a living legally and paid all taxes, and were otherwise of sound character. If all that was proven, you still had to jump through a number of hoops. However, the odds were pretty good that you ranked near the top in terms of characters of good citizens.
How about the people that have immigrated here, hate everything about our culture but want to live here and vote? You mean the people we call naturalized citizens similar to the ancestors of most of us? I suspect I am in a minority given that my ancestors were here before the revolution. Does that mean I get all the votes?
How about all the people that think that it is the government's responsibility to provide for them and vote that way? I've always called those people Republicans.:rolleyes:


Those are the folks that made the difference in the last election. And that is the voting group that is growing disproportionitly and would be happy to vote for anything that destroys our heritage.

It is these voters that have elected the idiots we have running the country today!

If several states wanted to leave the union, no one is going to make them stay! One of the interesting developments of the last administration was the adoption of amendments to the Insurrection Act (including renaming it the act for "Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order." This makes it much easier for the federal government to send in forces to ensure that federal laws are followed in the event that a state does not.
Again, the Treasonist are in Washington DC.I assume because they are the ones requiring, as the Constitution demands, that each state maintain a republican form of government with representatives elected democratically. That sounds like treason to me.

Captain Mike D
12-10-2009, 09:29 PM
Actually, I think Reagan was the only president who let that happen. All you had to do was prove you had been in the country for more than a decade, had earned a living legally and paid all taxes, and were otherwise of sound character. If all that was proven, you still had to jump through a number of hoops. However, the odds were pretty good that you ranked near the top in terms of characters of good citizens. You mean the people we call naturalized citizens similar to the ancestors of most of us? I suspect I am in a minority given that my ancestors were here before the revolution. Does that mean I get all the votes? I've always called those people Republicans.:rolleyes:

One of the interesting developments of the last administration was the adoption of amendments to the Insurrection Act (including renaming it the act for "Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order." This makes it much easier for the federal government to send in forces to ensure that federal laws are followed in the event that a state does not.I assume because they are the ones requiring, as the Constitution demands, that each state maintain a republican form of government with representatives elected democratically. That sounds like treason to me.

Twist and Shout, Hey, hey hey hey, Twist and Shout. Yeah, Yeah

dnf777
12-10-2009, 09:29 PM
Let's say my two respected friends from Pennsylvania wake up on Christmas morning and run down the stairs to find a big Wayback machine under their tree from Santa. They excitedly get in their new Wayback machine, press the wayback button and they're sent back in time to 10 April 1912...and they're on a boat. Which boat you ask? The RMS Titanic and it's steaming towards catastrophe.

What will they do? Obviously they'll try like hell to convince the Captain of the Titanic that his big boat is gonna hit an iceberg and everybody's going to die. They will try and try and try again but the Captain won't listen because he think's they're crazy. And none of the passengers will listen, either. What will they do?

And that's where we are today. We've had so many crappy Captains I can't keep count. There's Skipper Clinton, Skipper Bush and Skipper Obama...all three stupidly steaming full speed ahead. And this country WILL hit an iceberg soon. Make no mistake.

Unlike the lying scientists in the global warming scam the math doesn't lie. We're BROKE! Flat ass broke! And the only thing the democrats want to do is raise the debt ceiling so they can borrow some more and I'm tired of this crap because IT WILL NEVER END. We're broke.

So some of us just want off this boat. I'm tired of living in Cuba.

Have you asked yourself in all your angst exactly WHY we're broke? Have you looked at the chart posted here several times of the national debt under various presidents and congresses? Therein lies your answer. As you said, the math doesn't lie!!

Franco
12-10-2009, 09:48 PM
Let's say my two respected friends from Pennsylvania wake up on Christmas morning and run down the stairs to find a big Wayback machine under their tree from Santa. They excitedly get in their new Wayback machine, press the wayback button and they're sent back in time to 10 April 1912...and they're on a boat. Which boat you ask? The RMS Titanic and it's steaming towards catastrophe.

What will they do? Obviously they'll try like hell to convince the Captain of the Titanic that his big boat is gonna hit an iceberg and everybody's going to die. They will try and try and try again but the Captain won't listen because he think's they're crazy. And none of the passengers will listen, either. What will they do?

And that's where we are today. We've had so many crappy Captains I can't keep count. There's Skipper Clinton, Skipper Bush and Skipper Obama...all three stupidly steaming full speed ahead. And this country WILL hit an iceberg soon. Make no mistake.

Unlike the lying scientists in the global warming scam the math doesn't lie. We're BROKE! Flat ass broke! And the only thing the democrats want to do is raise the debt ceiling so they can borrow some more and I'm tired of this crap because IT WILL NEVER END. We're broke.

So some of us just want off this boat. I'm tired of living in Cuba.

That is one awesome analogy!

Franco
12-10-2009, 09:57 PM
Actually, I think Reagan was the only president who let that happen. All you had to do was prove you had been in the country for more than a decade, had earned a living legally and paid all taxes, and were otherwise of sound character. If all that was proven, you still had to jump through a number of hoops. However, the odds were pretty good that you ranked near the top in terms of characters of good citizens. You mean the people we call naturalized citizens similar to the ancestors of most of us? I suspect I am in a minority given that my ancestors were here before the revolution. Does that mean I get all the votes? I've always called those people Republicans.:rolleyes:

One of the interesting developments of the last administration was the adoption of amendments to the Insurrection Act (including renaming it the act for "Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order." This makes it much easier for the federal government to send in forces to ensure that federal laws are followed in the event that a state does not.I assume because they are the ones requiring, as the Constitution demands, that each state maintain a republican form of government with representatives elected democratically. That sounds like treason to me.

Pres Reagan's amnesty led to another 20 million plus illegals. The U S Tax Payer didn't need or ask for that additional burden. An issue now is that Tax Payers are going to have to pay thier Health Insurance soon! We've already been paying for it but now, will cost us more. That's on top of all the other services we provide like education and city infrastructure/maintenance. I could go on and on, on this alone.

Similar to our anncestors? This country's ancestors overwhelmingly came from western Europe. I don't think any of them ever saw a camel or monkey in their ancesteral homes.

Yes, the American people have been betrayed by those in power!

YardleyLabs
12-10-2009, 09:58 PM
....

So some of us just want off this boat. I'm tired of living in Cuba.
Three are lots of other countries to choose from. Of course, almost all have higher taxes and national health insurance in one form ot another. I can recommend Switzerland from personal experience. Their gun laws are great.

Franco
12-10-2009, 10:16 PM
Three are lots of other countries to choose from. Of course, almost all have higher taxes and national health insurance in one form ot another. I can recommend Switzerland from personal experience. Their gun laws are great.

Swiss chicks are boring.

Might I suggest Costa Rica

JDogger
12-10-2009, 10:25 PM
Swiss chicks are boring.

Might I suggest Costa Rica

I hear Hew likes Haiti.

JD

Pete
12-10-2009, 10:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goose http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?p=534168#post534168)
Once Texas secedes from the United States of Obama I hope our good friends in Oklahoma and Louisiana will join us in forming a great, new country.

We live in Cuba now.

That's funny. First, Texas would forfeit its federal aid, and go bankrupt. Second, Mexico would re-claim the territory, and with Ft. Hood and Ft. Bliss mothballed, they would have no resistance.

Besides, that was tried already about 150 years ago and did nothing but to temporarily weaken the whole nation.

I really don't like such treasonous talk in the first place


Oklahoma hasent seceded from amaerica ,,the fricken government has
Our federal government is treasonous not the other way around.
God bless OK

Pete

Bud Bass
12-10-2009, 11:02 PM
Mannnnnn I tell you, there are a lot of you folks that appear to be so farrrrrrr right wing you would be better off going and trying another country for a while, and we would be better off if you did. Goose, you love Cuba so much, you should move there and see what socialism is really about. If you don't like our form of government, all you have to do is elect another reresentative to change the laws, if enough don't like it, the laws will be changed to suit your brand of politics. The country is being run the way the majority voted it to be run, (was not that way with Bush as pres) with our method of democratic elections. And to think, I spent a year in Viet Nam to give you folks a right to talk treason like this crap I'm hering tonight. Bud

kdeckels
12-10-2009, 11:31 PM
Goose, you love Cuba so much, you should move there and see what socialism is really about.

The way things are going you may not have to go to Cuba to see what socialism's all about.

Hew
12-11-2009, 05:03 AM
Personally, I would view a fight to save the union as vital to the future of our country and important to the world.
Interesting. You wanted no part of a preemptive war to remove a mad-man who was a perceived threat to our country (WMDs), and who threatened our access to the lifeblood of our country (oil), and who brutally reigned over 25 million of his own terrorized people. And then, even when that war turned into a war of retaliation against those who attacked our country (al Qaeda), you still railed against it and wanted our troops to come home.

But if the people of Texas democratically determined that they no longer wanted to be ruled by Obama and the Democrat-controlled Congress and that this country was fundamentally different (per Obama's own stated desires) than the one they originally agreed to join, you'd be all for sending tanks into Houston, lobbing missles into Dallas and dropping JDAMs on San Antonio. No wonder you don't want our troops in Iraq...they're better needed here to kill rebellious Texans.

dnf777
12-11-2009, 05:27 AM
I thought you were a stickler for the facts, rather than political propaganda???
There were no WMDs, and a mounting body of evidence to prove that those making decisions KNEW that at the time, but manipulated and cherry picked intel to justify their war for whatever reasons. Saddam may have been a "meanie", and I'm not sad to see him go, but I am sad to see the once moral leader of the free world abandon it's policies in lieu of the Bush doctrine, rather than stick to what has worked and been respected for the past 200 years. More Iraqi civilians have died and been displaced under the Bush doctrine than under all the years Saddam ruled.

I won't even comment on the rest of the treasonous secessionist talk going on. I thought we were all proud Americans here, so I'll ignore that talk as disgruntled sophomoric behavior, that will fade once your guys win a few elections again.

Gerry Clinchy
12-11-2009, 05:31 AM
If you don't like our form of government, all you have to do is elect another reresentative to change the laws, if enough don't like it, the laws will be changed to suit your brand of politics.

Let's not forget that we don't always get what the candidate promises in his/her campaign;-)


The country is being run the way the majority voted it to be run, (was not that way with Bush as pres) with our method of democratic elections.

We elected all those guys, too ... so if they could run the govt counter to what our democratic election process should/would dictate, and what the electorate believed they would get, so can the guys we've got now.


And to think, I spent a year in Viet Nam to give you folks a right to talk treason like this crap I'm hering tonight. Bud

Anyone who has served commands my gratitude and respect ... but, yes, you did serve to preserve everyone's right to free speech. We've granted that to those who desecrate the flag and a host of other monstrous ideas, like the fact that California really still should belong to Mexico. There are plenty of uses (abuses?)of free speech that make us cringe.

Terry Britton
12-11-2009, 05:42 AM
[QUOTE]The War of Northern Agression itself addressed the right of secession in a pretty definitive manner by treating it as insurrection. We have a much ...........

Can you guys at least get the name of the war right?

Hew
12-11-2009, 06:16 AM
I thought you were a stickler for the facts, rather than political propaganda???
There were no WMDs, and a mounting body of evidence to prove that those making decisions KNEW that at the time, but manipulated and cherry picked intel to justify their war for whatever reasons. I wrote "perceived" specifically to blunt getting sidetracked by revisionist horsemanure like you just wrote. Saddam may have been a "meanie", and I'm not sad to see him go, but I am sad to see the once moral leader of the free world abandon it's policies in lieu of the Bush doctrine, rather than stick to what has worked and been respected for the past 200 years. More Iraqi civilians have died and been displaced under the Bush doctrine than under all the years Saddam ruled. You're something else, dude. The most apt description that you can come up with of a brutal dictator who killed nearly a million of his own citizens during his reign is "meanie." There aren't nearly enough rolly eye smiley thingamabobs available to heap the sufficient scorn that that statement truly deserves. And you follow that gem of an absurdity up by contending that Bush was even worse than Saddam (of course using an imaginary factoid that laughably equates temporary displacement to being graveyard dead and laughably pretends that 100,000 dead civilians during the Iraq war ((mostly killed by other Iraqis, btw)) is more than nearly a million killed during Saddam's tenure).

.................

YardleyLabs
12-11-2009, 07:36 AM
Interesting. You wanted no part of a preemptive war to remove a mad-man who was a perceived threat to our country (WMDs), and who threatened our access to the lifeblood of our country (oil), and who brutally reigned over 25 million of his own terrorized people. And then, even when that war turned into a war of retaliation against those who attacked our country (al Qaeda), you still railed against it and wanted our troops to come home.

But if the people of Texas democratically determined that they no longer wanted to be ruled by Obama and the Democrat-controlled Congress and that this country was fundamentally different (per Obama's own stated desires) than the one they originally agreed to join, you'd be all for sending tanks into Houston, lobbing missles into Dallas and dropping JDAMs on San Antonio. No wonder you don't want our troops in Iraq...they're better needed here to kill rebellious Texans.
I wanted nothing to do with our second invasion of Iraq because I do not believe that we as a nation have the right to dictate the governance of another country except under extraordinary conditions that were not present in Iraq, and I saw no evidence at the time or since that led me to believe that Iraq represented a significant threat of any kind to the US or our allies. I viewed then and still view our invasion of Iraq in 2003 as an unjustified act of aggression. FWIW, I did support our first invasion of Iraq and I supported our invasion of Afghanistan. I also supported our involvement in Bosnia and Kosuvo, and I completely opposed our engagements in Vietnam. Panama, and Grenada.

On the question of threatening access to oil, I do not believe that would justify war. The oil is theirs, not ours. If I need a loan from the bank to avoid disaster, and they refuse me, that does not give me the right to rob the bank to get the money. Likewise, I believe we have no more right to the natural resources of another country than they have to the resources of our country.

Al Qaeda had nothing to do with our invasion of Iraq. Unfortunately, by completely screwing up the management of the war, we created a new safe haven for terrorist operation. At that point, in fact, I supported continuation of our involvement as needed to try to mitigate the disaster created by our incompetence and aggression. I hope that the Iraqi people will actually end up better off in the future than they would have been had we left them alone. They certainly deserve some benefit from the 100,000+ deaths that happened because GWB and Cheney felt compelled to show the world that they had big b@lls..

With respect to your Texas example, I believe that the US is a single country and that any party that seeks to remove part of our country without the consent of the nation as a whole is waging a war that threatens our national sovereignty. The instigators deserve to be treated accordingly. I don't care if the situation is one of Mexico invading Texas to take it back, or a band of militia fanatics trying the same thing through insurrection. Both would become our nation's enemy. While we are not used to the idea for ourselves, most nations understand that wars of survival are fought on home grounds with devastating effect on civilians.

A legal move to split the country, in my opinion, would require approval through our legislative and legal processes. In fact, I suspect that it would require a Constitutional amendment (requiring approval of 3/4 of the states) since I see no legal basis for any part of our government to authorize segmentation of the country (the Constitution specifically prohibits dividing or combining states other than with the approval of the states themselves as well as by the federal government, and only then if they remain as states within the country.).

Pete
12-11-2009, 09:15 AM
If you don't like our form of government, all you have to do is elect another reresentative to change the laws, if enough don't like it, the laws will be changed to suit your brand of politics. The country is being run the way the majority voted it to be run, (was not that way with Bush as pres) with our method of democratic elections. And to think, I spent a year in Viet Nam to give you folks a right to talk treason like this crap I'm hering tonight. Bud

Our form of government gives Oklahoma the right to do what it did,, one of these days there might just be more forieners here to vote in worse things than socialism,,,and thats ok cause its the vote that matters and nothing else.:rolleyes:


Ask an old guy

Ask them what they think about this country,,, Ask anybody over 70
if this country is better now than back than ,,,they will look at you like your from outer space.
All this is crazyness if you think whats happening in this country is good for america,,, you have an incredably deep seated mental problem.

Can not you see a 180 shift in the american way of life... What the hell is wrong with you.
All I can say is liberals must believe in slavery

Some of the comments here made by posters are down right treasonist.

Voting has gone down the path as health care,,,you have no choice in the matter,, and its all crap


Pete

Goose
12-11-2009, 09:22 AM
We're going to have to set up some citizenship rules for the folks who want in to our new and excellent nation. There will be many seeking shelter from the long train of abuses. I'll have to think about that one but one thing's certain...if you want in you have to know who Betty Lou Thelma Liz is and you'll have to be able to sing Merle's song "Muskogee".

But what's all the stink about from you lefties? Treasonous? Traitorous? What are we talking about anyway? We're talkin' flyover country, man. Flyover country. We're just a bunch of hicks, hayseeds and bitter clingers. It's flyover country...not real country. Flyover. You can still have San Francisco and New York! We're talkin' flyover country, man.

Now we're gonna want all the money we contributed to social security, too. No greenbacks...gold or silver. Don't make us come up there and get it:)

We live in Cuba now.

Pete
12-11-2009, 11:28 AM
I wanted nothing to do with our second invasion of Iraq because I do not believe that we as a nation have the right to dictate the governance of another country except under extraordinary conditions that were not present in Iraq, and I saw no evidence at the time or since that led me to believe that Iraq represented a significant threat of any kind to the US or our allies

Amen to that Jeff
If people want to dress their woman looking like the KKK than thats their perogitive.
I watched a tribe from New guinny or somewhere like it on TV recently
The men just hunted and smoked weeds
The woman did all the hard labor ,lived with the live stock ,,did all the grunt work and if they screwed up ,,they were beaten by their husbands
wHEN INTERVIEWED BOTH MEN AND WOMAN SMILED AND LAUGHED ABOUT THIS BEHAVIOR,,,,
tHATS THE WAY THIS CULTURE WANTS TO LIVE,,,SO LEAVE THEM ALONE
OPPS caps locked bumped,,,,anyway should we barge in and arrest these guys because they violate our laws.
We need to keep our noses out of other countries business,,,,

Alot of our behavior does contribute to the trouble we are in. we have wove a nasty web and paralasis is setting in.
Pete

Steve Amrein
12-11-2009, 11:41 AM
We're going to have to set up some citizenship rules for the folks who want in to our new and excellent nation. There will be many seeking shelter from the long train of abuses. I'll have to think about that one but one thing's certain...if you want in you have to know who Betty Lou Thelma Liz is and you'll have to be able to sing Merle's song "Muskogee".

But what's all the stink about from you lefties? Treasonous? Traitorous? What are we talking about anyway? We're talkin' flyover country, man. Flyover country. We're just a bunch of hicks, hayseeds and bitter clingers. It's flyover country...not real country. Flyover. You can still have San Francisco and New York! We're talkin' flyover country, man.

Now we're gonna want all the money we contributed to social security, too. No greenbacks...gold or silver. Don't make us come up there and get it:)

We live in Cuba now.

I am thinking a bit more pro active. Maybe we can vote states out that dont wish to follow the constitution or obey our laws. Beside Sanfran and NY will be underwater soon if algore gets his prediction right.

dnf777
12-11-2009, 12:34 PM
.................

I haven't seen so much manure spewed since my dog ate our turkey carcass after Thanksgiving! Get some realistic numbers and cool down a bit, then we can talk. On second thought, don't bother. ;-)

dnf777
12-11-2009, 12:38 PM
We're going to have to set up some citizenship rules for the folks who want in to our new and excellent nation. There will be many seeking shelter from the long train of abuses. I'll have to think about that one but one thing's certain...if you want in you have to know who Betty Lou Thelma Liz is and you'll have to be able to sing Merle's song "Muskogee".

But what's all the stink about from you lefties? Treasonous? Traitorous? What are we talking about anyway? We're talkin' flyover country, man. Flyover country. We're just a bunch of hicks, hayseeds and bitter clingers. It's flyover country...not real country. Flyover. You can still have San Francisco and New York! We're talkin' flyover country, man.

Now we're gonna want all the money we contributed to social security, too. No greenbacks...gold or silver. Don't make us come up there and get it:)

We live in Cuba now.

Set the bottle down, and step away from the keyboard!
This has been good entertainment though! I just hate to see our great Country so disrespected by disgruntled hypocrits. I'm not sure if the disgruntled part comes from Nov '08, or 1865!!??

brandywinelabs
12-11-2009, 01:09 PM
Mannnnnn I tell you, there are a lot of you folks that appear to be so farrrrrrr right wing you would be better off going and trying another country for a while,.... If you don't like our form of government, all you have to do is elect another reresentative to change the laws, if enough don't like it, the laws will be changed to suit your brand of politics. The country is being run the way the majority voted it to be run, (was not that way with Bush as pres) with our method of democratic elections. And to think, I spent a year in Viet Nam to give you folks a right to talk treason like this crap I'm hering tonight. Bud

Whoa! Why should we try another country. It could not have been the "farrrrrrr right" that only voted for what OK did. Read the polls. These are things that the people want.

Re "The country is being run the way the majority voted"
Again thats not what the polls indicate. The majority was scammed in the last election. The Reed group and all his cronies are so in disfavor with their constituents and the country that they should STFU and listen.

Hew
12-11-2009, 05:39 PM
I wanted nothing to do with our second invasion of Iraq because I do not believe that we as a nation have the right to dictate the governance of another country....
But you're OK with us dictating to Texas how they govern themselves...even if you have to kill them to prove it.

Hew
12-11-2009, 05:46 PM
Get some realistic numbers and cool down a bit, then we can talk. On second thought, don't bother. ;-)
Oh, come now. In the past you've argued much more stupid stuff than 100,000 dead Iraqis under Bush is a larger quantity than a million Iraqis killed under Saddam. Don't let the immutable laws of mathmatics stop ya.

YardleyLabs
12-11-2009, 06:08 PM
But you're OK with us dictating to Texas how they govern themselves...even if you have to kill them to prove it.
I have no problem with the fact that, as a nation, we have laws and processes that determine how we govern ourselves and those laws apply everywhere equally -- even Texas. Had Texas chosen long ago to remain as an independent nation, I suspect that its history would have been very different and much less glorious. We will never know, however, because it did elect to become part of the nation and the nation voted to accept it. It's what we call a done deal.

Pete
12-11-2009, 07:50 PM
[QUOTE][I suspect that its history would have been very different and much less glorious. We will never know, however, because it did elect to become part of the nation and the nation voted to accept it. It's what we call a done deal./QUOTE]

Its very possable if Texas was its own sovern country we would be at the mercy of texas instead of the middle east

Pete

Gerry Clinchy
12-12-2009, 10:46 AM
Yardley

the 100,000+ deaths that happened because GWB and Cheney felt compelled to show the world that they had big b@lls..

Of course, we can't really know how many Iraqi civilians would have died during that same period if Sadam had remained in power. Undoubtedly, with his previous track record, there could have been quite a few.

YardleyLabs
12-12-2009, 11:36 AM
Yardley


Of course, we can't really know how many Iraqi civilians would have died during that same period if Sadam had remained in power. Undoubtedly, with his previous track record, there could have been quite a few.
Gerry,

I agree that one can never know with hypotheticals. However, in estimating the number of civilian deaths associated with the war, two basic methods were used that came up with relatively consistent answers: one based on the number of deaths from violence and one based on the increase in death rate in comparison with what existed in Iraq prior to the war. The 100,000+ number is from the latter method. That suggests that, for all his brutality, Saddam Hussein was not nearly as deadly as the violence that accompanied his removal. I think it is also fair to note, however, that whether or not we had invaded, Saddam would have been removed from power at some point either through natural death or violent removal. I suspect that much of the sectarian war we have seen might have happened at that time anyway.

The problem with our invasion of Iraq in 2003 was that we were attempting "regime change" in a country that had a functioning, albeit tyrannical government, but had no viable opposition within the country. That is why the popular support predicted by the administration never materialized. Our invasion destroyed that basic infrastructure of governance -- the army, the police, and all public services. We did not simply depose Saddam, we deposed all who worked for the government leaving no one behind to help run the country. That was not a military mistake. Our military performed outstandingly well. It was a political mistake that originated at the top with Bush, Cheney, and the neo-con contingent in the White House that was blinded by hubris and their perceived need for an opportunity to demonstrate America's strength.

dnf777
12-12-2009, 02:58 PM
Gerry,



The problem with our invasion of Iraq in 2003 was that we were attempting "regime change" in a country that had a functioning, albeit tyrannical government, but had no viable opposition within the country. That is why the popular support predicted by the administration never materialized. Our invasion destroyed that basic infrastructure of governance -- the army, the police, and all public services. We did not simply depose Saddam, we deposed all who worked for the government leaving no one behind to help run the country. That was not a military mistake. Our military performed outstandingly well. It was a political mistake that originated at the top with Bush, Cheney, and the neo-con contingent in the White House that was blinded by hubris and their perceived need for an opportunity to demonstrate America's strength.

Very well said, succinctly. I think our middle-estern expirement showed that in some areas, it's better to have an iron-fisted ruler, than none at all!

If Mr. Cheney had followed his OWN ADVICE regarding the toppling of the Saddam regime following his first bosse's pullout, we could have avoided this quagmire. (his word, not mine) It's interesting to note also, that NOTHING changed from when he made those prophetic comments, until he disregarded them and created this mess.

zeus3925
12-12-2009, 05:44 PM
Hate to rain on your parade. Oklahoma. When they had OK high school seniors try the citizenship test, only 2.8% passed.

Regards.

Hew
12-12-2009, 06:11 PM
That suggests that, for all his brutality, Saddam Hussein was not nearly as deadly as the violence that accompanied his removal. Sorry to beat a dead horse, but your continual hand wringing about Iraq juxtaposed against your willingness to kill Texans should they decide this country no longer represents their values and they want out is mind boggling.

-Iraq can have a murderous dictator and we're not justified to remove him.
- Texas can have a duly elected governor who has not harmed a soul and the United States should depose him, violently if necessary, if his state votes to seceed.

- Iraq can pose a threat to the United States and try to assassinate a US president and we're wrong to attack them.
- Texas can peacefully say, "drop our subscription, we're done" and its bombs away on them.

- We horribly violated Iraq's sovereign territory.
- Texas only has as much sovereignty as we tell them they can have and we'll violate it as we see fit.

- Killing destabilizing tyrants: bad
- Killing Texans who peacefully want to seceed: that's OK

As I've read your responses about defending your position on upholding the Union even if it means using the military on our own people, I kept thinking, "hmmmm, here's one of the most big-hearted (and bleeding hearted), dovish folks I've ever quasi "known" and he's saying that he'd support killing little children in Texas if that's what it took to keep them in the United States. That can't be. He must have backed himself into a rhetorical corner he can't get out from." But no, now you've got me convinced. Now I just think, "Holy sh!t, what a freakin' statist!"

I'll try not to bring this subject up again.

.............

Hunchaser
12-12-2009, 06:14 PM
Glad to see that you guys are fighting back. Canada died in 1974 when the Liberals took over the government. English Canadians have been pushed around ever since. Now we finally have a conservative government but the damage done by the Liberals is everlasting.
In Britian some areas of the country have traffic signs in various languages. My buddy over there says it simply doesn't work.
Keep fighting and don't let your guard down.

YardleyLabs
12-12-2009, 06:40 PM
Sorry to beat a dead horse, but your continual hand wringing about Iraq juxtaposed against your willingness to kill Texans should they decide this country no longer represents their values and they want out is mind boggling.

-Iraq can have a murderous dictator and we're not justified to remove him.
- Texas can have a duly elected governor who has not harmed a soul and the United States should depose him, violently if necessary, if his state votes to seceed.

- Iraq can pose a threat to the United States and try to assassinate a US president and we're wrong to attack them.
- Texas can peacefully say, "drop our subscription, we're done" and its bombs away on them.

- We horribly violated Iraq's sovereign territory.
- Texas only has as much sovereignty as we tell them they can have and we'll violate it as we see fit.

- Killing destabilizing tyrants: bad
- Killing Texans who peacefully want to seceed: that's OK

As I've read your responses about defending your position on upholding the Union even if it means using the military on our own people, I kept thinking, "hmmmm, here's one of the most big-hearted (and bleeding hearted), dovish folks I've ever quasi "known" and he's saying that he'd support killing little children in Texas if that's what it took to keep them in the United States. That can't be. He must have backed himself into a rhetorical corner he can't get out from." But no, now you've got me convinced. Now I just think, "Holy sh!t, what a freakin' statist!"

I'll try not to bring this subject up again.
HEW, I thought I was pretty clear. Iraq is not our country. It is a separate country. Texas is an integral part of our country. It is NOT its own country. An attack on the government of Iraq is NOT an attack on the United States. An attack that seeks to separate Texas from the United States IS an attack on the United States. I believe that the government of the United States of America is obligated to defend the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the country.

Under what circumstances do you believe it would be appropriate for Canada to invade the United States and replace its government? Under what circumstances would it be appropriate for Canada to invade Quebec and replace its government? I believe the answers to those two questions are different and that the government of Canada has much more inherent discretion over what it may properly choose to do in its own country. People seem to assume that my opposition the second war in Iraq and even my opposition to the war in Vietnam evidences some form of pacifism on my part. I believe that in almost every instance diplomacy is preferable to war. However, I am NOT a pacifist by any stretch of the imagination.

dnf777
12-12-2009, 07:07 PM
.............
As I've read your responses about defending your position on upholding the Union even if it means using the military on our own people, I kept thinking, "hmmmm, here's one of the most big-hearted (and bleeding hearted), dovish folks I've ever quasi "known" and he's saying that he'd support killing little children in Texas if that's what it took to keep them in the United States. That can't be. He must have backed himself into a rhetorical corner he can't get out from." But no, now you've got me convinced. Now I just think, "Holy sh!t, what a freakin' statist!"


Hew,
Really, now. Jeff "supporting killing little children"???

Listen.....do you hear it?.....that sound. It's everyone's eyes rolling in their heads at your ludicrous twisting of words!!

And please, don't dig up twisted quotes and arguments on this one....just let it go. We'll all forget it......as soon as someone else says something MORE bizarre and crazy! (hopefully it won't be me) ;-)

Rodney Crim
12-12-2009, 07:25 PM
Hate to rain on your parade. Oklahoma. When they had OK high school seniors try the citizenship test, only 2.8% passed.

Regards.

Where did you get your data and what was the rest of the US?


Regards

YardleyLabs
12-12-2009, 07:49 PM
Where did you get your data and what was the rest of the US?


Regards
http://www.ocpathink.org/publications/perspective-archives/september-2009-volume-16-number-9/?module=perspective&id=2321 (http://www.ocpathink.org/publications/perspective-archives/september-2009-volume-16-number-9/?module=perspective&id=2321)

This was based on a simplified version of the test generally used to assess the knowledge of applicants for citizenship. It is not routinely administered to high school students in the US.

EDIT: You can check on how well you might do on a citizenship test at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13442226/

dnf777
12-12-2009, 08:10 PM
Whew! The only one I missed was 'which is the correct form to apply for citizenship in the US?' Since I was born here, I never paid much attention to that! I don't feel bad, I'll bet NONE of the politicians we've elected know such a form even exists! A more appropriate question might be, "what does WOP stand for?"

I looked into the article regarding the 2.8% of Oklahoma seniors passing. That was somewhat questionable, and unscientific at least. Still scary though, that ANY number less than 100% is found!!!

Hew
12-12-2009, 11:57 PM
HEW, I thought I was pretty clear. Iraq is not our country. It is a separate country. Texas is an integral part of our country. It is NOT its own country. Right, it's its own state. And when the country was founded states were considered sovereign entities loosely confederated under one flag for each other's mutual benefit. Washington, Jefferson and most importantly, Madison, were staunch state rights proponents. That the federal govt. has gradually usurped and perverted the rights of states to the point that statists among us believe that it is acceptable to kill the citizens of any wayward state when necessary is probably one of the reasons that a state like Texas might want to eventually seceed in the first place. An attack on the government of Iraq is NOT an attack on the United States. An attack that seeks to separate Texas from the United States IS an attack on the United States. Texans voting to seceed is not an "attack" upon anybody (except perhaps statist's beliefs). That would be a peaceful expression of their desire to no longer participate in the union. You appear to be the one advocating an attack. I believe that the government of the United States of America is obligated to defend the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the country. Really? So you're in favor of rounding up the 12 to 20 million illegals and their children and deporting them immediately as well as denying them medical care, education for their kids and all other social services? You agree that the United States should never be bound by any decision made by the United Nations? I'm guessing that your concern for our sovereignty has peculiar starting and stopping points.
.......................

Hew
12-13-2009, 12:06 AM
Whew! The only one I missed was 'which is the correct form to apply for citizenship in the US?'
Nice job, Cliffy. Everyone has been nervously pacing about waiting for you to post your test score. Now we can all sleep peacefullytonight; being fully affirmed in our opinion that you're so darn smart.

JDogger
12-13-2009, 12:40 AM
I remember a few years ago, Texas had a tourism promotional ad that claimed 'Texas, it's like a whole other country.'
Well jeeze, no kiddin'.
We used to joke that if Oklahoma lauched a similar campaign. it would be titled,
'Oklahoma, the countries largest unfenced penitentiary.'

JD

If God meant for Texans to ski, he would have given them mountains.

Que no?

YardleyLabs
12-13-2009, 06:12 AM
Right, it's its own state. And when the country was founded states were considered sovereign entities loosely confederated under one flag for each other's mutual benefit. Washington, Jefferson and most importantly, Madison, were staunch state rights proponents. That the federal govt. has gradually usurped and perverted the rights of states to the point that statists among us believe that it is acceptable to kill the citizens of any wayward state when necessary is probably one of the reasons that a state like Texas might want to eventually seceed in the first place.
....
Texans voting to seceed is not an "attack" upon anybody (except perhaps statist's beliefs). That would be a peaceful expression of their desire to no longer participate in the union. You appear to be the one advocating an attack.
...
Really? So you're in favor of rounding up the 12 to 20 million illegals and their children and deporting them immediately as well as denying them medical care, education for their kids and all other social services? You agree that the United States should never be bound by any decision made by the United Nations? I'm guessing that your concern for our sovereignty has peculiar starting and stopping points.

The original "loose confederation" of the states was adopted in the articles of confederation in 1777. Of note is the fact that even then the articles were entitled "Articles of confederation and perpetual union". They also prohibited two or more sates from entering into treaties with each other without consent of the others. The second clause of those articles stated:
"Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled."

Thus, even at that time, no provision was made for dissolution. However, this first constitution was viewed as too loose and it was replaced with the adoption of the US Constitution in 1787. Missing from that new Constitution was any language similar to that included in the 1777 articles with their guarantee of individual sovereignty. It also included article 8 stating, among other things, that Congress has the power to "To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions". So I guess the power grab that you are criticizing began quite early in our history.:rolleyes:

If Texans voted to secede and acted on that vote by seeking to sever ties with the United States, that would, in my opinion, constitute insurrection. It would also directly violate the 14th amendment prohibition on any state from making or enforcing "any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States". Removing those citizens from citizenship is a pretty significant abridgment. Of course, the extent of any military action in the event of insurrection would depend primarily on the insurrectionists.

By contrast, illegal immigrants are not insurrectionists and are not seeking to attack or break apart our country. They are criminals and should be treated as such under the laws of our country. The fact that illegal immigrants find it easy to enter the country and, once here, find it easy to find employment and prosper reflects, I believe, a relative indifference to immigration laws among our population generally and among our business in particular. As long as immigrants are working hard and providing essential services, it does not appear that anyone is particularly interested in their legal status as other than an abstract issue. If they were, there would be more calls to police reporting illegals, there would be fewer people willing to emply them, and the local police would be eager to arrest them for prosecution and deportation. Maybe there would be more popular support for the laws if the laws were different.

EDIT: BTW, if by "statist" you mean a patriot citizen of the United States of America, you are correct.I have lived in Tennessee, New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, and I have traveled through most of the other states of our country, but I have only pledged allegiance to the United States of America.

ducknwork
12-13-2009, 07:53 AM
As long as immigrants are working hard and providing essential services, it does not appear that anyone is particularly interested in their legal status as other than an abstract issue. If they were, there would be more calls to police reporting illegals, there would be fewer people willing to emply them, and the local police would be eager to arrest them for prosecution and deportation. Maybe there would be more popular support for the laws if the laws were different.

If the government were to 'man up' and do something about them when they actually were reported, perhaps people would start doing the things you mentioned. I don't think it's that people don't care if they are here or not, it's just that the government doesn't do a good job of enforcing the laws we have. People know it is almost useless to report an illegal.

If your house caught on fire and you knew the fire dept wouldn't come when you called, would you waste them time dialing 911, or would you grab a garden hose and do your best?

YardleyLabs
12-13-2009, 08:07 AM
If the government were to 'man up' and do something about them when they actually were reported, perhaps people would start doing the things you mentioned. I don't think it's that people don't care if they are here or not, it's just that the government doesn't do a good job of enforcing the laws we have. People know it is almost useless to report an illegal.

If your house caught on fire and you knew the fire dept wouldn't come when you called, would you waste them time dialing 911, or would you grab a garden hose and do your best?
I think the "government" will do something only when people demand it. It's sort of like speeding. When the police begin to enforce laws strictly, the first to complain are the local citizenry. In one local township near here, the police were explicitly directed not to ticket anyone driving less than 11 miles over the speed limit. In my town, the chief of police was forced out of office for ticketing people driving 35 mph in a 25 mph zone. By contrast, if you are caught stealing a car -- even for a little "joy ride" -- you can expect to do time if you are an adult and to do time or go into the army if you are a juvenile. If you are in an accident while intoxicated, you will absolutely go to jail with no chance for a deal. If you are an illegal immigrant working for a landscaping company, neither you nor your employer needs to worry about the local police at all. They are not interested. I believe our police reflect the priorities of our population very accurately. Of course, in PA only 4.1% of the population is foreign born and only 8.4% speak languages other than english at home (NC is similar). The comparable numbers in Texas are 13.9% foreign born and 31.2% speaking languages other than english at home.

Hew
12-13-2009, 08:23 AM
Missing from that new Constitution was any language similar to that included in the 1777 articles with their guarantee of individual sovereignty. It also included article 8 stating, among other things, that Congress has the power to "To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions". So I guess the power grab that you are criticizing began quite early in our history.:rolleyes: For starters, the word "insurrection" as used then, and even now, doesn't have any applicablility whatsoever to a situation whereby a duly elected and representative state government decides to leave the union. If insurrection = session, then square = round. Secondly, if you're trying to make the case that the current Federal government has the same power over the states that it had in 1790 then you're tilting at windmills. Early in our country at least two state legislatures refused to participate in a national embargo without punishment from the Fed. Heck, in the War of 1812, with British troops on our soil, two state governments refused their militias' service, in effect saying, "not our problem." Again, without ramifications from the Fed.

If Texans voted to secede and acted on that vote by seeking to sever ties with the United States, that would, in my opinion, constitute insurrection. It would also directly violate the 14th amendment prohibition on any state from making or enforcing "any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States". Removing those citizens from citizenship is a pretty significant abridgment. Of course, the extent of any military action in the event of insurrection would depend primarily on the insurrectionists. A lucid argument up until the last sentence. The last sentence says, in effect, that an abused wife makes the determination on whether or not her husband beats her. In any confrontation between the US and Texas, the US govt. holds all of the cards on determining whether the confrontation becomes violent or not. So no, Texas wouldn't "deserve" whatever bombs you'd like to drop on her.

By contrast, illegal immigrants are not insurrectionists and are not seeking to attack or break apart our country. They are criminals and should be treated as such under the laws of our country. The fact that illegal immigrants find it easy to enter the country and, once here, find it easy to find employment and prosper reflects, I believe, a relative indifference to immigration laws among our population generally and among our business in particular. As long as immigrants are working hard and providing essential services, it does not appear that anyone is particularly interested in their legal status as other than an abstract issue. If they were, there would be more calls to police reporting illegals, there would be fewer people willing to emply them, and the local police would be eager to arrest them for prosecution and deportation. Maybe there would be more popular support for the laws if the laws were different. As I suspected, you have peculiar starting and stopping points for your concerns about America protecting her sovereignty.

EDIT: BTW, if by "statist" you mean a patriot citizen of the United States of America, you are correct.I have lived in Tennessee, New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, and I have traveled through most of the other states of our country, but I have only pledged allegiance to the United States of America. No, by statist I mean:

Statism (or etatism) is a term that may refer to either one or both of the following:

An economic position that includes a major state (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_state) role in directing the economy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy) or economic activity, both directly through state-owned enterprises (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-owned_enterprises) and other types of machinery of government or indirectly through the state-directed economic planning of the overall economy.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statism#cite_note-0)[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statism#cite_note-1)
A political viewpoint (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_philosophy) "that sovereignty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereignty) is vested not in the people (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_sovereignty) but in the national state, and that all individuals and associations exist only to enhance the power, the prestige, and the well-being of the state. The fascist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism) concept of statism, which as seen as synonymous with the concept of nation, and corporatism repudiates individualism and exalts the nation as an organic body headed by the Supreme Leader and nurtured by unity, force, and discipline."[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statism#cite_note-2)

.............................

dnf777
12-13-2009, 08:23 AM
Sorry Hew, I wasn't trying to impress anyone. My sincere apology for rubbing your nose in what should have been an easy pass.

If you look at the test, you will see it is basically an insult to the intelligence of any American taking it. Of course, it wasn't desingned for Americans to be taking in the first place. I do appreciate your unprovoked attack. What would this forum be without them? BTW, do you know what the correct form is for applying for naturalization?

Enjoy your sandwich, I have to go to work.

dnf777
12-13-2009, 08:37 AM
I take comfort in realizing that the overwhelming majority of Texans, including many of my family and friends, are proud Americans, many of whom are serving in the armed forces, scoff as such ridiculous, treasonous talk as secession! As always, (we even have a few here in Pa) there are a handful of nut-jobs who tend to excite the likes of Hew, and talk of such bravado and thump their empty chests with big talk. Usually they end up in some remote area of their state, living with teenage girls as wives, hiding behind the first amendment, while dismissing all the others!
I think they crave the attention such talk garners for them. If they could ask Robert Lee, or Jefferson Davis, they would get set straight in a hurry.

Art Geddes
12-13-2009, 09:27 AM
Hate to rain on your parade. Oklahoma. When they had OK high school seniors try the citizenship test, only 2.8% passed.

Regards.

Most notable about this figure is the oklahoma dept of education as long been a stronghold of the democrat party under the leadershiop of Sandy Garrett for almost the last 20 years. The biggest thing we hear is how they always need more money. Can't help but think the democrats don't want informed voters

Art.

dback
12-13-2009, 12:13 PM
Sorry Hew, I wasn't trying to impress anyone. My sincere apology for rubbing your nose in what should have been an easy pass.

LMAO...Cliffy, you remind me of a chihuahua nipping at the heels of the participants of a 'Big Dog' fight.



I have to go to work.

Please do. This is an interesting conversation interrupted by your need to maintain (approaching) 9 (often) irrelevant posts a day.

This conversation began with "Lets *PLAY* what if..."
Jeff...I am under the impression (possibly mistaken) that you believe American troops would (in fact) take up arms against a 'secessionist' Texas. If so, this is where I believe your Ivy League, (at least fairly privileged) Union Carbide, overseas youth background separates you from many of us.

A few reasons why I would disagree.
*I have literally hundreds of law enforcement and military friends and without exception each (that I questioned) has responded 'no' to that very question. (Yes...I know and they know it's treason to refuse your superior's order) Just say'in, none of them would actually take up arms against countrymen for this reason.

*I believe a majority of the military is made up of 'conservative' types and would be sympathetic to Texas and would refuse to participate.

*Most (if not all) of 'fly over' America would be sympathetic to Texas. (Not saying they would want Texas to leave)

*I don't have the figures to back it up, but I would imagine that most of the military is made up of 'fly over' Americans (certainly not LA, San Fran, NYC types) and would not follow an order to attack Texas.

*Most importantly,the public at large would be so enraged with any POTUS and the party that supported such an action that you would be correct...bloodshed would be significant. (Mostly Ivy Leaguers)

So, while your case law may or may not have legs, reality, I believe, is a whole different animal. I would have to agree with HEW that the 'kinks' would be worked out before all that transpired.

BTW...before anyone starts the 'treasonous talk' BS...none of this is going to happen, I'm not suggesting it, Texas hasn't requested it.

dnf777
12-13-2009, 12:27 PM
Yeah, well Dback, when the conversation turns to fellow RTFers "killing children", that is so absurd I would think even you would be turned off. Also by the unprovoked attacks which some have become famous.

You can check for yourself who brought up Texas secession, yet again on this forum. I just am sick of hearing this dead thread over again. Spending a large chunk of my life there, I know this talk is a bunch of disgruntled children who do NOT represent the views of the good people of Texas. (or any other state)

So long as people stay off the icy roads, I may not have to work today. Sorry if a few facts and civil debate gets under your skin. But as long as these juvenile attacks pesist, I figure you don't have any thing substantive to counter with.

If you weren't responding to me, sorry. I don't know who cliffy is, but it sounded like you were talking to me. Was that just more childish name-calling?

Have a nice day...

dback
12-13-2009, 01:25 PM
Yeah, well Dback, when the conversation turns to fellow RTFers "killing children", that is so absurd I would think even you would be turned off.
Simple...I recognized it as a "hypothetical"


Also by the unprovoked attacks which some have become famous.
So, you to find his 'unprovoked attacks' on my sweet, elderly coach distasteful also? :-)


You can check for yourself who brought up Texas secession, yet again on this forum. I just am sick of hearing this dead thread over again.
HINT....don't read or respond to it!!!


So long as people stay off the icy roads, I may not have to work today.
Those pesky 'working class' thugs screwing up your day doc?


Sorry if a few facts and civil debate gets under your skin. But as long as these juvenile attacks pesist, I figure you don't have any thing substantive to counter with.
You're so cute when you're angry :-) :-)


If you weren't responding to me, sorry.
Oh, let's be very clear....I was responding to you :-)


I don't know who cliffy is, but it sounded like you were talking to me. Was that just more childish name-calling?
Cliffy: Must have been oak, that's one of your heavier grains...Yeah, but as any lumberjack will tell you though, it's not the toughest one to cut through...No, no. (turns to Fraiser)Hey Doc, what do you think the toughest thing to cut through is?
Fraiser: Your unending bull! :-) :-)

Have a nice day...

dnf777
12-13-2009, 03:11 PM
Simple...I recognized it as a "hypothetical"


So, you to find his 'unprovoked attacks' on my sweet, elderly coach distasteful also? :-)


HINT....don't read or respond to it!!!


Those pesky 'working class' thugs screwing up your day doc?


You're so cute when you're angry :-) :-)


Oh, let's be very clear....I was responding to you :-)


Cliffy: Must have been oak, that's one of your heavier grains...Yeah, but as any lumberjack will tell you though, it's not the toughest one to cut through...No, no. (turns to Fraiser)Hey Doc, what do you think the toughest thing to cut through is?
Fraiser: Your unending bull! :-) :-)

Have a nice day...

And you call ME a nippy chihuahua??

And FYI, most MVAs around here are people coming from bars, not jobs! But I take care of them all just the same. The ER is a place to help people, not judge them.

I had a young man come in an ER in Louisiana one night, reaking of beer, blood, and vomit. He was cursing and swinging at our staff. He was intubated and shipped to Lake Charles. About 3 months later the same guy, (unrecognizable) came in to the ER with a cane, neatly groomed, and apologized profusely for what he had done. There was no doubt he was sincere, and explained what all he was doing to turn his life around. I pray he is still on the wagon, and has found his way. He forever changed my quickness to judge my fellow man.

So no, dback, those "pesky working class" as you put it, do NOT screw up my day. They make my day. It's why I'm here.

sweepthelegnate
12-13-2009, 05:31 PM
If God meant for Texans to ski, he would have given them mountains.

Que no?

Interestingly enough - the Republic of Texas was much bigger than the State of Texas. If you check out a map of Texas in 1846 you'll see that parts of Colorado, Wyoming, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Kansas were once a part of Texas. I imagine there might be some decent skiing there ;)

Goose
12-14-2009, 11:52 AM
And we're going to change the way our children are educated in the new country. No more leftist teachers in the classrooms. No more school books like "Rethinking Mathematics: Teaching Social Justice By The Numbers". You can keep that trash in the old country. And no more clowns like Kevin Jennings passing out 'fisting kits' to our children. You can keep the kits in the old country.

Our kids will actually be required to learn in school and we'll make it fun, too. Like rifle and pistol marksmanship classes at an early age 'cause I'm sure we'll have to defend the borders against potential attacks from the north! And marshmallow shooters for the really young 'uns!:)

We'll teach the kids to skin a buck and run a trot-line and we'll have victory gardens behind each school. No more school indoctrination. School will be fun and productive again.

We live in Cuba now.

YardleyLabs
12-14-2009, 12:02 PM
And we're going to change the way our children are educated in the new country. No more leftist teachers in the classrooms. No more school books like "Rethinking Mathematics: Teaching Social Justice By The Numbers". You can keep that trash in the old country. And no more clowns like Kevin Jennings passing out 'fisting kits' to our children. You can keep the kits in the old country.

Our kids will actually be required to learn in school and we'll make it fun, too. Like rifle and pistol marksmanship classes at an early age 'cause I'm sure we'll have to defend the borders against potential attacks from the north! And marshmallow shooters for the really young 'uns!:)

We'll teach the kids to skin a buck and run a trot-line and we'll have victory gardens behind each school. No more school indoctrination. School will be fun and productive again.

We live in Cuba now.
Just think -- Visit Oklahoma ... a Christian version of Saudi Arabia.

dback
12-14-2009, 12:11 PM
Just think -- Visit Oklahoma ... a Christian version of Saudi Arabia.

Oil and all......who said Jeff had no sense of humor? ;-)

JDogger
12-14-2009, 12:16 PM
Interestingly enough - the Republic of Texas was much bigger than the State of Texas. If you check out a map of Texas in 1846 you'll see that parts of Colorado, Wyoming, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Kansas were once a part of Texas. I imagine there might be some decent skiing there ;)

I believe you are referring to Aztlan. Beware the Reconquistadors.;)

JD

achiro
12-14-2009, 12:31 PM
Wow. How about I just jump right into the stereotypes with this one...
Some of you folks need to just go **** yourselves!

Steve Amrein
12-14-2009, 12:39 PM
While we are playing the "if" game if Texas was it own country. How would they handle all the folks that wanted to move there. What would happen to all the states that had people that work for a living and did not want to give most of the fruits of labor to the re distributors.

I have always said at some point we as a country will reach a tipping point that people will have had enough. Something has to give and we can not continue to print money.

dnf777
12-14-2009, 02:30 PM
And we're going to change the way our children are educated in the new country. No more leftist teachers in the classrooms. No more school books like "Rethinking Mathematics: Teaching Social Justice By The Numbers". You can keep that trash in the old country. And no more clowns like Kevin Jennings passing out 'fisting kits' to our children. You can keep the kits in the old country.

Our kids will actually be required to learn in school and we'll make it fun, too. Like rifle and pistol marksmanship classes at an early age 'cause I'm sure we'll have to defend the borders against potential attacks from the north! And marshmallow shooters for the really young 'uns!:)

We'll teach the kids to skin a buck and run a trot-line and we'll have victory gardens behind each school. No more school indoctrination. School will be fun and productive again.

We live in Cuba now.

Heck, you won't need ANY math or science books....just Bibles. Your new gov't can have a good ol' book-burnin'! As for the rest, if it's not in a Hank Jr. song, I guess it just ain't 'pertent 'nuff to teach!

BTW, since we're playing this "what if" game.....What if the majority of Texans are PROUD AMERICANS and DON'T want to leave the USA??? (which I believe to be the case, back here in reality-land)

ducknwork
12-14-2009, 07:52 PM
BTW, since we're playing this "what if" game.....What if the majority of Texans are PROUD AMERICANS and DON'T want to leave the USA??? (which I believe to be the case, back here in reality-land)

One more 'what if'...

What if what the 'proud americans' were proud to be and stand for is no longer what is and what is being stood for?

Stirrin' regards,

dnf777
12-15-2009, 01:41 AM
One more 'what if'...

What if what the 'proud americans' were proud to be and stand for is no longer what is and what is being stood for?

Stirrin' regards,

I think there's ways of protesting short of destroying what is the USA. What W did was in no way what the USA stood for either, but nobody secededed. Although, we nearly ceased financially to exits under his big government.

Goose
12-15-2009, 09:27 AM
While we are playing the "if" game if Texas was it own country. How would they handle all the folks that wanted to move there. What would happen to all the states that had people that work for a living and did not want to give most of the fruits of labor to the re distributors.

I have always said at some point we as a country will reach a tipping point that people will have had enough. Something has to give and we can not continue to print money.

All are welcome in our new and excellent country (except a few on this board:)) We're a big and open tent to those freedom loving men and women seeking relief from the yoke of tyranny and jack-booted thuggery.

The new life will be a wonderful life. No social security, no FED, no Dear Leader and no IRS. No hoax and chains, no cap and trade, no government mandated healthcare and no trial lawyers.

And if you've been forced to contribute money into social security in the old country don't worry. Once things settle down we'll be sending up a delegation to meet with old country leaders to demand payment of all social security deposits and we won't take no for an answer. It's our money no theirs.

We live in Cuba now.

Henry V
12-15-2009, 09:42 AM
What if OK only received $1 back for every federal tax dollar instead of the the $1.39 that they typically receive? and they are only 15th on the dependency list. Heck of a deal!
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/266.html

dnf777
12-15-2009, 09:54 AM
"The new life will be a wonderful life. No social security, no FED, no Dear Leader and no IRS. No hoax and chains, no cap and trade, no government mandated healthcare and no trial lawyers."

To borrow a quote from Rodney Dangerfield, "And you can call it FANTASYLAND!!"

But there's some living there already...

ducknwork
12-15-2009, 11:37 AM
And if you've been forced to contribute money into social security in the old country don't worry. Once things settle down we'll be sending up a delegation to meet with old country leaders to demand payment of all social security deposits and we won't take no for an answer. It's our money no theirs.



Just cut out the middle man and go straight to China to ask for your money back.

YardleyLabs
12-15-2009, 12:30 PM
....

And if you've been forced to contribute money into social security in the old country don't worry. Once things settle down we'll be sending up a delegation to meet with old country leaders to demand payment of all social security deposits and we won't take no for an answer. It's our money no theirs.

....
That's what my employees from India used to tell me. They would work in the US for about six years, pay $30-40,000 in Social Security taxes, and then return to India where they would never see their money again. I simply replied that we appreciated their generous contributions and hoped they would send their friends to contribute more.

Franco
12-15-2009, 12:41 PM
What if OK only received $1 back for every federal tax dollar instead of the the $1.39 that they typically receive? and they are only 15th on the dependency list. Heck of a deal!
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/266.html

OK has more than enough Oil reserves to not need any Federal assistance.

I applaud them for not wanting to go down with the ship they didn't help build!

paul young
12-15-2009, 04:00 PM
it would be interesting to see who would be willing to buy that oil if payment in gold was a requirement like you guys are suggesting. this ain't 1880.......

i wonder how much Texas would charge oklahoma to use their seaports and refineries? where would Oklahoma get the gold?

but it's an entertaining thread. fantasies usually are.-Paul

Pete
12-15-2009, 04:07 PM
wonder how much Texas would charge oklahoma to use their seaports and refineries? where would Oklahoma get the gold?

I'm sure the state of Idaho would gladly trade gold,silver,gems and minerals for OK oil :cool:

And what does Massachucettes have for sale or trade besides crooked politicians or more paper work

Pete

Franco
12-15-2009, 04:21 PM
Hey, Louisiana will refine OK's oil if Texas is too busy. Plus, we will give OK credit. La.' natural gas reserves are in the billions of cubic feet. Since the Socialist states will be going green, we can sell it to China for 10x's what we are selling it for now!

paul young
12-15-2009, 05:45 PM
i'm not sure, Pete. you'd have to ask someone from Massachusetts; i'm from Connecticut.

and what if China just decided to take it, Franco? or Mexico, for that matter? you gonna mobilize the shrimp boat navy?

and don't discount natural disasters; no FEMA, no relief fund money, no utilities crews from the rest of the country, steel to rebuld the refineries......

let's keep this one going; this is fun!-Paul

dnf777
12-15-2009, 05:51 PM
Hey, I don't like any secessionist talk...but if you're talkin' about taking away crawfish boils and Etouffe....this is going too far!!!!!

Just curious...since we're playing along with this.....WHO amongst the Texas "secessionists" would be willing to put W in charge of your new country???? Honestly. Really. He has executive experience. Look at his resume. (where's that little emoticon that rolls on the floor and laughs his arse off?)

Tim West
12-15-2009, 06:02 PM
Wow, just got on this after a friend told me about it.

Don't forget that Oklahoma also has U.S. Senator James Inhoffe, who as we speak is traveling to the Global Warming Summit to speak the truth once again. China knows it, Russia knows it. CO2 emmissions are a bunch of crap. One volcano erupting will erase all of the ten years of cap and trade BS measures.

O'Bama and all the rest of the Socialists in the world are taking us down a road that will surely make SW States think about seceding. It's called Cap and Trade and if passes you can kiss our Southern Oil Producing States Good bye. We'll be broke.

Steve Amrein
12-15-2009, 06:15 PM
Hey, I don't like any secessionist talk...but if you're talkin' about taking away crawfish boils and Etouffe....this is going too far!!!!!

Just curious...since we're playing along with this.....WHO amongst the Texas "secessionists" would be willing to put W in charge of your new country???? Honestly. Really. He has executive experience. Look at his resume. (where's that little emoticon that rolls on the floor and laughs his arse off?)


W could not get the votes.

Pete
12-15-2009, 08:35 PM
All this talk about seccesion is mostly frustration the the feds wont put their foot down,,,
I am almost positive this country can get back on top if we turned the clock back 50 years.
We can and do produce everything we need and what other parts of the world need,,,, And we have energy and the potential for more excess energy than you can possibly immagine
I sit over a massive natural gas reserve that was supposed to be tapped last spring,,,,havent heard hide nor hair from anyone,,,,,we have a new nuclear plant that is supposed to come soon..
The waco environmentalist cause the problems.
They are the :sky is falling society" a bunch of weak minded weebles

Pete

dnf777
12-15-2009, 09:17 PM
All this talk about seccesion is mostly frustration the the feds wont put their foot down,,,
I am almost positive this country can get back on top if we turned the clock back 50 years.
We can and do produce everything we need and what other parts of the world need,,,, And we have energy and the potential for more excess energy than you can possibly immagine
I sit over a massive natural gas reserve that was supposed to be tapped last spring,,,,havent heard hide nor hair from anyone,,,,,we have a new nuclear plant that is supposed to come soon..
The waco environmentalist cause the problems.
They are the :sky is falling society" a bunch of weak minded weebles

Pete

I was speaking with a gentleman who drills and harvests natural gas in this area about investment opportunities. He gave me an honest assessment of the natural gas market, as he sees it. There will be a lot of drilling and establishing infrastructure (pump houses, collection vessels, pipelines, etc) and prices will remain flat or possible rise slightly as investors recoup the start-up costs. Then, there will be so much natural gas being produced, prices will not be able to maintain, and will fall.

I don't believe everything I hear of course, but this man could have gotten money out of me, and instead, we parted ways as friends, after what I feel was honest advice, from someone who's been highly successful in the energy business for a long time.

If you doubt this, think about the pictures you see of all these new mega-drilling rigs in the gulf and elsewhere. They're producing OIL, but often you see massive flares burning off to the side. This is millions of CF of natural gas, that is often found with oil, that isn't worth them harvesting, so it's burned off!!! And to think many of us pay a gas bill each month.

Henry V
12-15-2009, 10:50 PM
Yes, domestic oil clearly is the future........
http://www.theoildrum.com/files/US%20Oil%20Production_0.png

achiro
12-15-2009, 11:55 PM
Yes, domestic oil clearly is the future........
http://www.theoildrum.com/files/US%20Oil%20Production_0.png
Someone please tell me that the dude from Minnesota didn't just try and talk Oil.:confused:

achiro
12-15-2009, 11:59 PM
If you doubt this, think about the pictures you see of all these new mega-drilling rigs in the gulf and elsewhere. They're producing OIL, but often you see massive flares burning off to the side. This is millions of CF of natural gas, that is often found with oil, that isn't worth them harvesting, so it's burned off!!! And to think many of us pay a gas bill each month.
PICTURES?!?!?!?! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Someone please tell me the dude from PA didn't just try and talk gas.:confused:

BonMallari
12-16-2009, 07:17 AM
all this talk about seceeding is all a bunch of hot air...NO STATE could exist on its own, up to and including my home state of Texas...nice to think you can but it aint going to happen ,wayyyyy too much infrastructure to be lost, mail, monetary system, defense..still want to go on your own...didnt think so

Franco
12-16-2009, 07:38 AM
all this talk about seceeding is all a bunch of hot air...NO STATE could exist on its own, up to and including my home state of Texas...nice to think you can but it aint going to happen ,wayyyyy too much infrastructure to be lost, mail, monetary system, defense..still want to go on your own...didnt think so

You are selling your state short. All those things you've listed could be better handled by your state than the current Feds.

Your state is being invaded now and what are the Feds doing about it? Nothing!

Franco
12-16-2009, 07:44 AM
and what if China just decided to take it, Franco? or Mexico, for that matter? you gonna mobilize the shrimp boat navy?

and don't discount natural disasters; no FEMA, no relief fund money, no utilities crews from the rest of the country, steel to rebuld the refineries......



FEMA is a useless government agency. Having watched them down here for the past 5 years it is obvious that FEMA is nothing more than a money pitt.

Invasion? Never happen! We can afford our own militia and we have a popluation that is armed. Our current and near past Federal leadership(last 20 years) has led this country to the brink of financial disaster and they keep heading in the same direction.

Hew
12-16-2009, 07:58 AM
all this talk about seceeding is all a bunch of hot air...NO STATE could exist on its own, up to and including my home state of Texas...
I disagree. Of all the states, Texas is probably the best positioned economically and geographically to sucessfully seceed. Their economy is larger than most European countries. California is also well-positioned to seceed and has something like the 8th largest economy in the entire world. Really, any non land-locked state could seceed and still survive.

paul young
12-16-2009, 09:05 AM
keep the hot air coming! it's cold up here!-Paul

road kill
12-16-2009, 09:07 AM
keep the hot air coming! it's cold up here!-Paul

Paul, where is CT exactly?

Is that just ti the left of MASS??:D


Hoax & Chains regards!!

rk

paul young
12-16-2009, 09:12 AM
FEMA is a useless government agency. Having watched them down here for the past 5 years it is obvious that FEMA is nothing more than a money pitt.

Invasion? Never happen! We can afford our own militia and we have a popluation that is armed. Our current and near past Federal leadership(last 20 years) has led this country to the brink of financial disaster and they keep heading in the same direction.
__________________
The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government. Thomas Jefferson

yeah, it's obvious you guys have completely recovered from Katrina, "pulling yourselves up by your own bootstraps". 5 years and you still aren't finished. you guys could have refused FEMA funding any time you wanted to.

watching your "militia" fight the Chinese army and navy would be a hoot....but i'm glad it will never happen. stick to shooting ducks, Booty-they don't shoot back!-Paul

paul young
12-16-2009, 09:24 AM
glad you can read a map, Stan.

yeah, that's where it is. a little south of it, too.

did you know we have a Republican Governor whom i voted for, by the way?

i drove thru Wisconsin when i went to Canada duck hunting a few years back. beautiful country and nice folks. pretty much like anywhere i have traveled in our great nation.

i'm sorry all you guys are so bent out of shape about whatyou believe that we've become. it's so much better than any other country that i have seen that i just don't understand your discontent.

just be patient. if enough people see it your way we'll begin to see some changes after the elections this year and in 2012. that's the way it works. been that way for almost 240 years. and it does work.-Paul

Franco
12-16-2009, 09:27 AM
yeah, it's obvious you guys have completely recovered from Katrina, "pulling yourselves up by your own bootstraps". 5 years and you still aren't finished. you guys could have refused FEMA funding any time you wanted to.

watching your "militia" fight the Chinese army and navy would be a hoot....but i'm glad it will never happen. stick to shooting ducks, Booty-they don't shoot back!-Paul

The FEMA money is going into Orleans Parish, a parish run by mostly Democrats. That's why the city is still rebuilding. Democrats can't do anything for themselves, they need the FEDs to do the job!

Chinese Army? What the heck are you smoking up there?;-)

Our biggest threat to our security are the Obamas, Pelosis, Reids, Dodds, Franks, Shumers of the world.

paul young
12-16-2009, 09:27 AM
disagree. Of all the states, Texas is probably the best positioned economically and geographically to sucessfully seceed. Their economy is larger than most European countries. California is also well-positioned to seceed and has something like the 8th largest economy in the entire world. Really, any non land-locked state could seceed and still survive.
__________________
Enjoy every sandwich.

there's a world of difference between surviving and FLOURISHING.....Paul

Franco
12-16-2009, 09:31 AM
there's a world of difference between surviving and FLOURISHING.....Paul



This country is FLOURISHING ? Better get your head out of the sand, we are on the verge of a financial meltdown!

Those that want us dead and destroyed don't have to fire a shot because our so called leadership in DC is doing it all on thier own!

Goose
12-16-2009, 09:41 AM
Never been much of a bald eagle guy and you really don't see too many of them around here anyway. The new country will definately need a national symbol once we've seceded. Something we can all be proud of and something that demands respect.

In Texas we love our little nine-banded armadillos but Oklahoma's bison and Louisiana's black bear are more in line with what a national symbol should be. Both are big, independent, fierce and demand respect. I could be happy with either but I've always thought a big bear would be a fantastic national symbol so he gets my vote.

And the little Mexican Freetail Bat gets my vote for national mammal, the Brown Pelican for our national bird and that little Mountain Boomer dude would make a cool national reptile:)

I've always loved that coiled snake on the flag with "Don't Tread On Me" in big bold letters underneath. Might need to change it to "Don't Tread On Me, Commies" and have a bunch of these flags displayed as a warning along our borders with the old country.

We live in Cuba now.

Hew
12-16-2009, 10:00 AM
there's a world of difference between surviving and FLOURISHING.....Paul
China's flourishing. Would you want to live there? There's a lot of folks who'd rather survive free than flourish as constrained minions.

paul young
12-16-2009, 11:13 AM
HEW,

ONLY YOU could suggest i would want to live in China...

i'm sure you are barely getting by.

i'd be willing to bet your disposable income is several times what mine is. keep bit#^in' and moanin' all the way to the bank.

my needs are pretty simple. i'm content with my lifestyle.

it would be interesting to know what all of the malcontents on this thread do for work. are any of you unemployed?-Paul

Hoosier
12-16-2009, 03:14 PM
I'll be moving to Gooses new country, and I'll be bringing my guns to help protect the new republic.

Hoosier
12-16-2009, 03:16 PM
Maybe we could just kick all the blue states out, and take our own country back.

Hew
12-16-2009, 04:20 PM
HEW,

ONLY YOU could suggest i would want to live in China...

i'm sure you are barely getting by.

i'd be willing to bet your disposable income is several times what mine is. keep bit#^in' and moanin' all the way to the bank.

my needs are pretty simple. i'm content with my lifestyle.

it would be interesting to know what all of the malcontents on this thread do for work. are any of you unemployed?-Paul
I asked if you'd like to live in China; not suggested that you go live in China. And the reason I asked is because you seemed to be trying to make the case that propserity was more important than freedom. In the above post you seem to be making the opposite argument. Pick a side, will ya?

road kill
12-16-2009, 04:37 PM
I asked if you'd like to live in China; not suggested that you go live in China. And the reason I asked is because you seemed to be trying to make the case that propserity was more important than freedom. In the above post you seem to be making the opposite argument. Pick a side, will ya?

Actually, we could be living in China....soon....if they call their paper on us!!

I mean they hold our mortgage.

Maybe RP or Yardley could check that for me.

Fellas, who holds the paper on all the money we have been borrowing??

Hoax & Chains regards!!

dnf777
12-16-2009, 04:55 PM
PICTURES?!?!?!?! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Someone please tell me the dude from PA didn't just try and talk gas.:confused:

I have three producing oil wells on my property. How many do you have?
You might want to read the history of oil drilling. You will see Titusville, Pa is where it all started. The town next to me is Oil City. We currently sit on one of the largest untapped shale beds of oil and natural gas in the United States, if not the world. It is where Quaker State, Pennzoil, and near where Standard Oil got started. (which was later broken up into "smaller" companies like Exxon and Mobil)

When it comes to hot air, I admit you got us beat. ;-)

badbullgator
12-16-2009, 05:01 PM
I have three producing oil wells on my property. How many do you have?
You might want to read the history of oil drilling. You will see Titusville, Pa is where it all started. The town next to me is Oil City. We currently sit on one of the largest untapped shale beds of oil and natural gas in the United States, if not the world. It is where Quaker State, Pennzoil, and near where Standard Oil got started. (which was later broken up into "smaller" companies like Exxon and Mobil)

When it comes to hot air, I admit you got us beat. ;-)

OUCH!
Damn Russ, I hate to say it, but I guess he told you.....

Henry V
12-16-2009, 10:56 PM
Someone please tell me that the dude from Minnesota didn't just try and talk Oil.:confused:
Dude, US oil production peaked in the 70's. There is nowhere to go but down. Disagree? - then please present some facts to back up your opinion.

achiro
12-16-2009, 11:55 PM
I have three producing oil wells on my property. How many do you have?
You might want to read the history of oil drilling. You will see Titusville, Pa is where it all started. The town next to me is Oil City. We currently sit on one of the largest untapped shale beds of oil and natural gas in the United States, if not the world. It is where Quaker State, Pennzoil, and near where Standard Oil got started. (which was later broken up into "smaller" companies like Exxon and Mobil)

When it comes to hot air, I admit you got us beat. ;-)
But we have to look at PICTURES of the rigs. :rolleyes:
It was a joke man, lighten up.

achiro
12-17-2009, 12:02 AM
Dude, US oil production peaked in the 70's. There is nowhere to go but down. Disagree? - then please present some facts to back up your opinion.
My hope is that you do realize that production and reserves are two different things but based on your comments I am not hopeful.

JDogger
12-17-2009, 12:55 AM
Wow. How about I just jump right into the stereotypes with this one...
Some of you folks need to just go **** yourselves!

It was a joke man, lighten up, ...

JD

http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll176/JDoggger/LightenupFrancis.jpg

dnf777
12-17-2009, 05:45 AM
But we have to look at PICTURES of the rigs. :rolleyes:
It was a joke man, lighten up.

Not everyone lives where there are mega rigs drilling. Especially miles offshore, so pictures are a little more convenient that leasing a helicopter or driving to west Texas, eh? As for the hot air comment, you were the one who brought up gas, weren't you? Maybe we can all lighten up...

blue flame regards....

(that was a joke, too)

achiro
12-17-2009, 09:44 AM
It was a joke man, lighten up, ...

JD

http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll176/JDoggger/LightenupFrancis.jpg
I wasn't talking to you.;-)