Go be commies in Canada, Europe, Mexico or who the fuck cares where.
They've used the media, deep state and academia to indoctrinate millions of our youths with cultural Marxism, yet most of the country is still conservative at its heart.
AMERICA STAYS AMERICA.
The Marxists can go move to one of the dozens of other "socialist paradises" out there.
I don’t even want them to go be commies there, because there is only one kind of commie I like, and that’s a good commie, and as we all know, a good commie.......
Yes, we are past the point of no return for the Republic in its current form. We've been flooding the country - legally - for decades with people who will never become Americans, let alone Republicans. We have shrugged our shoulders at those who come here illegally seizing government benefits and citizenship. We've allowed the welfare state to bloat well past the breaking point of any reasonable society.
AND the time in the last 50 years when our side had the absolute most power, rather than fixing these problems, we started two completely pointless wars.
Luckily, the parts of the country that we would need to shear off to preserve our liberties and the free market are relatively small. We have to do it. There's no other outcome besides being overwhelmed.
I mostly agree, but here's the devil's advocate argument: allowing a state to leave would fundamentally weaken the country as a whole. It would have widespread economic repercussions. It would upset the delicate balance that currently exists between political parties. If Texas were to leave the Union, no Republican would ever see the Presidency again. Texas, by itself, would be weak militarily, and open to invasion. Potentially by Mexico, if Mexico could convince a few South American countries to get on board. Which means we have war, here, on this side of the Atlantic, right on the United States' border.
Those are the arguments that could potentially be used against allowing Texas, in particular, to separate. I don't necessarily agree with all of them, but the people making them would be the same people advocating for the whole country to wear muzzles and become shut-ins because of the common cold, and there's a whole lot of people who'd by it.
I disagree entirely. My argument is that Texas is the spiritual and cultural descendant of old America, and why should you leave your own home? We should focus on kicking NY, CA, and IL from the US.
I believe that Jefferson (and the rest of the Founding Fathers) believed not only that it should be possible, but that it was our DUTY to do it if the government failed to represent the people.
Texas is the only state that can legally leave the Union if it decides to. If I remember correctly from studying Texas history, there are provisions to allow it since they where the only state that used to be it's own Republic.
or this
“[T]o secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it . . .”
— Declaration of Independence
A friend of mine that I graduated with who has accepted the brainwashing and Kool-Aid and deems himself "further left than the Democrats" (because according to his revisionist ideas, they are barely leftist) brought this up the other night.
He suggested that the House should double its size to better represent the People. I agreed that the Representation Power of the people was severely diminished and even gave him the numbers I had from the top of my head (690,000 constituents per Rep circa 2010) and that it would be even higher after the Census and redistricting for 2020 were finalized. I suggested however, that the Federal Govt return powers back to the state.
I guess this was too much for his little brainwashed mind to focus on because he told me he didn't see how that would be any easier than doubling the size of the House.
So somehow giving power back to the states that was stolen in Reconstruction and the New Deal that is covered in the 10th Amendment is harder than adding 400 new Reps into Congress, needing new districts, a new place to house the House and the double of House expenditures? These people perceive reality falsely.
I can think of one reason on solid principle that anyone can give. At the end of the day, Lincoln probably declared secession illegal for the reason of keeping the Union for the sake of the Union (and because they were morally in the right). My problem is that making secession illegal has got to be illegal.
It cannot be any simpler put than in the Declaration: men can find it necessary to dissolve the political bonds to their governing power when the government acts tyrannically. A new State can then rightfully be formed. How, then, could the Federal Gov ever restrict us from doing so when that is among man's rights in the Declaration? There is nothing in that regard that should stop us from listing our reasons and dissolving our political bonds to the US.
My one real reason would be the preservation of the Union serves to continue the social experiment that is America. Should we leave, our secession would say that as it was founded, the United States is over. The country failed to be ruled by The People and for The People, otherwise we would have stayed and resolved our conflict through the legislative system. So we should make a valiant effort to take back our country, and if we deem we cannot, then secede. No rational person would destroy an experiment in an attempt to keep it going. Neither should we let ourselves be subjected to tyranny in the hope to regain control.
God bless America. And should He remove His blessing, God bless Texas.
Well, the original Republic of Texas bordered what is now South Dakota.
The original Republic of Texas was all of Texas, the eastern third of New Mexico, the Oklahoma panhandle, the easternmost quarter of Colorado, the ~ westernmost eight slice of Kansas, ~ the westernmost sixteenth slice of Nebraska, and the ~ easternmost sixteenth slice of Wyoming.
If the Republic of Texas was reconstituted in its original area...South Dakota would have no problem bordering Texas...
Yeah, fuck this "break up the country" horseshit.
Go be commies in Canada, Europe, Mexico or who the fuck cares where.
They've used the media, deep state and academia to indoctrinate millions of our youths with cultural Marxism, yet most of the country is still conservative at its heart.
AMERICA STAYS AMERICA.
The Marxists can go move to one of the dozens of other "socialist paradises" out there.
I don’t even want them to go be commies there, because there is only one kind of commie I like, and that’s a good commie, and as we all know, a good commie.......
Has kicked his clogs off!
We have a clogging problem ...
Yo fuck that racist commercial
Replace the question mark with an exclamation point and you got it. 😁
No need for that question round ‘chere
Free helo rides
Oh damn lol...too soon? Nah.
"Nothing is fucked dude...Nothing is fucked? The god damn plane has crashed into the mountain!"
I like you.
requests a last cigarette because even tho they are against smoking they are also hypocrites.
True and sad.
Well, they haven't done well keeping the commies at bay so far. They appear to be taking over Texas too.
Yes, we are past the point of no return for the Republic in its current form. We've been flooding the country - legally - for decades with people who will never become Americans, let alone Republicans. We have shrugged our shoulders at those who come here illegally seizing government benefits and citizenship. We've allowed the welfare state to bloat well past the breaking point of any reasonable society.
AND the time in the last 50 years when our side had the absolute most power, rather than fixing these problems, we started two completely pointless wars.
Luckily, the parts of the country that we would need to shear off to preserve our liberties and the free market are relatively small. We have to do it. There's no other outcome besides being overwhelmed.
This we you speak of, what do you call yourselves? Globalists? Satanists? Communists?
Demographics are Destiny.
I mostly agree, but here's the devil's advocate argument: allowing a state to leave would fundamentally weaken the country as a whole. It would have widespread economic repercussions. It would upset the delicate balance that currently exists between political parties. If Texas were to leave the Union, no Republican would ever see the Presidency again. Texas, by itself, would be weak militarily, and open to invasion. Potentially by Mexico, if Mexico could convince a few South American countries to get on board. Which means we have war, here, on this side of the Atlantic, right on the United States' border.
Those are the arguments that could potentially be used against allowing Texas, in particular, to separate. I don't necessarily agree with all of them, but the people making them would be the same people advocating for the whole country to wear muzzles and become shut-ins because of the common cold, and there's a whole lot of people who'd by it.
I agree 100%. Like I said, I was just playing devil's advocate.
I wish I could buy you a cup of covfefe, fren! It's like reading my own thoughts! I'm sure we would have some great discussions!
I disagree entirely. My argument is that Texas is the spiritual and cultural descendant of old America, and why should you leave your own home? We should focus on kicking NY, CA, and IL from the US.
not if only NYC ,Boston,LA,SF, DC and Chicago are kicked out. Then the country woulld prosper
"Texas, by itself, would be weak militarily, and open to invasion."
You know we made it 9+ years the first time fighting a war against outsiders didn't end til after the civil war, right?
It's been 150 years since then. Texas would have some catching up to do in developing military weaponry.
Thats because it was mostly East Tennesseans doing the fighting. Austin, Houston... my hero, David Crockett. TN has your back
If that happened, Texas would have a bunch of other states' citizens wanting to join. There is no way Texas would be alone.
I believe that Jefferson (and the rest of the Founding Fathers) believed not only that it should be possible, but that it was our DUTY to do it if the government failed to represent the people.
Texas is the only state that can legally leave the Union if it decides to. If I remember correctly from studying Texas history, there are provisions to allow it since they where the only state that used to be it's own Republic.
You are right!
or this “[T]o secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it . . .” — Declaration of Independence
A friend of mine that I graduated with who has accepted the brainwashing and Kool-Aid and deems himself "further left than the Democrats" (because according to his revisionist ideas, they are barely leftist) brought this up the other night.
He suggested that the House should double its size to better represent the People. I agreed that the Representation Power of the people was severely diminished and even gave him the numbers I had from the top of my head (690,000 constituents per Rep circa 2010) and that it would be even higher after the Census and redistricting for 2020 were finalized. I suggested however, that the Federal Govt return powers back to the state.
I guess this was too much for his little brainwashed mind to focus on because he told me he didn't see how that would be any easier than doubling the size of the House.
So somehow giving power back to the states that was stolen in Reconstruction and the New Deal that is covered in the 10th Amendment is harder than adding 400 new Reps into Congress, needing new districts, a new place to house the House and the double of House expenditures? These people perceive reality falsely.
I can think of one reason on solid principle that anyone can give. At the end of the day, Lincoln probably declared secession illegal for the reason of keeping the Union for the sake of the Union (and because they were morally in the right). My problem is that making secession illegal has got to be illegal.
It cannot be any simpler put than in the Declaration: men can find it necessary to dissolve the political bonds to their governing power when the government acts tyrannically. A new State can then rightfully be formed. How, then, could the Federal Gov ever restrict us from doing so when that is among man's rights in the Declaration? There is nothing in that regard that should stop us from listing our reasons and dissolving our political bonds to the US.
My one real reason would be the preservation of the Union serves to continue the social experiment that is America. Should we leave, our secession would say that as it was founded, the United States is over. The country failed to be ruled by The People and for The People, otherwise we would have stayed and resolved our conflict through the legislative system. So we should make a valiant effort to take back our country, and if we deem we cannot, then secede. No rational person would destroy an experiment in an attempt to keep it going. Neither should we let ourselves be subjected to tyranny in the hope to regain control.
God bless America. And should He remove His blessing, God bless Texas.
The only reason I can come up with Texas not leaving the Union is that South Dakota is not bordering Texas so they can go together.
Well, the original Republic of Texas bordered what is now South Dakota.
The original Republic of Texas was all of Texas, the eastern third of New Mexico, the Oklahoma panhandle, the easternmost quarter of Colorado, the ~ westernmost eight slice of Kansas, ~ the westernmost sixteenth slice of Nebraska, and the ~ easternmost sixteenth slice of Wyoming.
If the Republic of Texas was reconstituted in its original area...South Dakota would have no problem bordering Texas...
I like it. Count me in.
If thats the wall of xeir choosing
We just need more helicopters and pilots.