Don't Mess With Texas ... Get Rid Of It

[jlbyrd]

I thought this was an interesting article..

NPR.org, April 28, 2009 · During the campaign, President Obama talked a good game about bipartisanship. Now he has the perfect opportunity to achieve something that people on both sides of the aisle desperately want: kicking Texas out of the union.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry recently implied that Texas might need to leave the United States if the mean old federal government doesn't stop doing things like sending stimulus money and slightly raising the top marginal tax rates. These things being obvious markers of impending fascism (unlike, say, unapologetically institutionalizing a global torture regime), Perry thinks it's time to go. Unsurprisingly, a majority of Texas Republicans approved of these remarks.

Texas asking Blue America for a divorce is like a woman asking her boyfriend if he'd like to sit around all day drinking Miller and watching football, or like the Patriots offering Tom Brady to the Redskins for a 19th-round draft pick. Befuddled liberals can only shake their heads in gratified amazement while they pop the cap on their first beer, settle into the sofa and watch Brady pilot the 'Skins to the Super Bowl.

The transition should be peaceful — no need for 600,000 Americans to die like the last time a state tried to leave the union. These kinds of things are best handled with negotiations — just ask the Czechs and the Slovaks, who dissolved Czechoslovakia like an old married couple who remain great friends but just don't want to sleep together anymore.

First, Texas should be given the option of taking neighboring Oklahoma, Alabama and Louisiana with them. These states are reliably deep red, and are also three of the biggest tax drains in the country, raking in federal dollars while kvetching about Obama's tyranny. In return, the U.S. gets to keep the liberal oasis of Austin, like the little swath of Azerbaijan surrounded by Armenia and Iran.

Second, Texas Rangers outfielder Josh Hamilton should immediately be seized by the Washington Nationals as part of the deal. The Washington Wizards should also demand star San Antonio point guard Tony Parker, who is French and therefore probably unwelcome in what is likely to be the violently xenophobic Republic of Texas. The U.S. would, of course, have to cough up some native Texans, like Houston Astros meatballer Brandon Backe.

Finally, the Republic of Texas should arrange a population transfer with the United States, like how Turkey and Greece exchanged all their misplaced Turks and Greeks after the first World War — only this time without the forced marches and famine. Basically, we get all the New Yorker-reading lefties, and Texas can have all the crazies — millenarians with basement stockpiles of semiautomatics, true believers who blockade abortion clinics, paranoiacs who think The Gays are coming to get them, and anyone who believes that evolution is "just a theory."

Getting rid of Texas is a once-a-century opportunity for America's new leader. Texas Republicans have spoken. The only question is, "Are you listening President Obama?"

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103543574

[Neil D]

Ooooboy! Now here is something that should have all the conservatives in an uproar....

I too suggested that Texas was thinking of suceding [sp] from the Union. But when it was suggested that the sucedation [sp] was a legal right, I suggested that it was not a legal thing...and gave the Civil War as evidence that states can not sucede from the Union without a fight...

However, during my research in all of this, I did see that Texas has the right to split into 5 different states...If Texas did this, that would mean that there would be 10 redneck senators [8 news ones] and instead of the presumed 60 votes to achieve that 2/3 majority, there would need to be 66.....

And Shane, ....your take on all this is........?

[carolaa]

Perhaps the author of the article doesn't realize that Tony Parker's wife - the actress Eva Longoria - is a native of Corpus Christi. Besides, we aren't going to give away all our assets just to be able to secede. No, like Moses said to Pharoah, we'll take all the men, women, children, and animals with us - not one hoof will be traded.

[Dr. Shane]

The article is taken from NPR.org. What do we expect from NPR? The article says more about NPR than it does about Texas.

[Neil D]

The article is taken from NPR.org. What do we expect from NPR? The article says more about NPR than it does about Texas.

Ooooh, now Shane....it's a spoof...There are other news storys that have put out something similar....Let's face it, your govener is inciting the secession spirit...Now, how many of your fellow Texans that are thinking that....that is something different.....

[Dr. Shane]

Yes, there are other news stories for other bias sources of news. Our governor said "we have a good union". "We have a good union" doesn't mean "let's secede." Some liberal, hate-mongers that make a living publishing liberal forms of media may not grasp that but any ninth grader in an English literature class can explain it.

[Neil D]

Yes, it's one thing to say for the moment, " We have a good Union", and it is quite another to spend 15 minutes out of a 20 minute speach on "Don't mess with Texas" and "If Washington doesn't hear our voice, there are other ways to get thier attention." and then talk about how Texas was concidered an independant country at one time.

But yes, you are correct...He did say that we have a good union....

[Dr. Shane]

Texas was an independent country. The word "considered" doesn't belong in that sentence. Texas was not purchased or conquered by the United States. It was a sovereign nation from 1836 to 1845. It had been part of Mexico but when the Mexican constitution was scraped Texas lost its representation in Mexico's government and decided to break away. This started the Texas Revolution. As a sovereign nation Texas requested to join the US and was rejected the first time. The next time they were accepted and the United States annexed the Republic of Texas. The Republic of Texas came with not only what is Texas today but also with parts of New Mexico, Oklahoma, Kansas, Colorado, and Wyoming. These parts of these other states were given to the US in a agreement that transferred Texas' debts to the US.

[jlbyrd]

The article is taken from NPR.org. What do we expect from NPR? The article says more about NPR than it does about Texas.

This was an opinion piece by the writer, not an official NPR news story.

[Dr. Shane]

NPR decides which opinion pieces get published and which do not. Unless they have an opposing view published next to it, the piece reflects on the new organization. And this piece certainly says more about NPR than it does about Texas. NPR is pretty liberal and Texas is pretty conservative. I wouldn't expect Texas to get much good press from NPR.

[jlbyrd]

Unless they have an opposing view published next to it, the piece reflects on the new organization.

As a matter of fact, they did have an opposing view published right next to it.

In Defense of the Lone Star State

... I think that says more about NPR than anything else.

[Dr. Shane]

Is that going to be posted too or is there a reason for not posting that?

[jlbyrd]

I provided the link.

[Dr. Shane]

Read the story and you will see it does not address Governor Rick Perry's comments. There is no defense of Prick Perry. The original article takes Rick Perry out of context and the defense of Texas article fails to address that. Typical NPR stuff. At least they tried to look balanced. I think we owe a lot to FOXNews. Because of FOXNews more and more news organizations are trying to get more balanced. I will give NPR credit for trying but it was a pretty lame rebuttal.

[jlbyrd]

I find it amazing that anyone can believe FOX news is 'fair and balanced' ... if NPR sways slightly towards liberalism, FOX news anchors are wearing elephant masks.

But, this should be a thread of its own, and I'm sure it would be the entire board against me.

[Bravus]

Erm, not the *entire* board.

Shane, might want to do a quick proofread of your post above, mate: I'm amazed the swear-filter missed it, actually.

[phkrause]

I saw that too, but figure it was just a miss type.

pk

[Woody]

Erm, not the *entire* board.

Well .... some of the board might stand up for Fox as being fair and balanced.

[Bravus]

jlbyrd was saying the entire board would claim that Fox was fair and balanced...

[Woody]

jlbyrd was saying the entire board would claim that Fox was fair and balanced...

Ahhh. Good man. I like that opinion. Wish it were true. But there are SOME here that oppose Fox.

[Planey]

But there are SOME here that oppose Fox.

There are some here who can see Fox for what it really is.

Graeme

[Dr. Shane]

FOXNews has done a great service to the news industry by tapping a market that was not being serviced by the liberal-leaning mainstream media. Many of these mainstream outlets have now moved closer to reporting the news from an objective view since FOXNews started broadcasting. MSNBC, however, is moving further to the liberal slant. They may be trying to pick up a market they believe is not being serviced by the mainstream.

[jlbyrd]

A prime example of how unbalanced FOX is:

[Dr. Shane]

That is a compilation, mostly of commentary programs. It demonstrates nothing. The same could be done of any news network to show just about anything. All they did was take selective clips from mostly new commentators (not journalists or new anchors) and link them together.

FOXNews claims to be fair in balanced in that they give both sides of the story. It is rather easy to take news clips from only one side, link them together and say "look how one-sided they are" but it is rather disingenuous too.

[bonnie]

A prime example of how unbalanced FOX is:

">