posted
The "below the fold' feature article (headlined in traditional WSJ typeface) appearing in this past Monday's Wall Street Journal should be of interest to Mr. Smith and likely others:
In the real world, Texas remains very much a part of the United States.
But in the world of fiction, several authors have released books in the past year depicting the Lone Star State as a breakaway republic rebelling against shenanigans in Washington.
It's the start of a literary subgenre: secessionist fantasy.
."The Secession of Texas" by Darrell Maloney of San Antonio envisions an independent Texas with its own border patrol, guarding against people trying to sneak into the country illegally—from Oklahoma.
"Lone Star Daybreak" by Erik L. Larson of Houston tells the story of recruits in the Texas Defense Force, a militia that protects the separatist state from Yankee armies. "Yellow Rose of Texas" by Dennis Snyder describes a U.S. saddled with $22 trillion in debt, a defanged military and a leftist president who promises to remove religion from public life, prompting an armed and economically vibrant Texas to declare that it has had enough.
Next up; a TV series patterned after the successful (why I know not other than to say I watch it) NBC "Revolution"?
Posts: 9980 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hold on to your Confederate money, it will be valuable again.
The only thing wrong with the picture in "The Secession of Texas" is that Oklahoma might want to join in.
The discription of the situation in "Lone Star Daybreak" sounds way too close to the fast approaching reality.
Some people have jokingly said that California would seceede and become the "People's Republic of Kalifornia". The question becomes, how much of the rest of the country is saying, "Please, please, go ahead."
Posts: 2810 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
First, Texas would not secede from the USA. We would resign our membership in the failed union, but would probably adopt the US Constitution. It is currently not being used by anyone.
Second, we already have the Texas Rangers that could easily take the FBI's place, with Chuck Norris as its head.
Third, border patrol... Ted Nugent.
Fourth, We have LOTS of oil. We would not need an income tax. We would put an excise tax on our oil and natural gas exports.
Fifth, we already have a world-wide recognized Flag.
Sixth, "he needed shooting, your honor" would be an acceptable defense against a liberal or an illegal alien.
Posts: 1418 | From: Houston, Republic of Texas | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Would this mean a Sunset re-route over Raton, connecting with the Eagle at Hope?
Posts: 1572 | From: St. Paul, MN | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Texas would build the "Texas Triangle" Houston - Dallas - Ft. Worth - San Antonio - Houston using an environmental analysis that considers people the most important part of the equation rather than some critter no one ever heard of before. Using that method the alignment would be settled within one year of the decision to build the system and construction would start within six months of the alignment being settled, and people be riding trains before the first round of lawsuits were settled in Kalifornia.
Yes, Texans will ride trains. Look at what has been done in Dallas and is being done in Houston. Texans will say, let's don't use our oil running up and down the roads where there are practical alternatives, after all, petroleum product export and processing are a major source of hard currency, with hard currency being gold, yen, or renmenbi, dollars and euros not acceptable.
Posts: 2810 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike Smith: First, Texas would not secede from the USA. We would resign our membership in the failed union,
Mike,
This reminds me of the way things were stated in Singapore. I worked there for four months, but it was not supposed to be that long, so I never had a work visa, which meant that I had to leave every few weeks. The easiest and cheapest thing to do was to ride a train up into Malaysia. When the Brits left and the Malay Federation was formed Singapore was supposed to be part of it and apparently was for a while.
In the Singapore version of history, Singapore resigned from the Malay Federation. In the Malaysian version of history, Singapore was expelled from the Malay Federation.
They chose to disagree on almost everything else as well. In fact, according to Malaysia, the Malaysian Railway owned the track, land under it and the railway station in Singapore. According to Singapore they only had an easement to operate and maintain the railway and operate and maintain the station, but no absolute right to anything otherwise, not even to develop any additional usages for the station building and site.
Posts: 2810 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Expelled from or resigned, either one works for Texas. Our State and the other States that would join us can get back to the prosperity that USA used to have, before the federal government double-downed on their failed War on Poverty in their absurd attempt to get more dependent democrat voters.
Posts: 1418 | From: Houston, Republic of Texas | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
It would work for the rest of us, too. Without Texas and some other states (South Carolina, Mississippi, maybe Arizona), impeding progress in Congress, the USA could have high speed rail, cradle -to - grave health care, green technology so lesss dependence on foreign (read Texas) oil. Meanwhile the New Confederacy can have its Southern Baptist theocracy and its no - Government - regulated industries. (How's that no - zoning laws workin' fer ya, Texas?) This is laid out in an excellent book called "Better Off Without 'Em", by Chuck Thompson. http://www.amazon.com/Better-Off-Without-Manifesto-Secession/dp/1451616651/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1369968071&sr=1-1&keywords=better+off+without+em The book's only flaw is that it advocates the USA keeping Texas and letting the other Southern States go, for among other reasons that an independent Texas would expand and invade other states and/or Mexico. I say Southern secession won't be worth it without getting rid of Texas!
Posts: 510 | From: Richmond VA USA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
If Texas goes, there might be a "Berlin Airlift" to Austin to get the people who "need shooting" out.
Would Houston be renamed "Norris" or "Nugent"? Ol' Sam was a Democrat who refused to swear loyalty to the Confederacy when Texas seceded the first time, and was removed from office.
Posts: 1572 | From: St. Paul, MN | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
There should be a grace period of five or ten years - in which people can move to the side of the border they will be most comfortable on. Yes, the USA will get a lot of poor people, but it will also get a lot of smart people. Cities like Asheville, Atlanta, Austin,and Charlotte, will empty out, and the South will be left with not enough people smart enough to hack our systems or anything of a technological nature.
Posts: 510 | From: Richmond VA USA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I do agree with the grace period concept. However, I seriously doubt that there will be any real brain drain out of the south. Might even go the other way. As to those people that think they are so smart that they know how the rest of us should think and act, don't let the door bang your butt on your way out. You are free to impose your arrogant "know it all" isms elsewhere.
I have heard stories of the massive movements of people following the India - Pakistan split. They were not pleasant.
Posts: 2810 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Currently, there's only 1 GOP that holds a statewide office on the west coast--WA's Secretary of State Kim Wyman. After the 2012 election, where a very moderate Republican (Rob McKenna) lost to a fairly far left Democrat (Jay Inslee), the head of WA's GOP made this statement: "If we can't elect Rob McKenna, maybe it is time to move to Texas,".
Seeing many WA license plates in TX yet?
Posts: 831 | From: Seattle | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Texas may need to build a serious border fence on its north and west sides, maybe the east side as well, but checking passports for origin in other southern states. The problem with many of these immigrants is that they tend to bring attitudes with them that are part of their home state problem. You can't take a geography cure if the problem is inside you.
Posts: 2810 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:You can't take a geography cure if the problem is inside you.
Yes, you can. Texas has a zombie hunting license. As soon as we explain to them it is hard to tell the difference between a zombie and a socialistic democrat, they change, or... Whoops... thought it was a zombie...
And has anyone ever known a Texan that did not have an attitude? It is totally normal and we are not bashful about it. Get stupid and we will let you know you are getting stupid.
Posts: 1418 | From: Houston, Republic of Texas | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've always wondered if Texans are somehow required to live up to the stereotype!
Posts: 510 | From: Richmond VA USA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Required?" "Required?" No need to require someone to do something they want to do. OK, so I am not a Texan. I have lived there for a couple of years in the past and have a son who has lived there for several years, and will admit to having mindset that is comfortable there, and not so much in San Fran. Just spent 2 weeks in Dallas. Aaaah.
Posts: 2810 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
