And this arguement has been educational for both my knowledge of Government and History, so thanks for giving me a reason to research those things I didn't know.
Anyways, getting back on Topic, I hope we don't go into a Depression or Revolution. I would rather just play DDO and not have to worry about wiether or not it will be gone if such an event starts.
Last edited by TiranBlade; 05-20-2010 at 01:53 AM.
Sam Houston, might have heard of him.
I had thought Stephen Austin was another, but he came from Missouri.
And as far as the technological backbone of the nation. . . . The fine folks as Marshal Space Flight Center, Redstone Aresenal, United Launch (Formerly Lockheed-Martin and Boeing whom both have major R&D centers in Huntsville AL) and countless others on the cutting edge of military and aerospace technology might have issue w/ that.
I've got my affairs in order for the coming zombie apocalypse, do you?
Oh man, the guy on the street corner was right.
"The end is ni" Lol
Some toons with Cow in the name, and some without.
--
Originally posted by C-Dog
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck but it's undead, then it's an undead duck.
Well that goes back to what I was saying before. Given the current situation and state of the Union it would not be unfathomable for a state or states to secede in such a fashion. I do believe should a state like Texas decide to remove themselves from the Union, that at least a few others would also take measures to remove themselves from the Union as well. Just my opinion, but I think it is a possibility
No. In order for a state to secede from the United States, it must be successful in its attempt. If it is unsuccessful (because it was "convinced" militarily or otherwise), then it never really seceded in the first place.
I love Texas dearly (my mom was from Dallas) but I guarantee you that as long as the United States is able to prevent it, Texas would fail in any attempt to secede.
As far as your Declaration of Independence argument goes, the right to abolish the government because it has grown tyrannical is reserved for the PEOPLE and not to individual States. But that document was written BEFORE the U.S. Constitution. And from the Government that was created by the Constitution's viewpoint, what the Declaration says no longer applies to it. Why? Because there are provisions in the Constitution itself to change it (thus, in theory, the Federal Government) lawfully and peacefully (See Article V of the U.S. Constitution).
Now, having said all that, do I think "We the People" have the right to abolish a tyrannical government? Yes, through constitutional means. Do I honestly believe that's very realistic? I'm beginning to doubt that more and more. How about abolishing the Government through extra-constitutional means? The constitutional scholar in me says, "No." However the philosopher in me says, "Hell yes!" The Declaration of Independence reflects some basic God-given rights of all men (and women), which certainly include the right to abolish a tyrannical government by revolution.
Which part of me (and everyone else) is actually correct? That depends on who wins should a state or states declare their independence from the U.S. If the secessionists are successful, the philosophers (Declaration of Independence) are correct. If the US Federal Government manages to force the secessionists to abandon their attempt at independence, the constitutionalists will be correct.
The lesson here is if you're going to try to secede, it's no joke and you'd better be successful.
Trouble at the US/Can border
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agJ34o6PLhI
wow just wow
=(
PPT Invoked Rule 48 Today, DOW Would Have CRASHED
http://blogs.wsj.com/marketbeat/2010...arket-opening/The New York Stock Exchange is invoking “Rule 48,” which suspends a requirement for designated market makers to show premarket prices to help smooth the opening, for the second time this month. The move thus far has been rare, but seems to be becoming not so rare these days amid the recent volatility. NYSE has no specific threshold for invoking the rule, but tends to use it following big moves in stock futures.