you're reading...
agenda, civil disobedience, customer service, economics, freedom, history, politically incorrect, Texas, The Republic

Texas Was Always Iffy, Anyway…

Free North Carolina brings us this gem:

Ukraine Rebels Plan ‘Summit Of Unrecognized States’ Including Texas!

 https://i1.wp.com/resources1.news.com.au/images/2014/07/21/1226996/215141-69acd80c-1087-11e4-9633-5d2eb5bc90d6.jpg

A top official from the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic (DNR) has said he will host a “summit of unrecognized states” in February or March if he can guarantee the security of its participants. In an interview with the Donetsk-based Oplot-TV, Aleksandr Kofman, the self-styled foreign minister of the Moscow-backed DNR, said talks on the summit have already begun and that he hopes the meeting will result in a “League of New States.” Kofman listed representatives from Spain’s Basque region, Belgium’s Flanders region, Venice, Italy, and the U.S. state of Texas as potential participants. (There was no mention of Kosovo, which has been recognized by 108 states but notably not by Russia.) Kofman’s interviewer expressed particular interest in Texas, asking if there are “sprouts of support” in the U.S. state. “There’s more than sprouts,” he said, adding that those in favor of Texas independence “fully support the Donetsk People’s Republic.”

Texas reportedly has the best and freest of the State economies, with ever-increasingly-more free gun laws and business growth!  Compare with NY and California.  And, they have made secession noises before.
And they were there own Republic, previously.
Who knows?  Could happen…
Advertisements

About guffaw1952

I'm a child of the 50's. libertarian, now medically-retired. I've been a certified firearms trainer, a private investigator, and worked for a major credit card company for almost 22 years. I am a proud NRA Life Member. I am a limited-government, free-market capitalist, who believes in the U.S. Constitution and the Rule of Law.

Discussion

8 thoughts on “Texas Was Always Iffy, Anyway…

  1. One big problem with that scenario: Texas is a “taker” state. For every dollar it gives to the Feds, it gets back about $1.50. That would be a pretty big revenue hole to make up.
    Flanders and Venice are both “maker” states in their republics, they give more than they get, which is a big factor in their independence movements (there are other factors as well).

    I wouldn’t give Putin’s mouthpiece too much credibility.

    Posted by Tomi | February 3, 2015, 8:55 am
    • Well, I’m not going to argue Texas’ position. I’ll leave that up to the Texans.
      This post was simply an observation made by a third party with regard to their view of Texas. I did notice California,
      New York, and Illinois were not included.
      I wonder if they are ‘taker’ states?

      Posted by guffaw1952 | February 3, 2015, 9:43 am
  2. Alaska’s recently departed Governor, Sean Parnell, was once asked what impact secession would have on the state. He said, “It would have a devastating financial impact, initially.” A number of us noted at the time that it’s a) clearly something he & others have thought about, and b) they’ve thought past the initial act to the aftermath.

    Pretty telling, right there. Why think about the impact of something, unless it’s something you might have to do?

    Why do I mention this? Because Texas has an economy larger than most nations, and the fact that it gets a lot of federal money wouldn’t stop it from leaving – if it wanted to. Texas could go it alone. Alaska could not; but if it partnered with, say, Montana …

    Posted by Rev. Paul | February 3, 2015, 9:45 am
    • ‘Why think about the impact of something, unless it’s something you might have to do?’
      There was a time, not that long ago, that such talk would be considered at least foolish, at most treasonous.
      Now, reasonable men discuss it.
      HMMM…

      Posted by guffaw1952 | February 3, 2015, 9:55 am
  3. We have this contract that begins with the words “We the People” which specifies the conditions that the government will abide by in order for “We the People” to allow it to govern us. When the government continuously refuses to abide by the conditions of that contract, like any other contract, it becomes null and void. Do I want to leave the Union, most emphatically NO! But equally as emphatically, I want the government to fulfill its responsibilities. If they continue to refuse, then we should leave.

    Posted by juvat | February 3, 2015, 12:07 pm
  4. Umm… Interesting to put it mildly…

    Posted by Old NFO | February 3, 2015, 7:11 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

"Round up the usual suspects."

In Loving Memory…

%d bloggers like this: