(02-05-2009 02:53 PM)niuhuskie84 Wrote:  You're all nuts.

So were the Colonists and those who signed the declaration.

(02-05-2009 09:55 AM)Rebel Wrote:  

(02-05-2009 09:53 AM)mlb Wrote:  

(02-05-2009 09:48 AM)Paul M Wrote:  What would stop you from continuing to vacation there? They would appriciate your business.

I'd guess the fact that if they leave the union that most of the ways in and out of that state would be blocked off to pressure them back in to the union. Just a hunch.

Like someone else said, this would never happen anyway.

You realize how many leftists in the country want the South and Midwest, I.e. "Those Bible-thumpin' fundies" out of the union as it is? I can surely see a voluntary secession in the near future. .....and I pray that's all it is.

I would bolt to SEC country, have been vacationing in Destin for 10 years, Wife is from Tenn. I like SEC folks better than Yankees these days.

(02-06-2009 07:14 PM)I45owl Wrote:  ok. I probably misstated what snopes claimed anyways, but the annexation and the constitution are really saying the same thing. I didn't interpret this as a treaty, so I'm surprised at that characterization (again I defer to you). Does the annexation still count as a treaty since the Republic of Texas no longer exists?

I think your general statement "Treaties trump the constitution" means it's going to be hard to appease the black helicopter crowd for the next four years (minimum). SOAF will not sleep well tonight.

I think the document you actually quoted is the act of congress admitting Texas as a state, but IIRC the wording conforms to the treaty that was executed. You raise one of several interesting if esoteric legal issues involved here--since the Republic of Texas no longer exists, exactly who are the proper parties to the treaty? A group of nuts thought they were the Republic of Texas, and they camped out in the boonies near Marfa a few years ago. My old friend Terry O'Rourke had to go out and talk them out of it.

(02-06-2009 07:23 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(02-05-2009 02:53 PM)niuhuskie84 Wrote:  You're all nuts.

So were the Colonists and those who signed the declaration.

Yes...Wanting to live without a foot on my throat would make a total roasted in the shell Nut.

(02-06-2009 08:23 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(02-06-2009 07:23 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(02-05-2009 02:53 PM)niuhuskie84 Wrote:  You're all nuts.

So were the Colonists and those who signed the declaration.

Yes...Wanting to live without a foot on my throat would make a total roasted in the shell Nut.

(02-06-2009 10:54 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(02-06-2009 08:23 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(02-06-2009 07:23 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(02-05-2009 02:53 PM)niuhuskie84 Wrote:  You're all nuts.

So were the Colonists and those who signed the declaration.

Yes...Wanting to live without a foot on my throat would make a total roasted in the shell Nut.

Where have you been Cat?....I have not seen you post here before. Stick around...There are a few control freaks here that need calming down!

(02-06-2009 07:19 PM)Tulsaman Wrote:  

Quote:Does this mean that Oklahoma is officially illegal, and should be abolished?

no the lands that oklahoma is made up of was ceeded to the United states in return for the US assuming the debt of the Republic of Texas.

Well, I guess we'll have to go back to looking for another reason to make Oklahoma illegal.

(02-07-2009 12:00 PM)I45owl Wrote:  Well, I guess we'll have to go back to looking for another reason to make Oklahoma illegal.

I'm here. That should count for something.

Technically, the Constitution is illegal. We're still under the Articles of Confederation because we never had all 13 original states vote against them and in favor of the Constitution. It's the dirty little secret that lawyers just have to avoid.