Chuck Norris, President of....Texas?

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

http://www.theweek.com/article/index/94248/Chuck_Norris_Texas_secessionist

[SimonM]

Give Texas back to mexico.

Bet you Norris would love that. ;)

[sanjuro_ronin]

Why would Chuck take a step down from being God to be President of anything ??

[Pork Chop]

Give Texas back to mexico.

Bet you Norris would love that. ;)

Give it back?
Texans won it fair and square with no help from the US military the first time around.
What makes you think it'd go any different this time?

[Drake]

Chuck Norris doesn't commit treason against the United States. The United States commits treason against Chuck Norris. :D

[Shaolinlueb]

what sanjuro said. he is a god now. why settle for being a mear human.

[Mano Mano]

I’m curious as an outsider what would be the implications if Texas did want independence from the rest of the U.S. or even if Hawaii wanted independence.

[GLW]

Chuck Norris could not be president of Texas anyway...

He was born in Oklahoma...only a natural born citizen of Texas could be president.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Chuck Norris could not be president of Texas anyway...

He was born in Oklahoma...only a natural born citizen of Texas could be president.

Chuck Norris wasn't Born, he simply IS !!!

[xcakid]

I’m curious as an outsider what would be the implications if Texas did want independence from the rest of the U.S. or even if Hawaii wanted independence.


Given that this country has become more of a wussy liberal country, and as of late socialist. Being able to break off and continue to have freedoms as it was stated in the constitution in the fullest sense is quite attractive in my opinion. Since TX joined the Union and was not incorporated into it, this state does have that option to break off. However, TX does not have the infrastructure to do it. So I guess I need to just live with it.

Liberal Socialism.....yea!! :(

[1bad65]

Given that this country has become more of a wussy liberal country, and as of late socialist. Being able to break off and continue to have freedoms as it was stated in the constitution in the fullest sense is quite attractive in my opinion. Since TX joined the Union and was not incorporated into it, this state does have that option to break off. However, TX does not have the infrastructure to do it. So I guess I need to just live with it.

If we do, I'll never leave!

As it is now, I'm considering moving to Israel.

[SanHeChuan]

Norris’ main beef seems to be that we have “a secular government,” and he blames both parties.

Yeah, lets force everyone to be christian through rule of law.

The founding fathers obviously only put separation of church and state, and religious freedom in to the constitution, to give Christans the opportunity to build their power base, so that when the time was right they could take control and repress all other belief systems.
:rolleyes:

I should roundhouse kick norris right in his 60 year old beard.

[Reverend Tap]

Eh, crackpots have been calling for various states to secede since the Civil War. I bet you could find people trying to cause the secession of every state and/or patch of land in the US.

As for good ol' Chuck...
the man knows fighting, the man knows acting. The man don't know politics. ;)

[SimonM]

Liberal Socialism.....yea!! :)

W00T for Socialism!!!!!

Two thumbs up! :D

[GreenCloudCLF]

Yeah, lets force everyone to be christian through rule of law.

The founding fathers obviously only put separation of church and state, and religious freedom in to the constitution, to give Christans the opportunity to build their power base, so that when the time was right they could take control and repress all other belief systems.
:rolleyes:

I should roundhouse kick norris right in his 60 year old beard.

The genius of the Constitution was that the founding fathers were smart enough to realize they did not know everything and could not prepare for everything. The Constitution as a document at one point said slaves only counted as 3/5 of a vote. That was removed, what would make you think that changing the goverment to a more religious one isn't the next step?

[Lee Chiang Po]

the constitution not only gives us freedom of religion, but freedom from religion. We can never allow religion to enter into our politics. That is what is happening in the middle east right now.
Texas has several groups calling themselves The Republic of Texas, one headquartered only a few miles from my home. There are all sorts of people involved in that one. Chuck Norris is actually an honorary Texas Ranger, and he actually took part in a drug roundup in a small town in Texas where over 1% of the entire population was arrested. All over the local news.
texas actually does have the infrastructure to govern itself and function, but it would not be something a reasonable person would want to do. Sessation would amount to borders and foreign visa's and passports and all that goes with that. Of course we could always apply for foreign aid. Then we could extend our borders all the way down to Guatamala.

[Hardwork108]

As for good ol' Chuck...
the man knows fighting, the man knows acting. The man don't know politics. ;)

For those of you who don't know politics is on one level about acting!

The best "actors" get elected because they are good at:

Acting as if they give a d@mn!


Now I am not that sure about Chuck Norris's acting abilities or wether he is a good enough an actor to pull off a successful career in politics.:D

[bakxierboxer]

The genius of the Constitution was that the founding fathers were smart enough to realize they did not know everything and could not prepare for everything. The Constitution as a document at one point said slaves only counted as 3/5 of a vote. That was removed, what would make you think that changing the goverment to a more religious one isn't the next step?


Agreed.... an improbable degree of foresight.

Counting slaves as 3/5 of a vote is one helluva big improvement over most of the world's categorization of them as "mere" chattel/property.


Dictionary: chat·tel (chăt'l) pronunciation
n.
1. Law. An article of movable personal property.
2. A slave.

The "other side" of "movable" in the above definition actually implied the rights of "disposition" of said "property"..... the right to "dispose" of it in whatever manner at whatever time for whatever reason/whim.......

[David Jamieson]

looks like the shark has jumped the chuck norris here.

[AdrianK]

I should roundhouse kick norris right in his 60 year old beard.

Chuck Norris's 60 year old beard would round kick you first.

[SanHeChuan]

The genius of the Constitution was that the founding fathers were smart enough to realize they did not know everything and could not prepare for everything. The Constitution as a document at one point said slaves only counted as 3/5 of a vote. That was removed, what would make you think that changing the goverment to a more religious one isn't the next step?

The central or core concept of the constitution is freedom. Equal rights grants more people freedom and is therefore in line with the core tenets of the founding fathers. Religion does not offer more people freedom, but would rather people conform to a limited doctrine and oppress opposing beliefs. It is the opposite of freedom. You are given the freedom to worship all you ****ing want on your own time, that is the gift of freedom the government has given to you. Why must you be such a hypocrite that you would turn around and try to take that gift from others. :mad:

[Zenshiite]

The funniest thing about this thread, besides Chuck Norris' old man stupidity... is the Texans using the word "socialism" as if they even know what the **** they are talking about.

[GLW]

not all Texans are right wing neocons....

[Zenshiite]

The two that posted about the US being "socialist" and "unfree" in this thread before you are who I was referring to.

[AJM]

Give it back?
Texans won it fair and square with no help from the US military the first time around.
What makes you think it'd go any different this time?
Correct. Who can forget the war to perpetuate slavery? Planned by congressman David Crocket of Tennessee.

[Pork Chop]

Correct. Who can forget the war to perpetuate slavery? Planned by congressman David Crocket of Tennessee.

Yah and attempts at an iron-fisted, centralized government on top of abolishing the 1824 constitution had nothing to do with that... :rolleyes:

[Drake]

Slavery wasn't even economically viable by the time the Civil War came around...

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Slavery wasn't even economically viable by the time the Civil War came around...

Reply]
How could free labor NOT be economically viable?

[Drake]

Reply]
How could free labor NOT be economically viable?

Purchasing and maintenance was a beyotch.

[Drake]

http://everything2.com/title/The%2520expansion%2520of%2520American%2520slavery

Pretty good explanation... hits some of the major points...

[GLW]

Crockett was just one player in the Texas revolution. There WERE a great number of peole from the US who came to Texas and immediately violated Mexican law - in particular with their refusal to give up their slaves.

However, there were others who ended up siding with the revolt because they had made their contract with the original Mexican govt. (Federalists if memory serves..but I get them backwards at times). Then the military and others seized control from the Federalists and started the Centralists...and Santa Anna then eventually became the leader. He then set about to make many of the original arrangements null and void...not just on the slavery toting newbies...but on those who had come in with original land grants and who were following the laws and simply expected the Mexican govt. to do the same.

The fact that Texas had been originally a state of another country, went through it's own revolution and then was its own nation before joining the US is the basis for those ideas about secession. But by that logic, Hawaii should be able to go first...it was a true sovereign nation and was eventually taken over by major double dealing.