southsider2k5 Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 QUOTE (kapkomet @ Feb 4, 2010 -> 08:41 PM) Uh oh, Palin didn't pay some taxes. SCANDALOUS! Well, she is now qualified to be in the Obama administration! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 QUOTE (Tex @ Feb 4, 2010 -> 09:12 PM) Rex, you are far smarter than this. OK, you take him seriously. All I'm saying is that if my governor went to my political event and said things supportive of what I support... and used extreme language to do it, and then the next day said - oh I didn't mean it, I'd feel pretty personally insulted. Sorta like when my state senator decided to vote against marriage equality and then introduced a resolution a month later encouraging a DADT repeal because lots of folks in her district that would have voted for her are looking to primary her ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted February 5, 2010 Author Share Posted February 5, 2010 QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Feb 5, 2010 -> 12:03 AM) All I'm saying is that if my governor went to my political event and said things supportive of what I support... and used extreme language to do it, and then the next day said - oh I didn't mean it, I'd feel pretty personally insulted. Sorta like when my state senator decided to vote against marriage equality and then introduced a resolution a month later encouraging a DADT repeal because lots of folks in her district that would have voted for her are looking to primary her ass. I'm not certain anyone at that event supported secession. If any did, they were in the extreme minority. The tax stuff, the anti-Washington stuff, that was all real and pretty accurate. Did he use an extreme example to discuss that Texas pays way to much in Federal taxes? Sure. I guess I seriously under-counted the numbers of people who felt that Perry was calling Texas to secede from the Union. I thought only some real goofballs would have thought he meant to literally secede. I'm surprised, since it was so easy to take him seriously, then that none of his opponents, Rep or Dem, have called him out on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted February 5, 2010 Author Share Posted February 5, 2010 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 4, 2010 -> 08:42 PM) Well, she is now qualified to be in the Obama administration! It is a big tent! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted February 5, 2010 Author Share Posted February 5, 2010 http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?sh...p;#entry1871529 BTW, most everyone here took it as a joke when it happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonxctf Posted February 13, 2010 Share Posted February 13, 2010 do you think that Rick Perry, or the 20% odd percentage of the GOP voters who want to secede from the US knows that they can't secede? In deciding the merits of the bond issue, the Supreme Court further held that the Constitution did not permit states to secede from the United States, and that the ordinances of secession, and all the acts of the legislatures within seceding states intended to give effect to such ordinances, were "absolutely null". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted February 13, 2010 Author Share Posted February 13, 2010 QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Feb 12, 2010 -> 09:48 PM) do you think that Rick Perry, or the 20% odd percentage of the GOP voters who want to secede from the US knows that they can't secede? In deciding the merits of the bond issue, the Supreme Court further held that the Constitution did not permit states to secede from the United States, and that the ordinances of secession, and all the acts of the legislatures within seceding states intended to give effect to such ordinances, were "absolutely null". The difference with Texas' ordinance is that it was included as a condition of entering the Union. Texas was an Independent Country, fully recognized by the US as a Independent Country. As with all matters like this, it would take an actual court case, to determine if it would be legal. And really, Perry was not serious and 20% of GOP voters really do not want to secede. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted February 13, 2010 Share Posted February 13, 2010 And the court has already ruled on this issue - Texas cannot secede. That loophole was closed after the civil war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted February 14, 2010 Author Share Posted February 14, 2010 QUOTE (kapkomet @ Feb 13, 2010 -> 12:02 PM) And the court has already ruled on this issue - Texas cannot secede. That loophole was closed after the civil war. As they have on capital punishment, separate but equal, abortion, . . . You forgot to take a shot at activist judges, you are turning into a lib after only one day in Canada! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted February 14, 2010 Share Posted February 14, 2010 QUOTE (Tex @ Feb 13, 2010 -> 10:52 PM) As they have on capital punishment, separate but equal, abortion, . . . You forgot to take a shot at activist judges, you are turning into a lib after only one day in Canada! There's no logic in your argument. The "legal right to secede" as Texans like to claim is false under current law. Now, if Texas wants to break the laws of the United States, I guess they're free to do so. Next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted February 14, 2010 Author Share Posted February 14, 2010 QUOTE (kapkomet @ Feb 13, 2010 -> 10:53 PM) There's no logic in your argument. The "legal right to secede" as Texans like to claim is false under current law. Now, if Texas wants to break the laws of the United States, I guess they're free to do so. Next. I know it ain't going to happen, it's silly to even discuss. But you know them activist judges, they could just say f*** the law and make up a new one like they always do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted February 14, 2010 Share Posted February 14, 2010 after re-reading the intitial thread you are posting, you are confusing us taking the state of texas as a joke, with us taking Perry's comments as a joke. The latter is just a complete fabrication. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted February 14, 2010 Share Posted February 14, 2010 QUOTE (kapkomet @ Feb 13, 2010 -> 11:53 PM) There's no logic in your argument. The "legal right to secede" as Texans like to claim is false under current law. Now, if Texas wants to break the laws of the United States, I guess they're free to do so. Next. I used to keep the link that Soxbadger posted that showed the Supreme Court ruling saying this to show people. The answer is usually "do you really think we would listen to the Supreme Court if it came to that" well yeah, but you can use that logic to justify breaking any law if you wanted I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted February 15, 2010 Author Share Posted February 15, 2010 QUOTE (lostfan @ Feb 14, 2010 -> 12:53 PM) I used to keep the link that Soxbadger posted that showed the Supreme Court ruling saying this to show people. The answer is usually "do you really think we would listen to the Supreme Court if it came to that" well yeah, but you can use that logic to justify breaking any law if you wanted I guess. How can anyone take this seriously? A state is not going to leave the union. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted February 15, 2010 Share Posted February 15, 2010 QUOTE (Tex @ Feb 14, 2010 -> 09:07 PM) How can anyone take this seriously? A state is not going to leave the union. /shrug I don't know, you have to ask the 25% of Texans that would support it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted February 15, 2010 Author Share Posted February 15, 2010 QUOTE (lostfan @ Feb 14, 2010 -> 08:16 PM) /shrug I don't know, you have to ask the 25% of Texans that would support it LOL not certain where you got that number, but I don't know anyone that would seriously support it. Now I would be with the 87% who support the proposal to give everyone $3,000 in direct stimulus money. Y'all need to look up sarcasm and false bravado. Texans are a proud bunch and pretty independent. You may hear that sort of bragging, but it is about as serious as saying you'd move out of the country if "fill in the blank" is elected President. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted February 15, 2010 Author Share Posted February 15, 2010 rex, congrats, you did get some traction for this at least among soxtalk. You are a damn fine political operative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MexSoxFan#1 Posted February 19, 2010 Share Posted February 19, 2010 For precisely this kind of thread is why I voted for Tex as funniest poster on Soxtalk...Perry/Palin would make a fantastic comedy duo! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted November 2, 2010 Author Share Posted November 2, 2010 Perry begins his run for the Presidency today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 QUOTE (Tex @ Nov 2, 2010 -> 01:19 PM) Perry begins his run for the Presidency today. I believe the GOP will quietly groom Marco Rubio for a Presidential run instead of your guy from Texas. After his victory today, he will rise like Obama did in popularity. Dems got the first black president, GOP may have the first hispanic president. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 QUOTE (Tex @ Nov 2, 2010 -> 01:19 PM) Perry begins his run for the Presidency today. President of Texas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Nov 2, 2010 -> 03:12 PM) I believe the GOP will quietly groom Marco Rubio for a Presidential run instead of your guy from Texas. After his victory today, he will rise like Obama did in popularity. Dems got the first black president, GOP may have the first hispanic president. I dunno, he would basically need to start running now, meaning he'd never really be much of a Senator. 2016 would make more sense, assuming a second Obama term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 2, 2010 -> 03:18 PM) I dunno, he would basically need to start running now, meaning he'd never really be much of a Senator. 2016 would make more sense, assuming a second Obama term. Kinda like Obama? Although yeah, I would like for him to wait his turn, but not waiting behind Obama. As far as a Repub that may contest in 2012, I hope to god it isn't Palin or Huckabee. I would prefer Pawlenty, however you spell it. Or give me the fatman from Jersey. He would bring some fiscal smackdown to the office, for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Nov 2, 2010 -> 03:53 PM) Kinda like Obama? Although yeah, I would like for him to wait his turn, but not waiting behind Obama. As far as a Repub that may contest in 2012, I hope to god it isn't Palin or Huckabee. I would prefer Pawlenty, however you spell it. Or give me the fatman from Jersey. He would bring some fiscal smackdown to the office, for sure. Obama had 2 years under his belt before he ran. The problem with Marco Rubio is that campaigning for the 2012 presidential election basically starts in January/Feb of next year. He's have to be in office one day, then start gearing up fro the presidential primaries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 (edited) QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Nov 2, 2010 -> 03:53 PM) Kinda like Obama? Although yeah, I would like for him to wait his turn, but not waiting behind Obama. As far as a Repub that may contest in 2012, I hope to god it isn't Palin or Huckabee. I would prefer Pawlenty, however you spell it. Or give me the fatman from Jersey. He would bring some fiscal smackdown to the office, for sure. QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Nov 2, 2010 -> 04:09 PM) Obama had 2 years under his belt before he ran. The problem with Marco Rubio is that campaigning for the 2012 presidential election basically starts in January/Feb of next year. He's have to be in office one day, then start gearing up fro the presidential primaries. Exactly. Obama announced his campaign in February 2007. Obama's time as a dedicated Senator was short, but it was at least a couple of years. Rubio would have a month. edit: not saying I doubt a Rubio run because a lack of Federal experience, just that the timing wouldn't exactly line up. It'll be interesting/incredibly painful to watch what happens in the Republican primaries. Just going on this election, we'll probably see the more sane part of the GOP start to coalesce around one candidate with the Tea Party people (Palin Beck etc.) supporting another. Ultimately, only one will get the nomination and it'd be interesting to see what the Palin crowd would do if it wasn't their person. Edited November 2, 2010 by StrangeSox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts