Texas you gotta love em...Hello Obama? You listening?

[JustRalph]

0LHrIxc-QyE

WAKE UP CALL: TEXAS GOV. BACK RESOLUTION AFFIRMING SOVEREIGNTY
Tue Apr 14 2009 08:44:54 ET

AUSTIN – Gov. Rick Perry joined state Rep. Brandon Creighton and sponsors of House Concurrent Resolution (HCR) 50 in support of states’ rights under the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

“I believe that our federal government has become oppressive in its size, its intrusion into the lives of our citizens, and its interference with the affairs of our state,” Gov. Perry said. “That is why I am here today to express my unwavering support for efforts all across our country to reaffirm the states’ rights affirmed by the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I believe that returning to the letter and spirit of the U.S. Constitution and its essential 10th Amendment will free our state from undue regulations, and ultimately strengthen our Union.”

Perry continued: "Millions of Texans are tired of Washington, DC trying to come down here to tell us how to run Texas."

A number of recent federal proposals are not within the scope of the federal government’s constitutionally designated powers and impede the states’ right to govern themselves. HCR 50 affirms that Texas claims sovereignty under the 10th Amendment over all powers not otherwise granted to the federal government.

It also designates that all compulsory federal legislation that requires states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties, or that requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding, be prohibited or repealed.

[JustRalph]

Please watch until the end of this video.....for the Q&A part where he basically tells Washington to go screw themselves


This is unprecedented ............this is a transformational moment.

[Tom]

If Texas secedes, I will move there!

[Lefty]

Rush and Hannity were talking about a new homeland security memo to law enforcement. Here's a couple of the nuggets: If you have a Prolife or NRA bumper sticker you are a potential problem.
If you're for States rights you're a potential problem.
If you're against obama's budget, ditto ditto.
So I guess the terrorists are not Al Qaeda or Pirates but Govs like Rick Perry and the rest of us that dare believe in such things1

[jballscalls]

Rush and Hannity were talking about a new homeland security memo to law enforcement. Here's a couple of the nuggets: If you have a Prolife or NRA bumper sticker you are a potential problem.
If you're for States rights you're a potential problem.
If you're against obama's budget, ditto ditto.
So I guess the terrorists are not Al Qaeda or Pirates but Govs like Rick Perry and the rest of us that dare believe in such things1

that'd be interesting to see that memo

[ddog]

Please watch until the end of this video.....for the Q&A part where he basically tells Washington to go screw themselves


This is unprecedented ............this is a transformational moment.


wanta bet.

without masses it's nothing.

one could only hope the drug addled dopes of this country would rise up.

I am not betting on it.

Uruguay has a much better climate.

[ddog]

Rush and Hannity were talking about a new homeland security memo to law enforcement. Here's a couple of the nuggets: If you have a Prolife or NRA bumper sticker you are a potential problem.
If you're for States rights you're a potential problem.
If you're against obama's budget, ditto ditto.
So I guess the terrorists are not Al Qaeda or Pirates but Govs like Rick Perry and the rest of us that dare believe in such things1


lefty ol sod, when they come for you , don't forget you were ALL FOR THIS POWER to be available to DC when the other scum was in power.

In fact, you were for the "memo" to not even be made public or page to be blacked out on it.

You can't turn gvt on a dime once we get people in you don't trust.

Learn to like it , you were all for being "safe" at all costs.

[ArlJim78]

here is an excerpt, you can see the whole report at the link.
i've never seen such a steaming pile in my life.

(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A will be working with its state and local partners over the next several months to ascertain with greater regional specificity the rise in rightwing extremist activity in the United States, with a particular emphasis on the political, economic, and social factors that drive rightwing extremist radicalization.

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/04/14/confirme-the-obama-dhs-hit-job-on-conservatives-is-real/

[JustRalph]

I was told about it last week........by a police officer who said he thought it would take just a few days to be leaked

[ddog]

i know many who are NOT a "Malkin conservative" given the current bastardization of the label. It is as bad if not worse than the liberal junk now.

We are not part of the main-stream pug farce that is called conservative.

They are so far away as demonstrated by their ACTIONS of the last 15-20 years that the conservative term is useless if it covers them.


nonetheless , WE are not cowed by any DHS i can tell you that.

As to the "memo" the Bush team was doing this long ago.

They didn't care who the groups were , if you advocated anything other than "the party line" you were suspect.

That's what gvt tend to do, they wish to protect their authority and amass more and more of it.

[Bubba X]

0LHrIxc-QyE

WAKE UP CALL: TEXAS GOV. BACK RESOLUTION AFFIRMING SOVEREIGNTY
Tue Apr 14 2009 08:44:54 ET

AUSTIN – Gov. Rick Perry joined state Rep. Brandon Creighton and sponsors of House Concurrent Resolution (HCR) 50 in support of states’ rights under the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

“I believe that our federal government has become oppressive in its size, its intrusion into the lives of our citizens, and its interference with the affairs of our state,” Gov. Perry said. “That is why I am here today to express my unwavering support for efforts all across our country to reaffirm the states’ rights affirmed by the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I believe that returning to the letter and spirit of the U.S. Constitution and its essential 10th Amendment will free our state from undue regulations, and ultimately strengthen our Union.”

Perry continued: "Millions of Texans are tired of Washington, DC trying to come down here to tell us how to run Texas."

A number of recent federal proposals are not within the scope of the federal government’s constitutionally designated powers and impede the states’ right to govern themselves. HCR 50 affirms that Texas claims sovereignty under the 10th Amendment over all powers not otherwise granted to the federal government.

It also designates that all compulsory federal legislation that requires states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties, or that requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding, be prohibited or repealed.

OK, Ralph. I watched the video and I read the Resolution. I assume you did as well.

First, of course, Texas is not declaring itself a soverign nation. Tom will need to make other plans.

Next, the Res basically states the 10th Amendment.

Then, the Res alleges Many Federal laws to be in violation of the 10th amendment.

The Res alleges, additionally, that more proposed legislation from prior administrations as well as the current administration and congress would violate the 10th Amendment.

But nowhere in the Res, nor in the comments in the video (save for a short comment regarding Unemployment) are any of these alleged violations enumerated. The Gov did say he'd have a full list of these available shortly.

Personally, I probably agree with the Unemployment arguement that will be made and am even more likely to do so with respect to Medicaid.

But really, sincerely, what exactly is their beef?

[Lefty]

http://www.midwesthuntingsource.com/index.php?topic=4489.0

I think this is it.

dog, you are wrong again. Bush targeted terrorists, not his own citizens. He didn't go after abortionists and people who believe socialism is the way.
He targeted terrorists. You are barking into the night.

[ddog]

http://www.midwesthuntingsource.com/index.php?topic=4489.0

I think this is it.

dog, you are wrong again. Bush targeted terrorists, not his own citizens. He didn't go after abortionists and people who believe socialism is the way.
He targeted terrorists. You are barking into the night.


lefty , you ARE really blind.

abortionist - socialists , what in gods name are you rambling about?

If you were hard line against the Iraq war and demonstrated that point , do you think you don't have a rap sheet now?

If you were hard line against the bailouts and shipping jobs overseas and other crap , you don't think you have a rap sheet now.

if you own weapons - you don't think you have a rap sheet now?


You can't be serious.

The powers are the same.

Once granted and implemented it's just a short step to be used against "terrorist".


Who is a "terrorist" exactly, seems it could be anyone.

You are dangerously unware my man.

[JustRalph]

Lefty.......stop responding to him.........not worth it......

[Bubba X]

You asked me to attend this thread. I did. I read and watched. I responded. And I asked one question. Care to answer?

[Lefty]

JR, he is 'wearing" i'll give you that.

[NJ Stinks]

Let's see. So far Texas has gifted the country with LBJ and GWB - two guys willing to fight wars over nothing. Now the governor there boldly states he doesn't like taxes. I guess he doesn't like paying for stuff at the grocery store either.

Texans can't quite wrap their minds around basic freedoms like letting their residents enjoy casino gambling if they choose to. Twenty years ago people in Dallas flew to Arkansas if they wanted to play the horses. Today there is no betting from home legally allowed. No doubt Magna is thrilled it invested heavily in Lone Star (Lone Star opened in 1997) but Texas residents still can't sign-up for Xpressbet. :rolleyes:

I wouldn't move to Texas if they gave me Southfork.

But I think you might fit right in there, Tom. :ThmbUp:

[Lefty]

sorry, JR, but just gotta "mix it up"
dog, i'm talking about this admi targetting its dissenters and labeling them as "potential problems"
Bush never turned homeland security or any other entity against his dissenters. And when they come for you, "us believers in free speech might already be done in by this admin. then nobody will be there for you.
Scary, ain't it?

[JustRalph]

Let's see. So far Texas has gifted the country with LBJ and GWB - two guys willing to fight wars over nothing. Now the governor there boldly states he doesn't like taxes. I guess he doesn't like paying for stuff at the grocery store either.

Texans can't quite wrap their minds around basic freedoms like letting their residents enjoy casino gambling if they choose to. Twenty years ago people in Dallas flew to Arkansas if they wanted to play the horses. Today there is no betting from home legally allowed. No doubt Magna is thrilled it invested heavily in Lone Star (Lone Star opened in 1997) but Texas residents still can't sign-up for Xpressbet. :rolleyes:

I wouldn't move to Texas if they gave me Southfork.

But I think you might fit right in there, Tom. :ThmbUp:

I suggest you get your facts straight...................

your post is absurd and inaccurate

[JustRalph]

You asked me to attend this thread. I did. I read and watched. I responded. And I asked one question. Care to answer?

I got things to do..........give me a chance.....

first of all.......the Governor of the 2nd Largest State in the Nation, just told the Fed Government that it is going too far..........

That is a huge thing. The Mainstream media will try to hide this. But it will get airplay. He mentioned the tea parties and he was backed up by the state legislature. this is a cross roads in some ways. This could be an opportunity or a missed opportunity.

You asked what his beef was? You're kidding right?

There are Texans on this board I am sure will be interested enough to reply to your inquiry.

[prospector]

its not just Texans who are fed up:)

[ezrabrooks]

Let's see. So far Texas has gifted the country with LBJ and GWB - two guys willing to fight wars over nothing. Now the governor there boldly states he doesn't like taxes. I guess he doesn't like paying for stuff at the grocery store either.

Texans can't quite wrap their minds around basic freedoms like letting their residents enjoy casino gambling if they choose to. Twenty years ago people in Dallas flew to Arkansas if they wanted to play the horses. Today there is no betting from home legally allowed. No doubt Magna is thrilled it invested heavily in Lone Star (Lone Star opened in 1997) but Texas residents still can't sign-up for Xpressbet. :rolleyes:

I wouldn't move to Texas if they gave me Southfork.

But I think you might fit right in there, Tom. :ThmbUp:


"basic freedoms like letting their residents enjoy casino gambling if they choose to"? Basic freedoms? I guess basic freedoms aren't what they use to be. Only in NJ could a statement like that be conjured up..

Ez

[lsbets]

I got things to do..........give me a chance.....

first of all.......the Governor of the 2nd Largest State in the Nation, just told the Fed Government that it is going too far..........

That is a huge thing. The Mainstream media will try to hide this. But it will get airplay. He mentioned the tea parties and he was backed up by the state legislature. this is a cross roads in some ways. This could be an opportunity or a missed opportunity.

You asked what his beef was? You're kidding right?

There are Texans on this board I am sure will be interested enough to reply to your inquiry.

Perry said it - that means its meaningless. His motivation? He has a primary challenge from Kay Hutchison coming up. As governor, he signed the largest business tax increase in state history - one reason I don't like him. He is no friend of gaming - another reason I don't like him. And he pissed off a lot of wingnuts by supporting vaccinating teenager girls against cervical cancer. He has to get to the right of Kay before the primary. She voted for the "kids health insurance" bill. She's worse than he is. I'm hoping Kinky runs again.

Perry sucks. He's not speaking out because he cares about the size of government. He loves big government, when he is in charge. He's speaking up because he wants to get reelected.

[NJ Stinks]

I suggest you get your facts straight...................

your post is absurd and inaccurate

OK. I'll bite. What facts have I botched? Maybe I'll learn something.

[lsbets]

Texans can't quite wrap their minds around basic freedoms like letting their residents enjoy casino gambling if they choose to. Twenty years ago people in Dallas flew to Arkansas if they wanted to play the horses. Today there is no betting from home legally allowed. No doubt Magna is thrilled it invested heavily in Lone Star (Lone Star opened in 1997) but Texas residents still can't sign-up for Xpressbet. :rolleyes:

I wouldn't move to Texas if they gave me Southfork.

But I think you might fit right in there, Tom. :ThmbUp:

Now living in the people's state of NJ, I'm sure you don't realize this, but the right to keep and bear arms is a basic freedom guaranteed by our Constitution and not respected by the state of NJ. We understand our freedoms, although we do have some problems in the gaming area. We let a crazy amount of money escape to neighboring states because we won't allow casino gaming here. However, your statement that we are not legally allowed to bet from home couldn't be more wrong. I have accounts with Youbet, Twinspires, and PTC. I think that is more options than you have in NJ. I could also sign up for several more services, but I don't see the need. I can't wager on Lonestar, but I can wager on Retama and Sam Houston. Years ago, the state attorney general offered an opinion that account wagering wasn't allowed in Texas. Most account wagering companies took the opinion (correctly) that account wagering was not illegal for Texas residents based on the fact that it was not outlawed, and allow Texas residents to open accounts and wager. There is nothing in the laws of the state of Texas that says account wagering is illegal. Only the opinion of a former AG who was in the backpocket of the Southern Baptists says so.

Having lived in both states, I would say your name is right - NJ does stink - big government, high taxes, a crazy cost of living, and a major inferiority complex that pervades the state. Stay there, we wouldn't want you here.

Hopefully I've answered your question to JR about the basic facts you got wrong. As usual, you really have no clue about that which you speak. No wonder you love Biden.

[JustRalph]

Ding!!

You got your answer NJ


LS.......... I applaud Perry for making the statement in cahoots with the legislature.........had he done it alone........ I might look at it with a more crooked eye..........but you know better. You are in the bosom of the battle.

I still say this will be played down............but it is an opportunity ....but who will carry the ball ? Kinky should run again............ Love the guy.......

[NJ Stinks]

"basic freedoms like letting their residents enjoy casino gambling if they choose to"? Basic freedoms? I guess basic freedoms aren't what they use to be. Only in NJ could a statement like that be conjured up..

Ez

I stand by the statement. I realize it takes an open mind to legalize casino gambling....

[NJ Stinks]

Now living in the people's state of NJ, I'm sure you don't realize this, but the right to keep and bear arms is a basic freedom guaranteed by our Constitution and not respected by the state of NJ. We understand our freedoms, although we do have some problems in the gaming area. We let a crazy amount of money escape to neighboring states because we won't allow casino gaming here. However, your statement that we are not legally allowed to bet from home couldn't be more wrong. I have accounts with Youbet, Twinspires, and PTC. I think that is more options than you have in NJ. I could also sign up for several more services, but I don't see the need. I can't wager on Lonestar, but I can wager on Retama and Sam Houston. Years ago, the state attorney general offered an opinion that account wagering wasn't allowed in Texas. Most account wagering companies took the opinion (correctly) that account wagering was not illegal for Texas residents based on the fact that it was not outlawed, and allow Texas residents to open accounts and wager. There is nothing in the laws of the state of Texas that says account wagering is illegal. Only the opinion of a former AG who was in the backpocket of the Southern Baptists says so.

Having lived in both states, I would say your name is right - NJ does stink - big government, high taxes, a crazy cost of living, and a major inferiority complex that pervades the state. Stay there, we wouldn't want you here.

Hopefully I've answered your question to JR about the basic facts you got wrong. As usual, you really have no clue about that which you speak. No wonder you love Biden.

First off, fear not, Isbets, I'm staying. :ThmbUp:

So Expressbet's website is wrong when it says residents of Texas cannot open an account? And TVG is wrong when it does not list Texas as state where it's wagering services are available? (I stopped with those two.)

Isbets, if you are looking for cheap just about any state in the Northeast is not for you. I happen to like the standard of living here. As for the right to bears arms, I'm sure things are more free-wheeling in Texas. But it's not like gun shops and hunting is prohibited here.

Oh yea, before I forget - I love Joe Biden! :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

[Rookies]

Ralph, it's a perfect place for all you cons. I mean it. :ThmbUp:

Save the rest of the country for the rest of us. Hard to say never, but VERY unlikely I'll ever be setting foot in TEX-ass.

[lsbets]

Dude - I have accounts with 3 different ADWs. It is not illegal for me to use account wagering in Texas. I don't know how much more simple it could be. Its so simple I thought even Joe Biden's number one fan could understand it. Magna and TVG chose not to challenge the AGs very incorrect opinion. They are cowards. There is nothing in the law in Texas that says account wagering is illegal.

[NJ Stinks]

Dude - I have accounts with 3 different ADWs. It is not illegal for me to use account wagering in Texas. I don't know how much more simple it could be. Its so simple I thought even Joe Biden's number one fan could understand it. Magna and TVG chose not to challenge the AGs very incorrect opinion. They are cowards. There is nothing in the law in Texas that says account wagering is illegal.

OK, Isbets. Those guys are cowards even though they have a substantial financial stake.

I take it all back. Texas is greatest. I wish it independence ASAP. :ThmbUp:

[dav4463]

Texas is a great place to live.

The weather is usually awesome. When many of you guys were on this forum griping about shoveling snow, I was out playing tennis!

We have great colleges.

The women are hot!

The sports teams are good....we have a lot of champions....Tim Duncan, David Robinson, Hakeem Olajuwon, Roger Staubach, Troy Aikman, Emmitt Smith, Tony Dorsett, Doak Walker, Sammy Baugh,....plus many more legends from the world of sports.

Horseracing is good.

We have beaches, we have desert, we have woods, we have canyons, caverns, rivers, lakes, and an ocean, we have small hills that we call mountains!

People are friendly for the most part. In fact, in rural Texas, people still wave at you as you meet on the highway!

We have great barbeque! We have great Tex-Mex.

We aren't all crowded together in one place.

You can actually be out in the country in about an hour no matter where you live, even from downtown Houston.

We have a great history. We have arts and entertainment. We have great hunting and fishing.

Texas has something for everyone and for those who say they would never live in Texas.....no worries......we won't miss you...it just means more space for the rest of us!

[lsbets]

OK, Isbets. Those guys are cowards even though they have a substantial financial stake.

I take it all back. Texas is greatest. I wish it independence ASAP. :ThmbUp:

I realize living in NJ you are probably very undereducated when it comes to how the law is supposed to work, so I will try to spell it out in very simple terms. If something is not made illegal under the law, it is generally considered to be legal. The law mentions nothing about you eating or breathing, so those are considered to be legal activities. The law in Texas mentions nothing about account wagering. A former AG wrote an opinion and sent a letter to the ADWs telling them that since account wagering is not mentioned under Texas law, it is not legal. Most ADWs ignored the letter and correctly came to the conclusion that account wagering is not illegal in Texas because the law does not make it illegal. A couple decided that it would not be worth any potential hassles to challenge the opinion and decided not to offer account wagering services to Texas residents. That is cowardly.

You made a claim. As usual it was wrong, and that is evidenced by every member of this forum who is a Texas resident and has an account with an ADW that is perfectly legal.

[cj's dad]

Texas is a great place to live.

The weather is usually awesome. When many of you guys were on this forum griping about shoveling snow, I was out playing tennis!

We have great colleges.

The women are hot!

The sports teams are good....we have a lot of champions....Tim Duncan, David Robinson, Hakeem Olajuwon, Roger Staubach, Troy Aikman, Emmitt Smith, Tony Dorsett, Doak Walker, Sammy Baugh,....plus many more legends from the world of sports.

Horseracing is good.

We have beaches, we have desert, we have woods, we have canyons, caverns, rivers, lakes, and an ocean, we have small hills that we call mountains!

People are friendly for the most part. In fact, in rural Texas, people still wave at you as you meet on the highway!

We have great barbeque! We have great Tex-Mex.

We aren't all crowded together in one place.

You can actually be out in the country in about an hour no matter where you live, even from downtown Houston.

We have a great history. We have arts and entertainment. We have great hunting and fishing.

Texas has something for everyone and for those who say they would never live in Texas.....no worries......we won't miss you...it just means more space for the rest of us!


Texas is a great state - having said that - exactly which OCEAN are you referring to.

[ezrabrooks]

Isbets: You are correct, the statute you mentioned does not refer to Account Wagering, and your reasoning is sound; however, the statue does provide that no wagering can take place in the State, except as provided by the statue. If you ask the State, it will say that Account Wagering is not legal. Most ADWs that take Texas residents will not allow these residents to wager on Texas Tracks, which is part of the contracts between the various Tracks and ADWs. My problem is with the Terms of Service of most ADWs who accept Texas residents. If the State were ever to go after the ADWs, it looks like the ADWs could come back on their customers. Just one more hassle that I don't want deal with. I don't know what the answer is, but do think that Casino gambling is just around the corner in Texas, so maybe this ADW confusion can be straightened out, one way or the other, at that time.

Ez

[Tom]

Easy fix. Move to Texas and change the law.
Unlike the other 49 states, Texas is still FREE.

;)

[lsbets]

Ezra - they all say we can't wager on Texas tracks, but the only track I have not been able to wager on is Lonestar. I have never had a problem betting on Retama or Houston.

[ezrabrooks]

Ezra - they all say we can't wager on Texas tracks, but the only track I have not been able to wager on is Lonestar. I have never had a problem betting on Retama or Houston.

I am not that familiar with what is available on the ADWs that take Texans. I have a buddy who is on Youbet, and he said that they have all the Texas Tracks blocked. It is a crazy situation. The State of Texas has bigger fish to fry than going after ADWs...that is for sure. As for me, I make the trip over to LS to wager. It is a pain, but one thing good about it, my wagers are between me and the machine.

Ez

[schweitz]

Prior to the sale of Lone Star to Magna you could wager on Lone Star in Texas via ADW's. The Texas Racing Commission made Lone Star off limits for on-line wagering for Texas residents as a condition of the sale to Magna. I have always been able to wager on Sam Houston and Retama on-line---however, since TwinSpires took over BetPad I have not been able to wager on Retama on-line.

[philcski]

Texas is a great place to live.

The weather is usually awesome. When many of you guys were on this forum griping about shoveling snow, I was out playing tennis!

We have great colleges.

The women are hot!

The sports teams are good....we have a lot of champions....Tim Duncan, David Robinson, Hakeem Olajuwon, Roger Staubach, Troy Aikman, Emmitt Smith, Tony Dorsett, Doak Walker, Sammy Baugh,....plus many more legends from the world of sports.

Horseracing is good.

We have beaches, we have desert, we have woods, we have canyons, caverns, rivers, lakes, and an ocean, we have small hills that we call mountains!

People are friendly for the most part. In fact, in rural Texas, people still wave at you as you meet on the highway!

We have great barbeque! We have great Tex-Mex.

We aren't all crowded together in one place.

You can actually be out in the country in about an hour no matter where you live, even from downtown Houston.

We have a great history. We have arts and entertainment. We have great hunting and fishing.

Texas has something for everyone and for those who say they would never live in Texas.....no worries......we won't miss you...it just means more space for the rest of us!

Texas is a great place, I was really impressed. I almost moved there a couple years back for a job (DFW area) despite the fact that I'd be giving up the only thing I love more than racing (skiing). But there's no question that some things down there wouldn't jive with my Yankee mentality, such as their cavalier attitude towards guns and the pervasive influence of the Baptist church on certain segments of life (such as the ADW issues). That said, it's seemed big enough that you can avoid that if you wanted to.

By the way, Lone Star Park is awesome. Friday night racing there is such a great atmosphere...

[NJ Stinks]

The women are hot!



No doubt about it. I never saw so many good looking women in one place as I did in Dallas. :ThmbUp:

[dav4463]

Texas is a great state - having said that - exactly which OCEAN are you referring to.

Gulf of Mexico is part of the ocean. You can go to South Padre, Corpus Christi, Galveston, and a few other spots.

[dav4463]

No doubt about it. I never saw so many good looking women in one place as I did in Dallas. :ThmbUp:

Practically every night in Dallas clubs is "Girls Gone Wild" ! It's great !

[dav4463]

By the way, Lone Star Park is awesome. Friday night racing there is such a great atmosphere...

It is a great atmosphere on Friday nights. Saturday was fun as well. The Beach Boys were there.....only a couple left, but still very cool !

That being said, Lone Star needs to repair 50% of the TV's and clean it up a bit. It's really starting to look run down. Also, there are quite a few rude people working there. It's still a fun place for the most part, though.

[prospector]

Practically every night in Dallas clubs is "Girls Gone Wild" ! It's great !
pictures please:jump:

[GaryG]

If Osama wants to piss somebody off he would be advised to pick somewhere besides Texas. Maybe Jersey or one of those other sissy blue states. Texans have pride and huevos, a tough pair to beat. They are also well armed.

In a different vein, Sam Houston was one of my favorite tracks to visit prior to the visit from Ike.

[Snag]

If Texas secedes, I will move there!

Tom, come on down now and beat the rush!

[Marshall Bennett]

What a fine place . I love my state . Whenever I leave I can't wait to get back . :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

[NJ Stinks]

If Osama wants to piss somebody off he would be advised to pick somewhere besides Texas. Maybe Jersey or one of those other sissy blue states.

Just to set the record straight, NJ has fought in and helped win every war this country has been in. Whereas Idaho was lucky enough to join us in 1890.

You can look it up.

[Tom]

How many toxic dump sites are in Idaho? :rolleyes:
I've been to Jersey. I still have flashbacks!

[NJ Stinks]

How many toxic dump sites are in Idaho? :rolleyes:
I've been to Jersey. I still have flashbacks!

And to think I never complain about Finger Lakes taking up space in my Racing Form.:p :)

[Tom]

Think of them as blank withdrawl slips. ;)
Just remember, I live in NYS, so who am I to throw stones? NY - worst state in the union.

[dav4463]

pictures please:jump:

I might get sued! Anyway, what happens in Dallas....stays in Dallas! :D

[cj's dad]

Think of them as blank withdrawl slips. ;)
Just remember, I live in NYS, so who am I to throw stones? NY - worst state in the union.


I challenge that remark !

[Bubba X]

So, what happened?

Is Texas still with us?

Against us?

What will happen to Texas' 500,000 welfare recipients?

Are they going too?

Anyone think about that?

[Tom]

Sending them all to Joisey!

[ElKabong]

So, what happened?

Is Texas still with us?

Against us?

What will happen to Texas' 500,000 welfare recipients?

Are they going too?

Anyone think about that?


Of course Texas is still with the USA. No need to break away.

As for the 500,000 out of staters collecting welfare, you can have em all back. ;) Lot of these people moved here from (Katrina) or the west coast looking for work & didn't pan out for them. I feel for them, but I hope they go.

[boxcar]

So, what happened?

Is Texas still with us?

Against us?

What will happen to Texas' 500,000 welfare recipients?

Are they going too?

Anyone think about that?

Most of this number are probably illegal aliens. So, they can be sent back from whence they came. The rest of them could choose to play by new rules or migrate to other states -- preferably blue ones like NY, NJ, MA, IL, etc. These liberal states, I'm sure, would welcome them with open arms.

Boxcar

[Bubba X]

Most of this number are probably illegal aliens. So, they can be sent back from whence they came. The rest of them could choose to play by new rules or migrate to other states -- preferably blue ones like NY, NJ, MA, IL, etc. These liberal states, I'm sure, would welcome them with open arms.

Boxcar

So, you've given up on Illinois for good, huh?

Quite the beaten down defeatist you are.

[boxcar]

So, you've given up on Illinois for good, huh?

Quite the beaten down defeatist you are.

The last time anything good came out of IL was Lincoln. But what since then? BO, Blagojevich, the Daley machine, etc., etc. :rolleyes: This is a state that should secede from the Union on the basis that it's an embarrassment to the rest of the nation.

Boxcar

[Bubba X]

The last time anything good came out of IL was Lincoln. But what since then? BO, Blagojevich, the Daley machine, etc., etc. :rolleyes: This is a state that should secede from the Union on the basis that it's an embarrassment to the rest of the nation.

Boxcar
What do think about Alabama?

[boxcar]

What do think about Alabama?

You cut a smart aleck remark about IL., so I gave you my opinion of that one state. End of story. (You may now resume playing with your blocks.)

Boxcar

[Bubba X]

You cut a smart aleck remark about IL., so I gave you my opinion of that one state. End of story. (You may now resume playing with your blocks.)

BoxcarIllinois has voted Republican in 8 of the last 14 elections.

Why did you give up?

[mostpost]

If Osama wants to piss somebody off he would be advised to pick somewhere besides Texas. Maybe Jersey or one of those other sissy blue states. Texans have pride and huevos, a tough pair to beat. They are also well armed.

In a different vein, Sam Houston was one of my favorite tracks to visit prior to the visit from Ike.

I live in the Midwest, but I hear that if Texas tries to secede, Obama is going to send in the Oklahoma cheerleaders to handle the problem.

[boxcar]

Illinois has voted Republican in 8 of the last 14 elections.

Why did you give up?

I hear there's a state called Illinois right outside Chicago.

And..."voted Republican" in what elections, specifically?

Boxcar

[boxcar]

I live in the Midwest, but I hear that if Texas tries to secede, Obama is going to send in the Oklahoma cheerleaders to handle the problem.

More likely BO would send his version of the "brown shirts" -- like the ones in the videos that were eventually removed from the web.

Boxcar

[ElKabong]

I live in the Midwest, but I hear that if Texas tries to secede, Obama is going to send in the Oklahoma cheerleaders to handle the problem.


You'd better hope 0u's cheerleaders are tougher than their football team is. Otherwise, it's Church for them.

[Suff]

The United States of America

[mostpost]

You'd better hope 0u's cheerleaders are tougher than their football team is. Otherwise, it's Church for them.

They don't have to be tougher than the OU football team. They only have to be tougher than a Texan. (or many Texans)

[ezrabrooks]

So, what happened?

Is Texas still with us?

Against us?

What will happen to Texas' 500,000 welfare recipients?

Are they going too?

Anyone think about that?

Since when do you have to be a US Citizen to get welfare?

Ez

[ElKabong]

They don't have to be tougher than the OU football team. They only have to be tougher than a Texan. (or many Texans)

45-35. 0u failed.

Next.

[JustRalph]

http://www.legis.ga.gov/legis/2009_10/search/sr632.htm


Georgia Senate re-asserts the right to ignore the Federal Government
This was April 1st and the resolution passed 43-1


Date Time Vote No Yeas Nays NV Exc Description
04/01/2009 9:41AM Senate Vote #340 043 001 007 005 RESOLUTION CALENDAR EXPRESSING THE WILL OF THE SENATE


Senate Resolution 632
By: Senators Pearson of the 51st, Rogers of the 21st, Williams of the 19th, Wiles of the 37th, Mullis of the 53rd and others

ADOPTED SENATE

A RESOLUTION


Affirming states' rights based on Jeffersonian principles; and for other purposes.

WHEREAS, the Ninth Amendment of the United States Constitution states "[t]he enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people" and the Tenth Amendment states "[t]he powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."


NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SENATE that this body reaffirms the principles of government expressed by Thomas Jefferson in a resolution written for the Kentucky legislature in 1798 stating that the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a General Government for special purposes, -- delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force; that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party: that the government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress; and
That the Constitution of the United States, having delegated to Congress a power to punish treason, counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States, piracies, and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the law of nations, slavery, and no other crimes whatsoever; and it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people," therefore all acts of Congress which assume to create, define, or punish crimes, other than those so enumerated in the Constitution are altogether void, and of no force; and that the power to create, define, and punish such other crimes is reserved, and, of right, appertains solely and exclusively to the respective States, each within its own territory; and
That it is true as a general principle, and is also expressly declared by one of the amendments to the Constitution, that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people;" and that no power over the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, or freedom of the press being delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, all lawful powers respecting the same did of right remain, and were reserved to the States or the people: that thus was manifested their determination to retain to themselves the right of judging how far the licentiousness of speech and of the press may be abridged without lessening their useful freedom, and how far those abuses which cannot be separated from their use should be tolerated, rather than the use be destroyed. And thus also they guarded against all abridgment by the United States of the freedom of religious opinions and exercises, and retained to themselves the right of protecting the same. And that in addition to this general principle and express declaration, another and more special provision has been made by one of the amendments to the Constitution, which expressly declares, that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press": thereby guarding in the same sentence, and under the same words, the freedom of religion, of speech, and of the press: insomuch, that whatever violated either, throws down the sanctuary which covers the others, and that libels, falsehood, and defamation, equally with heresy and false religion, are withheld from the cognizance of federal tribunals. That, therefore, all acts of Congress of the United States which do abridge the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, are not law, but are altogether void, and of no force; and
That the construction applied by the General Government (as is evidenced by sundry of their proceedings) to those parts of the Constitution of the United States which delegate to Congress a power "to lay and collect taxes, duties, imports, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States," and "to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the powers vested by the Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof," goes to the destruction of all limits prescribed to their power by the Constitution: that words meant by the instrument to be subsidiary only to the execution of limited powers, ought not to be so construed as themselves to give unlimited powers, nor a part to be so taken as to destroy the whole residue of that instrument: that the proceedings of the General Government under color of these articles, will be a fit and necessary subject of revisal and correction; and
That a committee of conference and correspondence be appointed, which shall have as its charge to communicate the preceding resolutions to the Legislatures of the several States; to assure them that this State continues in the same esteem of their friendship and union which it has manifested from that moment at which a common danger first suggested a common union: that it considers union, for specified national purposes, and particularly to those specified in their federal compact, to be friendly to the peace, happiness and prosperity of all the States: that faithful to that compact, according to the plain intent and meaning in which it was understood and acceded to by the several parties, it is sincerely anxious for its preservation: that it does also believe, that to take from the States all the powers of self-government and transfer them to a general and consolidated government, without regard to the special delegations and reservations solemnly agreed to in that compact, is not for the peace, happiness or prosperity of these States; and that therefore this State is determined, as it doubts not its co-States are, to submit to undelegated, and consequently unlimited powers in no man, or body of men on earth: that in cases of an abuse of the delegated powers, the members of the General Government, being chosen by the people, a change by the people would be the constitutional remedy; but, where powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy: that every State has a natural right in cases not within the compact, (casus non foederis), to nullify of their own authority all assumptions of power by others within their limits: that without this right, they would be under the dominion, absolute and unlimited, of whosoever might exercise this right of judgment for them: that nevertheless, this State, from motives of regard and respect for its co-States, has wished to communicate with them on the subject: that with them alone it is proper to communicate, they alone being parties to the compact, and solely authorized to judge in the last resort of the powers exercised under it, Congress being not a party, but merely the creature of the compact, and subject as to its assumptions of power to the final judgment of those by whom, and for whose use itself and its powers were all created and modified: that if the acts before specified should stand, these conclusions would flow from them: that it would be a dangerous delusion were a confidence in the men of our choice to silence our fears for the safety of our rights: that confidence is everywhere the parent of despotism -- free government is founded in jealousy, and not in confidence; it is jealousy and not confidence which prescribes limited constitutions, to bind down those whom we are obliged to trust with power: that our Constitution has accordingly fixed the limits to which, and no further, our confidence may go. In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution. That this State does therefore call on its co-States for an expression of their sentiments on acts not authorized by the federal compact. And it doubts not that their sense will be so announced as to prove their attachment unaltered to limited government, whether general or particular. And that the rights and liberties of their co-States will be exposed to no dangers by remaining embarked in a common bottom with their own. That they will concur with this State in considering acts as so palpably against the Constitution as to amount to an undisguised declaration that that compact is not meant to be the measure of the powers of the General Government, but that it will proceed in the exercise over these States, of all powers whatsoever: that they will view this as seizing the rights of the States, and consolidating them in the hands of the General Government, with a power assumed to bind the States, not merely as the cases made federal, (casus foederis,) but in all cases whatsoever, by laws made, not with their consent, but by others against their consent: that this would be to surrender the form of government we have chosen, and live under one deriving its powers from its own will, and not from our authority; and that the co-States, recurring to their natural right in cases not made federal, will concur in declaring these acts void, and of no force, and will each take measures of its own for providing that neither these acts, nor any others of the General Government not plainly and intentionally authorized by the Constitution, shall be exercised within their respective territories; and
That the said committee be authorized to communicate by writing or personal conferences, at any times or places whatever, with any person or person who may be appointed by any one or more co-States to correspond or confer with them; and that they lay their proceedings before the next session of the General Court.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United States of America or Judicial Order by the Judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not delegated to the government of the United States of America by the Constitution for the United States of America and which serves to diminish the liberty of the any of the several States or their citizens shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the United States of America by the government of the United States of America. Acts which would cause such a nullification include, but are not limited to:
I. Establishing martial law or a state of emergency within one of the States comprising the United States of America without the consent of the legislature of that State.
II. Requiring involuntary servitude, or governmental service other than a draft during a declared war, or pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.
III. Requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of persons under the age of 18 other than pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.
IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government.
V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press.
VI. Further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition; and
That should any such act of Congress become law or Executive Order or Judicial Order be put into force, all powers previously delegated to the United States of America by the Constitution for the United States shall revert to the several States individually. Any future government of the United States of America shall require ratification of three quarters of the States seeking to form a government of the United States of America and shall not be binding upon any State not seeking to form such a government.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Secretary of the Senate is authorized and directed to transmit an appropriate copy of this resolution to the President of the United States, each member of the United States Congress.

[socantra]

And such was the sense of the Georgia Senate on

APRIL FOOL's DAY!!!

[JustRalph]

And such was the sense of the Georgia Senate on

APRIL FOOL's DAY!!!


you gotta take the fun out of everything?