Arizona to Secede?

I am very curious to why you left out the 2nd part of my post.

Narrative History of Texas Annexation
Texans voted in favor of annexation to the United States in the first election following independence in 1836. However, throughout the Republic period (1836-1845) no treaty of annexation negotiated between the Republic and the United States was ratified by both nations.

When all attempts to arrive at a formal annexation treaty failed, the United States Congress passed--after much debate and only a simple majority--a Joint Resolution for Annexing Texas to the United States. Under these terms, Texas would keep both its public lands and its public debt, it would have the power to divide into four additional states "of convenient size" in the future if it so desired, and it would deliver all military, postal, and customs facilities and authority to the United States government. (Neither this joint resolution or the ordinance passed by the Republic of Texas' Annexation Convention gave Texas the right to secede.)

In July 1845, a popularly-elected Constitutional Convention met in Austin to consider both this annexation proposal as well as a proposed peace treaty with Mexico which would end the state of war between the two nations, but only if Texas remained an independent country.

The Convention voted to accept the United States' proposal, and the Annexation Ordinance was submitted to a popular vote in October 1845. The proposed Annexation Ordinance and State Constitution were approved by the Texas voters and submitted to the United States Congress.

The United States House and Senate, in turn, accepted the Texas state constitution in a Joint Resolution to Admit Texas as a State which was signed by the president on December 29, 1845. Although the formal transfer of government did not occur until February 19, 1846, Texas statehood dates from the 29th of December.

Opposition to Texas' admission to the United States was particularly strong in the North during this period. If a challenge to the constitutionality of the move could have been made successfully at that time, there is little doubt that the leaders of the opposition would have instituted such a suit in the Supreme Court.

Narrative by Jean Carefoot
Texas State Library and Archives Commission April 1997
Click to expand...
 
oldschooler.jpg
 
So, they have to ask you each and every time? How considerate. Didn't know that you can read minds whenever they're around to read threads. I do it automatically so they won't have to ask.
 
kokonut said:
So, they have to ask you each and every time? How considerate. Didn't know that you can read minds whenever they're around to read threads. I do it automatically so they won't have to ask.
Click to expand...

Ah okay. That's cool. Here's a pat on the back for ya.
I just thought it was irrelevant contribution to the thread (the image would be named as oldschooler.jpg on their read-out / braille software) that could be omitted.

I've done it in the past with Hear Again / Mrs Bucket and they've never had an issue with my posts?
shrug.gif


Thanks for your concern though. I will fix it for them when I notice discontented replies.
 
kokonut said:
So, they have to ask you each and every time? How considerate. Didn't know that you can read minds whenever they're around to read threads. I do it automatically so they won't have to ask.
Click to expand...

really? please provide description for your photos in your blog :cool2:
 
Wirelessly posted

Might want to brush up on the a and img code on your blog.

Mind you, my casual blog isn't blind-friendly either. The one I am working on as a side-project is however.
 
Last edited:
TXgolfer said:
Right.....so not 1812 as one has said 4-5 times.

I never maintained Texas had a "legal right" to secede. Only that it didn't happen in 1812.

Of course they could decide to secede illegally. Question is, would the U.S. try to do anything about it.

I wonder how many supported the revolution before it started???
Click to expand...

Need to go back and read again. The treaty was signed that negated their right to secede during the War of 1812. That is what I have said 4 or 5 times. And provided the link to support it.
 
Jiro said:
War of 1812 - the Hartford Convention. that was when New England wanted to secede from the Union. It is relevant to Texas-Arizona secession.
Click to expand...

Thank you. Someone who can sythesize!:lol:
 
TXgolfer said:
Might have been better if these had been added.... :)
Click to expand...

Looks like you have a bullet in your foot as well, there, old buddy.:cool2:

Wasn't a matter of misstatement on my part, but a matter of failure to sythesize information on yours.:cool2:
 
Steinhauer said:
certainly would .... if I was wrong.


Unlike some "certain" individuals that have a strange inclination to think they are right about everything.

Oh yeah .. "Jane Roe" finally admitted she was wrong.

Have a nice day ... gotta go now ;)
Click to expand...

The very fact that you still don't get it makes this all the more humorous.:laugh2:

Still limping on that foot?
 
Steinhauer said:
Yep .... and isn't it a nice little gem that she came out years later and admitted she was wrong?



Norma McCorvey - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Steinhauer said:
still hasn't owned up to their mistake .... quite doubtful if that will ever happen.

It would be nice if a specific quote was found in the article mentioned that Texas signed, or rather, waived, their rights to secession could be found ..... anywhere.


I guess "facts" can be made up :giggle:
Click to expand...

if New England cannot secede... then what makes you think Arizona-Texas can? :hmm:

better brush up on War of 1812 - Hartford Convention! you ain't done till when I say you're done! :nono:

kokonut said:
Bwahahaaa!! Classic! Classic!! That's the funniest thing I ever saw on what you posted (http://www.alldeaf.com/current-events/78052-arizona-secede-8.html#post1587375 ). I'm spilling my guts here on that one. Man, I guess you got a hold of Bob Andweave, eh? Hoooboy (*wipes tears away*).
Click to expand...
uh ohhhhhhhhh Bob Andweave just got Chuck Norris'ed! :-o and Chuck Norris didn't even move an inch!
 
Steinhauer said:
I can illustrate using an analogy to better show you with precise clarity .....


Mr. and Mrs. Union are a lawfully wedded couple. They both married, then began having marital disputes over marital duties. Eventually, Mrs. Union told her spouse, "you know what, I have had enough, you have made my life miserable and I simply wish to dissolve our marriage peacefully".

So with that, Mrs. Union planned her divorce. Mr. Union, however, was furious. He told her "You do not have the 'right' to leave me, it is important to our entire family that we stay together".

Mrs. Union said "Get bent, I am leaving".

Mr. Union then chased after Mrs. Union, beat her to a bloody pulp, burned down her parents back yard and house and dragged her kicking and screaming back into the marriage.


Did she have a right to leave?
Click to expand...

Fallicious reasoning. But to be expected.:roll:
 
kokonut said:
So, they have to ask you each and every time? How considerate. Didn't know that you can read minds whenever they're around to read threads. I do it automatically so they won't have to ask.
Click to expand...

Only after you were embarrassed into it after posting several audios without trascripts on a deaf forum. Please do not take that tone of superiority when guilt is written all over you.:laugh2:
 
It's pretty convenient when they forced Texas to agree to abide with the rules and if they go outta line, force Texas to break up into 5 states of "convenient size".

The smaller the population, the easier it is to control us. Main keyword, "CONTROL". Something that a Government loves to do, to control the masses into THEIR will rather than the will OF THE PEOPLE.

Yiz
 
Back
Top