TexasCHLforum.com

This has me a bit concerned for our current and future CHL laws, or out right able to carry a firearm @ all. Real concerned. It can happen...what ya think?

Not trying to get toooo political...just my hair raised on my neck about the possible FACT me losing the ability to carry concealed. OR the law being nerfed to the point that I can carry, just can't use it.

Democrats vow to turn Texas Blue

AUSTIN — In their first meeting in the Lone Star State in more than three decades, national Democrats on Friday vowed to repaint red-state Texas in Democratic blue and assailed Republicans as obstructionists standing in the way of President Obama's economic recovery and health care initiatives.

"We're here to win, folks, we're here to win," proclaimed Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, saying that the DNC is prepared to stand "side-by-side'' with Texas party leaders to lead Lone Star Democrats to victories in 2010 and 2012.

Kaine also blasted Republicans for opposing Obama's economic recovery program at a time when America is trying to pull itself out of the worst downturn since the Great Depression.

"Texas Gov. Rick Perry openly opposed it and even threatened to secede because of it," Kaine said, referring to Perry's much-publicized suggestions that some Texans might be in favor of seceding out of frustration with the federal government. Perry has opposed the president's stimulus plan but has repeatedly said that he does not advocate secession.

More than 500 DNC members and party officials are attending the three-day meeting, which marks the first time the party leaders have gathered in Texas since a meeting in San Antonio in the 1970s. The meeting winds up Saturday, with Republicans planning a demonstration at the State Capitol to tell Democrats to keep their "hands off" Texas.

But the message from Kaine and other speakers served notice that national Democrats firmly believe that Texas is becoming a competitive state after years of Republican domination. No Democrat has won statewide since 1994.

Kaine, who has helped lead a Democratic resurgence in his own state, called the Texas Democratic Party "one of the best organized in America," saying it has helped produce a "tremendous acceleration" of party strength across the state in recent years. The DNC's decision to meet in Texas, he said, reflects the national party's recognition that Texas has the potential to become a blue state.

"Texas can do it, and Texas will do it," he declared.

It is my understanding that Texas can NOT secede. Understand that this happened after the civil war. What Texas can do.............it split into 4 states (thus adding 3 states to the current number.....the total number of states seems to be in question depending on if you count the stars on our flag or use the answer Obama gives)

This would give Texas a boot load of Reps and 8 Senators

Ok, my idea is divide into 4 states, give the one down by the border to the Dems and let them deal with the illegals how they want to, and let them bleed The Democratic State of Texas dry, and we will take the other three. More logical and sane voices in DC and we solve the illegal problem we currently have by enforcing the current laws but give the illegals a choice....go home or to the Democratic State of Texas.

Garry

My understanding was that Texas, under the original agreement when it entered the union, could secede if it did not become part of or join another nation, or it could opt to become four states within the United States. Technically, I guess, it didn't follow the rules when it seceded and join the CSA in the 1860s, but I doubt Lincoln would have seen it any differently even if Texas had just gone back to being the Republic of Texas - alone. Texas failed to take Sam Houston's advice in the matter (remain neutral) and it broke his heart. Dividing into four states would give the area we now call Texas more conservative representation (I think), but I believe the powers that be, as well as many Texans, would vigorously oppose any such move. Actually seceding, from my point of view, is a bit like saying the 2nd Amendment gives me the right to own and carry anything a basic infantryman does. That is exactly the way I see it, but it has little to do with me doing so without be arrested or at least severely hassled. The Indians had legally enforceable treaties out the kazoo, but did the Federal Government honor them outside of a very few which they choose to honor only because it benefited the US.

I was born and raised in the Great Lone Star State and would love to see Texas become the Republic of Texas again, but unless we could control illegal immigration, which it is now too late to do now, we would only end up becoming part of Mexico again within 100 years. Within 250 years, I believe Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and southern California will end up in Mexican hands or as corrupted as Mexico - anyway. The truth is, we should have invaded and annexed Mexico right down to the not yet Panama Canal back when we had the chance to. We would all be a lot better off today had we done this - us and those living in Mexico.

My 2 Cents - Soap Box Mode "OFF".

OK folks, be cautious with this thread. We do not promote the talk of secession on this forum.

Of course the best place to fight this is at the ballot box.

Nothing ensures someone elses victory better than apathy by the opposition.

Vote, vote, vote...well vote only once each time (we aren't in Florida )

Actually, if I was the president, I would have declared war on Mexico and invaded that part of the world and cleaned the mess! The drug mess that is.

We are losing the drug war. It is already lost. Drugs are national security threat number 1. The cost of drugs, in lives and money and lost productivity is the worst ever. Drugs just simply destroy generations.

2009 Assessment: http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/concern/18862/ndic_2009.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

To be noted 1/3 of the population adult as well as students smoke Pot, weesds, Hasheesh, that is the first step for the drug dealer to own you for ever! Some 1 in 8 teens are hard drug users

The ballot box is definitely the way to go with this...It is unfortunate that we have to deal with candidates flip flopping on issues all the time, though. If a person is running for office you would imagine they have considered most of the big issues, input their person beliefs and situation into them, and created a platform based on those thoughts and beliefs. And that they will vote that way in office when required to. Unfortunately, by the time all the nit picking and compromising is done, their own input is watered down, altered, or obliterated. When I vote, I try to find out not just the stance of the candidate, but their history on the issue. He/she can be pro 2A verbally all day long. Talk is cheap.

I would rather have a candidate elected who understands that this may just be a one term deal, that if he does not or cannot deliver on his promises, there'll be someone else warming that chair next election. Even if my guy doesn't win every fight, I expect him to be in there swinging....not sitting around yakking with lobbyists and fat catting it around the capital going on boondoggles....

I have to work to earn my money, so should they...

There are two kinds of dogs in the world. One will yip and nip and try to be dominant, the other will roll over and expose its soft underbelly when confronted. What kind of politician do I prefer? One that I agree with that has big teeth.....

Ouch!! Just sprained my ankle jumping off this soapbox!!

TEX wrote:My understanding was that Texas, under the original agreement when it entered the union, could secede if it did not become part of or join another nation, or it could opt to become four states within the United States. )

It's actually just a well propagated myth that Texas has the right to secede from the Union. The treaty under which Texas was annexed had no such provision. Just that we could be divided into five separate states.

Here's a Dallas News article on it for anyone interested:

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent ... 59869.html

Even if we shift more to the Dem side, I don't think the CHL laws will become unfair overnight.

lonewolf wrote: There are two kinds of dogs in the world. One will yip and nip and try to be dominant, the other will roll over and expose its soft underbelly when confronted. What kind of politician do I prefer? One that I agree with that has big teeth.....

The third type is the one that actually is dominant. I think that's the one with the big teeth you mentioned.

Agreed. I just kind of lumped nippers and yippers in with the type with big teeth. I've seen as many little ferocious as big ones. Either kind gets my respect. Willing to do the deed.........just preferably not on my flesh..........Have you seen the teeth on some of those little dogs? They look REALLY BIG when they're being aggressive.......

A couple of my friends had a chihauaha (sp?) that had HUMONGOUS teeth. Looked like something out of an old Alien movie.....no one could touch that dog but its owners. Very possessive/protective.

Not trying to be toooo political as well...Yeah right...Some know me too well to believe that...

In regards to the "S" word...I'd rather not, and just do what we can to keep it Red...

The democrats in this state are in a heap of sour grapes, simply because of the core conservatism that is the foundation of the people in this state...

Are we perfect, heck no, but since the sour grape party comes here and bloviates about how they want to rurn Texas into something it isn't so they can ride high on that accomplishment...

I say we can still keep them sucking vinegar as far as I am concerned...

That doesn't mean I say we can't allow them to try...Sure, knock yerselves out...Put all the effort you can into it...Throw all the money you can afford into it...Go for it!

From what I've seen, many dems here in Texas are pro gun.

Even if they werent, I can tell that the pro gun sentiment in this state is pretty strong.

Anti-gun activists have a nearly impossible job here; we already have very permissive gun laws, and there's no blood in the streets here.

Then again, I'm thinking with logic. Such things all to often do not make it into political discourse these days.

BrianSW99 wrote:

TEX wrote:My understanding was that Texas, under the original agreement when it entered the union, could secede if it did not become part of or join another nation, or it could opt to become four states within the United States. )

It's actually just a well propagated myth that Texas has the right to secede from the Union. The treaty under which Texas was annexed had no such provision. Just that we could be divided into five separate states.

Here's a Dallas News article on it for anyone interested:

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent ... 59869.html

I believe the article to be in error, also. I researched this a couple of years ago. The proposed treaty would have allowed the right to secede as well as subdividing, but the treaty was never ratified.

Texas then joined the Union by simple annexation.

That doesn't mean I say we can't allow them to try...Sure, knock yerselves out...Put all the effort you can into it...Throw all the money you can afford into it...Go for it!

That reminds me of the Blood,Sweat & Tears. song "Spinning Wheel", because that's all they are doing......spinning their wheels.

Well put stevie_d