What do you think of THE COUNTRY of TEXOARKLA?
Saturday, May 1st, 2010 at
5:00 pm
You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “What do you think of THE COUNTRY of TEXOARKLA?”.
Filed under: Business Phone Systems
Neither the Texas Constitution, nor the Consti
Shoot! I’m movin’ down there, y’all.
I like it!
Just thought you might want to know, there are a few rather major flaws in your argument there…
Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1869) was argued before the United States Supreme Court in 1869. The Court held in 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".
And it is odd that I am not finding the treaty you were referencing… especially since Texas joined the United States as a state in 1846 not 1848… Arkansas in 1836… Oklahoma not until 1907 …. and Louisiana in 1812 (and add to that the state of Louisiana was purchased)…
In fact the only references at all I find to "Texas/Louisiana-American Annexation Treaty of 1848" is a bunch of forum posts on various sites trying to claim what you are trying here… The only treaty involving the U.S. from 1848 is the "Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, 1848" which was the peace treaty that ended the Mexican-American war.
So what I think is that it will never exist, as the basis you are giving is false.
I am there as long as Obama is not given a Visa to enter TEXOARKLA.
I’m all in, but we can keep the name the united states of America and keep the US constitution, because I’m sure Texoarkla would actually follow it. The rest of the former US can call themselves the Marxist Fascist States. But if the next election goes anything like the elections went in Japan we won’t have to worry about it.