Skip to main content

Today's Texas Political Forecast Calls For: secession, deportation...and deepthroating corndogs.

Texas Mojo
There's a saying that we've all heard:  that what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas. Now, I've never actually *been* to Vegas; the majority of my knowledge of Vegas comes from true crime novels and episodes of CSI, so I always assumed that had something to  do with murder, or doing cocaine with mobsters and strippers.

I suppose I could be wrong - it could quite possibly have less to do with murder; I am not totally sure (though I think I'm dead on with the rest.)

There's also a saying here in Texas...shit, there are lots of sayings here in Texas, and now that I think of them, they don't have anything to do with the Vegas one. So, I am not really sure where I was going with that.

In any case, what happens here...well, it's pretty obvious that shit doesn't stay here. Google anything related to Texas these days, and you'll no doubt come across a slew of articles and such, all more or less in the same vein: Texans are dumb, their politicians are crazy as hell, they want to secede*, etc...and most likely, that picture of Rick Perry (Governor of Texas, for those who don't know, and somehow missed the 2012 Presidential Race) with the John Holmes' dick-sized corndog.

Yeah. Shit doesn't stay here worth much. You'd think today's news feeds were all done by giggly seventeen year-old high school girls, with the smack talk that goes on. In fact, I think it's only the lack of "ZOMG, did u see what he said!!!1!" that leads me to think that maybe (just maybe) they're written by someone else.

Now, with that preamble out of the way, let me point out a few things:

1. You've probably guessed by now, I live in Texas.

2. The above statement makes me a Texan, if you will.

3. No, figuring out the above neither makes you smart nor wins you a prize, so sit the fuck down and keep reading.

4. While I cannot claim to know EVERY Texas resident (well I could, but I'm not running for office, so I will keep the lies to a minimum), I am reasonably certain they're not ALL mentally feeble.

5. Referring to #4, this means the following:


WE DO NOT ALL WANT TO SECEDE.



se-ces-sion  [si-sesh-uhn] 

noun

1.

an act or instance of seceding.

2.

( often initial capital letter ) U.S. History . the withdrawal from the Union of 11 Southern states in the period 1860-61, which brought on the Civil War.


See, it's that last part that gets me there. As memory serves, the last time someone tried that here in the US, it did NOT go so well for those that seceded. Unless of course, high body counts, economic ruin, and decades of regional shame define your concepts of "going well" and "success".



So, with that little historical precedent, it certainly makes secession look decidedly unfun and unsexy, right? Add in that SINCE the above bit of history the US has made it illegal for unilateral secession, it gets even less awesome - think more "The other 49 states are your enemy and want to kick your ass" and less "Oh hai, leave the Union, and get free oil and cupcakes."


Then there's the last little niggling bit, namely: HELLO, ELECTED OFFICIALS. I KNOW YOU "ACT" AND "REPRESENT" THE "PEOPLE'S INTERESTS", BUT HAVE YOU ASKED ANY OF *US* WHAT WE MIGHT THINK?


(It's at this point you are probably thinking, "Hey, jackass, ever heard of a representative governing body? They don't just do whatever you people wish, you know. The answer is, yes, of course, and as soon as we get one, I can tell you even more what I think. Oh, and you're wrong. Just so you know.)


Oh sure, there ARE some holdouts that think yeah, this is a good idea. They probably also secretly think by seceding, it'll restore us to some magical place where everything is great: the economy is solid, we have tons of everything, people all look like the Osmonds, and every TV station shows nothing but WWE and NASCAR. Now, I am not a wizard, or a historian, or whatever, but I am pretty sure that seceding does not cause these things to happen.


So, I am going to refer back to the comments about not everyone being enfeebled and/or related in some creepy Tobacco Road way, and assume that it stands to reason that NOT ALL OF US want this.

Let's take that a little further, OK? I know, I am probably interrupting your watching "Big Brother" or "Who Wants To Marry A Golddigger" or whatever reality spew you favor. Bear with me - I am nearly done. (Maybe).

So, should Texas actually do this (and by Texas, I mean, the crazy asshats in Texas politics who think being a politician means you get to do whatever you like. Asshats like Barry Smitherman. Not that I am naming names or calling anyone out, mind you. I would never. You know, the whole high school girl thing. That.), we, the people, would have:


1. The rest of the US as possible enemy territory.

2. Trade embargoes - not just for Cubans anymore!

3. A possible further internal civil war - not just Texas vs The US, but Texas vs Texas.

4. You know, we did actually steal Texas from Mexico...

5. See #4 - get the drift?


So, simple math and history suggests that, yeah overall, this is a REALLY REALLY REALLY bad idea. Worse than reading the whole Twilight series of books bad. Think about it.

Ok, but...but...what IS your point? Sure, not all Texans are dumb, and not everyone reading this is in Texas (assumption of my own - I am indeed a legend in my own mind.), and equally not dumb - we gather that secession is full of bad, and historical fail. Why bring it up?

Because, friends (you know, the ones of you I didn't pay to read or like this): You and I know this, but some Texas politicians don't, or worse, don't care. And like their tireless (and illegal) crusades against women's health and anyone who isn't white and wealthy, they'll push to make this a stupid (and quite possibly fatal) reality. If this happens, well...you can get the rest easily enough:

 People will die, and the situation for the whole country will be that much worse...which means you too, dear Readers. We spend a lot of money on overseas conflicts...now, imagine that, only directed inwards. Meanwhile, as the country fractures, where does that leave the nation, as a defensible whole?


*Update: Some time has passed since I started this piece. In that time, Greg Abbott (the Attorney General of Texas) has announced that he would like to be governor of Texas, and make this place into a Perry-esque conservative paradise. If you've read the prior, you get an idea of how bad that would be, right? Right. With that said, AG Abbott decided, during a recent rally to crowdsource for some ideas as to what the people want. Some answers included "Texas should succeed from the Union" and "Close the borders and deport all illegal immigrants, homosexuals, and liberals." Oh, and "secure the boarders".

(Again, review the earlier bits and let that sink in some)

"Succeed from the Union" - Ok, so I stand corrected. Apparently some bozos want us to leave the US. Or maybe it's people saying that they want success for...yeah, I can't finish that. Historical pro tip, folks - the last time anyone "succeeded" from the Union, they were not ultimately "secessful".  So, looking over the obvious problems in the first suggestion, I would like to counter with - how about increased history and spelling lessons? You know, EDUCATION? Yeah, that. That could go a long way towards improving things here...

and

"Deport illegal immigrants, homosexuals, and liberals" - where DOES one begin with this bag of insanity? Last I checked, deportation is a federal thing, rather than a state thing. But, let's pretend that Texas DOES become the conservative paradise of Whitemanistan. How then, does one prove someone's sexual or political preferences, let alone enact this into a deportable offense? Do liberals or homosexuals all look alike? What would stop this scenario from happening: "Border Security - are you a homosexual or a liberal?" "Nope. I love me some opposite gender action. Ronald Reagan sure was awesome." "Oh. Have a nice day, sir/ma'am."

"Secure the boarders" - well, I am not running a bed and breakfast, but yeah, I would want to make sure that my paying customers (if I were indeed running a B&B) were secure. Somehow, though, I do not think this is the intended meaning...

IS IT JUST ME, OR DOES THE LEVEL OF IDIOCY IN THE ABOVE MAKE ONE'S HEAD HURT?

Yeah, what I thought.

So - to sum up: Fellow Texans...fellow Americans...people who like Texas...fuck, people who've heard of Texas, or have a pulse, and nothing better to do: Don't let this be a reality.

After all, what happens in Texas...won't necessarily stay in Texas. This kind of dumb can come to YOUR neighborhood too.

Links, for people who like to see what all is what:


PS: For everyone else too lazy or scared to Google it, here's the link for Rick Perry deepthroating that corndog: http://republicofaustin.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/rick_perry_corn_dog2.jpg

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Syrian air base attack triggered blame on Obama for chemical weapons in Syria

Embed from Getty Images ( BlastingNews ) - Since the Syrian air base attack, the discussion over chemical weapons in Syria continues to develop with the new comparison between diplomacy and military action. In that comparison, the Obama administration is still taking some heat from conservatives about how they are at fault for doing nothing. In this article about a discussion that took place on Charlie Rose between conservative columnist Bret Stephens and former White House official Tony Blinken, the blame over Syria's chemical weapons is about what was declared and what wasn't. To add, Stephens continues to tow the Republican line about the former president's "red line" statement and how they feel it made America look weak. [ Please support this writer by sharing out the source article and/or this service by donating what you can via PayPal ]

Devin Nunes Gains GOP Support To Attack Mueller's Investigators

Embed from Getty Images Since being cleared by the House Ethics Committee in early December, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) has reportedly amp'd up his efforts to investigate those who are investigating President Trump over possible collusion with Russian officials during the 2016 presidential election. The committee initially began their investigation against Devin Nunes over allegations that he had revealed classified information to the public. This was determined when the California Republican arranged a spontaneous press conference in front of the White House one morning, after he had disappeared the night before to meet with then-unknown members of the President's National Security Council. It was later learned that those two unknown figures were Ezra Cohen-Watnick and Michael Ellis. Cohen-Watnick was one of the few White House staffers fired in August. It was during that press conference when Nunes claimed he acquired information that validated President Trump's cl...

Sen. Leahy, Emoluments Clause and 'Smug Judge' Neil Gorsuch

Embed from Getty Images ( Esquire ) - Since hearings for judge Neil Gorsuch started, the Senate Judiciary Committee -- as well as the rest of America -- has seen Gorsuch's personality on display. Esquire  details a series of questioning from Democrat Patrick Leahy that brought up President Trump's violation of the emoluments clause. Specifically, what he thought it meant. The article draws out quotes from Gorsuch where he sometimes seemed condescending in his answer or elusive in providing his opinion, knowing that at the very least, it was being "evaluated" over the current president. "Well, I am hesitant to discuss any part of the Constitution to the extent we're talking about a case that's likely to come before a court, pending or impending." The condescending part of his response is that no one knew what the Emolument Clause was until recently. Embed from Getty Images Giving Gorsuch a hard time in a hearing under the mo...