Texas goes to hell...or further into it

Once again Texas sending an fu' to the rest of the country and world by not caring about treaties, life, or pretty much anyone but themselves. This doesn't mean all texans have a party in it but all it takes is a majority.http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/08/us/08execute.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=execution&st=cse

only in a country that has three branches of goverment where there are supposed to be checks and balances could even with those powers being split equally between parties, could the one half being the least democratic (the word not the party) hold more power.

Judicial/Supreme Court - appointed not elected by the population (Republican controlled) LIFE TERM

Executive/President - technically not elected by a majority vote but nearly all are (Democratic controlled) 4 YEAR TERM

Legistlative/Senate - elected by entire state votes (Democratic controlled) 6 YEAR TERM

Legistlative/Congress - elected by local conressional districts which are are often drawn by appointed commities or other partisan measures. - while democratic in that they can represent and fight for more local issues, from a national perspective this leads to "pork-barrel" spending which is often derided from nearly everyone whose not getting it. although a 2 YEAR TERM helps counterbalance the influence it is also probably the most innefictive branch of goverment.

So why then does the party with the least "national consensus" somehow always claim a mandate and dictate control?

curious said:

Once again Texas sending an fu' to the rest of the country and world by not caring about treaties, life, or pretty much anyone but themselves. This doesn't mean all texans have a party in it but all it takes is a majority.http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/08/us/08execute.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=execution&st=cse

Click to expand...

After spending a year in Texas with the military, being related to a Texan and seeing all the games that family plays, all the hyper conservative/biblethumping/redneck/etc people that i have met there, I can honestly say that Texas is one of my least favorite places in the US. not saying everyone there is like that, but there are too many whoa are.

Ultimately, this was the right decision by the state of Texas. The defendant never bothered to tell anyone he was a Mexican citizen. He'd lived in the US since the age of 2, so he was Americanized enough that the police never had reason to suspect that he was not a US citizen (ohh and lets not forget that state level and below officers aren't even supposed to ask about the immigration status of an arrestee)

Ultimately it came down to whether or not the case should be halted for legislation that MIGHT be passed (and hasn't passed the last four times it was brought up). We don't apply justice based on what laws may or may not exist in the future, and it sets a bad precedence to do so.

I don't commend Perry for much (as he is generally useless and often detrimental to the state, see his recent college reforms), but I will commend him in telling Obama & Co to keep their nose out of state's business.

Judicial/Supreme Court - appointed not elected by the population (Republican controlled) LIFE TERM

Click to expand...

I suppose you were ok with it when it was Democratic controlled? And yes, you want them to be appointed and for life terms. You WANT the ultimate legal authority to be independent of political pressure or the whims of the public. If you want to see what it is like otherwise, look at the Texas Supreme Court (Civil) and the Texas Court of Appeals (Criminal). They're all elected and they issue rulings that reflect it.

It’s funny how people cheer when the system gets them that which they agree with or support, and boo when it goes against their ideals.

What you just saw was the checks and balance system at work. Also, I say bravo to Texas for not being a bunch of bitches who kowtow to what foreigners or other states think they should do.

Anyone who truly believes in diversity dreads a world where everyone agrees. The question is why do you dislike those who think and act different than you believe they should? Do you get angry when China arrests someone for criticizing the State? Do you post about the injustice Muslim women are subjected to every minute of every day? Do you post in outrage when their clits are cut off, when they are beaten legally, and raped legally? Where are your angry posts about gays in the Muslim world being killed for being gay? Or men and women arrested for touching in public?

You seem to save your hate for when a specific party in the US seems to get something you think they want. Just as I’m sure you see the actions of one side as hate-crimes, and the other side as free expression, or free speech. Its funny how that works. “If only everyone just believed as I do, the world would be so much better.” As the kids are so fond of saying these days, haters gonna hate.

Unrestigered said:

It’s funny how people cheer when the system gets them that which they agree with or support, and boo when it goes against their ideals.

What you just saw was the checks and balance system at work. Also, I say bravo to Texas for not being a bunch of bitches who kowtow to what foreigners or other states think they should do.

Anyone who truly believes in diversity dreads a world where everyone agrees. The question is why do you dislike those who think and act different than you believe they should? Do you get angry when China arrests someone for criticizing the State? Do you post about the injustice Muslim women are subjected to every minute of every day? Do you post in outrage when their clits are cut off, when they are beaten legally, and raped legally? Where are your angry posts about gays in the Muslim world being killed for being gay? Or men and women arrested for touching in public?

You seem to save your hate for when a specific party in the US seems to get something you think they want. Just as I’m sure you see the actions of one side as hate-crimes, and the other side as free expression, or free speech. Its funny how that works. “If only everyone just believed as I do, the world would be so much better.” As the kids are so fond of saying these days, haters gonna hate.

Click to expand...

Seems to me that the only question here was if he was not given the opportunity to contact his embassy....an age old "Right" of foreigners accused of crimes in foreign lands, then Americans could be refused that "right" in turn. There's a lot of place in the world where the police will arrest foreigners just for the sake of arresting them, and Americans, especially. This is not something to be taken lightly if you travel.

Jhari said:

Seems to me that the only question here was if he was not given the opportunity to contact his embassy….an age old "Right" of foreigners accused of crimes in foreign lands, then Americans could be refused that "right" in turn.

Click to expand...

Uh. How loud would the "the American cry" if Mexico actually DID that ? Seriously ?

And THAT sheds some light on the power - and power which can be abused.


But apart from that, I'd be cautious with Mexico. With all of these drug-wars going on (and the … was it the FBI ? the CIA ? - actually gave weapons to Mexico - with the thought to follow the weapons' trail into Mexico - but that just didn't work somehow).

Alrik Fassbauer said:

Uh. How loud would the "the American cry" if Mexico actually DID that ? Seriously ?

Click to expand...

If the American ha requested it an not received it, you're damn right we'd be pissed. The fact though is that this guy never even identified himself as a foreign national, had lived in the US since he was 2, and the left has made it particularly difficult for Law Enforcement to find out if someone is a foreign national (have to be worried about being accused of racial profiling!).

His attorneys were just using this as a ploy to avoid him being executed.

But apart from that, I'd be cautious with Mexico. With all of these drug-wars going on (and the … was it the FBI ? the CIA ? - actually gave weapons to Mexico - with the thought to follow the weapons' trail into Mexico - but that just didn't work somehow).

Click to expand...

ATF, and yes that was a colossal failure. Exhibit 1872305783 of why I don't trust the government to do just about anything right.

blatantninja said:

ATF, and yes that was a colossal failure. Exhibit 1872305783 of why I don't trust the government to do just about anything right.

Click to expand...

Don't kid yourself. The ATF did exactly what it set out to do there. And that thought is much scarier than incompetence.

No, they didn't accomplish shit. Their goal was to track the movement of guns from the US into Mexico and ultimately the cartels hands so that they could shut them down. Instead they gave them a ton of upgraded weapons and completely lost track of them.

blatantninja said:

No, they didn't accomplish shit. Their goal was to track the movement of guns from the US into Mexico and ultimately the cartels hands so that they could shut them down. Instead they gave them a ton of upgraded weapons and completely lost track of them.

Click to expand...

That was never their goal. Look closer.

Jhari said:

After spending a year in Texas with the military, being related to a Texan and seeing all the games that family plays, all the hyper conservative/biblethumping/redneck/etc people that i have met there, I can honestly say that Texas is one of my least favorite places in the US. not saying everyone there is like that, but there are too many whoa are.

Click to expand...

My brother lives just outside of Austin, and I couldn't disagree more with your analysis. It sounds like you're trying to stereotype an entire state based on your limited experience.

CrazyIrish said:

That was never their goal. Look closer.

Click to expand...

Sorry, I forgot my tinfoil hat today.

JDR13 said:

My brother lives just outside of Austin, and I couldn't disagree more with your analysis. It sounds like you're trying to stereotype an entire state based on your limited experience.

Click to expand...

Agree 100%. I've lived in Dallas and Austin and it is nothing like what he describes. Certainly there are areas like that, but to classify the entire state like that is blatantly ignorant.

blatantninja said:

Sorry, I forgot my tinfoil hat today.



Agree 100%. I've lived in Dallas and Austin and it is nothing like what he describes. Certainly there are areas like that, but to classify the entire state like that is blatantly ignorant.

Click to expand...

I don't know about Dallas, but I do like Austin.

Dallas has its good and back. It's full of 30k/yr millionaire douchebags, but has some great restaurants and nightlife. Plus its cheaper than Austin. I'd still take Austin over it, but its not bad.

blatantninja said:

Dallas has its good and back. It's full of 30k/yr millionaire douchebags, but has some great restaurants and nightlife. Plus its cheaper than Austin. I'd still take Austin over it, but its not bad.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, Austin is atypical to the rest of Texas. Austin is more like a northern city rather than a Southern city, but then again, so is Atlanta or Raleigh.

more from such a smart and wise man like rick perry
because jesus (christ) would put people to death.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43758839/ns/politics-more_politics/

also i'm not sure who the quote is by but it goes "every country has the government it deserves" which could be applied all the way down in scale. therefore like i said texas may be a diverse state but apparently no one took ap us history or failed bonehead history as we all know texas has always prided themselves as being fuck everyone else, hating mexico and really hardly a place for global thinking or rational behavior. i guess maybe those that fall in line with the pseudo christianity will have fun when they get the apocolypse they pray for and deserve when all the oil and in the world won't save their state from drought and burning to ash. but i'm sure when those federal tax dollars go to bail them out they can tought how much they love state rights. i'm not sure what the ratio in texas is but i know that california has one of the lowest rates on returns in funding to how much federal taxes they pay, yet ironicly texas is always the "model" for where to do business and california isn't. still i'd rather pay double taxes then live in a state with a fraction of diversity in both its people culture and natural beauty.


edit:the proof is in the numers
Texas gets nearly all its money back while california gets 3/4. i'd say that's a whole lot of dough since california makes up around 10% of the country or more.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/22685.html

texas is page 43 california is on page 5 and of course it should be now suprise that maverickly alaska gets over the two combined.

-----but we don't go war for oil, and we don't give tax breaks and sweetheart deals to those who make it happen. i'll say that at night 3 times before bed and jesus will save my soul and promise me trust fund babies---

curious said:

more from such a smart and wise man like rick perry
because jesus (christ) would put people to death.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43758839/ns/politics-more_politics/

Click to expand...

He's idiot. He was just right in this execution case.

still i'd rather pay double taxes then live in a state with a fraction of diversity in both its people culture and natural beauty.

Click to expand...

That's pretty ignorant. Texas may not have mountains, but it has a very diverse ecosystem and a lot of truly beautiful places. Big Bend is one of the most beautiful places I have ever been. As for culture, California doesn't have any more diversity that Texas. We both have strong conservative and strong liberal areas (though the proportions are flip flopped), strong Hispanic communities with roots going back to Imperial Spain, and large immigrant populations from India and Asia. Additionally, not sure about California, but Texas has several pockets of historical Czech and German culture that retain a lot of their cultural heritage.

edit:the proof is in the numers
Texas gets nearly all its money back while california gets 3/4. i'd say that's a whole lot of dough since california makes up around 10% of the country or more.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/22685.html

texas is page 43 california is on page 5 and of course it should be now suprise that maverickly alaska gets over the two combined.

Click to expand...

It ebbs and flows depending on who has power in Congress. Look at the historical numbers. Starting in 1981 (as far as that report goes back), Texas has never received more than it put in, while California did for the first half of the 80's.

well its continually gone down in california, which in addition to prop 13 passing around the same time has prop 13 passed around the same time in california which has, despite the dotcom boom years, made balancing budgets in california more difficult. whereas texas while not much more has steadily increased and if you factor in the price of oil in the 80's versus now.

also i wasn't saying texas wasn't beautiful but it is hardly as diverse as the lands in california, there's not to many state's that can have areas with mediteranian regions, huge mountain ranges, vast deserts, forests containing the largest and tallest and oldest living things, and not to mention one of the largest estuaries in the world with the bay and delta with the rivers that feed into it that encompass the entire middle of the state.

while texas may be ethnically diverse and only 5% more whites that california, both have huge hispanic populations though with texas having only 4% asian (which make up over 1/4 of the global population) i'd say that kind of exludes them from being a template of diversity. and although the african-american population is greater in texas i don't think i put that in a diversity column in any state that participated in slavery...

i've only spent a few days driving through texas many years ago as a kid, and granted it was only in the north, so obviously i'm sure there's plenty of beauty to see, maybe someday, but having been to 48 (all but hawaii in a car) of the 50 states (sorry michigan and louisiana...some day) texas would be in the bottom 10 of most memorable.

i was up at lake tahoe the last few days surveying and a lady from texas came up and asked what we were doing. the lake levels by the way are above the high water mark which hasn't been seen in well over a decade. she said in texas we could sure use some of this water with the drought and all, being scared of a fire burning it all away. i said it might be a good idea since they're dumping all this money into an oil pipeline from canada into texas maybe they should build a water aqueduct/pipeline instead. she thought it was a good idea and said i should do it and become rich. in reality even it were to happen, the only way to make money of that would be to have good lobbyists in congress to get overpriced contracts or to somehow be able to leverage an insane amount of money to start buying up lands that would most likely fall within a path to be built. also it would help if my bleeding heart extended to texas i guess. in the long run texas needs that water for more than dirty tar sands oil. so again i have to point out if the people of texas care about their fate they will come up the right solutions rather than letting the politicians and corporations dictate their fate or doom.

Your entire post reads like some kind of biased rant against Texas. Do you really think one state is superior because X amount of X race lives there? Texas has had the greatest increase in population of all 50 states since 2000, so it must be doing something right.

As far as California is concerned, yes it's quite diverse, and it also claims the nation's worst economy, the worst quality of air (pollution), and highest number of illegal immigrants.

talk about biased--your brief and incorrect statements i think show where ignorance lays. california hardly has the worst economy considering its still one of the largest in the world. bad air quality maybe in some cities but as a whole again that's a fairly useless statement as pollution and environmental degradation should be weighed as a whole, drinking water, waste etc. also in california we don't call them illegal immigrants due to the fact that we are made up of so many immigrants. also for the most part immigrants aren't treated as much like cattle as in other states due to there being a vital part of our economy and agriculture for over a hundred years. again i think calling them such and using that in a list a bad's shows how different/diverse california is to other state's and there attitudes. i could gladly lay into michigan if you like, though as i've said i've never even been there, but then i could 'reprimanded' for going off on another tangent. many of the greatest labor and civil rights leaders of the last century have come from this "illegal" immigrant population in california.

you do realize that blatantninja's sig was somewhat of an "inspiration" for the thread title combined with the fire threat and toss in the fact that it has a bible beating governer? also i think any unaccidental death is tragic so again i'm not going to apologize for any one or state who thinks they have the right to execute someone and i would gladly lay into my own state and its leaders if they did the same.

race hardly makes a state better, simply more diverse. the "other" diversity which you seemed to have missed was the land itself which is much more subjective than numbers but more important because you can ethnically mix up a state all you want but until we get grand terraforming capabilites most things done to a state usually make its lands less spectacular and do to its size, diversity, and lack of time having large amounts of people living on it california is worth its higher cost of living. again i can argue that point as i've lived here all my life, and someone who complains about the cost or economy can't really debate it. nor can i argue with you that a better economy (which must be a different michigan than i'm aware of) and lower cost of living are worthwhile tradeoffs for having to live in michigan.

if you think the greatest increase in population is a good thing...maybe you envy the average person in china or india perhaps? i mean they have such a high standard of living compared to those poor layabouts in europe!

increased population in a world with shrinking resources only looks good to the goons with power and the lackeys that will gladly do their biding.