godd old texas gorvering

[sue sodenberg]

Perry pointed out that Texas had entered the union under a unique agreement that gave us the right "to leave if we decided to do that." Good line, but utterly untrue. No such agreement ever existed.

Facts aside, what's going through Perry's perfectly coiffed head is that polls presently show him losing his re-election bid in next year's Republican primary.
Thus, he's scrambling to excite the most rabid of the Texas GOP fringe by posing as a courageous defender of Texas sovereignty against meddlers from Washington. His chief target is $555 million in federal money that would come to our state under Obama's economic stimulus program. This is desperately needed money that would go straight into our nearly broke unemployment compensation fund, but he asserts that he will reject it, claiming that the federal dollars come with strings attached.

The "strings" are actually simple and sensible threads of reform that would help the hard-hit workaday people of our state. For example, the federal stimulus program requires that part-time workers also be eligible for unemployment comp. In today's harsh economy, when part-time work is all that many people can get, they ought to be covered, too. But common sense has never met Perry, much less befriended him, so he continues to posture: "We think it's time to draw the line in the sand and tell Washington that no longer are we going to accept their oppressive hand in the state of Texas," he recently spewed.

Yes, comandante, but what about that other $16 billion or so in Obama's stimulus money that you are going accept? For example, while you slap away funds to help working folks, you're eagerly reaching out with your other hand to grab $1.2 billion of those filthy federal dollars to put into your pet project of saddling Texans with a network of privatized toll roads. If it's a matter of principle, why not reject all federal money? Indeed, you used to be a cotton farmer who benefited from Washington's crop subsidy programs - how oppressive was that for you?

OK, our governor has not quite attained the Blagojevichian level of gubernatorial gooberness, but he's a striver, and he's only one bad haircut away from getting to the top. Illinois, we feel your pain.
© 2009 Creators Syndicate Inc.

National radio commentator, writer, public speaker, and author of the book, Swim Against The Current: Even A Dead Fish Can Go With The Flow, Jim Hightower has spent three decades battling the Powers That Be on behalf of the Powers That Ought To Be - consumers, working families, environmentalists, small businesses, and just-plain-folks.

* E-mail
* Print
* Share
Close
o Delicious Delicious
o Digg Digg
o StumbleUpon StumbleUpon
o Newsvine Newsvine
o Facebook Facebook
o Google Google
o Yahoo Yahoo
o Technorati Technorati
* Discuss

Posted in Politics, rightwing
2 Comments so far
Show All
Comment viewing options
Nanoo April 22nd, 2009 8:58 am

Nanoo

So, to secede from the Union is illegal. Do you really think that the rest of the States would take up arms and start a civil war? What if Vermont, Alaska, Hawaii seceded as there is much dissatifaction there as well. Frankly the empire is too big and results in little opportunity for the people to have much control, let alone a democracy.

What I heard on CNN was that Texas had a legal treaty that says the Republic of Texas could be subdivided into 5 States. Just imagine this increase in Congress.

* Login or register to post comments
* report this comment

EKATON April 22nd, 2009 9:28 am

In my opinion, if 2/3 of the voters in a state vote to secede, then the state should be allowed to secede. It would be interesting to hold non-binding referenda in states just to see how the populace would vote. The federal government is corrupt and out of control from top to bottom. Voting won't work. Petitions won't work. Demonstrations and civil disobedience won't work. Violence would only beget more violence. We are cooked. We live under a third world regime. Get used to it.

* Login or register to post comments
* report this comment

Join the discussion:

You must be logged in to post a comment. If you haven't registered yet, click here to register. (It's quick, easy and free. And we won't give your email address to anyone.)

[Frederick Schaffner]

Sue,

What is the purpose of posting copied opinions without the insertion of your own opinion to your blog post? I am curious to hear what you think about this issue you are posting on our Social Unity Community. I'm especially curious to hear why a constituent of another state is so concerned about our state government here in Texas.

I am a Texan extremely concerned with our federal government's overstepping of their enumerated powers. Gov. Perry's stand may not be favored by many here in Texas, and is obviously not favored by what seems to be most of the other states. But there are many other states in the union taking this same stance regarding soveriegnty...yet there's not a big stink being raised about those states. I believe this big uproar about Texas taking this stand and refusing to accept our federal government's attempts to control our state's decisions is mainly due to the very fact Texas was not annexed into the union, and therefore could take the path of secession if the constituents of Texas so choose...and do take notice I said "constituents", not state government.

As to the money Texas is accepting...and might I point out this is money Texans have given to the federal gov't to begin with (it's our money)...which many individuals are putting spins about it being used for projects saddling Texans with burdons. Those very same people making statements of that nature neglect to tell the whole truth, only making statements which seem to support their agenda of dictating what Texans can and can't do.

I'm surprised, Sue, that you seem to feel a state's right to sovereignty is a detrimental stand for a state to take, and must somehow be destroyed. Yet this federal government of ours is taking our great country down a destructive path, and you choose to speak out about a state's right to sovereignty as if it's more destructive than our federal government's actions.

Please share with the community why you feel this issue of state sovereignty is more serious than our federal government putting future generations in debt with their out-of-controlled gov't spending and their overstepping of their enumerated power.

~SilverSurfer~