The Houston Chronicle Goes on the Record about Texit, and I respond.

Recently, the Houston Chronicle decided to post an article dealing with one of my pieces regarding Texas independence. You can read that in the link (http://www.chron.com/news/politics/texas/article/Texas-secessionist-want-place-in-presidential-9297870.php). They didn’t quite get things right. Also, their regular respondents attempted to malign the character of those who believe in Texas Independence, and substitute the actual arguments raised with the grotesque straw-men of their own imagination. So, I decided to respond on their site in five segments. Here’s the entire response.

I would like to thank the Chronicle for highlighting the views of many concerned Texans. I’m very pleased they took notice of my article, however I would like to address a few things.

First, let me assure those that may be confused, the Texas Nationalist Movement (TNM) is not calling for a place on the POTUS debate stage. If you read the ORIGINAL article, you’ll find that I was just marveling at how it only takes 15% interest to get such a national platform, but an issue like independence, that has greater support, tends to be ignored. I hope that clears things up.

Additionally, I’d like to take issue with the Reuters quote at the end of the article that seemed to downplay the number of Americans committed to Independence. Frankly, to describe 1/4 of the US or 1/3 of the Southwest states as “‘tiny'” is absurd. Elections tip on such numbers. Here in Texas, the number in favor of independence is stronger. Additionally, TNM has collected over 300,000 pledges to vote for independence when Austin gives us a referendum. With that many who are openly committed, experience suggests that this number represents many more who have not been quite so vocal. If given a chance at the ballot box, I’m confident that Texit would win the day, much as Brexit led the way of liberation to the U.K. from their own intractable bureaucracy.

I’d also like to address some of the concerns of your readers.  Members of TNM are Texans of many races and beliefs. Many of us (like myself) are veterans, and we are all very patriotic Americans, perhaps even more than the average American. This because we are patriotic for the thing that matters most, not the soil or the government, but the founding rights & principles of the U.S. contained in the Constitution; nothing more radical than that! It was to protect the principles of natural rights that our founding fathers seceded from Great Britain, and to those principles we are committed. In fact, we at TNM are so thoroughly loyal to that idea of America that we refuse to part with even one of our blood-bought constitutional rights!

It’s easy to forget that USA was very different than any other Union formed in the world. Most countries were built on loyalties of race/ethnicity, and had traditions that included the divine right of kings.  Not so with our own system of limited government, where the individual is sovereign. In current times however, instead of having to contend with a British monarch for our rights, it is our own federal government (originally conceived to protect Liberty) that every day takes progressively away decisions that rightly belong in the hands of individual citizens and consolidates them in their own inept grip, whether or not the Constitution (the supreme law of the land) grants them such authority.

As you may know, Texas’ relationship to the federal government is contractual, and a contract is only as good as the honor of the parties involved. If you were in a marriage where your spouse continually abused you and cheated on you, all while spending the money you had laid aside for your children, it is doubtful that a reasonable person would say to you, “Too bad! You have to stay married!” Certainly the founders didn’t believe this, and the 10th amendment of the Constitution reserves all power not given the federal government for States, including the power the leave the union. Furthermore, Article 1 of the Texas Constitution recognizes the inalienable right of the people “to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think expedient.” It also asserts that the “perpetuity of the Union depend upon the preservation of the right of local self-government, unimpaired to all the States.” No one can honestly say that this condition of unimpaired local self-government still exists. Every day, the federal government finds new ways to insert itself into local affairs.

Now, if you are unconcerned with Washington’s unconstitutional assumption of powers that are supposed to be reserved for the states and the people, if you are un-phased by unending deficit spending, and if you are happy to see federal courts overruling Texas law with only their own biases to serve as guidance, I don’t suppose anything I say will change your mind. But if these things do concern you, then consider this: decades of work by honest Americans to change this course have at the best only slowed the rise of authoritarianism and the profligate spending of Washington. If you want to retain your rights of speech, religion, or to bear arms, then peaceful legal independence is the only way. If we would preserve our values and keep from sliding into the economic abyss, then we’ll have to go it alone. However, here’s the advantage! Overnight, all of that abuse and corruption would be gone! Texans would be free to form their own responsible government, making sure not to repeat the mistakes of the United States, while preserving its best principles for future generations. And while there can be no guarantees of Utopia, I am confident that Texans know better how to run Texas than a multitude of politicians and bureaucrats more than a thousand miles away.

It should be clear by now that we can’t save the United States. However, through regained self-determination, we might just be able to save Texas. The alternative is to accept the current state of affairs, which, make no mistake, are existential: the continuing loss of Liberty and the economic ruin that must come from a government that CAN’T stop spending money it doesn’t have. There are moments when the right choice is obvious, and this is one of them. I’m with Texas!

Ryan Thorson

 

Original Article:

http://www.thetnm.org/something_major_is_missing_from_the_presidential_debate

TNM: FAQ page:

http://www.thetnm.org/answers

Pledge your vote for independence:

http://www.thetnm.org/vote

 

 

Advertisements

Trump Vs. Clinton, Round 1: More Tedious than Titanic.

So, the moment we were all waiting for! The big show! Monster versus monster, in an epic throw-down between two of the most dreadful candidates ever nominated… Or was it? Not being in favor of either of these contenders, though perhaps being slightly more against Hillary (we have a longer history of enmity), I didn’t feel that I had a dog in this fight. However, I was looking forward to an epic clash, hoping to at least see a good show and momentarily forget that one of these horrors will afterwards end up leading the country! This was supposed to be the one joy I was to going to get out of the remainder of this election, watching Trumpzilla and Mecha-Hillary savage each other for 90 minutes! “Cry ‘Havoc!’ and let slip the dogs of war.” Unfortunately, it was hopelessly anticlimactic and very disappointing. How could this be? All of the drama of the campaign was building to this point! This was THE moment that a candidate like Trump was chosen for, but in the end it was a huge let-down.

TrumpensteinTrump came out strong, at first. Trying to take charge and even slyly doing his thing where he shows disrespect by being respectful. Hillary initially fumbled, trying out a few pet names for Trump policy and failing miserably. She really ought to leave the name-calling to Trump; she doesn’t do it with the same panache. Don’t get me wrong, Donald wasn’t really winning on substance. Trump was using his usual shtick of saying anything he needed to, if he thought it would help him, leaving the voters to sort through and decide which parts he meant and which ones he didn’t.  His answers were often confused and often off-topic, but at least in style, this served him well. However, things quickly went downhill.

Donald let Hillary get away with calling him out on the birther issue without retorting that it was originally the Hillary camp that aired this conspiracy theory during her previous failed bid for the Democrat nomination. This was a clear error. Also, his actual defense against this came off as very weak. And as if this wasn’t bad enough, Trump didn’t know where to quit on the e-mail issue. He had a chance to address her challenge about releasing his tax returns with a curt retort asking when she was going to release the 30,000 e-mails she deleted from her illegal private server. Instead, he ruined an otherwise excellent opportunity to leave his audience wanting more by ineffectively going on and on about it, pitiably adding how much his lawyers advised him that he doesn’t need to release his tax returns. This is where things really started to turn against the Donald.

After this, Hillary started to get her pace. She was even able to let Trump make the case for her, tacking onto Trump’s boorish quip with her own version of “There you go again.” And Trump, as if trying to assist Hillary, started talking about the areas where they agreed, clearly trying to appeal to his own tribe of liberals. At one point, Trump endorsed the “no-fly, no-buy” proposal, an unconstitutional abridgement of the second amendment! Although he’s been in favor of U.S. Senator Hillary Clinton gestures from the stage at the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denverthis for a while, never before has this particular position received this kind of public airing. It is likely to cost with his base. Even his interrupting himself on this topic to remind the audience of his NRA endorsement will probably do nothing to help him mitigate the damages.

Most excruciating of all, at least for those of us who tried to reason with the Trump crowd during the primary that this was likely to happen should Donald become the nominee, Hillary laid into Trump on his bad record with women and race! Donald could not properly parry this. He was so much on defense that he wasn’t able to strike back effectively. Even his well-worn claim of how his opponent was “unfair” couldn’t save him. Trump ridiculously commented on how nasty Hillary had been to him in ads and so forth, and how he was going to hit her back by saying something nasty as well. Mercifully, he thought better of it, but made sure to let us all know that he held himself back! Who is Trump getting his debate advice from? Mike Huckabee? Pathetic.

Although Hillary presented like an automaton, I have to agree that she came off much better than Trump in this debate and is likely to get a small bounce in the polls. Trump came of as rambling, uninformed, and weak, not at all like he’d prefer to be seen: the alpha male. Hillary appeared prepared and with a working knowledge of the issues, while Trump appeared underprepared and was ill-served by his usually effective off-the-cuff extemporaneousness. Though not a KO (more like a TKO), It’s clear that Hillary won this one. Too bad. I was so much looking forward to something more decisive, dramatic, and entertaining; I had little else to look forward to with a binary choice of essentially two Democrats. However, I was even denied even this! And to think, the GOP nominee could have been Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio, someone who understands the issues and could have really sunk the knife into her highness! Instead, what we ended up with was a candidate who shows himself to be, in almost every way, out of his depth. I think that this race is once again Hillary’s to lose. The Trumpster will fight again, but this time he woefully underestimated his opponent, and I’m not sure that he has it in him to turn this thing around.

– Ryan Thorson