Subject: Re: Texas panhandle - 3 miles into New Mexico (?)<br/>
Date: Jan 08, 2004 @ 16:10<br/>
Author: m06079 (&quot;m06079&quot; &lt;barbaria_longa@...&gt;)<br/>
<a href="12774.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="12780.htm">Next</a>&emsp;[<a href="topic12740.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="12775.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="12777.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-1151123836">ah kevin but as usual you are altering what i said in order to <br/>
disagree with me<br/>
<br/>
no problem<br/>
but it is quite vivid in this case<br/>
<br/>
& so i would add that any unilateral attempt at multiplication by <br/>
texas would most probably be no less contentious than the <br/>
multiplication of any other state<br/>
whether unilateral or otherwise<br/>
 <br/>
& this certainty of contention or objection whenever one tries to <br/>
leverage ones value at the expense of others is a third reason why <br/>
texas doesnt appear to me to have acquired any advantage<br/>
<br/>
i mean beside the fact that she has already split into 6 states or <br/>
parts thereof<br/>
& the fact that every state can legally split into as many parts as <br/>
it likes anyway<br/>
per the constitution<br/>
provided the totality will agree<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
so its like<br/>
oh & you certainly have been preapproved for that additional 10 grand <br/>
on top of your regular line sir but we just noticed you already have <br/>
12 other grand outstanding<br/>
so we would like you to apply for this additional application & <br/>
security check too please if you wouldnt mind <br/>
etc etc<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
& so if that really is an advantage well i still dont see it<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
--- In <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="mailto:BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com">BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com</a>, &quot;Flynn, Kevin&quot; &lt;flynnk@r...&gt; <br/>
wrote:<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; -----Original Message-----<br/>
&gt; From: m06079 [mailto:barbaria_longa@h...]<br/>
&gt; Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 9:34 AM<br/>
&gt; To: <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="mailto:BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com">BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com</a><br/>
&gt; Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: Texas panhandle - 3 miles into New<br/>
&gt; Mexico(?)<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt;  (Snip)<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; &gt; & so texas does not appear to me either to have acquired any <br/>
&gt; &gt; advantages over other states from this act<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; I would disagree with your conclusion that Texas didn&#39;t acquire any<br/>
&gt; advantages over other states, even though I agree it would be <br/>
 </span></blockquote>contentious.<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; It has the specific right and expectation for eventual division <br/>
 </span></blockquote>built into<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; its admission into the union, and no other state had that TMK. <br/>
 </span></blockquote>That&#39;s not to<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; say there wouldn&#39;t be an argument if and when it occurred. But <br/>
 </span></blockquote>Texas has<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; sort of a pre-approved status, like those credit card offers I get <br/>
 </span></blockquote>every day<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; in the mail: &quot;You are already approved for a $10,000 Visa!&quot;<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; If Texas were to move on this privilege, the foundation for the <br/>
 </span></blockquote>arrangement<br/>
<blockquote><span title="qreply"> &gt; is already out of the way. Other states do not have this leg up. </span></blockquote></div>