That would have been kinda tricky, as Texas was part of Mexico, the settlers had abandoned US citizenship and sworn allegience to Mexico - and were pretty much Mexicans themselves.
I put that in there because sometimes these replies get complicated.
Actually, I think that's the true test of a post. High-test p-ratings are nice - but I like to see the conversation going. Twenty or so replies is a nice target.
As for that whole Alamo thing - Mexico for the Mexicans. Unless they are Texicans, of course, or Tejanos. In which case it's pretty much every man for hisself...
For some reason I signed up for a year of The History Channel Magazine. There's an article this month about the Alamo. Not one mention of slavery as a primary reason Texas sought independence from Mexico.
That T-shirt is not nearly short enough.
CK:
That would have been kinda tricky, as Texas was part of Mexico, the settlers had abandoned US citizenship and sworn allegience to Mexico - and were pretty much Mexicans themselves.
CK:
I put that in there because sometimes these replies get complicated.
Actually, I think that's the true test of a post. High-test p-ratings are nice - but I like to see the conversation going. Twenty or so replies is a nice target.
As for that whole Alamo thing - Mexico for the Mexicans. Unless they are Texicans, of course, or Tejanos. In which case it's pretty much every man for hisself...
What we call conservatism is actually a reactionary movement to make it the 19th century again.
nounverb911:
For some reason I signed up for a year of The History Channel Magazine. There's an article this month about the Alamo. Not one mention of slavery as a primary reason Texas sought independence from Mexico.
I'm having trouble reading the first paragraph because the reading voice in my head is just cold refusing to do the accent.
There are mornings when I just feel like forgetting the Alamo.
Texas: Time to appoint a federal receiver. Maybe Steve Ratner can do for Texas what he did for GM.