After all, Texas is a pretty dim candle, and none of the other rebel states are among the brightest in the box. Barack Obama has actually been doing a pretty good job, moving steadily closer to achieving his goal of converting the United States into a Muslim Socialist Democratocracy, only thirty or so degrees to the right of Germania, and if a few states have decided to secede because they can't bear the thought of his success, well, considering which states they are, is it not true that we might be far better off without them?
I want to make it clear that I am not motivated by any desire to be disloyal, but only by a concern that bringing to heel these places that are, after all, magnets for the batshit crazy, might not be worth risking the lives of our brave and loyal soldiers. To be sure there are parts of these states that are not half bad, and many of their citizens are undoubtedly displeased at the prospect of being governed entirely by lunatics, but should we sacrifice our young men and women for so small a percentage of the populations of those places?
And even if the rebel states are not forced back into the Union, there remains the possibility that, following the precedent set by the rebels themselves, those citizens in such relatively sane enclaves as Tucson and Albuquerque might secede from the secession (West Virginia offers another precedent) and rejoin the Union as new states. The disruption might well be worth it not only to the rest of America, but to the loyalists in the rebel regions as well. Indeed, such cities as El Paso might even be able to take refuge by joining the Republic of Mexico, to which they once belonged in any case.
As we embark on Operation Jade Helm, we should also keep in mind what happened the last time that Texas was part of the United States. We got stuck with eight years of that guy, not to mention that other guy (the one who set up a fake residence in Wyoming to get around the rule that the President and Vice President could not be from the same state.) Do we really want to run the risk of that sort of thing happening again, and so soon? Indeed, I do sometimes wonder at President Obama's determination to force the rebels back into the Union.
Perhaps he is doing it out of a sense of obligation to the memory of President Lincoln, because of the whole Emancipation thing and all, but despite Lincoln's determination to preserve the Union in 1861, I think he would understand the very good reasons to let some parts of it go today. Indeed, I suspect that were he alive to see what those places have become he would believe their modern lunacy to be even worse than the sin of slavery, and know that some places are just beyond redemption and are best dealt with by simply putting them away from us, to avoid any further contamination.
I suspect that the worst consequence of letting the rebel territories go would be that, once the foolish notions of their leaders had ruined the places socially, culturally, and economically, the United States might be faced, for the first time in its history, with the prospect of hordes of actual murderers, drug dealers, and diseased prostitutes flooding into the country from across our southern border. Well, I'm sure we'd be able to come up with a solution should the need arise. In fact I'd bet that establishing regular patrols by troops of loyal American pachucos could keep most of the rebel dregs out!
Finally, I'd like to say one thing to those presumptuous rebels who think that 90% of Americans not them are just worthless weaklings: You can have my latte and brie when you pry them from my cold, dead hands! No, really, you can have them. They are pretty tasty and I'd hate to see them go completely to waste after you've murdered me. If you try them you might even begin to develop some good taste yourself, and even be tempted to attempt subtlety of thought, and maybe even develop a bit of good sense. Well, probably not, but it's worth a try.