Texas Secession resolution passes GOP committee

[Skylar]

you missed my point, the secessionists have already seceded. they are the democrats and the Obama administration.

Lol. You don't get to just change the meaning of words.

The secessionists are those looking to abandon the constitution and the united states. They are the ones pushing it in texas.

Are you against them?

the Texas people that you mention are not secessionists, they are patriotic americans that want the constitution to be followed. The liberals in DC have abandoned the constitution-------------------they have already seceded.

Is that too complicated for your thought processes?

Given the ignorance and stupidity of this post, you're in no position to question others' 'thought processes.'

But try to process this:

Residents of Texas are first and foremost citizens of the United States, residents of Texas subordinate to that, where their citizenship is immune from attack by the state – this is why it is un-Constitutional for a state to 'secede' absent the consent of the other 49 states (see Texas v. White).

For you and most others on the right this nonsense about 'secession' is nothing more than a partisan temper-tantrum because you lost the last two General Elections.

What you dumbfucks don't get is that it doesn't matter if secession is "legal" or not. Were the founders of this nation in compliance with British law when they signed the declaration of independence? Of course not.

If a state of states decided to leave the USA, they would be saying that they no longer will be subject to US laws. Would that cause a civil war? That is the question that should be asked. Not some foolishness about whether it would be "legal" or not.

Which would mean they are abandoning the constitution and what it stands for

So abandoning the constitution in 'defense of the constitution'.

Sounds like Texas to me.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

[ hater dupes. Ay caramba.

Thats another great Franco GEDism!! Submoron liberal Nazi illiterate is so sure of the truth he does not need to have reason to think it is truth.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So we should ask permission from the very people we want to break away from? Seems our 2nd amendment does the talking for us if it needs to come to that.

there is no harm in telling them your intentions are to free of them.

Nutjob terrorists on the march! Big chickenhawk moron talk. Change the channel and get some fresh air, hater dupes. Ay caramba.

Do you sound as stupid in real life as you do online?

You're right, calling for violent revolution is a great idea for the whacky idiot RW.

Dear, our Founders wanted freedom from liberal govt
They were whacky idiots to modern liberals.

 

[Skylar]

So we should ask permission from the very people we want to break away from? Seems our 2nd amendment does the talking for us if it needs to come to that.

there is no harm in telling them your intentions are to free of them.

Nutjob terrorists on the march! Big chickenhawk moron talk. Change the channel and get some fresh air, hater dupes. Ay caramba.

Do you sound as stupid in real life as you do online?

You're right, calling for violent revolution is a great idea for the whacky idiot RW.

Dear, our Founders wanted freedom from liberal govt
They were whacky idiots to modern liberals.

The founders generally didn't support the idea of secession. Violent revolution was a different story. But only theirs.

When others tried the same tactic the Founders stomped on them with both feet. Washington put his boot into Shay's ass up to about his knee.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The founders generally didn't support the idea of secession.

“The founders believed in it, there’s no prohibition in the Constitution against secession,” adding that the union was voluntary and therefore secession was also voluntary under the tenth amendment.
Nullification (U.S. Constitution) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaNullification_(U.S._Constitution)
‎
Thomas Jefferson and James Madison set forth the theories of nullification and interposition in the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions in 1798. Courts at the state ...

 

[Skylar]

The founders generally didn't support the idea of secession.

“The founders believed in it, there’s no prohibition in the Constitution against secession,” adding that the union was voluntary and therefore secession was also voluntary under the tenth amendment.
Nullification (U.S. Constitution) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaNullification_(U.S._Constitution)
‎
Thomas Jefferson and James Madison set forth the theories of nullification and interposition in the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions in 1798. Courts at the state ...

Madison explicitly rejected the idea of secession, as he didn't recognize the people of a single state as 'The People' as described in the Preamble of the Constitution.

He did support the idea of overthrowing the government in revolution...in theory. But didn't recognize any 'right to secede' under the constitution.

And of course, whenever anyone got violent and uppity during the era of the founders....they stomped them. Exactly as the English tried to do to them. The 'right to revolution' was a justification for their actions. Not anyone else's.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The founders generally didn't support the idea of secession.

“The founders believed in it, there’s no prohibition in the Constitution against secession,” adding that the union was voluntary and therefore secession was also voluntary under the tenth amendment.
Nullification (U.S. Constitution) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaNullification_(U.S._Constitution)
‎
Thomas Jefferson and James Madison set forth the theories of nullification and interposition in the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions in 1798. Courts at the state ...

Madison explicitly rejected the idea of secession,.

The Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 argued that each individual state has the power to declare that federal laws are unconstitutional and void.

 

[Skylar]

The founders generally didn't support the idea of secession.

“The founders believed in it, there’s no prohibition in the Constitution against secession,” adding that the union was voluntary and therefore secession was also voluntary under the tenth amendment.
Nullification (U.S. Constitution) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaNullification_(U.S._Constitution)
‎
Thomas Jefferson and James Madison set forth the theories of nullification and interposition in the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions in 1798. Courts at the state ...

Madison explicitly rejected the idea of secession,.

The Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 argued that each individual state has the power to declare that federal laws are unconstitutional and void.

With every OTHER state but Kentucky and Virginia rejecting the idea. That would be 14 to 2 AGAINST the idea of the states ignoring such federal laws. But it gets so much worse for you.

In the Report of 1800, Madison clarified his position, recognizing that the states declaring a federal law was void was merely a statement of opinion and was not legally binding.

Nor did the Kentucky or the G didn't say that the Constitution could be declared void. With Madison rejecting the idea of secession explicitly. As you've abandoned any talk of secession (despite it being the topic of the thread), I'll take that as your recognition of these facts.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

With every OTHER state but Kentucky and Virginia rejecting the idea. .

dear, our subject was not the "other states", but rather the Founders!!! Madision and Jefferson were the key founders!!! Sorry


Skylar: "The founders generally didn't support the idea of secession."

 

[francoHFW]

So we should ask permission from the very people we want to break away from? Seems our 2nd amendment does the talking for us if it needs to come to that.

there is no harm in telling them your intentions are to free of them.

Nutjob terrorists on the march! Big chickenhawk moron talk. Change the channel and get some fresh air, hater dupes. Ay caramba.

Do you sound as stupid in real life as you do online?

You're right, calling for violent revolution is a great idea for the whacky idiot RW.

Dear, our Founders wanted freedom from liberal govt
They were whacky idiots to modern liberals.

Liberal monarchy. Right.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

there is no harm in telling them your intentions are to free of them.

Nutjob terrorists on the march! Big chickenhawk moron talk. Change the channel and get some fresh air, hater dupes. Ay caramba.

Do you sound as stupid in real life as you do online?

You're right, calling for violent revolution is a great idea for the whacky idiot RW.

Dear, our Founders wanted freedom from liberal govt
They were whacky idiots to modern liberals.

Liberal monarchy. Right.

what?????

 

[francoHFW]

Nutjob terrorists on the march! Big chickenhawk moron talk. Change the channel and get some fresh air, hater dupes. Ay caramba.

Do you sound as stupid in real life as you do online?

You're right, calling for violent revolution is a great idea for the whacky idiot RW.

Dear, our Founders wanted freedom from liberal govt
They were whacky idiots to modern liberals.

Liberal monarchy. Right.

what?????

British monarchy was not liberalism. Libs and Dems are DAMN GLAD to have the Founding Fathers' constitution to stop semi-fascist New BSA GOP nastiness. You're a brainwashed ignorant functional moron.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

British monarchy was not liberalism. .

obviously it was dear, that's why our founders gave us freedom from monarchy and all other forms of powerful central govt.

Notice how the founders talk about government, not monarchy.

Jefferson Madision
16)the natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to grain ground; that the greater the government the stronger the exploiter and the weaker the producer; that , therefore, the hope of liberty depends upon local self-16)governance and the vigilance of the producer class."


-17)A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor (read-taxes) and bread it has earned -- 18)this is the sum of good government.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

. Libs and Dems are DAMN GLAD to have the Founding Fathers' constitution.

too stupid if so they would not be 100% opposed to the central principle of the Constituion and stand for nothing but growing central govt th eexact opposite principle of the Constitution

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

' constitution to stop semi-fascist New BSA GOP nastiness..

and the best example of new bsa gop nastiness is??????????????

 

[francoHFW]

' constitution to stop semi-fascist New BSA GOP nastiness..

and the best example of new bsa gop nastiness is??????????????

Trump unconstitutional religious bigotry etc etc

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Libs and Dems are DAMN GLAD to have the Founding Fathers' constitution.

too stupid Consitituion is to limit govt from stopping free speech, providing welfare, imposing religion whhile

' constitution to stop semi-fascist New BSA GOP nastiness..

and the best example of new bsa gop nastiness is??????????????

Trump unconstitutional religious bigotry etc etc

be specific sub moron!!! etc etc is an argument only in GED glass!!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Libs and Dems are DAMN GLAD to have the Founding Fathers' constitution.

too stupid Consitituion is to limit govt from stopping free speech, providing welfare, imposing religion whhile

' constitution to stop semi-fascist New BSA GOP nastiness..

and the best example of new bsa gop nastiness is??????????????

Trump unconstitutional religious bigotry etc etc

be specific sub moron!!! etc etc is an argument only in GED glass!!

Franco is too stupid and liberal to be specific.

 

[Redfish]

you missed my point, the secessionists have already seceded. they are the democrats and the Obama administration.

Lol. You don't get to just change the meaning of words.

The secessionists are those looking to abandon the constitution and the united states. They are the ones pushing it in texas.

Are you against them?

the Texas people that you mention are not secessionists, they are patriotic americans that want the constitution to be followed. The liberals in DC have abandoned the constitution-------------------they have already seceded.

Is that too complicated for your thought processes?

Given the ignorance and stupidity of this post, you're in no position to question others' 'thought processes.'

But try to process this:

Residents of Texas are first and foremost citizens of the United States, residents of Texas subordinate to that, where their citizenship is immune from attack by the state – this is why it is un-Constitutional for a state to 'secede' absent the consent of the other 49 states (see Texas v. White).

For you and most others on the right this nonsense about 'secession' is nothing more than a partisan temper-tantrum because you lost the last two General Elections.

What you dumbfucks don't get is that it doesn't matter if secession is "legal" or not. Were the founders of this nation in compliance with British law when they signed the declaration of independence? Of course not.

If a state of states decided to leave the USA, they would be saying that they no longer will be subject to US laws. Would that cause a civil war? That is the question that should be asked. Not some foolishness about whether it would be "legal" or not.

That states are claiming secession *under the constitution*. The founders didn't claim independence under British law. There is no secession 'under the constitution'. At least not unilateral secession.

Yeah, so what?

 

[Redfish]

you missed my point, the secessionists have already seceded. they are the democrats and the Obama administration.

Lol. You don't get to just change the meaning of words.

The secessionists are those looking to abandon the constitution and the united states. They are the ones pushing it in texas.

Are you against them?

the Texas people that you mention are not secessionists, they are patriotic americans that want the constitution to be followed. The liberals in DC have abandoned the constitution-------------------they have already seceded.

Is that too complicated for your thought processes?

Given the ignorance and stupidity of this post, you're in no position to question others' 'thought processes.'

But try to process this:

Residents of Texas are first and foremost citizens of the United States, residents of Texas subordinate to that, where their citizenship is immune from attack by the state – this is why it is un-Constitutional for a state to 'secede' absent the consent of the other 49 states (see Texas v. White).

For you and most others on the right this nonsense about 'secession' is nothing more than a partisan temper-tantrum because you lost the last two General Elections.

What you dumbfucks don't get is that it doesn't matter if secession is "legal" or not. Were the founders of this nation in compliance with British law when they signed the declaration of independence? Of course not.

If a state of states decided to leave the USA, they would be saying that they no longer will be subject to US laws. Would that cause a civil war? That is the question that should be asked. Not some foolishness about whether it would be "legal" or not.

Which would mean they are abandoning the constitution and what it stands for

those states would be declaring their independence just as the founders declared their independence from Great Britain. Forget the legality bullshit, it means nothing. Are you so naïve that you think some court would decide this?