Where do you stand on State succession?

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Work to make it work. Don't just cut off your nose to spite the assholes who are ruining things for everyone.

The results will not be what you now imagine.

Rather than relief you'll end up causing much, much pain.

Not worth it in the long run, until several generations are dead and gone.

Don't use permanent solutions to solve temporary frustrations.

This country isn't salvageable. All the incentives work in the wrong direction. Congress will never be reformed by profession politicians. The U.S.A is swirling down the toilet bowl.

If you think the people of the Roman Empire didn't know they were headed for oblivion, you're mistaken. They simply couldn't do anything about it. That's why the secession movement is gaining steam here. Plenty of Americans understand the same exact process is going on here.

Ah! Well stated!
The problem? Even our States are so embroiled in corruption it would take nothing short of a total elimination of both major parties, and trust in a new one, to establish the smallest governing body possible required for essential services such as a military.

All true. The coolest part of that story, is that the hordes of Barbarians didn't destroy Rome.

It bounced them on their ears, that's for sure, but it didn't destroy them.

What destroyed Rome, was Islam. Which invaded and shut down the means of Romans to trade. Just as it did for Europe, which of course resulted in what's known as the dark ages.

Anyone see the most recent British census? Islam is on the march in Europe.

But I wouldn't worry about it being a problem here. The US is SO full of highly principled people these days, that to even besmirch Islam here is practically taboo.

So I wouldn't worry about it.

 

[Indeependent]

When Texas secedes, does it return the 3.8 billion it took from TARP?
Speaking of which, why did Texas accept the bail-out in the first place?

Didn't all the firms receiving TARP money repay it? Is the federal government going to refund all the money Texans have paid in federal income tax?

Big talk Texas took the money (Texas was in major debt).
So where's the money?
Please refrain from posing questions that detract from the direct question.
A question which I wouldn't have asked if every Texan didn't possess a tremendous ego based on false State of Texas assumptions.

 

[kaz]

They do have the Port of Houston, oil, cattle, etc. They have a low 6.1% unemployment rate. If they could get treaties with other states in the Union, maybe they would be ok.

There would also be a flood of high achievers like me who move there and build up their industry. And they would not go alone. They might blaze the trail, but if they went, there are a lot of surrounding States that would follow.

I presume your new State would not allow entities that rely solely on Smoke & Mirrors quarterly results as opposed to actual achievement?

I would love that, but no, we will need some sort of government, just less than we have now

 

[Iceman]

When Texas secedes, does it return the 3.8 billion it took from TARP?
Speaking of which, why did Texas accept the bail-out in the first place?

Didn't all the firms receiving TARP money repay it? Is the federal government going to refund all the money Texans have paid in federal income tax?

Big talk Texas took the money (Texas was in major debt).
So where's the money?
Please refrain from posing questions that detract from the direct question.
A question which I wouldn't have asked if every Texan didn't possess a tremendous ego based on false State of Texas assumptions.

Texas is a net benefactor. It makes sense why the Feds wouldn't want them to leave. Texas isn't getting their dollar's worth in benefits that they pay in.

Is Your State A Net Giver or Taker of Federal Taxes? | The Big Picture

 

[Harry Dresden]

What socialism, fool- you're ALREADY .

Yeah, what socialism

.

Typical brainwashed ADD DUPE...''What socialism, fool- you're ALREADY paying for their health care, just in the stupidest, most expensive, cruelest way possible...just why ignorant businessmen shouldn't be in charge...see Booosh and Mittens.''

BTW, Texas would have fallen apart and gone cannibal without all that oil... PUBS CAN'T RUN ANYTHING- SEE HISTORY, HATER DUPES...

they are not doing a bad job here in Orange County.....5.6% unemployment...without your stupid ID card....dumbass Dem Dupe....

 

[Mojo2]

I like the idea of amicable divorce...

and I'm currently working through such a thing with my soon-to-be-ex wife...

why shouldn't states be able to do the same thing regarding their marriage to the U.S...?

Abraham Lincoln.

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate, we can not consecrate, we can not hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced.

It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gettysburg_Address

 

[Harry Dresden]

Big talk from brainwashed hater morons...politically.

Frankie calling others "brainwashed".....geezus Frankie....you wont even question your precious little party.....that makes you a Dem Dupe.....

 

[Harry Dresden]

Hey Bozo, you are free to leave any time. You don't like the United States of America, get your scuzzy ass out of here.

Why do liberals all sound like rednecks these days?

Why are RWers such crap citizens these days...

to a person like yourself Frankie,a crap citizen is someone who does not agree with you....so you are one in your own special little way yourself....

 

[Mojo2]

The United States become what it once was, prior to the recent collapse, because 'they all were separate, distinct and sovereign individuals, doing their own thing. Producing, earning, doing, fulfilling the fulfillment of their own lives, all of which summed to their being "the most prosperous and freest peoples on Earth".

And there's one and only ONE reason why the United States is no longer free and prosperous and, that reason is, a sizable percentage of the citizenry are no longer free, they no longer produce, they no longer pursue the fulfillment of their own lives, they've turned from the principles that define America, to the grope for 'the easier way.

They've adhered to foreign ideas that are hostile to those principles.

So, rather than fighting to preserve what we had even as recently as when "41" was still in the Oval Office, you'd throw your weight behind withdrawing.

That's not who we are.

That's who I am. I'm not the kind who goes down with a sinking ship.

This country is toast. You might was well get used to the idea. Hard times are coming. In fact, they are already here. Your children will enjoy a much lower standard of living and live in constant fear of their government.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0jnqy9Scvo]Marines' Hymn, slow version Iwo Jima "Marine Corps" "World War II" "military music" - YouTube[/ame]

 

[House]

Ironically wanting to maintain slavery was one of the big reasons the South seceded the first time, and this time it would be to escape slavery...

There's that public school education rearing its ugly head again.

The Civil War was fought over state's rights. Slavery was merely an exercise of those rights.

 

[Harry Dresden]

We could swap out Texas for Puerto Rico and never have to change the flag.

I think California and New York should just take over things and say unless you want to starve or go back to the dark ages, step in line and do as we say.

30 of Californias 58 Counties are at 9% Unemployment,15 of them are 10% or better .....still want them in charge?....

California Counties: California?s unemployment rate by county - Data Desk - Los Angeles Times

But golly, look...the absolute mostest librulest part of the whole state? 5.2%

what the hell does that have to do with what i said?.....oh you must be one of those party people....ok i can play....big bad Conservative Orange County is like no 3 at 5.5% according to the map.....see i can play that too.....how about the other 30 Counties?.....are they part of the State?....

 

[House]

don't tolerate intolerance.

The intolerance of intolerance is, by definition, intolerance.

Thus, those who do not tolerate intolerance are hypocrites.

 

[auditor0007]

For most of my life, I could not have contemplated the idea that I would support such a thing. But the curve of the country towards socialism and away from liberty is so steep that I would now not only embrace the idea, but move to a State that secession. What say you?

We could swap out Texas for Puerto Rico and never have to change the flag.

I think California and New York should just take over things and say unless you want to starve or go back to the dark ages, step in line and do as we say.

Texas will be blue before too long. No sense throwing them away.

 

[House]

I just don't see why anybody, liberal or conservative, should really care if a state that leans the other way should leave the Union. If the liberal northeast wanted to secede and form their own government then why in the world should that bother Texas, Arizona, etc..., or vice versa?

Easy: It fucks with the electoral college.

The way to fix that? Do away with the damned electoral college. Presidents are elected to govern people, not land masses. 1 vote should equal 1 vote.

 

[Mojo2]

That is another form of redress. But if enough of people in one geographical area want to leave, secession makes sense as well. That is what the OT is about.

Work to make it work. Don't just cut off your nose to spite the assholes who are ruining things for everyone.

The results will not be what you now imagine.

Rather than relief you'll end up causing much, much pain.

Not worth it in the long run, until several generations are dead and gone.

Don't use permanent solutions to solve temporary frustrations.

This country isn't salvageable. All the incentives work in the wrong direction. Congress will never be reformed by profession politicians. The U.S.A is swirling down the toilet bowl.

If you think the people of the Roman Empire didn't know they were headed for oblivion, you're mistaken. They simply couldn't do anything about it. That's why the secession movement is gaining steam here. Plenty of Americans understand the same exact process is going on here.

Here's a plan for restoring the Republic.

Now tell me why you think it can't work.

A Summary of ‘The Liberty Amendments: Restoring the American Republic’

by Mark R. Levin

Posted on September 24, 2013

‘The Liberty Amendments: Restoring the American Republic’ by Mark R. Levin (Threshold Editions; August 13, 2013)

Table of Contents:

i. Introduction/Synopsis

PART I: WHY THE LIBERTY AMENDMENTS ARE NECESSARY

1. The Birth of Confederation and the Framing of the American Constitution

a. Limits on the Power of the Federal Government & Federalism
b. The System of Checks-and-Balances: The Branches of Government
2. The Rise of the Federal Government: The Erosion of Federalism and the Breakdown of the Limits on the Central Government

3. The Effect of Big Government: Higher Taxes, More Debt and Less Freedom

4. What Can Be Done?

PART II: THE LIBERTY AMENDMENTS

5. Amendment 1: An Amendment to Establish Term Limits for Members of Congress

6. Amendment 2: An Amendment to Restore the Senate

7. Amendment 3: An Amendment to Establish Term Limits for Supreme Court Justices and Super-Majority Legislative Override

8. Amendment 4: An Amendment to Limit Federal Spending

9. Amendment 5: An Amendment to Limit Taxation

10. Amendment 6: An Amendment to Limit the Federal Bureaucracy

11. Amendment 7: An Amendment to Promote Free Enterprise

12. Amendment 8: An Amendment to Protect Private Property

13. Amendment 9: An Amendment to Grant the States Authority to Check Congress

14. Amendment 10: An Amendment to Protect the Vote

PART III: HOW TO ENACT THE LIBERTY AMENDMENTS AND CONCLUSION

15. Amending the Constitution: The Two Ways

16. Amendment 11: An Amendment to Grant the States Authority to Directly Amend the Constitution

17. Conclusion

i. Introduction/Synopsis

When the early states came together to discuss the possibility of establishing a confederacy, they did so with a great deal of hope, but also a great deal of trepidation. The hope was that a federal government might be formed that could handle the few issues that were common to all the states but which could not be dealt with by the states individually. The fears, on the other hand, were that this government might come to gain an enormous amount of power; that this power might come to be concentrated in the hands of very few; and that the federal government as a whole might end up overreaching its purview and meddling in affairs that ought rightly to be left to the states and the various local governments (if not individuals themselves).

Thus the constitution was framed in such a way that the power of the federal government would be split between 3 separate branches—each acting as a check-and-balance on the power of the others. And the power of the federal government as a whole was limited to certain specific areas—all other areas being left expressly to the power of the states and local governments (and individuals).

Over the past century, though, this original arrangement has largely been undone. Indeed, after numerous constitutional amendments—and loose interpretations of the constitution itself—each of the branches of the federal government has, by turns, usurped (or been left with) more power than it was ever meant to have, and the federal government as a whole routinely involves itself in matters far from federal in nature—to the extent that it now insinuates itself into virtually every aspect of life, political, economic, and social.

For author and commentator Mark R. Levin it’s time we reversed this situation. For while those who made for the changes may have thought they were strengthening the nation, the fact is that the changes have contravened the very wise principles upon which the nation was built, and the practical results have been nothing but negative. Specifically, the changes have left the nation with nothing but ever-increasing taxes, ever-mounting debt, and ever-more soft tyranny for some with ever-reduced freedom for everyone else.

And the reform we need, according to the author, runs more than legislation-deep. It is reform that needs to happen at the very source: it is the constitution itself that must be reformed. For only radical constitutional reform can undo the radical and misguided reform that has come before.

Specifically, Levin proposes 11 constitutional amendments. They include: 1) term limits for members of Congress; 2) the election of Senators to be returned to state legislatures; 3) term limits for Supreme Court Justices (and the opportunity for federal and state legislatures to override Supreme Court decisions with a supermajority); 4) limits on federal spending (with an eye to curbing federal debt); 5) limits on taxation; 6) limits on how much power Congress can delegate to the federal bureaucracy; 7) limiting the federal government from interfering with economic activity that does not pertain to interstate or international trade; 8) requiring the government to compensate property owners for the devaluation of property caused by regulations; 9) allowing the states to amend the constitution directly (without having to go through Congress); 10) granting states the right to overturn the laws and regulations of Congress with a supermajority; 11) requiring voters to produce photo identification at election booths.

Of course, the federal government cannot be expected to make the proposed changes itself (since many of the amendments entail limiting this government’s power). Thankfully, though, it needn’t; for as the author points out, provisions exist under Article V of the constitution that allow the document to be amended not just at the instigation of Congress, but at the instigation of a state-led convention—which is precisely what Levin is pushing for here.

What follows is a full executive summary of The Liberty Amendments: Restoring the American Republic by Mark R. Levin.

#43. A Summary of ?The Liberty Amendments: Restoring the American Republic? by Mark R. Levin | New Books in Brief

 

[hortysir]

Where do I stand on secession?




South of the Mason/Dixon Line

 

[House]

We conflate nothing. We aren't suffering from the leftwing delusion that socialism is a euphemism meaning "earthly paradise."

Socialism is the most perfect form of government that will never work due to humanity's imperfections.

 

[Agit8r]

Unbelievable that such things are still spoken of after all these years

"Even in the case of a mere League between nations absolutely independent of each other, neither party has a right to dissolve it at pleasure; each having an equal right to expound its obligations, and neither, consequently a greater right to pronounce the compact void than the other has to insist on the mutual execution of it."
-- James Madison; from letter to Nicholas P. Trist (Feb. 15, 1830)

At the 1787 Constitutional Convention a proposal was made to allow the federal government to suppress a seceding state. James Madison, the acknowledged father of our Constitution, rejected it, saying: “A Union of the States containing such an ingredient seemed to provide for its own destruction. The use of force against a State would look more like a declaration of war than an infliction of punishment and would probably be considered by the party attacked as a dissolution of all previous compacts by which it might be bound.”

Preceded by:
"The last clause of Resolution 6. [FN11] authorizing an exertion of the force of the whole agst. a delinquent State came next into consideration"

we can gain some more insight into what "delinquent" means through the remarks of George Mason:

"Will the militia march from one State to another, in order to collect the arrears of taxes from the delinquent members of the Republic? Will they maintain an army for this purpose? Will not the citizens of the invaded State assist one another till they rise as one Man, and shake off the Union altogether. Rebellion is the only case in which the military force of the State can be properly exerted agst. its Citizens"

Article 1, Section 1: Records of the Federal Convention

As you can see, "delinquent" refers to taxes rather than secession.

 

[bripat9643]

I like the idea of amicable divorce...

and I'm currently working through such a thing with my soon-to-be-ex wife...

why shouldn't states be able to do the same thing regarding their marriage to the U.S...?

Abraham Lincoln.

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate, we can not consecrate, we can not hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced.

It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Gettysburg Address - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Gettysburg Address is the biggest lie ever uttered by a U.S. President. If anyone was fighting for government "of the people, by the people and for the people," it was the Confederacy. Lincoln was a tyrant who wiped his ass on the Constitution. The entire purpose of the war was to prevent people from having the government they wanted.

 

[bripat9643]

Unbelievable that such things are still spoken of after all these years

"Even in the case of a mere League between nations absolutely independent of each other, neither party has a right to dissolve it at pleasure; each having an equal right to expound its obligations, and neither, consequently a greater right to pronounce the compact void than the other has to insist on the mutual execution of it."
-- James Madison; from letter to Nicholas P. Trist (Feb. 15, 1830)

At the 1787 Constitutional Convention a proposal was made to allow the federal government to suppress a seceding state. James Madison, the acknowledged father of our Constitution, rejected it, saying: “A Union of the States containing such an ingredient seemed to provide for its own destruction. The use of force against a State would look more like a declaration of war than an infliction of punishment and would probably be considered by the party attacked as a dissolution of all previous compacts by which it might be bound.”

Preceded by:
"The last clause of Resolution 6. [FN11] authorizing an exertion of the force of the whole agst. a delinquent State came next into consideration"

we can gain some more insight into what "delinquent" means through the remarks of George Mason:

"Will the militia march from one State to another, in order to collect the arrears of taxes from the delinquent members of the Republic? Will they maintain an army for this purpose? Will not the citizens of the invaded State assist one another till they rise as one Man, and shake off the Union altogether. Rebellion is the only case in which the military force of the State can be properly exerted agst. its Citizens"

Article 1, Section 1: Records of the Federal Convention

As you can see, "delinquent" refers to taxes rather than secession.

Exactly. How does that support your claim about secession?