The end of America has begun: TX & LA petition to secede

I just signed the Coal petition and several others.

jpete wrote:So you don't believe in the "Natural Law" philosophy?

The Constitution list some specific rights but certainly not ALL rights.

It even contradicts itself in the case of slavery for instance. Until the 13th Amendment, the practice wasn't specifically banned and it was upheld by SCOTUS.

But that still doesn't mean it "right".

Natural Law exists despite what any written or unwritten constitution or law says.

By denying the right to succession, you are using Lincoln's argument that a person, or state can voluntarily join a group, but then can never voluntarily leave.

If that makes sense to you, then you might be a statist...

I think we're arguing past each other or at least arguing different facets of this issue. I'm merely stating the legality of secession under current US Law while you're looking at it from a more humanist philosophical viewpoint (one shared by our Founders for what its worth). Secession was tried rather unsucessfully several times in our history and there have even been a couple of other rebellions based on a defiance of the Federal government (Whiskey Rebellion comes to mind as does Vermont's insurgency during the War of 1812). It was a debatable legal question all the way until Texas v. White in 1869 (IIRC, going off memory for the year there). It was threatened by the Federalists in New England in 1814 to disasterous effects (it led to the eventual dissolution of that party and for the only President to run for reelection unopposed). South Carolina threatened it in 1830 only to have Andrew Jackson browbeat them into submission before it became in open conflict and of course the Civil War and its outcome.

Philosophically, I think there are a bunch of peacable options for a redress of grievances and I think our system allows for them. I also think that any sort of dissolution of the Union would have disasterous long-reaching effects both in our nation and throughout the world. Take Texas as a perfect example (given their petition has the most support so far). They rightly state that they are the 15th largest economy in the world and that they have a balanced state budget. On the surface, that is very much true. However, there are a couple of minor issues with that statement. For example, they balance their budget by using accounting tricks and using federal funding to cover down on programs they won't cover (Medicaid, etc)with their own money. Their state economy is also fairly dependent on off-shore drilling...in federal waters. If they were to secede (and did so legally with a Constitutional Convention, etc), they'd lose those drilling rights and a huge part of their oil industry. They'd also have to start paying for border patrol and customs along their southern border (the Fed gov't pushes a ton of money into that). It'd be lose-lose for Texas and the United States. This is ignoring all the other federal funding they are dependent on for their economy (like the military money that Lackland, Hood, etc bring in). Its simply not a good idea for a whole bunch of reasons.

The Civil War established that secession from the union is no longer an option, but said nothing about expulsion.

Davian wrote:I think we're arguing past each other or at least arguing different facets of this issue. I'm merely stating the legality of secession under current US Law while you're looking at it from a more humanist philosophical viewpoint (one shared by our Founders for what its worth). Secession was tried rather unsucessfully several times in our history and there have even been a couple of other rebellions based on a defiance of the Federal government (Whiskey Rebellion comes to mind as does Vermont's insurgency during the War of 1812). It was a debatable legal question all the way until Texas v. White in 1869 (IIRC, going off memory for the year there). It was threatened by the Federalists in New England in 1814 to disasterous effects (it led to the eventual dissolution of that party and for the only President to run for reelection unopposed). South Carolina threatened it in 1830 only to have Andrew Jackson browbeat them into submission before it became in open conflict and of course the Civil War and its outcome.

Philosophically, I think there are a bunch of peacable options for a redress of grievances and I think our system allows for them. I also think that any sort of dissolution of the Union would have disasterous long-reaching effects both in our nation and throughout the world. Take Texas as a perfect example (given their petition has the most support so far). They rightly state that they are the 15th largest economy in the world and that they have a balanced state budget. On the surface, that is very much true. However, there are a couple of minor issues with that statement. For example, they balance their budget by using accounting tricks and using federal funding to cover down on programs they won't cover (Medicaid, etc)with their own money. Their state economy is also fairly dependent on off-shore drilling...in federal waters. If they were to secede (and did so legally with a Constitutional Convention, etc), they'd lose those drilling rights and a huge part of their oil industry. They'd also have to start paying for border patrol and customs along their southern border (the Fed gov't pushes a ton of money into that). It'd be lose-lose for Texas and the United States. This is ignoring all the other federal funding they are dependent on for their economy (like the military money that Lackland, Hood, etc bring in). Its simply not a good idea for a whole bunch of reasons.

So after all the "legal" avenues have been exhausted and the government still tells you to F yourself, then what?

Grin and bear it?

Go down with the ship?

You really think dividing up the country would hurt the state more than the Federal government?

Where does all that "military money" come from in the first place? Other than out of thin air, don't they have to TAKE it from the state in order to give it back to them?

The individual comes first, then the state, then the Feds.

What you are advocating is taking a Slim Pickens ride into the middle of Greece. The states NEED to get back some of the control they have given up over the years or it's going to be worse when the collapse comes and they are trying to depend on D.C. for their survival.

And to be clear, these petitions are meaningless other than they let the White House take the temperature of the country.

If they get the required signatures, it only entitles them to an official response from POTUS.

It's not like they are binding agreements or anything.

I like the idea of the petitions and support those that have signed them...if nothing else it does tell the white house that we are upset, and if enough people ban together, and I think 17 states says something about the division in this country. The squeaky wheel does get the grease and after a bit, things cannot be swept under the rug by the media. How can they ignore 17 states filing 25,000 petitions apiece?

I will say this...watch out! As a Christian I know that infidelity is a serious matter, but when infidelity becomes a media blitz...as it is right now, one of the three branches of government is most likely doing a shell game regarding something they do not want the American people to see. They do that by giving the media something to chase and parade on television to avert attention to something big being done regarding our country.

I'll bet my 4th born child that in a month we will be surprised by an act of Congress, or an Executive Branch decree, that was signed NOW while we were blinded by alleged affairs. What it is I do not know? I am just a dumb sheep farmer that lives in Maine who doesn't even have access to National Television. I try not to be nasty about politics either, but something is up I assure you.

By the way, I just learned today that while the typical Presidential Cabinet was made up of workers with 55-60% of them being active businessman/businesswomen...President Obama's cabinet is made up of only 6% businessman/businesswomen. To put that another way; 94% of his cabinet have been people who obtained their salaries from charities and public service sectors. 94%!! No wonder they gave bailouts all over the place and were surprised when Wall Street took the money they were given and ran with it...

Don't you all think for just a moment that this election says something about the majority of the country? If anything it says what lousy losers many in the country are, like in my side lost so I'm gonna threaten to leave, how about instead trying to work together with the other better than half of the country to try & figure out how to thoughtfully & peacefully turn this thing around? Maybe just maybe there may be a point or two that you got wrong, I know it's hard to accept but it just may be. Or you can go sit in a corner & pout like an adolescent for the next four years or better trying to divide the country even more.

I agree, the problem is, it is like trying to get along with the environmentalists...they do not make concessions on their part, only yours. They have a single agenda, they make concessions to make you give in, then they go for another throat grab until they get what they wanted in the beginning.

There is a fundamental division in this country: do we remain with the free market system that America is known for, or do we gravitate towards the socialist type of government that exists on the other side of the Atlantic? I see Obama's election as taking us in the latter direction, and since I have been on the other side of the pond, and saw first hand the economic down turn Ireland had a few years ago, I DO NOT want America headed in that direction. I came back from Ireland and said, "If you think America is bad, go over to Ireland and you will think we are doing great."

I do not see these petitions as a true effort at being a separate country from the USA; I see it as people saying "we are so mad we could spit, and we are not going to take this lying down." A true separatist movement...I do not think so.

Nicely put NS you do a lot better with them thar words then I.

samhill wrote:Don't you all think for just a moment that this election says something about the majority of the country?

Not gonna sway you but did you see this link Voter turnout over 100%????? Funny I didn't see you post in that section

I guess it is the majority of the country if 1/4 of the counrty votes two or three times



Eric

I also believe that those who sign these petitions are now logged in the White House "list" of potential enemies of the state for future use. My name is among them too. Oh well ....

SMITTY wrote:I also believe that those who sign these petitions are now logged in the White House "list" of potential enemies of the state for future use. My name is among them too. Oh well ....

I am sure as like me your name was their long ago Smitty.

good riddance to e'm anyway

Flyer5 wrote:

SMITTY wrote:I also believe that those who sign these petitions are now logged in the White House "list" of potential enemies of the state for future use. My name is among them too. Oh well ....

I am sure as like me your name was their long ago Smitty.

I hear ya Flyer.