Posted on 10/17/2013 8:45:51 AM PDT by ComtedeMaistre
Governor Rick Perry was once alleged to have stated that Texas could secede in the future. But he now states he opposes succession:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/onpolitics/2012/11/13/rick-perry-texas-secession-petition/1702359/
If the different states were to become different nations, the federal government would cease to exist. That means that the federal debt would be reduced to Zero. But the price that Americans would pay, would be the loss of super power status. Would Americans be better off or worse off, if the states were to become different countries?
Don, I don’t want or have any intention of shooting anyone. My point is that liberals should live with their kind, and conservatives should live with theirs.
It is patently obvious that we cannot live together and are damn bad for each other.
This can and should be done peacefully. A lib in Texas could exchange their house for one in Mass and funds made available to make the move. But if they don’t move, they would be considered persona non grata, would recieve no benefits, could not vote or hold arms, office or license.
Unfortunately our side is beholden to corrupt, feminized modern Christianity.
When they start killing us, the preachers will tell us to "turn the other cheek."
The US Constitution is silent on the issue of secession. Quit spreading lies you are acting like OBastard.
The US Standing Army is too small it invade Alabama let alone the entire South LOL.
I figure that nuts like Tim McVeigh are always ready to start insurrections long before I am.
Per Wikipedia:
Even many who agreed with some of McVeigh’s politics viewed his act as counterproductive, with much of the criticism focused on the deaths of innocent children; critics expressed chagrin that McVeigh had not assassinated specific government leaders. McVeigh had indeed contemplated the assassinations of Attorney General Janet Reno, Lon Horiuchi, and others in preference to attacking a building, and after the bombing he said that he sometimes wished he had carried out a series of assassinations instead. Those who expressed sympathy for McVeigh typically described his deed as an act of war, as in the case of Gore Vidal’s essay The Meaning of Timothy McVeigh. Other journalists compared him to John Brown.
McVeigh believed that the bomb attack had a positive impact on government policy. In evidence he cited the peaceful resolution of the Montana Freemen standoff in 1996, the government’s $3.1 million settlement with Randy Weaver and his surviving children four months after the bombing, and April 2000 statements by Bill Clinton regretting his decision to storm the Branch Davidian compound. McVeigh stated, “Once you bloody the bully’s nose, and he knows he’s going to be punched again, he’s not coming back around.”
Keep in mind, McVeigh committed his little atrocity in 1995 right after Clinton’s party had just lost 54 seats in the house and 8 in the senate. Clinton rode sympathy for the victims of the atrocity and concern about Militia terrorism into a second term.
It is easier to win an election against a political party with nuclear weapons than it is to win a war against them.
Texas v. White is the case ruled on by the Supreme Court that discussed the previous insurrection.
I know you don’t like it, but it is there.
The US didn’t nuke China or Korea during the Korean War. It didn’t nuke Vietnam either. It didn’t nuke Iraq or Afghanistan. But these yahoo ninnies want me to believe FedGov™ would nuke Dallas? LOL
So when a lib shows up and tells you to move out of your house, you will go peacefully?
Right.
The US Army has shown that it can grow very quickly, and recruit from a wide spectrum of the country.
You hate freedom.
And you hate reality.
The problem is the majority don’t live in those counties. It is split 50-50 between those 146 counties and all the others.
I hate freedom to enslave, freedom to steal, freedom to murder.
Do you support freedom to enslave, freedom to steal, freedom to murder?
There is no need to do that, the slime bellies will self deport. The ones that stay will live under the new Constitution that outlaws welfare and a few other things. No violence.
You mean like the Federales in 1860's?
As has been shown on this thread, the dividing line is not aligned with states, or even with county boundaries.
Keep dreaming that you are the only one that has strong convictions, and you will wake with a bump to find it is not so.
Damn. I'd hate to see a draft of your constitution.
Rather like the pretended confederacy that began their insurrection and war to protect their domestic institutions that permitted slavery, theft, rape, and murder for a select portion of the population, and inflicted those domestic institutions on other states.
The dividing line will be the entire states. In the densely populated Northern liberal states they will go along with the Federales. So yes, it will be state by state. The major cities in the South and mid west might have pockets of discontent but what are they going to do? Nothing. The jig will be up. They will be drafted and have to do their duty. The Welfare state will end. Or they can vote with their feet. The State is the next logical demarcation whether you think so or not.
Find a new preacher.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.