Posted on 11/26/2016 4:58:45 AM PST by Kaslin
As disgraced Democrat John Edwards liked to say, “There are two Americas.” There’s an America where people love this country, want it to be successful and believe in using tried and tested means like capitalism, conservatism, the Constitution and Christianity to make that happen. Then there’s an America where this country is shameful, deserves to be brought down a peg and all the old values that served us in the past need to be disgraced and destroyed. These views are becoming increasingly difficult to square.
Take Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama, for example. Are there any meaningful areas of agreement you have with them politically as conservatives? Do you agree with them on abortion, gay marriage, Obamacare, the Constitution, controlling the border, taxes, states’ rights, spending, judges, school choice, etc., etc.? Those disagreements might be mostly irrelevant if liberals were content to live how they want in states they control while leaving everyone else alone. Instead, liberals have worked incessantly to create an all-powerful centralized government that they believe should marginalize and prey upon people who don’t share their political beliefs. The idealized liberal world is one where you do the work, they take your tax dollars and give that money to people who don’t work as hard as you in exchange for keeping the Left in power. That unworkable liberal philosophy is inexorably marching the country towards bankruptcy and ruin.
…Which brings us to California and the “Calexit.” Inspired by Britain’s “Brexit” from Europe, a group called Yes California wants to put leaving the United States on the ballot for Californians in 2018. If liberals want California to secede, then conservatives should say, “Godspeed, Libs!” Of course, there are some caveats. Any nuclear weapons and military equipment should stay in the United States. Buy your own military hardware for your new nation. Additionally, large swathes of California aren’t liberal. Roughly half the physical area in California went for Trump over Hillary, for instance. Split the state in two and let the liberal half form its own nation while the conservative “new California” stays in the United States. Given the raw size of California and the deep political differences, the state should be split in two whether there’s a “Calexit” or not.
That begs an obvious question. The Yes California group has an argument about why Californians should leave the United States, but why should the rest of us want it to happen?
Well, if you believe that liberalism is destroying the country, getting rid of California would put a big thumb on the scale for conservatism. California has 55 electoral votes that are automatically in the liberal column every presidential election. Spreading those electoral votes across the other states, or, even better, having California leave while a smaller, more conservative California stays in the country would make it much more likely Republicans would be elected. That might literally be the difference between the country having a bright future and going down the tubes. Additionally, California has two liberal senators and 39 out of 53 of its House members are Democrats. You want to cement in Republican control of the House for the foreseeable future? That shift would probably do it.
That alone would be worth getting rid of California, but there are also economic considerations. For one thing, we wouldn’t need to pay California residents Social Security or Medicare any longer. Given that we’re talking about a state with 36 million people where 11% of the population was over 65 in 2015 with that number projected to rise to 18% in 2030, the amount of money saved would be staggering.
Then there’s the state’s enormous debt,
“Stanford’s PensionTracker.org launched last fall, initially listing local agencies, and last week added data for every state. California ranked seventh highest nationwide for debt-per-household when viewed through rose-colored glasses ($15,618); and third-highest in the nation when viewed through skeptic’s glasses ($77,700).
“I was a little surprised that the unfunded amount per household is as high as it is,” said Joe Nation, public policy professor at Stanford and director of the data project.
All told, California’s public pension systems are $281.5 billion short, including pension bond debt. Through Nation’s lens, they’re nearly $1 trillion in the hole – or $946.4 billion.”
Like Detroit, Puerto Rico, and Greece, California is headed for bankruptcy and by the time it’s done, the bill will likely be over a trillion dollars. If we could wash our hands of that problem, it would be good news for the country.
So, if California wants to say, “Hasta La Vista, Baby,” conservatives across the country should welcome it and do everything they can to facilitate a happy split.
Were those Propositions struck down by a state or federal court? Judges are not omnipotent, and it’s time we stopped acting as if they are, when they strike down the legitimate will of the people via voting.
Calexit? - how can I help...
Why fight (and die) to keep a people under a government that they truly and officially reject? (Even if it is the best the world has to offer)
It’s going to get bad and may be too late already to position yourself. Not even government jobs will be safe because many of those jobs are so dependent on the illiterate foreign national.
California has used global warming to create rail, bus lanes, bike paths, and high density apartments. All geared towards government dependency of illiterate foreign nationals.
This differs from 1977 where high-tech jobs could no longer find employees as they fled Los Angeles.
California has 34% of the countries welfare recipients with on 12% of the population.
25% of their electricity comes from out of state.
The only military base that would be hard to relocate would be San Diego naval Station.
There is optimism and ingenuity galore still, in California. A few ugly years and arise from the ashes anew like the Phoenix.
Going back on my notes on Ted Cruz, he campaigned against rogue judges. He would make a great addition to Trumps presidency.
Judge Mariana Pfaelzer U.S. Federal Judge
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariana_Pfaelzer
Canada and Mexico won't take them, but they will feel right at home in North Korea or Zimbabwe.
Just the blue counties. We will keep the rest.
I’m a nationalist and a loyalist. I don’t want to start balkanization and think calexit is foolish. That said, I wouldn’t support shedding even one drop of American blood to keep californication in the union.
Our emphasis then should be on protecting the liberties and political freedom of loyalists who might might find themselves behind leftscum lines. There is a precedent from the last time this foolishness was attempted: West Virginia. So if californication wants to go into rebellion and lose its statehood, so be it. A new eastern California with most of the land area will be the eventual result.
I wouldn’t put too much stock in Zillow estimates. What do your local realtors say?
FYI to the Trump staff; this is just one state. Then there’s the DEAD who voted, felons who RAT governors let vote and the gutless Congress did Zip, Nada, Nothing, RATs who voted multiple times in multiple cities and states, RATs helping the elderly vote by filling out their ballots, voting machines not registering the Trump vote and filling in Hitlery, and the list goes on all over the USA.
I agree with you. Judges are not omnipotent. Unfortunately, our nation has been treating them as such ever since Marbury vs. Madison when the Supreme Court seized a power not given to it by the Constitution. It’s called judicial review, and it makes the Court the final arbiter of what is and is not constitutional. In other words, it makes the Court omnipotent (not individual judges though).
>>I’d love to see a mass movement among conservatives into CA, buying the homes of the leftists on condition that said moonbats remove themselves from the USA. “Remove and Replace.”
One slight flaw in your plan; the commies never keep their word.
Don’t forget, conservative California or Jefferson, replaces it. I’m not quite sure about the remaining population, but two senate seats and maybe 8 house seats not to mention more house seats spread out among the rest of the US, that’s probably a net 60-70 vote swing in the electoral college. There will also be a true destination for illegals everywhere else, now they are the country of California’state problem. Sounds good to me, go for it California.
I wish I knew how.
2) When California votes for succession, the northern half and conservative counties will vote to form a new state, ala West Virginia. Precedence.
3) The rest of California will riot and the Federal govt will have to go in to stop the riots and control the border and immigration. Trouble makers in jail. undocumented foreigners deported.
It will be bloody but short lived and then the expensive rebuilding starts.
4) the unknown is foreign influence. Mexico I don’t think will want to get involved. They will have their own problems on their southern borders. They like the money but wouldn’t want to adopt a troubleesome rebellious state.
China owns a lot of debt and real estate there, I think they would prefer stability at this time.
Others?
But under Hillary and Zero, the story would be different.
MEXentry is more accurate.
All of this talk of “purging” is ridiculous. Look at the Red/Blue map. You’d have Swiss-cheese for a country.
I realize that no one has time to think about it, or even read the tiny document that is the US Constitution, but much of the angst we are experiencing is from failure in the structure of government. The founders of our government were, indeed, brilliant and most of the structural failure can be blamed on the idiots who followed and the amendments they added.
But, there is one area where the Founders (and State Constitutions) failed, and I don’t think they can be blamed for their lack of prescience.
They had no idea that people would WANT to live like rats, packed into a box 50 stories high living on top of each other’s heads!
Why do we have voting districts, and all kinds of structure for State Representation? Why don’t we have pure Democracy? One vote for everyone and on everything?
The answer is because people don’t naturally live that way. They live in families and communities and other identifications which are most often regional. When free to move, people naturally tend to enhance this regionality. An unopressive government would recognize this and try to keep rule as local as possible.
Now, we have mega-population centers. Even the protections the Founders put in place are not enough to preserve enough local rule for people to be happy. The State of New York or California is not regional enough to protect the freedom of a large number of people from the tyrany of rule of their mega-population centers. The farmers of upper New York and California have no more wish to be ruled by the faggots in NYC or San Francisco than those in Washington DC.
The modern city has created a defacto “Three Fifths Clause” which uses the body-count of large numbers of people to prop-up the tyranny of people who do not represent them.
So, the answer is not “purging” or a geographical restructuring, but changes that address this unaccounted-for change in the way people live.
However it is accomplished, the population mega-centers must lose the slaves on whose backs they have been riding. Voting districts already account for some of the nature of “space” that make people feel government is local enough. State boundaries can largely be enough when they do not encompass population mega-centers.
But, the Red/Blue map shows the failures. Millions of Americans are hostages to a failed structure that makes them unhappy with government.
One suggestion of change is proportional representation of voting districts over land-area within a State. Another is a limitation to State size.
Above all, just about every Ammendment after X should be removed. Monkeys should not be allowed to play around with automobile engines.
Does California expect to keep mineral rights? federal benefits?
Ports?
commerce?
what if not all of California wants to leave?
this is stupid is as California does.
Oh no! We’re keeping the military bases/reservations.
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.