Posted on 04/29/2008 11:20:59 AM PDT by mek1959
Like a marriage that has gone bad, I believe there are enough irreconcilable differences between those who want to control and those want to be left alone that divorce is the only peaceable alternative. Just as in a marriage, where vows are broken, our human rights protections guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution have been grossly violated by a government instituted to protect them. Americans who are responsible for and support constitutional abrogation have no intention of mending their ways.
(Excerpt) Read more at jewishworldreview.com ...
I like it. It is darned "skippy" the GOP isn't going to be anything but another part of the problem for some time to come!
And please don't try and bait me with they are better than any alternatives - I don't believe it!
“Unfortunately that question was answered bloodily in 1861-1865. Those who want to be left alone will be kept in the marriage by force of arms by those who want to control.”
Yep.
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.” - John F. Kennedy
That be the case, and I have no reason to doubt it is, it only suggests the "majority" of the people don't have a clue concerning our form of "Constitutional Governance" as intended by our founding fathers. But why should they, as a majority are products of the "Government" Education System and have no desire to seek information on their own.
The Rotund Lady may not be singing but she is darned sure clearing her voice, quite loudly. When she does break into full song, it might be entitled "The Sky just might Fall"!
Everything Mr. Williams writes about in this 8 year old article is totally based upon our Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Declaration of Independence.
I for one living in the Republic of Texas, could very easily support the concept Mr. Williams talks of - "Texiana" would be just fine with me.
“Taking up arms when you don’t get your way on economic policy is self-destructive.”
Our founding fathers did it.
People tend to forget what drove our founding fathers to take up arms against their government. A great majority of it was economic as they understood a man’s income is his life’s work and to take that is to take his life.
What do you disagree with?
So where exactly are you planning on putting your Obama bumper sticker? I suggest the window as the adhesive ruins the paint.
There are only two choices! McCain is better on every issue than the DEMOCRATS. Not just a little bit he is mile ahead of the Democrat.
Good luck supporting the DEMOCRATS though. Enjoy your new party!
So where exactly are you planning on putting your Obama bumper sticker? I suggest the window as the adhesive ruins the paint.
There are only two choices. McCain is better on every issue than the DEMOCRATS. Not just a little bit he is miles ahead of the Democrat.
Good luck supporting the DEMOCRATS though. Enjoy your new party!
CW2 PING
bump
There’s a lot more to it than economic policy.
This is lunacy; I will not partake in it. Taking up arms when you don’t get your way on economic policy is self-destructive.
I havent' read his essay for a while. But I don't think he's advocating violence.
Just because Lincoln took us down that route doesn't mean a peaceful dissolution of the union could not take place now.
Lets face it: the Blue state majority don't believe a war to oust a horrible dictator who has killed over 1 million people, used WMDs on his minorities, used rape as tool of government repression, and put living humans into plastic bottle shredders and watched them be torn to bits ..... they are unlikey to go to war over a few states opting out of FedGov.
These people could not possible logically support a war to force free Americans who had expressed their will in a free and open election to adhere to a political entity they no longer wanted to be apart of.
Leftists have no ideological straw to anchor them to keeping recalcitrant states in. Most of them already favor letting Hawaii go.
This is lunacy; I will not partake in it. Taking up arms when you don’t get your way on economic policy is self-destructive.
I havent' read his essay for a while. But I don't think he's advocating violence.
Just because Lincoln took us down that route doesn't mean a peaceful dissolution of the union could not take place now.
Lets face it: the Blue state majority don't believe a war to oust a horrible dictator who has killed over 1 million people, used WMDs on his minorities, used rape as tool of government repression, and put living humans into plastic bottle shredders and watched them be torn to bits ..... they are unlikey to go to war over a few states opting out of FedGov.
These people could not possible logically support a war to force free Americans who had expressed their will in a free and open election to adhere to a political entity they no longer wanted to be apart of.
Leftists have no ideological straw to anchor them to keeping recalcitrant states in. Most of them already favor letting Hawaii go.
15. Nafta, and the subsequent export of 3.5 million U.S. manufacturing jobs. (What next, a new global era CCC?)
I’ve actually come up with a modest proposal: to have state wide referendums to get a sense of the people that Puerto Rico should not be offered statehood, and/or should be encoraged to seek, and be granted, independence.
The case for no statehood for PR are strong on both the right and on the left.
The right / traditionalist conservative message is that PR is a Spanish speaking state, with a vastly different history and culture. Including it would change America from 50 more or less similar states (or maybe 49 as Hawaii is quite different from the rest) to something more like the British Commonwealth. This is not desirable.
From the leftist point of view the American “colonization” of Puerto Rico is the result of an unjustified war of aggression undertaken by an imperialist America of vicious war mongers on the slightest of pretenses. (I wrote this to sound funny, like the moonbats shrieking at Bush, but in truth it’s a much more accurate description of Tedddy and the Spanish American War then Bush in Iraq).
Also, it would be great fun. It would seperate real conservatives from Faux ones, it would provide endless blovation material for Rush, et al.
Getting to closure on this would begin a new aculturation process where Americans came to see that these things could be resolved peacefully.
Right now everyone goes right back the the civil war.
If we encouraged, through plebescites, PR to gain their independence, if the action of even a few states to say: “No, thanks, we really don’t think you’d make a good 50th state, in fact we don’t want a 50th state at all” ... helped swing the balance (now nearly 50/50) on the island away from statehood and status-quo and into independence we would already have accomplished our goal without even getting to majority status.
That’s a highly leveraged play, like those employed by Rove to win in 2000 and 2004!
It would set the stage for a more realistic discussion about splitting the USA.
If we don’t split and have some areas with the US Constitution in force, we shall have none. Because we ain’t gonna win the East Coast back, and they are too big and powerful to give up their media domination, their control of the Federal Reserve, the stock markets and all the other powers that accrue to them and allow them to dictate all aspects of our lives.
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.