Do you think Bush or his successor would simply say "Please, take all you want"?
Oh, you mean send commissioners to Washington to negotiate all issues concerned with the separation like the Confederacy did? That might be OK, but I sincerely doubt La Raza Unida could afford to pay for what they want to take.
But it is not up to me. It's up to the Californians. However, if La Raza Unida agreed to take some obnoxious Hollywood actors and actresses with them I might call it a deal.
It is a sorry situation that politicians of the last 40-odd years have put us in.
California? If Bush is smart, that's exactly what he'll do. As long as it stays inside Kalifornia.
The only reason La Raza Unida could take power in California is because a coalition of “moderate” Republicans who are terrified of being called “racist” (including President Bush) and anti-American leftist Democrats have failed to enforce our immigration laws. And even our legal immigration laws have been weakened by the passage of Teddy Kennedy’s 1965 Immigration Act, which nearly every Republican voted for out of (you guessed it) fear of being called “racist”.
In other words, the politicians empowering La Raza are the same ones who would be the first to scream “racism” at the sight of a Rebel Flag.
If La Raza does come to power in California, and given current trends it probably will, what would be the point of keeping it in the union? Our hack politicians didn’t flood California with third worlders out of pure stupidity alone. Granted, many of them are stupid, but there’s more to it than that. They wanted to change the demographics of the United States to make our land more open to centralized government and to create a massive dependent class in “need” of government services. Instead of the people selecting their leaders, our “leaders” are selecting their constituents. Many of our politicians don’t like the traditional population make-up of the U.S., so they’re replacing it with a new one composed of people with no traditions of ordered liberty, federalism, independence, etc.
California is the template for what they want to do to the entire country. California went Republican in every presidential election from the end of the New Deal through 1988, with the sole exception of the 1964 Johnson landslide. It elected Ronald Reagan twice as governor. Now it’s degenerating into a socialist wasteland which the GOP can’t win. Oh, a “moderate” guy like Arnold can occasionally win due to his action film star popularity, but otherwise the state’s lost to the far left wing of the ‘Rat party.
What would really be the point of keeping California in the Union? So that it can send two ultra-leftist senators to Washington? So that it can send forty or fifty or sixty (in coming decades as the population continues to swell) leftists to the U.S. House? So that it can provide a guaranteed fifty or sixty or seventy electoral votes for the leftist Democrat presidential candidate?
Lincoln fought to keep the South in the Union because he knew the South wasn’t hostile to the founding principles of the United States. If anything, Dixie was viewed as being obsessed with those principles, which is why it’s always been such a patriotic region. In contrast, who in their right mind would want a massively populated La Raza enclave in our midst?