and I thought that maybe I was the only person in the Country that could not live under a Hussein regime.
A strict immigration policy heavily weighted again liberals and biased towards merit would need to be established. After all, as their country crumbled under their own idiocy, they’d be clawing to get into the one still based on the Constitution and the Founders’ intent.
I’m beginning -I think -to understand the Tower of Babel. I have close friends and colleagues that start talking Obama-I swear I don’t understand them-
Secession would be the wrong answer. If there were a CWII it would be to re-establish the constitution and the republic and to do what should have been done in 1865 — throw out the democrat party, outlaw it and if necessary hang the traitorous leadership of the party. Those who don’t like it can move Canada, Mexico or France where they might feel more comfortable.
The United States that was left would no longer be able to afford being a socialist country..
The North Eastern socialist states would crumble as the parasites they are.. or come together in communism like that they almost already are.. Eastern "southern" States would form some other kind of communion.. The states that UNIONS control would form their own communion..
The Soviet Union broke up.. could the United States do the SAME?.. Good question.. No doubt about it.. a civil war or revolution is seething like maggots in a dead body.. in ALL the states..
FREEDOM is ALWAYS gained by much blood.. always.. How this polarization(of americans) pans out is ignored at much risk.. The "republic" is at risk.. What states make up the republic is to be determined.. Some will become a democracy and others will become a republic.. or stand alone countries.. allied in a republic like communion..
I vote for a revolution.. to clean the socialists out.. a civil war would become the mother of all riots I think.. basically anarchy..
That person standing next to you in the line at the grocery store is one of the ones you no longer wish to share the country with. Who is going to move?
There are people that attend political rallies and shout “USA”, meaning The Constitution, Rule of Law, Of, By, and For The People ...
And there are people that attend political rallies and chant “I WANT PIE!!” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGBH86k3Y8w
These people live next door to each other but they are from different, irreconcilable, nations.
There is no chance for a peaceful, ‘you go your way and I'll go mine’ sort of geographic split.
Worth considering... “who is john galt?”
If we return to the principles of the Constitution, secession is not necessary.
With a country as large as ours, a single all-powerful federal government doesn’t scale. There is no way that a single government entity can be nimble enough to account for the needs of both the people in large metropolitan areas like San Francisco and rural areas in Kansas. They have different needs, different standards, and different expectations, and trying to apply one set of rules to both leads to the divisions that we see now.
The problem is that neither the Republicans nor the Democrats have any interest in shrinking the scope of the federal government; once the power has been allocated, they’re obviously not going to give it back. We can’t assign the blame to one party more than the other, either; the Democrats hypocritically talk about civil liberties while clamping down on video games and speech that they see as “dangerous”, while the Republicans (Nixon, Reagan, Bush) have all expanded federal legislation to enforce subjective moral codes and limit personal freedom and responsibility (War on Drugs, prohibitions on gambling and prostitution). Read some of the conservative opposition to the Lawrence vs. Texas decision (http://www.glapn.org/sodomylaws/lawrence/lawrence.htm); it goes well beyond the correct analysis that it infringes on states rights, and moves into the frightening territory that the state should be in the business of regulating peoples’ sexuality.
The problem we have in America isn’t that we have groups of people with different opinions living in close proximity, but that we try to enforce our personal beliefs on others through federal legislation. Instead, we need to stop — at the federal level — raiding California medical marijuana clinics, censoring speech that is critical of Muslims or any other religious group, and criticizing people who engage in private sexual behavior that we find “icky”. Instead, if we were to apply those standards at the local level and leave the federal government to only worry about the borders and intrastate commerce, I think we would all see fewer calls for the next civil war from both sides.
It’s not possible to divide the country, since the split is more urban-rural than regional. Imagine the split between India and Pakistan, which was really enforced ethnic and religious cleansing that led to millions of deaths. Even if a regional split was the end point, tens of millions of folks “in the wrong region” would have to move, and it would be happening in the midst of a CW. Very ugly.
WPtG, here is one of the most recent threads. I will ping you to the other...
Jack Black here is one of the keepers of the CWII ping list; he can add you.
The one thing I would like to see in the separate nation is a fairer, and truly free press that is willing to report rather than propagandize.
To quote Angela McGlowan, America has been thoroughly bamboozled in this election cycle, hence why Barack Obama, one of the most radical Democrats in that party's history, will be sworn in as the 44th President of The United States.
...If secession is doable, then I'm on board. I'd rather live free than under tyranny...even if it means leaving the warm climate of California.