Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

To The States: Should We Talk About Secession?
Market-Ticker ^ | 11 October 2009 | Karl Denninger

Posted on 10/11/2009 3:28:57 PM PDT by combat_boots

I'm going to go back to this quote by Barney Frank of the US House, because it says everything those in state and local governments need to know:

Barney Frank, the Massachusetts Democrat who is chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said in an interview that the defaults were, in essence, worth it.

“I don’t think it’s a bad thing that the bad loans occurred,” he said. “It was an effort to keep prices from falling too fast. That’s a policy.”

Got it? It's a policy to screw the state and local governments.

Huh, you say? It's simple, really: State and local governments rely on property tax revenues. Yet defaulted mortgages don't pay property taxes. Yes, there's a lien on the property but this doesn't help the municipal budget now.

And suffer they are:

Tax revenues used to pay teachers and fuel police cars continue to trail even the most pessimistic expectations, despite the cash from the economic stimulus plan pouring into state coffers.

"It's crazy. It's really just unbelievable," said Scott Pattison, executive

(Excerpt) Read more at market-ticker.denninger.net ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; Government
KEYWORDS: 10thamendment; 111th; bho44; bloggers; business; donttreadonme; economy; liberty; secession; states; statesrights; unfundedmandates; us
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 221-228 next last
To: April Lexington

“We were here first. The Federal “government” can go to hell...”

I like the way you think!


161 posted on 10/13/2009 8:21:38 AM PDT by antisocial (Texas SCV - Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: combat_boots

Count me in.


162 posted on 10/13/2009 8:26:15 AM PDT by My Favorite Headache
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AUH2O Repub

” If you want to try to destroy my country in 2009 you’ll be facing MY second amendment rights.”

“Anyone who even talks about this are TRAITORS to the United States. “

These United States are traitors to the Constitution. You just want to accept that and make nicey nice. I am loyal to the Constitution, not what a bunch of liberal commies are trying to turn it in to.


163 posted on 10/13/2009 8:32:08 AM PDT by antisocial (Texas SCV - Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

“Where does it forbid it?”

The 10th Amendment.


164 posted on 10/13/2009 8:34:59 AM PDT by antisocial (Texas SCV - Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: combat_boots
Texas certainly ought to secede, it's part of their agreement when they became a state.
165 posted on 10/13/2009 8:36:45 AM PDT by upcountryhorseman (An old fashioned conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Favor Center
There’s no “preserving” a voluntary Republic with force.
There was a little thing called the Civil War which happened almost 150 years ago, I believe your side lost. You can probably read about it in the history books if you look hard enough.
166 posted on 10/13/2009 9:04:43 AM PDT by AUH2O Repub (Palin/Hunter 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

What about the debt that will be foisted on us for generation after generation if we stay in the union with a correlating loss of freedom?

I’ve never said we could walk away debt free. But it will be far easier for Texas to recover from their own debt than it will be to continue to be saddled with the debt from Obama. Reid, Pelosi, Frank, Rangel, Schumer, etc.


167 posted on 10/13/2009 10:38:46 AM PDT by OrangeHoof ("Barack Obama" is Swahili for "Bend over suckahs".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: OrangeHoof
What about the debt that will be foisted on us for generation after generation if we stay in the union with a correlating loss of freedom?

And as far as I'm concerned you're free to go...so long as you take your fair share of the existing debt with you.

168 posted on 10/13/2009 10:41:26 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: lakey

I wasn’t aware of that. Interesting...

Thanks.


169 posted on 10/13/2009 11:22:31 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Deficit spending, trade deficits, unsecure mortages, worthless paper... ... not a problem. Oh yeah?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: April Lexington

Good points. Thanks...


170 posted on 10/13/2009 11:22:54 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Deficit spending, trade deficits, unsecure mortages, worthless paper... ... not a problem. Oh yeah?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Vanders9

I grew up thinking Lincoln was one of our top presidents.

I have since come to realize some very important issues were involved in the Civil War, not the least of which was slavery.

Slavery WAS NOT the driving force behind the Civil War in my opinion. The emancipation proclamation was not developed and publicized until the last year or so of the war. Lincoln’s support for the war was slipping, and it was anticipated that support would shore up if slavery were tied to the war effort more firmly.

I do not ascribe to Lincoln the objection to slavery that many people do. If it was that important to him he would have declared the emancipation proclamation from the get go.

Lincoln to my point of view, is the benefactor of a retelling of the Civil War.

Look, I may be wrong here, but that’s my current perception none the less.

As you mention, the effect on state’s rights and the federal government’s power, was severely changed at the end of the Civil War. That is indeed unfortunate.

It’s time to address those matters.


171 posted on 10/13/2009 11:30:36 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Deficit spending, trade deficits, unsecure mortages, worthless paper... ... not a problem. Oh yeah?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake

Talk of secession makes my blood pressure rise. What a silly idea! Even sillier is serious consideration of it. Only those who have not considered the full ramifications would propose it.


172 posted on 10/13/2009 12:38:36 PM PDT by oneamericanvoice (Support freedom! Support the troops! Surrender is not an option!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: oneamericanvoice
Only those who have not considered the full ramifications would propose it.

Respectfully disagree. While I don't presently advocate secession, the thought of living under tyranny, greater so than now even, is much more abhorrent than almost any other outcome I can think of. Some things are just worth fighting for. Freedom is one of them.

173 posted on 10/13/2009 12:57:54 PM PDT by ForGod'sSake (You have two choices and two choices only: SUBMIT or RESIST with everything you've got!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: AUH2O Repub

“There was a little thing called the Civil War which happened almost 150 years ago, I believe your side lost. You can probably read about it in the history books if you look hard enough.”

It’s funny that someone with “Goldwater Republican” as their name would champion the overbearing and un-Constitutional Federal government. I guess you like being ruled by DC.


174 posted on 10/13/2009 2:56:44 PM PDT by Favor Center (Targets up! Hold hard and favor center!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: oneamericanvoice

“Talk of secession makes my blood pressure rise. What a silly idea! Even sillier is serious consideration of it. Only those who have not considered the full ramifications would propose it.”

I’m sure the ancestors of many Canadians would agree with you.


175 posted on 10/13/2009 2:57:29 PM PDT by Favor Center (Targets up! Hold hard and favor center!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; Berosus; bigheadfred; Convert from ECUSA; dervish; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Fred Nerks; ...
Barney Frank, the Massachusetts Democrat who is chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said in an interview that the defaults were, in essence, worth it. "I don't think it’s a bad thing that the bad loans occurred," he said. "It was an effort to keep prices from falling too fast. That's a policy." Got it? It's a policy to screw the state and local governments. Huh, you say? It's simple, really: State and local governments rely on property tax revenues. Yet defaulted mortgages don't pay property taxes. Yes, there's a lien on the property but this doesn't help the municipal budget now. And suffer they are: Tax revenues used to pay teachers and fuel police cars continue to trail even the most pessimistic expectations, despite the cash from the economic stimulus plan pouring into state coffers.

176 posted on 10/13/2009 3:43:18 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/__Since Jan 3, 2004__Profile updated Monday, January 12, 2009)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Repeal The 17th

I agree with your name entirely. The battering given in the early 1860s was completed with the 17th amendment. Our founders set up a beautiful system of checks and balances. The people had the House and the States had the Senate. The Senate would be used to keep the federal government in check and make the States a partner. When that was removed, all bets were off and now you have what we have...To return to sanity, the States have to get back that control....REPEAL THE 17TH AND RETURN SANITY TO GOVERNMENT.


177 posted on 10/13/2009 4:51:32 PM PDT by MissouriConservative (Let the purging of the RINOs begin in 2010. - MissouriConservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Favor Center
It’s funny that someone with “Goldwater Republican” as their name would champion the overbearing and un-Constitutional Federal government. I guess you like being ruled by DC.
I never said I am championing the government - we need to work to change the government back to what it used to be, but we don't do that by destroying our country. I will fight against any traitor trying to break up the country.
178 posted on 10/13/2009 5:12:09 PM PDT by AUH2O Repub (Palin/Hunter 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

“The Supreme Court did rule on secession. In an 1869 decision the court ruled that states could leave the Union with the consent of the other states.”

Well, if Texans get mad enough, we won’t bother asking for permission to leave.


179 posted on 10/13/2009 6:51:21 PM PDT by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: AUH2O Repub

“I never said I am championing the government - we need to work to change the government back to what it used to be, but we don’t do that by destroying our country.”

What if that isn’t possible?

“I will fight against any traitor trying to break up the country.”

Redcoat, huh?


180 posted on 10/13/2009 6:58:35 PM PDT by Favor Center (Targets up! Hold hard and favor center!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 221-228 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson