Time to Part Company

WorldNet Daily | 9/13/2000 | Dr. Walter E. Williams

[B.O. Plenty]

As you can see, this was posted on FR on 9/13/2000, but given the events of last week, I think we need to revisit this.

[#3Fan]

If a lot of the other state's populations can't kick their nanny government addictions, it may be necessary.

[condi2008]

This caught my eye 2 years ago, and the concept has intrigued me ever since. See also The Free State Project's website.

[Pan_Yans Wife]

Ping.

[TXnMA]

There is no reason why Texiana (Texas and Louisiana) couldn't peaceably secede, be an ally and have strong economic ties with United States.

Secession might not even be necessary. IIRC, The Republic of Texas' ageement to join the U.S. as a state included the right for Texas -- at any time -- to split itself into (as many as) five (5) States. Think of the possibilities with ten (10) senators!

[Common Tator]

Williams is just playing games with logic.

Abraham Lincoln set the rule that a state can't leave the USA with out a war. West Va left the Confederacy to rejoin the USA in 1863... Obviously that was not a problem for the USA.

And it was determined shortly after 1800 that the constitution is what ever the Supreme Court Justices say it is.

How many times does the Supreme Court have to rule in direct oppostion to the clear meaning of the words in the constitution before Williams and others figure out that the Constitution is not the Supreme Law of the land. The Supreme law of this land is what ever 5 of the nine Supreme court justices say it is.

Time after time people bring cases that go to the surpreme court based on what the constitution says in the matter. As we have learned once again that is a dumb thing to do. If one wants to predict the outcome of a Supreme Court Case one should never ask what the law or Constitution says. Those Documents are worhtless predictors. The only question is are their 5 votes on the court to support a case. If there are not it does not matter what the constitution says. It matters what the judges say.

[gcruse]

: If one group of people prefers government control
and management of people's lives, and another prefers
 liberty and a desire to be left alone,

The good news is that the Supreme Court decision
getting government out of the American bedroom is
right in line with rejection of government control and
management of people's lives.  There is no need to
secede, Texas is where she needs to be.

The bad news is that too many conservatives
disagree with this.

[Nick Danger]

Sigh. These are the times that try men's souls, aren't they? Here we are, thinking we're finally making some progress... got the White House, both houses of Congress... got the Democrats on the run... even got the media on the run.

And then Boom-Pow-Splat we get a huge new entitlement bill that Lyndon Johnson would be proud of — and that Ted Kennedy is proud of — and a Supreme Court that can't tell the difference between "I have a dream" and "You owe me."

The Medicare bill has me feeling like I'm reading lips all over again. I knew the guy wasn't Barry Goldwater, but...

As for the Supremes, they have sentenced us to another hundred years of this sh*t. Damn them.

Not a good week, my friend.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

The good news is that the Supreme Court decision getting government out of the American bedroom is right in line with rejection of government control and management of people's lives.

It establishes the federal government's right to say what is allowed, which it has no power to do. It reenforces the intrusion of big brother rather than eliminate it. It just says that it must be the biggest brother rather than the next biggest. The tenth amendment says that the rights not enumerated are left to the states or the people. These rights were not enumerated so they are left to the states or the people whether they use them well or not.

[No!]

"Not a good week, my friend."

Man, you can say THAT again! And what about the filibuster(s)! Being majority means WHAT, exactly?

[MissAmericanPie]

Heck we better leave before the Mexicans do it first and we become Azatlan, lol.

[gcruse]

The Tenth Amendment is a dead letter. Let me know
when DOJ stops overruling state law and busting whore houses
in New Orleans. Then we can talk tenth amendment.

In the meantime, realize that among the components of sodomy
is heterosexual oral sex. Laws preventing this were rendered inoperative alongside the rest. We are freer today than before the court ruled. Any one wanting this to go the other way has
a morbid fascination with the sex lives of others that needs
scrubbing out.

[AdA$tra]

In the meantime, realize that among the components of sodomy is heterosexual oral sex.

Good point. I cannot, however, remember the last time I was pulled over for being a cunning linguist.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

Just like Scalia and Thomas, I am not arguing the merit of the sodomy laws, nor any other law that concerns bedroom activity including adultery (no exemption for incest or underage, though), I am simply saying that if the 10th amendment is a dead letter, as you say, this is one more nail in the coffin. We need not acquiesce to it.

[gcruse]

LOL

[gcruse]

I agree completely. While I see the Lawrence decision as being an increase in individual freedom, seeing the fedguv trample states rights is dismaying. However, to think this episode merits secession, when the Tenth has been raped and pillaged for the last fifty years, if not the last 120, suggests there
is more heat than light in the objections to it.

[Scenic Sounds]

Well, I'm hoping that this time y'all will listen to the advice that Sam Houston tried to give ya the last time we heard talk like this. ;-)

[BikerNYC]

Let's look at just some of the magnitude of the violations. Article 1, Section 8 of our Constitution enumerates the activities for which Congress is authorized to tax and spend. James Madison, the acknowledged father of the Constitution, explained it in The Federalist Papers: "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation and foreign commerce. ... The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives and liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State."

Very good. Now factor in the 14th Amendment...something that wasn't around when Madison was alive:

"...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. "

The 14th changed the terms of the debate from what the founders first thought of things.

[Founding Father]

It means the republicans have finally run out of excuses and are shown to be exactly what they are---democrats of a slower moving nature.

[Founding Father]

Assuming the 14th amendment was actually ratified---but we better not go there.