Posted on 04/22/2009 7:12:17 AM PDT by AmericanHunter
When Texas Gov. Rick Perry floated the idea of secession if the federal government continues to pursue an aggressive tax-and-spend policy, the mainstream media, as well as the political establishment, cringed.
MSNBC’s Chris Matthews called talk of secession “whack-job stuff,” calling Mr. Perry a “bozo” and telling the Texas governor, “You don’t have a choice buddy.” Mr. Matthews’ colleague, Rachael Maddow, said Mr. Perry was “flirting to the point of adultery” by talking about secession, while commentator Thomas Frank reinforced the disconnect between the media and many Americans.
“What you’re seeing … what is one of the surprising things about these tea parties … surprising to people like you and me, is how mainstream extremism is in the Republican Party and the conservative movement,” Mr. Frank, author of Wrecking Crew: How Conservatives Rule, told Ms. Maddow.
But is the idea of secession a foreign concept to the American experience? Is talk of secession automatically treasonous? Is any secessionist movement doomed to be defined by the Civil War and exiled to the political wilderness?
“I think the biggest surprise to me was the outrage expressed by an individual who even thinks ... along these lines,” U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, said yesterday on CNN’s American Morning.
“Because I heard people say, well, ‘this was treason,’ they say, and ‘this was un-American.’ But don’t they remember how we came in to our being? We used secession. We seceded from England. So it’s a very good principle. It’s a principle of a free society. It’s a shame we don’t have it anymore.”
Dr. Paul, who ran a hard fought grassroots campaign for the Republican nomination in 2008, argued the principle of secession is one that protects the union rather than threatens it.
“I argue that if you have the principle of secession, our federal government wouldn’t be as intrusive into state affairs. And to me, that would be very good,” Dr. Paul said. “We as a nation have endorsed secession all along. I mean, think of all the secession of the countries and the Republicans from the Soviet system. We were delighted. We love it. And yet we get hysterical over this.”
Critics of the coverage of the secession comment argue the media is trying to paint the Republican Party as extreme. They say Mr. Perry was not advocating secession, but rather saying the federal government could cause its resurrection.
“We got a great union. There’s absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, you know, who knows what might come out of that?” Mr. Perry asked.
While the notion of secession was floated by Mr. Perry, he was not expressly advocating Texas leave the Union. Rather, the Texas governor used the idea in a manner Dr. Paul believes is historically accurate — to send a warning shot across the bow of a federal government that is encroaching on state’s rights and individual liberties.
Last week’s tea parties exposed a major rift in the country, and some are concerned the Obama administration does not understand the degree of dissent that is fomenting outside the Beltway. And despite panning by the political establishment, the majority of the nation viewed tea party dissent in a favorable light.
Fifty-one percent of Americans had a favorable view of the nationwide rallies, while 32 percent responded their view was very favorable, according to a poll released by Rasmussen Reports. A third of the nation had an unfavorable view with 15 percent unsure.
But among the nation’s “Political Class,” Rasmussen found just 13 percent held a favorable assessment and zero percent held a very favorable view of the nationwide protest. This disconnect, according to Dr. Paul, is a major part of the problem.
“People are angry. And if we don’t sense that, we don’t know it’s actually what’s going on there,” the Texas congressman said. Dr. Paul said the worst is yet to come because secession will achieve a greater legitimacy as the country struggles.
“When the dollar collapses and the federal government can’t fulfill any of its promises, what if they send you dollars and they don’t work,” Dr. Paul said. “People are just going to — they’re not going to have a violent cessation. They’re just going to ignore the federal government because they will be inept.”
Oh..., I see. I am familiar with Yellowstone and that monster volcano, as when I was there and on a Ranger Walk, it was pointed out to us... looking around in a 360-degree circle...
But, I’m not sure of the exact boundaries. I would say that the Republic of Lakotah does not contain that caldera... but I could be mistaken. I don’t think it goes that far west...
Well I consider the train of abuses and ursurpations a very long one, indeed. To wit:
I could (and should, and will) go on, but the things I am incensed about are not products of Barry's three months as POTUS, or even Nancy's three years as Speaker. They are the fundamentals of the United Socialist State that FDR (principally) set up and stuck us with that the libtards insist we must make work, even though it is a fundamentally flawed and unconstitutional design. I for one no longer am intersted in arguing with illiterate non-citizen mobs who have seized control of LA and soon all of California and are busily bankrupting it, nor making deals with the corrupt East Coast politicians and their Wall Street handlers. I simply would like to reorganize into a polity that is smaller, more homogenuous, and not so full of imperial bluster. What good is the worlds mightiest military (in Iraq) when Arizona is subject to a kidnapping wave to equal anything seen in Bhagdad, 1/2 of my income goes to maintain the huge edifice of FedGov that does almost nothing postive for me, and meanwhile continually scolds me about everything from the propensity to "cling" to my guns to my proclivity for daily showers. What exactly are you waiting for? I don't get it. The end is here. Lets act while we can and salvage something for our children and grandchildren. We sure as hell can not salvage Los Angeles, New York or Massachusetts. Let it go, man, let it go. It is no good to force people who hate you to live by your rules. At best we are going to struggle to play king of the hill forever. Donkey's sway the stupid 10% and abortion is paid for, Reps sway em and it's not. Can you really say that another 10 or 20 years of this is going to do ANYTHING positive for us? I can not, and am happy to start discussing other options.
I'm cool with that.
In my opinion, the US screwed over the Natives twice: First we genocided them, then we put them on welfare. I think the 2nd is actually worse than the first as it saps culture and the human spirit.
Have faith in the system and the strenght of the conservative argument. The strenght of conservatism, in modern times, is that so many who are not politically active or who do not even know “what they are” (conservative, moderate or liberal)come to realize that they are conservatives. It is with the strenght in the numbers we get from these folks that we are the strongest. When we talk crazy about things like secession or armed conflict we lose these folks and we lose our edge.
Yes, assuming it is their clear desire, and not just the pet cause of a few activists.
I think that this is a “higher order” than the Constitution of the United States, because it was an agreement that was negotiated one nation to another nation and “another nation” is *not* under the Constitution, when negotiating and then finally agreeing. So, this — *supersedes* — the U.S. Constitution in my view...
Don't you understand that the Leftists and Muslim sympathizer's now control this country? Secession may well be the only hope REAL Americans have left.
Hey, dickhead, we're not the extremists, YOU are! The stuff we believe in has been the norm for centuries. You're the ones trying to change the rules and in so doing, breaking everything that works. Get your head, or whatever, out of your backside.
I would suggest getting involved in the process and making sure that this is so...
But, remember, the very same thing could be said about people in a state, too (i.e., “is this just the view of a few activists in that state?”). I mean, how would you know, unless you decide to “take a poll” or you “counted votes” or you “had a referendum”.
However, when I’ve suggested those things before, I’m told that a vote is not needed, a referendum is not needed, no procedures have to be followed and the U.S. does not have to agree.
Therefore, wouldn’t those same things apply to the Lakotah in forming their new nation?
Our system is based on the premise that there is no “premanent political class”. We are able to make changes through peaceful revolution at the ballot box every two years. We propelled Ronald Reagan into office this way in 1980 and took over congress with Gingrich in 1994. It takes courage and hard work.
Leave it up to those of us who are not afraid to pull the heavy load. You pick up a twelve pack, load the bong and replay that tired old VCR tape of “Red Dawn”.
That might be the conclusion of a tightly circumscribed mind. In a politically-correct world divide and conquer is non-existent.
For example if the US had 50 votes in the UN, it would change the muslim terrorist dynamic.
How many realize, for instance, that dar al Islam as a founding principle is "one world?" This is never stressed or discussed. Internally, Islam accepts that as a given; in fact is is required, under the severest penalty, of every muslim.
However, for political reasons even the tiniest muslim country has been declared "independent," for the specific purpose of perverting and overwhelming the UN membership into a tool of the main source of world terrorism today.
I have never bought into the "innocent muslim" rubric; muslim slaughter on a worlwide basis, virtually daily, could not be possible without the active or passive aid of the "silent" muslim.
Prevented by what exactly? If it's because of the treaty, all they have to do is terminate it.
If the federal government says they may not, the Lakotas have every right to tell the federal government to put it where the sun don't shine.
The pesky Law of Nations [located in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 10] enumerates the authority of Nations in their dealings with each other, and the federal government has no legal ability to dictate anything to another Nation.
If the Nation is trying to claim areas that are also claimed by one or more of the States, it needs to be talking to those States first, before worrying about the federal government.
when i joined FR someone else was using LT's war-name, so i chose to use (on the wise advice of our clan's Mother.) "a DIMINUTIVE of" BG Stand Watie's war-name. (NO man now LIVING is worthy to bear his war-name. i am simply his horse-holder. i'm proud "to brush-up his uniform, polish his boots/tack & hold his reins" on FR.)
free dixie,sw
In other words, you don't think that Texas has the right to secede because the federal government has the power to stop them? The rule of law is irrelevant to this discussion? I disagree with your premise, as do most freepers and most patriotic Americans.
I want the United States to remain one country, and I want a federal government (of the people, by the people, and for the people) that will follow the Constitution and earn the right to continue governing all 50 states. At least at the moment, I believe it would be better for Texas and all other states to remain in the union despite Obama's serious flaws. I hope we both agree on each of those points.
Where we differ is that I don't believe that I have the right (or that Obama has the right) to compel Texas to remain under federal rule if the people of Texas decide that the abuses of the Obama government are intolerable. Are you saying that Obama has not just the power to conquer Texas if he so chooses but also the right to do so? Or are values irrelevant and you are just addressing the practical question of whether the State of Texas and the people of Texas could secede against the will of a tyrant?
The power of the government can also be a product of the fear of the governed - but only until they overcome that fear.
Well, when you have institutions of the Federal Government, institutions of the State Government, institutions of the County Government, institutions of the various city governments, plus a lot of “foreigners” who are not Lakotah, and then you have laws which are not their own laws, and all these things are entrenched in their lands — all over the place — that’s not something that is accomplished very easily.
For example..., something really, really simple — let’s say that the Lakotah make a speed limit to be 50 MPH on a particular road and then they put their own “sheriffs” to patrol the area. But, that road is posted for 40 MPH by the “other government” who has not left...
So, when someone goes along the road at 50 MPH, and a “former government official” — a state trooper, stops the driver, does the “new official” come along and confront the “old official” (that state trooper) and tell him to “get lost” — or what? LOL...
What you suggest is something that *does not work* in reality... You just don’t tell all those “institutions” to “pack it up and leave by tomorrow” — they just won’t do it and they’ll keep right on doing what they’ve been doing for years...
So, sorry, that doesn’t work for gaining your independence back again...
No..., what I suggest is that we support the Lakotah in *actually accomplishing* their secession from the United States, in order to have a “framework” for doing the same thing with any other state that wants to do it.
I say to support the Lakotah for a couple of reasons. One is that they have a very good case of “one nation to another nation” — as they were a fully sovereign nation to begin with, and the Unites States recognize that *in writing* and it’s “on the record” as such.
Secondly, they have “been at it” for a long while now and have not been able to “accomplish it”. So I say that FReepers should help them *actually accomplish it* — since they are so far along in the process, and then we’ll have “legitimate framework” to use as that precedent for our states to leave the U.S.
So, how can we start helping the Lakotah *actually leave* the U.S. and have an actual and functioning nation totally separate from the U.S.?
Well..., that’s cool...
Come on out to Oklahoma where a goodly number of Indians are here, much more than in any other state in the United States.
And I’m serious about helping the Lakotah form their own nation and secede from the United States. All FReepers ought to chip in and help them out, all that they can, considering that *we* are a group that “truly understands” secession from the United States.
So, yes... FReepers, let’s get involved in helping the Lakotah secede, so we can also help ourselves, too — in the long run...
But I have no problem reminding pols why we have the 2nd amendment. It's not for hunting, its to deter criminals, particularly criminals on a macro scale.
Talking about the truth of the 2nd amendment, and doing so rationally, is always healthy for liberty. Rather than moving towards destruction of the Republic, it moves toward preservation of the Republic, which is exactly why it was put in place in the 1st place.
“So, how can we start helping the Lakotah *actually leave* the U.S. and have an actual and functioning nation totally separate from the U.S.?”
Will they still want USA government handouts? Or do they really want to be independent?
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.