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.”
There would be a massive change in population location.
I wouldn’t doubt that the “blue” states (actually, commie red states) would put up walls and barriers to emigration in order to keep people from fleeing.
Which then joined together to become the United States.
so what can you recommend that hasn't been tried?
No, actually State Secession and the "replacing" of the government was specifically written into the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, as the final option in dealing with a corrupt government.
***There are still legal means of changing the government to be used.***
Look who’s in the WH.
***but secession is out of the question period.***
Why? Where is it prevented in the Constitution?
***We either all hang together or we shall surely hang separately.***
Who’s going to hang us? We have all the guns, we’re the ones in the military, and we have the ability and will to defend ourselves.
I agree.
OK .. fine ...
If you want to live under FUHRER OBAMA, GO right ahead. NOT ME... I will Leave ..PEACEFULLY is PREFERRED..IF my STATE wishes to come with me,ALL THE BETTER. but I will not wear an ARMBAND signifying that I am a GOP, Conservative or any combination thereof. AND I WILL GUARANTEE that that day will be coming under FUHRER OBAMA and his REICH!!!
you wanna call names, I can too.. the posts of yours that I have read.. and listening to 20+ years of SEMINAR CALLERS... tells me you ARE ONE ... either a LIBERAL TROLL or a RON PAULISTINIAN..
If my state wishes to leave the UNION... I go with it.. if I do not.. I will move to a state that is not leaving.
Exactly, they joined together later. They were separate first. I’m not against union; I’m against forced union. I also have stated I’m in favor of state nullification of federal law that oversteps Constitution limitations on the federal government. I would argue that nullification come before secession, but that doesn’t mean secession as a right doesn’t exist.
So what exactly IS your purpose here, besides being a shill for ever bigger FedGov, I mean?
And, yes, I would support the Indians in their secession. Why ever NOT?
MrB ... a Wall around New York CITY??? OHHHH we should BE SO LUCKY!!!
Because the current system is controlled by the Left and, short of armed uprising, they won’t let go. It’s easier to secede. Less messy, too!
name one that hasnt already been made moot.
No, it would destroy the current U.S. Government, remember the Constitution is our Governments "blue print" and "We the People are what controls it.
So if you remove the current government you go back to the constitution and rebuild it.
Ron Paul is in favor of the principle of secession. I’m pretty sure DangerZone isn’t a fan of Ron Paul. If anyone is the “Paulistian” here it’s me, but that’s a different topic.
***If you want to live under FUHRER OBAMA, GO right ahead. NOT ME***
I’m right with ya.
I agree that we have an irreconcilable situation here. Some want to force their vision of society on the rest of us, and we refuse to allow them to impose this vision on us and our children. Separation is the only way to keep from killing each other, either by attempting to enforce their will or us resisting.
The 10th amendment sovereignty movement is the “sanest” way to approach this.
The states will eventually have to say that “Law XYZ is null and void because it is not within the Constitutionally delegated powers of the federal government. We will not enforce that law within the boundaries of our state.”
At that point, the fedgov will have to either back down or send in some FLEOs to impose its will.
They will, like every other leftist/collectivist political entity in the world, have to keep their citizens from “escaping”.
***At that point, the fedgov will have to either back down or send in some FLEOs to impose its will.***
I can see the ATF going in (Waco), but I have a hard time imagining that the military would comply with such an order. Not that sending in the military would be Constitutional or anything, but when has that ever stopped the federal government?
You forgot what created the revolution...Freedom.
----
BTW, not only did the colonies secede from Britain, but the new States began to secede from the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union.
It was the secession of those States from the Articles that caused our current Constitution to be formed.
"If the States look with apathy on this silent descent of their government into the gulf [of consolidation] which is to swallow all, we have only to weep over the human character formed uncontrollable but by a rod of iron, and the blasphemers of man as incapable of self-government become his true historians."
--Thomas Jefferson to Charles Hammond, 1821.
-----
What many here are advocating will destroy America.
No, it will destroy the tyrannical grip the federal behemoth now has over the States and the People.
As long as there are Americans, America will remain.
This time, however, instead of going against someone branded as a “kook”,
they’d be going against state level elected officials.
Absolutely. I was very happy I found that organization. I haven’t officially taken the oath, but I already know I’d follow it.
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.