Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Glenn Beck's Current Take on Secession ^ | Scott Ryan

Posted on 11/13/2012 8:25:48 PM PST by publius321

A great deal of discussion has taken place on conservative message boards today due to the fact that Glenn Beck has referred to those in twenty states who have signed petitions to “secede” from the union. These petitions seemed peculiar to me since it would be the job of their elected state legislators to secede if such an activity were to take place, not individual citizens.

As I elaborated in my video today, on his radio program Glenn has repeatedly urged listeners to move from northern states to Oklahoma and Texas. The inference is obvious.

Yet, he implies that people who see secession coming are insane.

This to me is a form of hedging that is taking place. Later, depending on what happens, these radio hosts can all say they always said these people were kooks. But when they see it become more inevitable as God fearing, red states defend their citizenry against brazen evil - then - the talking radio heads will go out on a limb and bravely “predict” secession.

I have been predicting secession since Obama was elected for reasons enumerated at and again today at the video following. However, the way in which the possibility is being handled by signers in these twenty states is unrealistic and will not take place as a result of this apparent endeavor.

If or when it happens it will occur as a result of Obama forcing states to protect their citizens against clear violations against the constitution. The beginning stages where Obama has waged war against states can be seen in the lawsuits launched against Arizona for simply trying to enforce federal law in protecting its borders against outside invasion. One can also point to Obama’s election ploy where he proclaimed that deportation laws against illegals would not be enforced.

It will get much worse once Obamacare fully kicks in over the next few years but with the aforementioned examples, one can see states exhausting all options through the legal system before they have to resort to secession. One can see these state representatives doing what our founding fathers did step by step through every channel before they were left with no other choice. Our founders were mostly “loyalists” to the crown until they had no other choice. Enter the Declaration of Independence where they expatiated in full – why they had no choice.

We have not reached that point yet, but I have no doubt in my objective mind that WE WILL. Obama has had no other intention from day one then to FORCE this upon the states.

There are some on the conservative boards that believe that the federal government will simply implode as the currency dies, thereby preventing this from happening. They are erroneously leaving out one important factor. The Obama administration is rapidly seeking to empower and surrender our sovereignty to the United Nations. This administration is treasonously participating in UN resolutions to take over our rights.

Regardless of whether this encroachment comes to full fruition before or after Bernanke prints our currency to worthlessness, they are coming with the United Nations and nations who hold the gold – like China.

In the days of the confederacy, the states were fighting a federal government that had arrogated power onto itself that was never intended by our founders. Similarly, the final confederacy will be fighting against a UN that was initially sold to us as a symbolic organization with no power or authority over US citizens.

I observed a few posts by some RINO types who will no doubt be similar to the implacable loyalists who refused to see the writing on the wall to the bitter end. One such post castigated a conservative as follows:

“As much as I don’t like the outcome of the election, I’m not ready to give up on America yet.

Anyone who wants states to leave our nation had better take a long look in the mirror. How dare you disrespect the sacrifices of our fallen veterans who gave their lives for America. And you call yourselves Patriots...I would use a different term...Quitters." (end quote)

If you want to leave America, then I suggest you follow in the footsteps of the forefathers you constantly use as an example and go find your own island, move there, and start your own nation. Leave America for the Americans. We may be a flawed nation, but I’d rather live in America than anywhere else in the world...including your new nation.”

We are seeing this type of rhetoric from some of the very people, including talk radio hosts who were the very people who were telling us that this election is for the fate of our nation since it was all coming down to this election since John Roberts left it to the electorate to overturn Obamacare. Now, when push comes to shove, it seems there stance has morphed into the old "well, there's always next election". Presumably they are now in denial and are conning themselves into the notion that once the kids and unmarried women suffer through four more years of Obama - THEN they will finally see the error of their ways and then elect the next Romney, McCain or Dole (as though that would save us).

What would it take to stop these RINOs from deluding themselves? Will they still be telling us "wait until 2016 as they are handcuffed to a pole in Gitmo?

I would agree these people should not be doing this because it is up to their sovereign states to handle this. From that standpoint, they should be petitioning their state legislatures, not the federal government.

It is also too soon.

Where I disagree with the sentiments is in his perspective about them being unpatriotic. These common assertions sound like sanctimonious platitudes that would fly 10 years ago but not now.

I’m not shouting but need to capitalize this for emphasis.










To the RINOs like the loyalists to the crown who cannot part with the gravy train from which they make their fortunes, I offer this favorite quote of mine by Samuel Adams written to the loyalists who put their status quo first - rather then the principles enumerated by our founding fathers:

"If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen."

As for me I stand for the constitution, which is the true America that our founders created 236 years ago. America is NOT a government that murders babies, the handicapped and the elderly. America is NOT a government that sees its citizens as mere resources to be disposed of the moment they deen them a burden.

TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; Politics; Religion
KEYWORDS: beck; glenn; obama; secession
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-42 next last

1 posted on 11/13/2012 8:25:52 PM PST by publius321
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: publius321

Sorry about the errors in advance such as “it seems there (their) stance...”

I appreciate any feedback as I didn’t take time to proof read and spell check didn’t catch everything.

Thank you.


2 posted on 11/13/2012 8:29:42 PM PST by publius321
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: publius321

Since I’m the person you quote in your rant, I’ll respond.

1) You state that because I don’t support secession I’m a RINO. If that’s the criteria, the there are only about .001% true Republicans in this country. Do you not understand that RID’s (Republicans in Delusion) such as yourself give the left very easy targets. Your cause, whatever it might be would be much better served if you’d follow the old maxim, talk less, listen more.

2) I stand by my comments that anyone who wants to break apart America has no right to call themselves American much less a patriot. Frankly I think that if you REALLY believe that we should break apart America, then your a traitor.

3) Any talk of breaking apart America is disrespectful to those people who have given their service and lives to America.

If that makes me a RINO, then so be it I can live with that. God Bless America.

3 posted on 11/13/2012 8:44:08 PM PST by chromdome35 (I'm the person you quote...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: publius321
Before any talk of Secession that the Feds would never allow...

The states should call a Constitutional Convention to allow states to leave and /or to dissolve the US and/or dissolve the current Federal government and let the state reform as the chose

I believe the Fed would have not legal power to stop Secession if the states approve it under terms of a Constitutional Convention

In fact the simple threat of a Constitutional Convention that may dissolve the Fed government may be enough

4 posted on 11/13/2012 8:45:25 PM PST by tophat9000 (American is Barack Oaken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chromdome35

“2) I stand by my comments that anyone who wants to break apart America has no right to call themselves American much less a patriot. Frankly I think that if you REALLY believe that we should break apart America, then your a traitor.”

Again, Obama seceded from the union through his nefarious usurpations. The constitution is the real union, not the governmen; therefore, I do not want to secede from the union.

I expect my state to uphold the constitution. Liberals will not allow that. They will physically move against the states to stop them from enforcing the constitution.

I’m not advocating anything but demanding not to do evil. The liberals will insist upon the evil they promulgate being carried out by EVERYONE.

The patriots who served and died did so for the constitution - NOT Barack Obama’s evil schemes.

If you bow to their idols - it is YOU who are the traitor.

END OF DISCUSSION as I do not suffer fools well.

5 posted on 11/13/2012 9:01:22 PM PST by publius321
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: chromdome35
We have hit a tipping point. Were the takers out vote the doers. Succession is inevitable it is only a matter of when.

I signed all that I could find but I know it isn't going to happen until things get worse. I would say 15 to 25 years.

6 posted on 11/13/2012 9:13:18 PM PST by Steve Van Doorn (*in my best Eric Cartman voice* 'I love you, guys')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: chromdome35

“Any talk of breaking apart America is disrespectful to those people who have given their service and lives to America.”

You are wrong. Servicemembers (and politicians for that matter) swear an oath of allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and vow to defend it against ALL enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC.

They do not swear an oath of allegiance to America. There is a BIG difference.

The federal government has, in most cases, become a domestic enemy of the Constitution and it needs to be brought to bear.

We tried elections and that didn’t work. Time to try something else.

7 posted on 11/13/2012 9:19:26 PM PST by 43north (BHO: 50% black, 50% white, 100% RED)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: All
Fred Thompson ‏@fredthompson Gun-maker Smith & Wesson's stock up 10% after election. Apparently people are investing heavily in precious metals, like lead & brass. #tcot
8 posted on 11/13/2012 9:23:26 PM PST by Kolath
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: tophat9000
ConCon would be the absolute WORST idea. Instead of states choosing to leave the union or enforce the Constitution, outlawing abortion, banning faggot "marriage," tossing the 16th and 17th Amendments, repealing 0Care and preventing future 0Care-like endeavors.......

our current crop would use this to radically seize power and remove government power restrictions altogether.

The last ConCon we had completely tossed the Articles of Confederation in favor of our current Constitution. I do not have any faith that 3/4 of the states' representatives have OUR unalienable rights as concern. The Bill of Rights would be first to perish.

I could see the "2nd Bill of Rights" getting passed and you and I having a "right to a job," a "right to a dwelling," a "right to food," and a "right to education," which sounds well and good to an idiot.....

until the realization is "education" = forced indoctrination of Dear Reader's most famous speeches, "dwelling" = soviet style apartments with communal kitchens and bathrooms, "food" = gruel, and "job" = make work programs like the WPA.

9 posted on 11/13/2012 9:23:45 PM PST by Repeat Offender (Official Romney/GOP-E Platform - We suck less)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: publius321

The dilemma is, so long as there is majority rule there will never really be protection of minority rights. This applies to states rights as with individual rights. It’s a problem of Democracy. I don’t favor secession, but the US should practice a less unitary form of federalism.

10 posted on 11/13/2012 9:25:46 PM PST by Carismar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Repeat Offender

Just judging by the types who favor a new constitution, I think you are right.

11 posted on 11/13/2012 9:29:39 PM PST by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: publius321

Well said. And I stand with you. Scared to death, but faithful in our Divine Creator and HIS will be done.

12 posted on 11/13/2012 9:35:01 PM PST by Lucky9teen (Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading.~Thomas Jeffer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: publius321

Even though it’s not about seceding, below is something a friend sent me on Facebook, that I found interesting...

Self-defense, against tyranny...

by Bo Perrin

Let me try to answer your question in three parts.

First, I want to deal with the author’s (see related article-The Use of Deadly Force in Self-Defense By Pastor Ricky Kurth/ contention that the government is to be obeyed even if it disobeys
the laws. The example he uses is when Paul was standing before the Jewish Sanhedrin and Ananias had Paul struck.

There are five things to keep in mind here. First, the Jewish Council was NOT the national government, Rome was. The extent of the Council’s authority was religious as Rome was considered the governing authority. Second, the law was the Jews’ religious law found in the Old Testament, NOT the law of the land. Third, in his retort Paul does not say that it was written that he must obey the High Priest when he does something unlawful rather he must not speak evil of such because in the Old Testament the High Priest was chosen by God through Levi to Aaron’s lineage. Additionally, there are many and I am one who believes that Paul was caving to the Ananias’ authority rather making a subtle religious point. In the Old Testament the High Priest had to be of the tribe of Levi and a descendent of Aaron. When a High Priest died he was replaced by one of his sons. There is a lot of evidence that Ananias was not of that lineage. In fact, during the early days of the church we know that the Romans maintained control over the High Priest position by giving it to the highest bidder. Additionally, if you study the Old Testament you will find that when Israel, God’s government, did not obey the laws of the land he destroyed the nation.

In fact, he permitted his people to actually overthrow the government when the Queen decided Israel was to worship a false god. Finally, there is a serious tension between the author’s conclusion and Scripture. Peter says we ought to obey God rather than man. Since Peter used the generic use of man rather than speaking directly to the Council his statement applies in all areas of life including the political. If I am to obey the government if it acts contrary to the law then that puts me in the position of possibly disobeying God. The proper governing authorities are endorsed by God (Romans 13). They are his servants to follow what is good and avenge what evil as God sees good and evil. God’s view of good and evil (virtue) is found in Scripture. Therefore, if I obey the government when it disobeys the laws then I end up disobeying God. So, for all it is worth I do not believe that this passage proves we are to obey the government when the government acts contrary to the law.

There are two other issues here as well. First, the author does provide a good overview of the passages which allow believers self-defense. He could have added Exodus 22:2 as well. The issues are (1) a believer is to obey the laws of the land if they are not contrary to God’s and (2) the laws of the land demand we protect the Republic.

I will begin with the second issue. Jesus argued we are to render to Caesar what is Caesar’s. Paul writes that God ordains the governing authorities as described in Romans 13. Peter argues that we are to honor the King. Notice that each title refers to the highest law in that area. In these cases the titles refers to individuals and this is where we must be careful in our interpretation. The highest law in the land was Caesar not the Senate at this time in Rome’s history. The Caesar was deity.

In America though the President nor Congress is the highest law of the land. The Declaration and the Constitution are the highest laws of the land and everything the President and Congress does must be accord with these legal documents. If they are not they are ruled unconstitutional and cast out. The President and Congress are not above these legal documents. This is important. A citizen of the Republic is under no Constitutional obligation to obey any law which a lawmaker creates that is contrary to the Declaration or Constitution. Our Caesar, governing authority and King is not a person but the Declaration and Constitution.

So, if a believer in America is going to fulfill God’s word then he must obey the Declaration and Constitution. Here is why this is important. The Declaration which is our national moral compass tells us, “Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.—Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. “ This includes not only the people in our present government but anyone they might aline with who wants to overthrow the law of this land. So, politically we are obligated by the law of the land to overthrow a tyrannical government.

The first issue is rather easy after understanding the second. The Declaration is not contrary to God’s word because if the need arose and it was necessary to overthrow the people who are acting contrary to the Declaration and Constitution we are in fact obeying God’s commands to obey our Caesar, governing authorities and King.

This is where so many fail in exegesis. Most writers apply the terms Caesar, governing authorities and King to the President or Congress in America. Now keep in mind that our American situation is different from other countries. So, they argue a believer cannot overthrow the President because he is our Caesar, governing authority or King. Constitutionally this flawed for the President is not “the head” of our nation and in fact, Congress has far more authority if they would only use it and properly. But in America the highest law of the land is the Declaration and Constitution and our allegiance is not to those we elect but to these legal documents. We can throw our allegiance behind our elected officials as long as they govern according to the Declaration and Constitution but the moment they fail to do so, we must remove our allegiance, remove them from office and elect those who have virtue.

13 posted on 11/13/2012 9:41:24 PM PST by Lucky9teen (Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading.~Thomas Jeffer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: publius321
I received this via email this evening, and I think it is fitting for this thread. We who lean to seceding understand what is stated, and that is what makes us want out. Right or wrong we have had enough, we can no longer fight the ignorant electorate.

....This quote came from the Czech Republic. Someone over there has it figured out. It was translated into English from an article in the Prague newspaper Prager Zeitungon:

"The danger to America is not Barack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president.

The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince.

The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools, such as those who made him their president."

14 posted on 11/13/2012 9:58:29 PM PST by annieokie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: publius321

Secession bookmark.

15 posted on 11/13/2012 9:59:33 PM PST by SoCal SoCon (Conservatism =/= Corporatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: annieokie
I've been saying that for years. I said that about Clinton. I remember how shocked I was when Clinton won re-election. I didn't think it was possible. I also remember being on FR in 2000 and about a third of the FReepers were absolutely convinced that Clinton would stage some excuse for martial law and take over the country before stepping down.

The country is in fact in serious crisis, but Obama, like Clinton is not the problem. Obama may be a terrible president but that is as much to do with his incompetence as it is his ideology. The true terror will come when a highly competent man with the same ideology is elected by the same star struck idiots who would re-elect an abject failure.

16 posted on 11/13/2012 11:01:33 PM PST by douginthearmy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: douginthearmy
The true terror will come when a highly competent man with the same ideology is elected by the same star struck idiots who would re-elect an abject failure."""".....

There is the fear, & it WILL happen, which leads many of us to start thinking ahead and to SECEDING.

Give us liberty or give us death.

17 posted on 11/13/2012 11:10:13 PM PST by annieokie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Lucky9teen

Entangling oneself with the kosmos is foolish. It makes the celestial promise in Christ a sham, substituting flesh for spiritual life. Not many know God and His plan of the ages, especially those calling themselves patriots. The day He returns is going to be humiliating and sorrowful for those who had placed their trust in mankind, particularly those believers who knew how deceitful even their own hearts had been.

Either you are a heavenly citizen, or you are not. Either all authority is out of God, or it is not. You are either in the world or dead to it. It is black and white, all philosophical gymnastics aside.

Saving your soul, your sensate libertarian life, is going to cost more than you bargained for. I guarantee it.

18 posted on 11/14/2012 12:20:57 AM PST by 5cents
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: publius321

The people of the state by initiative could call a special election of representatives to a Convention to decide whether to dissolve bonds with the United States. The People are sovereign, not the legislatures. The legislatures did not compact with eachother to form the federal government governed under a Constitution. The People did. The Legislatures did not contract with the federal government as it did not exist. The People, through special Constitutional Conventions took a portion of the power they had given to their inidividual states and gave it to a new federal government. They did this through special Conventions called just for this purpose.

19 posted on 11/14/2012 1:12:15 AM PST by marsh2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: publius321

It was Patrick Henry said that. At a church just up the road here.

20 posted on 11/14/2012 2:17:35 AM PST by wastoute (Government cannot redistribute wealth. Government can only redistribute poverty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-42 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
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

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