Seceding Seldom Succeeds, but Vermonters Try

The Christian Science Monitor ^ | 11-8-05

[Seizure]

"If we had a right to join the Union, we certainly have a right to disband from it."

[Sarajevo]

it does retain the right to split itself up into as many as five different states if it so chooses.

But which one would get the rights to the Alamo?

[The_Reader_David]

In answer to your question: The treaty between the Republic of Texas and the United States which admitted Texas to the Union, different terms than the admission of other states.

[GrandEagle]

In answer to your question:
Thanks, I did not know that until today.

Have a great day,
GE

[The_Reader_David]

Hmm, if they get state legislature approval, I say Congress should let VT go: good bye Socialist Congressman, Patrick Leahy and 'jumpin' Jim'.

It's a small thing, but it makes our majorities larger. We could let MN go too, but the rest of the blue states we keep (though we can encourage California
to let the Bay Area seceed from the state and the Union, and we could let a few Indian reservations that vote demonRAT have full sovereignty.)

[Seizure]

I recall watching a improptu press conference with President Bush. In response to a question asked by a reporter, President Bush quipped,

"I wish this were a dictatorship and I was the dictator."

Hmm...

[GrandEagle]

Hmm... indeed!

[sandbar]

>>>Well, tell THAT to the Founding Fathers. They were the ultimate seapartists...good thing for us they were. >>>

I was being sarcastic.

[Seizure]

"I was being sarcastic."

My apology. I do not always pick up on sarcasm in print. Especially given the fact that there are people who think along those lines. Without the benefit of vocal inflection, it is hard to tell.

[Verginius Rufus]

That's why Texas will never be divided...each of the resulting states would demand the Alamo.

Maybe the US can trade Canada Vermont for Alberta. Rename Alberta "Vermont" (it does have some green mountains) and rename Vermont "Alberta" and no one will be the wiser.

[Seizure]

I couldn't agree more. Whatever principles true conservatives cling to, principles that will not be compromised, will be relegated to the bench. One, because by and large, people to the left of genuine conservatives have no principles. Two, moderates and "compassionate" conservatives will surrender theirs for the good of the party, even if that means putting the Republican party on life support.

Yes, I find it humorous that there are conservatives who deride and laugh at liberals who launch personal attacks due to lack of sound, factual argument. Then on the other hand, attack fellow conservatives who shine a light on serious (or dangerous) breeches within the Republican party.

Lately, I have been called a "dummie" and a "troll" by "GloriaJane".

Read the posts exchanged between herself and me under the article: Given the mainstream media, it's a wonder Republicans win anything... (the title is close enough...I think you may have posted responses there).

[sandbar]

>>>My apology. I do not always pick up on sarcasm in print. Especially given the fact that there are people who think along those lines. Without the benefit of vocal inflection, it is hard to tell.>>>

It is very hard to pick that up on the computer. I usually use a little :o), but sometimes forget. ;o)

[Seizure]

"I usually use a little :0)..."

To tell you the truth, Sandbar, I am completely unfamiliar with the symbols used in text messaging or forums (other than "lol"). I am one of those dinosaurs who uses plain American English. I guess I need to get a text message/forum symbol dictionary.