Skip to comments.Modern-Day Secessionists Will Hold a Conference on Leaving the Union
Posted on 02/26/2009 5:41:03 PM PST by teg_76
Here come the new Green Mountain Boys. The Middlebury Institute, a think tank devoted to the study of separatism, secession, and self-determination, is planning the First North American Secessionist Convention in Burlington, Vt.
(Excerpt) Read more at nysun.com ...
My wife and I were saying we should give southern California back to Mexico and see how the Hollywood crowd would like that.
My wife said, “Ju’ workin’ for me! I want Eric Estrada back on T.V. and when Dana Carvey does the “Church Lady” ju’ must say ‘Senora de Iglesias”.
On the other hand, it will stop him in his tracks.
Alaska has the best chance to break away. They are geographically in the most secure position, and they don't need the US. Plus, their population is hard working and hardly the welfare, stupid, ACORN types.
The rest of the Union will be a tougher nut to crack. However, once the break up starts, it will be impossible to stop.
I could see it.....
“...successful secessionist strategies.”
Which ones were those?
“For one thing, as hurricane Katrina has glaringly shown, the Federal government is a clumsy, bureaucratic, politicized, and insensitive instrument...and states and localities that give themselves over to depending on it are in real trouble.”
And Louisianna did so very well at the State level.
Vermont ought to be very successful as an independant land locked Republic.
why? Why break it up? Were the vets, tax payers, direct link to the founders. Were the cops , nra, the people who make this work.
We need to revolt.
The date is September 27 2006. Anything more recent?
Compare 2008 map with 2004 map and you get a different picture, or else ACORN stole those votes.
Sad but I wish it would start.
I also know it won’t.
I can see the NE states going with liberal parts of Canada to form a socialist nation, California, Oregon, and Washington state forming their own country, maybe with some of the southern parts of Nevada and New Mexico and SW Texas (if Texas would let it!), and the SE U.S. up through the heartland (flyover country to liberal Dems) connecting up with central Canada on up to and including Alaska to form a new, better conservative nation.
We, the new conservative nation, would have a stronger Constitution, freer states and people, and would quickly become a world superpower (if we ever lost it in the breakup), while the liberal, socialist nation would wallow in self-incrimination ("I'm more liberal than you!", "Am not!", "Am too!" . . . ), and deteriorate into second-rate status.
Probably end up asking us for assistance and protection, too!
At this point, I’m all for it. It’s time to start a new country, one that honors and loves God, does what is right and admonishes what is wrong, one where not a single liberal/socialist/communist/fascist is tolerated.
Which ones were those?
I know I sound like a broken record, but until someone proves me wrong, I'll keep on saying it:
Get the liberals to want to break away from us! We're halfway there now!
What better place than Vermont to get it started.
By the way, I respect Sanders for his honesty.
States Rights movements do not require secession. Simply refuse to allow the Feds to do more than the Constitution allows them. The rest to the States and the People.
That is how the document is written. I know the Dems are not happy with that, but those are the facts.
The courts legislation by interpretation is what got us in this mess. It has been a long time coming, but it is here.
We must deal with it.
No Secession, but declare States Rights as per Constitution.
Draw the line, then give me 1 day to get me, and my peeps whatever stuff that I want on the side where the citizens own guns!
there is a red blue state map out there sized toopulation
It would throw the marxists currently in control of the government of the United States into a precarious situation.
If PALIN wants to make HISTORY, the time is now.
What you talkin bout Willis?
Once a State says its going, its national guard is the armed forces.
And brother against brother, father against son, etc.. Yes, it will be very ugly. As I've said for many years on this forum, it will make CWI look like a walk in the park on a warm spring day.
May God help us.
how about we call it renewing the union
I figure the 2010 midterms are the big test; if we can’t win the House back after all this garbage that is going on, I’ll know we’ve lost permanently, and I would totally support secession.
I apologize to everyone for posting an old article. I didn’t check the date. Just wanted to get this topic out there to see what people’s thoughts were.
Well the problem is how do you succeed when everyone is scattered all over the US, it isn’t like the Confederacy where people stayed where they already lived. The other issue is the money it would cost, because there aren’t any rich plantation owners to help finance such an endeavor as was available back then. That’s just a historical statement.
Most important is the proposal for a North American Union that, the Illuminati, Masons, Rhodes Scholars etc are promoting, as push for the NWO....noone escapes their plan, at least that’s their intention...not to mention the jhadists who want everyone to be muslim, it’s bizarro world already.
There isn’t much time left, and families aren’t going to break up as some are dems and some repubs in same families. Jesus is coming, as well as the next depression, the China Wars and Armegeddon...
I read the book “Financial Armegeddon” and it’s prophetically close, as is the possiblity that we may have a short lived recovery; then all this spending will cause us to hit rock bottom afterwards. Another scenario is no recovery, and we continue the downward spiral! It’s time to prepare for all of that, not to be moving around, as I don’t subscribe to pre trib, mid trib or post trib...I just want to prepare and occupy until.....and when the trumpet blows I’m outa here.
“Once a State says its going, its national guard is the armed forces.”
Armed forces which will be putting down the segment of the State population that doesn’t want to go, which segment will be resisting said armed forces. Not to mention the part of the National Guard that won’t want to go and will be part of the resistance.
And what do you mean “once a State says its going”? Who do you think is going to make the decision to stay or go? What makes you think the decision process will be peaceful?
Thanks metmom. I vaguely recall seeing or hearing something about this back then. VERY old news in any case ‘^)
That part doesn't have any Officers to lead them.
I'd like to believe you, I truly would. But the liberals have such a stranglehold on the judiciary, that they will declare anything we do unconstitutional, even if we amended it to limit what the judiciary can do about it (see California and Prop 8).
Heck, the courts now are so full of themselves with their perceived omnipotence, they will counter-attack viciously to any perceived threat to their power. They need to be seriously reigned in, and if they don't submit, be impeached, tried and put in prison.
The liberals, too, are in full swagger to build as much of a socialist state as possible before the pendulum swings back to a Repub prez and possibly even a Repub-dominated Congress. It will be hard, if not impossible, to undue the things the Dems are capable of doing in the next four years given their penchant for being very group-oriented (everything they do is "study-grouped" and "work-shopped" first.) I know. I've seen it. We all have.
Think of the seminar people that go on talk-TV and can stay on-message, and talk over everyone else to get their message out - and they all use the same buzzwords. Where do you think they get those buzzwords? Where do you think they get the training to to that? Believe me, it takes training and experience to go on TV and do that!
Some shows, notably on FNC, are wise to these people, especially Megan Kelly, when she accuses someone of trying to talk over her - that is priceless and it tells me that someone in the media finally gets it!
But, you tell me: How do we get around the liberals, who will put up every barrier and stand in our way to protect their own view of "America" (remember, they think they're right, too)?
I find no fault with your concerns or logic.
We have to options as I see it:
1. Attempt to rein in this through the Constitution (via States Rights) and the threat of Voter Rage.
2. Lock & Load
I am not for the latter yet, but if it must be— So be it.
1. Attempt to rein in this through the Constitution (via States Rights) and the threat of Voter Rage.
2. Lock & Load
I am not for the latter yet, but if it must be So be it
I also prefer option "1", and fear option "2" (you never know where it will lead). I pray for "1" and prepare for "2".
There won't be....and there shouldn't be. This needs a "revolt", not a "civil war".
In the last revolution, the "Tories", in large part, were killed or driven out of the colonies into Canada.
This time there is only one attribute by which to determine the enemy:
The answer to the question: "Do you believe in and support a Constitutional Republic as founded in 1787?"
This determination has no "gray" area. It is purely "yes" or "no". Any response other than "yes" translates to a "no".
The Media lie to you.
I was working the airlift for New Orleans after Katrina. Within hours we had pumps from the Netherlands flown in, food from all over the American nation, water, medicene, tents, blankets, and the 82nd Airborne as enforcement.
Some came from C-17s, and some came from 737s from Southwest, American, and Delta. The cost per airplane was (back then) about $39,000.
The State of Louisiana provided .....................nothing. We had a State Army National Guard General who was corrupt and a drunk. Gov Blanco was defensive and you could not contact her.
If the US Military means the "Feds" then things will get done. If not, good luck.
Alaska doesn’t need the USA? Give me a break. Alaska has one of the smallest populations of any state, and they’re further apart from each other than residents in any other state. Any kind of real organized defense would be impossible for Alaska. Without the United States military, Alaska would be back in the hands of Russia faster than you can spit. Putin would cream in his briefs if Alaska seceded.
I would prefer to keep the country and convert it back to free market capitalism. Everybody wins that way. Even the idiots will benefit from capitalism.
Well said. Thanks!
I think I read somewhere that when Texas joined the Union it did so with a proviso that they could leave at any time if they wanted to.
Any truth to this or have I been reading too much of “US History for Dummies”?
Exactly. Thank you for making my point.
Alaska does not need the rest of US.
Any kind of real organized defense would be impossible for Alaska.
What are you talking about? Defense of what, and from whom?
Without the United States military, Alaska would be back in the hands of Russia faster than you can spit. Putin would cream in his briefs if Alaska seceded.
This sounds like an alcohol fueled statment. Did you have any when you said this? Be honest. Do you really think Russia will invade Alaska if the State goes its own way? Why? Give me 2 reasons.
That’s what I’m wondering, KK. Would the armed forces sent to quell the revolting public be so blindly obedient to Obama, especilly if a majority of them didn’t care for him or respect him. I see soldiers leaving the military and joining the cause, especially since the libs have so little love for the military.
So, who would you join, the likes of Obama, Pelosi, etc., who’d just as soon spit on you, or the ones who stood up at the parades and saluted and waved for the military as they walked past?
“That part doesn’t have any Officers to lead them.”
Right, none of the officers will choose opposite sides—just like last time.
Like I said in Post 17: "It'll be neighbor v neighbor and it'll be ugly."
This time there is only one attribute by which to determine the enemy: The answer to the question: "Do you believe in and support a Constitutional Republic as founded in 1787?"
And a "yes" means you're willing to return the land the US bought from France and Russia and the land the US conquered/purchased from Mexico because there is no Constitutional basis for such acquisitions.
Ummm, for clarity, I hope you realize I was quoting from the article and taking issue with the quote.
“Most important is the proposal for a North American Union that, the Illuminati, Masons, Rhodes Scholars etc are promoting, as push for the NWO....noone escapes their plan, at least thats their intention...not to mention the jhadists who want everyone to be muslim, its bizarro world already.”
Everybody talks about it as if there will be only two sides, two points of view. It’s likely to be more complicated than that. You mentioned the NWO types and the jihadists, but there’s also the LA Raza types who want the Southwest returned to Mexico, the various gangs that might set up a “Warlord” type of territory and I bet there are some Religious types who would try to grab some territory and set up some sort of theocracy if they could.
Vermont will only be the first of a new confederacy, I believe. If things get bad, this could happen. A Russian recently said America will break up. I laughed when I read the article and thought it was only sour grapes for what happened to the USSR—but maybe he was on to something. If the federal Government bankrupts the treasury maybe a new nation could repudiate the debt and start over. Save your Confederate Money Boys, the south shall rise again. The US could break into five nations with only a handful still in the Obamanation. Lets all hope this is just some sci-fi dream of the future.
Ummm...for clarity, I don't get what you are saying vis what I posted.
I have talked to several state legisltors, including one in a leadership position, and it is a real possibility. There has been talk behind closed doors down on Lincoln Blvd. about this very subject.