Does U.S. Need To Split Along Political Lines?

Investors.com ^ | April 5, 2010 | WALTER WILLIAMS

[SmokingJoe]

Difference, though, is that those countries were not great military powers, much less superpowers, much less the world's only superpower.

The USSR was a superpower.

“I shudder to think of a world in which the United States is unable to project its superior military power.”

Russia is still the second most powerful military power even after losing the other 14 states of the former USSR.

“That said, if the split was a “virtual” one — where, because of a return to federalism, states were allowed to reinvent themselves in their own image — the union would be preserved and the one great task of the federal government would be to focus on national security and military defense”

That could work.

[fightinJAG]

You know, you’re right. I’ll have to ponder that.

However, I still wish to see the union preserved. I just want to have a limtited federal government and be able to live in a state that is not socialist or worse.

[Chuckster]

ping

[DTogo]

Dang, I like living where my ancestors settled ~320 years ago...

[bergmeid]

No, hell no, we are going to have the best borders in the world. Once they’re out, they’re OUT. No crawling back in.

[fightinJAG]

I and the fam went to the 9/12 Tea Party in D.C. this year. There were some people handing out fliers that urged conservatives to move to New Hampshire. Had info on the taxes and so on. Basically, they were working hard to get reinforcements up there.

It was an interesting concept and an interesting proposition.

[fightinJAG]

As for conservatives leaving Mass., yes, I hadn’t thought of that twist on the trend. And, yes, they will continue to vote conservative, so that’s a good thing. Plus, having experienced a taste of socialism, they’ll be good advocates against it in their new state.

[UnwashedPeasant]

This map was popularized by libereals after they lost the 2004 election. Unlike 1860, both sides want rid of the other side this time.

And by the way, why would we want Canada anyway?

[warsaw44]

I work part time in a coin shop. All last summer people were coming in selling off their coin holdings, safe deposit boxes and so on. These folks were leaving the state and mostly headed for South Carolina. A few were going to Texas, mostly Southern locations.

With the exception of one dingbat couple the entire group were Conservatives and very pissed off Conservatives. It broke their hearts to leave the state they had been born in, a state where their ancestors had been for generations but they felt they had no choice.

Once the subject came up that they were moving out of state all of their frustration would come boiling out of them. It was sad really but I know they'll make us proud in their new state.

[HereInTheHeartland]

Most of CA would also be red if a tiny sliver was split off to the blue side. And probably the same for IL.

[CPT Clay]

Good point by Walter Williams.

[ctdonath2]

If you look at the voting maps by precinct you'll see a stark political division between urban and rural. States, and even counties, do not have enough resolution to do what you suggest. Example: even famously Leftist state New York is, geographically, dominantly conservative - there's just tiny islands of stark Leftism.

[fightinJAG]

Thank you very kindly for that very HOPEFUL report.

I have a little experience with something like this myself, having been in a position where I could choose between two states from which to commute to my job in D.C.

I did not choose Maryland.

Then one time we were looking to buy a house. It was an election year. We pulled up to a rather nice place, but the political signs up and down the street told us all we needed to know. We told the real estate agent to keep driving. She was puzzled and we didn’t elaborate. But with so many neighborhoods to choose from, we felt there was no way we would knowingly plop down in the middle of a steaming stew of Rat voters.

[UnwashedPeasant]

"So, actually, we don't need a 2-state solution. We need a 50-state solution."

Well said!. We cannot trade one central-planning tyranny for another. Any interstate government must be extremely limited and checked by the States. For example, no taxation at the interstate level -- all taxes must be state or local.

[Safrguns]

>>> To keep (or at least discourage) the freeloaders from moving into free states, the free states should carefully amend their constitutions to have as ironclad as possible provisions against enacting anything that even smells like socialism from 200 miles away.

They called it McCarthyism I think... and it doesn’t work either.

The answer is education and morality... the two legs of a three legged stool they have successfully destroyed in this country.

[Safrguns]

Oh... and the third leg?.... Responsibility.

[DrewsMum]

But didn’t Sam Houston get ousted on his keester for refusing to secede....???

[Pining_4_TX]

That is the basic idea put forth in the book The Sovereign Individual - that the nation states are going to break up as the ability of smaller and smaller groups to use force increases. It predicts the possiblity of the re-emergence of city-states or march regions. It’s a very interesting take on history and the future.

[Miztiki]

.

[Monorprise]

Ehh dude, we do not want to let Ontario, or Quebec into our Union!
Indeed we should be iffy on every province except Alberta.

In any case let us reserve the right to leave(unilaterally) as well as perhaps most importantly, the right to kick delinquent States out of our union.