Skip to comments.[from 2010 and Still Applies] Parting Company
Posted on 06/29/2012 7:18:52 PM PDT by Bearshouse
Here's the question asked in my September 2000 column titled "It's Time To Part Company": "If one group of people prefers government control and management of people's lives and another prefers liberty and a desire to be left alone, should they be required to fight, antagonize one another, risk bloodshed and loss of life in order to impose their preferences or should they be able to peaceably part company and go their separate ways?"
The problem that our nation faces is very much like a marriage where one partner has broken, and has no intention of keeping, the marital vows. Of course, the marriage can remain intact and one party tries to impose his will on the other and engage in the deviousness of one-upsmanship. Rather than submission by one party or domestic violence, a more peaceable alternative is separation.
I believe we are nearing a point where there are enough irreconcilable differences between those Americans who want to control other Americans and those Americans who want to be left alone that separation is the only peaceable alternative. Just as in a marriage, where vows are broken, our human rights protections guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution have been grossly violated by a government instituted to protect them. The Democrat-controlled Washington is simply an escalation of a process that has been in full stride for at least two decades. There is no evidence that Americans who are responsible for and support constitutional abrogation have any intention of mending their ways.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
Secession is THE answer.
Texas is now California 2.
But Arizona looks great.
The rest of the article is amazing. I hope you have time to read it all, but the theme is pretty well summed up in these first few paragraphs.
Arizona IS great (from a former SoCal resident of 34 years).
Mrs. Prince of Space
It would be ok if a few of the states were socialists, then people could vote with their feet and move to free states. But now everything has been nationalized.
An old, old fault line. It is widening again.
“When in the course of human events”, and so on.
A great column by Mr. Williams.
Give the leftists three days to leave America or round them up and ship them one-way to North Korea.
Every leftist is within a three day drive to Canada or Mexico.
It’s a charitable choice for these nazis and commies.
That’s right: Phony-Care, Phony-Care is the Government Work-Camp: Arbeitsziehungslager
Arbeitsziehungslager to Labor Camp, U.S. Territory, the plan all along.
The problem is, those who want to control will respect no boundary... if there were a separation, they would scheme to cross the border and abscond with the goods of the other, and war would ensue, much death and mayhem... hence a civil war is coming... fingers in ears... la, la, la, la, la, la, la.............................
I always think to myself whenever I hear liberals piss and moan about how “evil” the US is: “Why don’t you leave and go to a country that has what you want?”
Too true. A conservative group would thrive while the libs would quickly run out of other peoples money and then scheme to steal what they think should have been theirs.
It sure is..I’m just wondering which choice will be made.
Exactly. Why should WE have to leave?
War is not inevitable. Secession may be the best option, and freedom's enemies are (rather fortunately) such sissies that the odds of a peaceful separation are enhanced. We may want to look at whether (a) secession of the states that want freedom or (b) expulsion of the states that want to be controlled by a 'benevolent' dictator is more likely to be interpreted as a constitutionally-permissible tax by the Roberts Court. We may also want to carefully analyze all the helpful and harmful Supreme Court decisions of the past 200 years and write a Constitution that preserves the good ones while preventing the blunders and genuinely limiting federal authority to the specifically enumerated powers.
That’s what happened with India and Pakistan. Supposed to be separation of the new country Pakistan, was nothing of the kind since Amalek cannot be appeased only killed.
Considering that they don't extend charity to those they have disagreement.
The SCOTUS made secession illegal by it's ruling in Texas v. White(1869), it ruled that secession WAS illegal when Texas did it.
"Not only, therefore, can there be no loss of separate and independent autonomy to the States through their union under the Constitution, but it may be not unreasonably said that the preservation of the States, and the maintenance of their governments, are as much within the design and care of the Constitution as the preservation of the Union and the maintenance of the National government. The Constitution, in all its provisions, looks to an indestructible Union composed of indestructible States."
If a state does leave, does it carry 1/57th of the nations debt with it?
Let the socialist keep the debt since that is what they want, print money and spend. The free states keep the military, guns and core business,since libs don’t like either of them.
Don’t be spoiling their fantasies with grin realities. ;-)
Nice Freudian slip there rockrr ;-)
Those of us who wish to be free and left alone MUST prevail against those who would enslave both themselves and us.
And THAT is worth fighting for, and worth dying for...
I'm sorry, but a few men in black robes cannot over-rule the natural right of a people to dissolve the political bands that connect them to the unwanted tyranny of a larger political union.
If the citizens of Texas voted to withdraw their membership in the United States, there isn't a damn thing anyone could do to stop them. States have gone to war over such things, and will again. You can only compel a people's membership in a union until they decide to abolish such agreement. When they do, it's simply over.
The Supreme Court has ultimate judicial authority within the United States to interpret and decide questions of federal law. It was a SCOTUS decision and ruling and therefore the law of the land.
If Texas tried to secede, US military forces would move in and reclaim Texas.
My proposal is for the State of Texas to petition the US Government to cede Texas back to Mexico. Since our US Government is in love with our neighbors to the south, they might just go along with it (kinda like returning half of Israel to the Palestinians).
Then as soon as the papers are signed ceding the state to Mexico, Texas could declare it’s independence from Mexico and after a very brief border war, Texas would be an independent nation.... again.
The US military spent nearly ten years trying to take control of Iraq. At no time were there ever more than about fifteen thousand 'insurgents' fighting them. In the end, they never truly conquered that insurgency, but left upon the command of the president.
Now multiply that fifteen thousand by about a thousand and tell me what sort of odds you think the US military would have in taking control of this place. There are more guns per capita here, than nearly anyplace else in the country, and Texans have a strong willingness to defend themselves against any aggressor.
And just how long do you think the rest of America would stand by while American troops fired on their fellow citizens over a political question? Not long, I guarantee you.
If Texas decides to leave the union, she will go, and no one will stop her.
I'm sure Obama would be all for that, but Washington DC will never willingly give up any of its enslaved territories. The slaves will have to rise up and declare their independence if they want out.
Liberals will never allow conservatives to secede -
Someone has to work and pay taxes so democrat voters can continue to live by sucking at the federal teat.
IF SECESSION IS NOT THE ANSWER, THEN REVOLUTION MUST BE.
Uh, YES, a bloodless revolution at the polls 11-6-12.
Oh noooooooo! They’d get all the good beaches.
Seriously now — the side that WW says prefers liberty, doesn’t prefer it enough to fight for it. Or we would have, by now.
We will not be allowed to secede, for we are the enablers.
The only possible course is to stop enabling, and even that is probably more sacrifice than we are willing to make.
People talk a good game. They display their red-white-and-blue colors via their keyboards. Then they go compliantly to work for the government.
Prefer liberty? They prefer their mortgaged homes, their vacations, their cars, their credit ratings, their toys, their finery and their entertainment, to liberty. They prefer the false security of these things, to liberty.
They will keep working and paying taxes to keep their oppressive government functioning.
There are 2 choices: Shoot (armed rebellion) — or shrug (quit, go galt, pay no income tax).
The Founders left their homes and families to fight against far less encroachment on liberty than we tolerate now. They suffered deprivations we can scarcely imagine today. They preferred — and many of them got — death, rather than submission to tyranny.
The people who fought to bring this country into being, would regard nearly ALL of us with loathing and shame.
It’s a good article, but let’s expand the “divorce” theme here a bit. I could see this happening in an alternative universe sort of way. The problem here is the “spouse” that’s mostly gotten its way won’t want to let completely go. They will demand “Alimony” since they obviously are incapable of supporting themselves on their own. And then they’ll want “Child Support” because they can’t support their children on their own.
The end result will be... The ones who are capable of standing on their own will end up being the “Debt-slaves” or “indentured servants” to the Ex-spouse for the rest of their lives. Oh yeah, they’ll be free of the ex-spouses other demands but still supporting them for years or decades to come.
So to come back to the “real world”, What I do see is that this abusive relationship is going to continue. Because one party doesn’t want to break faith and be blamed for everything that went wrong and the other party is a master of Passive-aggression and will eventually “kill the first party off through the death of a thousand or more cuts.
Unfortunately for them there doesn’t appear to be another sucker on the horizon for them to latch onto afterwards so as to continue their way of life.
Nothing will change, regardless of who is “elected”. A “choice” between 0bambi and a white 0bambi is no choice at all. I guess you missed my post on another thread:
It has taken me a while to realize finally that it makes no difference who controls Versaille on the Potomac. Whether it is the Democans or Republicats, the result is the same. Elections have become the modern day equivalent of bread and circuses, designed to placate our desires for excitement.
In 2008, we had the choice of McLame or 0bambi. Lets see, they agreed on abortion, immigration, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, bailouts, healthcare and everything else of consequence. Wow, some choice!
In 2010, we elected a bunch of new representatives who were going to take back our government. Hows that worked out? Name one accomplishment that has restored our freedom from the previous session of Congress. You cant because NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE.
Now, in 2012, we have a choice between reelecting 0bambi or electing a white 0bambi. Nothing will change. They will continue to take our freedoms away, one by one.
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Natures God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. 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 present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated 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 injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.
IF SECESSION IS NOT THE ANSWER, THEN REVOLUTION MUST BE.
The only thing I see is that we have to break the system so it comes to a standstill. You can’t fix a flat tire when it is still on the car.
Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.
Use every legal means to take advantage of every tax deduction, every government hand out, every grant to bleed out the beast. Propose even more nanny state programs to guarantee the right to satellite TV/Cable, free DSL, free housing for all, free electricity for all, free Cheetos, full coverage dental, free electric cars, free fuel.
It sounds distasteful, but I see no other non violent way to push the system over the edge so it breaks. We might get there without my help. It is a move of desperation. Those that wish to not be controlled and those that need/want more government are about 50/50. We each want to press our ideal government on the other party.
The question will be if we survive, what will rise from the ashes? A restored constitutional Republic or more of the same?
You make valid points. And there will be many freedom loving Americans who will go to Texas to join the fight. The federal government will be at war with patriots from all over the entire country and not just Texas!
Too true, on both counts. As I stated earlier, making war on Texas would be akin to making war on an entire country of angry, armed people. The odds would not be in favor of the US, hence, they wouldn't do a thing to try and stop us from seceding.
The same holds true for many other US states. Heaven help DC if several states decide to withdraw from the union simultaneously. That in itself could force the federal government to back down and accede to our demands.
This already happened once before.
South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina and Tennessee seceded from the United States between 20 December 1860 and 8 June 1861.
They were crushed in 4 years.
This ain't 1861, my friend. Millions of able-bodied American men are NOT going to jump out of their seats and join the US military to stop any state from seceding. The feral US government will have to make do with what military personnel they have, which at last count, is about 600,000 active duty.
There are an estimated 90 million gun owners in this country who possess an estimated 270 million firearms, and I can guarantee you that most of them are south of the Mason Dixon line. If the folks down here suddenly decide they're going to secede, there's not a damn thing that Washington will be able to do to stop them.
Are you sure you’re in the right place??? Sounds to me like your panties are too tight.
We are a republic, a nation of laws. These laws must be followed.
The purpose of the constitution was to create a more perfect union, and a divisible union is not perfect.
Marbury v. Madison, McCullock v. Maryland, Cohens v. Virginia and Texas v. White all confirmed the same thing. Succession is unconstitutional.
I will quote what Chief Justice Taney wrote on 1 February 1861 in a memorandum.
"The South contends that a state has a constitutional right to secede from the Union formed with her sister states. In this I submit the South errs. No power or right is constitutional but what can be exercised in a form or mode provided in the constitution for its exercise. Secession is therefore not constitutional , but revolutionary; and is only morally competent, like war, upon failure of justice."
On second thought, you may have your panties on your head, cutting off the circulation to your brain; such as it is. Next thing you know you’ll be telling me Øbamacare is constitutional because four marxists and a chicken$hit chief justice said so.