Posted on 04/01/2007 2:11:31 AM PDT by Timeout
Vermont was once an independent republic, and it can be one again. We think the time to make that happen is now. Over the past 50 years, the U.S. government has grown too big, too corrupt and too aggressive toward the world, toward its own citizens and toward local democratic institutions. It has abandoned the democratic vision of its founders and eroded Americans' fundamental freedoms.
Vermont did not join the Union to become part of an empire.
Some of us therefore seek permission to leave.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
BUT. Then I thought about it. And realized it wouldn't be long before Vermont was hosting visitors like Hugo Chavez and perhaps Ahmadinajad himself. They would relish the opportunity to go against American foreign policy and to create trouble wherever they could.
Sorry Vermont. I don't trust you enough to let you leave.
At least the second independence thread today (there's also one about Scottish independence).
if they begin and win a secession movement, can we invade and defeat them and really take over once and for all...?
Do the dems run Vermont? If so, why do they think they would get away from big government by secession.
you must kick it to New Hampshire to safely pick it up!
Aw, let 'em leave. I can do w/o Ben & Jerry's Ice Cream... ;-p
Do you seriesly take this seriesly?
The other 45% are patriots who live in the rural areas of Vermont, in the old tradition of Ethan Allen and the Green Mountain boys. We comprise the gun culture of Vermont , which has kept all gun laws , except for hunting, off the legislative books of our State. Vermonters can conceal carry as a matter of constitutional right. The moonbats would have a very difficult time pursuing their so called independence, for without the ability, culture, or attitude to fight, their musings on forming a Republic of Vermont are mere wet dreams.
Treasonous wimps! This writing is nothing but propaganda designed to whip the Moonbat base of Vermont into ever more erratic thinking, so that they will emerge as whacko whirling dervishes to demonstrate in front of the State House.
One call from their socialist leaders to go home and get their guns would see the lot of them vanish into obscurity, while the thread of the true Republic of Vermont continues to be woven into the fabric of our state by patriots, who are laughing their assess off at these silly little F*#ks.
Although obviously written by liberals, the article does point out that the the federal government has grow way out of proportion to what it was originally designed for, and that the tenth amendment of the Constitution has become practically vestigial.
Hey Jedi. can you give me the thread reference on Scottish Independence? Thanks bud.
While the people you describe seem to be liberal, it isn't treasonous to consider secession from the Union and independence for a State. The states are.....states. They are not provinces. Although most states came about from territories which were not given the option of full independence from the Union, all the states are supposed to be sovereign. Otherwise, they'd be practically provinces or territories under direct control by Washington, D.C.
The reasons given by the article are not those which would bring out the will to fight in Vermonst patriot population, which lives largely outside of the moonbat regulated cities of Brattleboro, Rutland and Burlington.
Thanks Jed, You're a peach.
Interesting to think this follows the Army's switch back to the old blue uniform. If Vermont rebels, and considering most of the active duty force now enlists from the south, perhaps soon Bluecoats will be able to liberate great great great grandma's silverware and bring it back to Atlanta.
No. The people are supposed to be sovereign.
The Constitution exists because the Articles of Confederation, which set up a voluntary association of sovereign states, wasn't a sufficient basis for a new and growing nation. There was a consensus in favor of a stronger central government, though some Founders -- most notably Samuel Adams and Patrick Henry -- differed strongly and in no uncertain terms.
The balance of powers between the Feds and the states was a struggle from the beginning of the Republic, as was the question of whether a state that had joined could later opt out -- the latter wouldn't be answered until 1865, and then only by force.
Pinging you to a Session Thread.
"And there ya go...what will they use for money?"
Perhaps they'll revert to their original currency, but this time it will say: 'Please tread on me'.
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.