Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

One Nation under God, indivisible '?
World Net Daily ^ | 10/22/2008 | Joseph Farrah

Posted on 10/22/2008 9:25:20 AM PDT by Jack Black

I've lived through some turbulent years of American history, but I have never seen our country more polarized, more divided, more ripe for – dare I say it? – breakup, dissolution, a secessionist movement. I admit I'm unafraid of radical ideas – if those radical ideas are just, righteous, moral and godly. I believe it's time for radical ideas – just as it was time in 1776. Frankly, I don't see a way to unite a people as divided as Americans are today. We are trying to pretend we're one nation when we are really two. One of those two nations clings to the promises and covenants of the past, the Bible, the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, as the guiding principles. The other believes in and lives with no immutable standards. It's not a Republican vs. Democrat split – as the current election illustrates. I know many Republicans would find themselves more comfortable in the country of no standards. I also suspect many Democrats would actually find themselves more at home in the nation of the Bible, Declaration and Constitution. Isn't it time for separation? Is the breakup of the union really such a difficult thing to consider?

Isn't it time for separation? Is the breakup of the union really such a difficult thing to consider? When there are no new lands to discover, what choice do we have?

....

There's only one way to recapture the greatness of America. That is to start over – with only those willing to play by the rules. Let those who don't believe in rules have their own country to destroy.

(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government
KEYWORDS: cwii; fruitcakesamitch; redstates; secession
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-141 last
To: JSDude1

Nobody’s saying they can’t. I personally think we’d be better focusing on one state to start with and letting it be a magnet for patriots.

And I think Texas is by far the best place to do that.


101 posted on 10/22/2008 11:48:32 AM PDT by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard (democratic socialism is totalitarian communism lying in wait.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard

Someone’s already kind of doing that (with a libertarian streak)-The Free State Project is focusing currently on NH because of it’s relatively low population.


102 posted on 10/22/2008 11:52:15 AM PDT by JSDude1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Technical Editor
Could you please copy and paste rather than type the names of articles, websites, and authors? There are entirely unnecessary errors in each of these all over FR.

Great advice. I will follow it from now on and encourage others to as well.

103 posted on 10/22/2008 11:53:49 AM PDT by Jack Black
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: roses of sharon
What is the series that Travis wrote?

Book Two: Five years later things have broken down all over and the SouthWest, particularly New Mexico is in the hands of the Aztlan seperatists. Very Brave New World kind of depiction of PC and aggressive pro-Hispanic beliefs running rabid.

The web site is HERE

104 posted on 10/22/2008 12:04:31 PM PDT by Jack Black
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: roses of sharon
What is the series that Travis wrote?

Book One: In which FedGov agents over-reach in attempting to use a "Columbine Incident" to ban most guns, and the resulting backlash - all from the point of view of two very sympathetic and well drawn characters.

Book Two: Five years later things have broken down all over and the SouthWest, particularly New Mexico is in the hands of the Aztlan seperatists. Very Brave New World kind of depiction of PC and aggressive pro-Hispanic beliefs running rabid.

The web site is HERE

105 posted on 10/22/2008 12:05:34 PM PDT by Jack Black
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: JSDude1
Yes, the Free State Project is focusing on New Hampshire, but by their own metrics I think they are losing there. The problem is that there are many more Massachusettes big-government libs moving there than FSP radicals. They have done some great agit prop though.

The original analysis behind the FSP is really interesting and still available on their web site, linked off the logo below:

The basic idea was that a realtively small number of people moving somewhere could really transform the political climate in a state. The bigger the state the less possible it is that you can get enough people to move somewhere that it's going to make a difference.

The problem with Texas is that it's still 50% Democratic. And it has huge urban minority populations, tons of illegals, the entire Austin libtard colony. Thus any attempt to rally the whole state to start acting more like a sovereign state is likely to fail.

The alternative suggested in the wake of the FSP memeber election of New Hampshire was a new movement based on Wyoming.

Wyoming has the twin advantages of being the smallest population state in the lower 48 and also already having a very strong Conservative mindset, as reflected in the strong support that Conservatives and Republcans get in the state.

The FSW has a much looser organization than the FSP. Many have said it reflects "western libertarianism" instead of "eastern libertarianism", meaning less bookish, less atheist, more of the organic cowboy code of "live and let live".

Anyway, the FSW Forum is a good place to learn about their ideas:

Free State Wyoming Forum

They have already made some nice coins:

Oh, yeah, the founder of FSW is 'Boston T. Party' the author of Boston's Gun Bible and the secessionist novel Molon Labe


106 posted on 10/22/2008 12:22:31 PM PDT by Jack Black
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

The last Gov's race in Wyoming had about 200,000 TOTAL voters. Thus an influx of even 50,000 people would have a huge, probably decisive impact on the politics of the state.

Imagine trying to have that impact in Texas, with almost 4.5 million voters.

Perry polled 2,632,591 votes (57.80 percent) to Sanchez's 1,819,798 (39.96 percent).

All this means is that Texas's secession or rebellion will have to be organic, not imported, I suppose.

107 posted on 10/22/2008 12:32:03 PM PDT by Jack Black
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black

ALaska would be a better free state- its got all the resources, sea ports and room we need. Great governor, too.


108 posted on 10/22/2008 12:34:13 PM PDT by Red Boots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black
All this means is that Texas's secession or rebellion will have to be organic, not imported, I suppose.

I would think it would have to be both. But you're right, a massive migration would be required.

Considering what we'd be facing under absolute Marxist control, such a massive migration wouldn't be that far-fetched. This is historical precedent for this sort of thing.

109 posted on 10/22/2008 1:32:09 PM PDT by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard (democratic socialism is totalitarian communism lying in wait.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Blade

You know that would change the moment red states are out with their own low tax plan whereas the tax rates are going to double for the residents of blue state!

That is just the nature of the beast. :)


110 posted on 10/22/2008 2:05:21 PM PDT by indianyogi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard

Can we have Alaska, please, please, please ?


111 posted on 10/22/2008 3:01:30 PM PDT by happygrl (we are all plumbers now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard

Is true or a myth that Texas has the right to secede?


112 posted on 10/22/2008 3:11:38 PM PDT by happygrl (we are all plumbers now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Terabitten
Read the history books closer, my FRiend.

The War of Independence (Revolutionary War) also was brother against brother with the population split into thirds: one third indifferent, one third against (Tory) and one third FOR revolt. Many of the Tories emigrated to Canada during and after the war.

113 posted on 10/22/2008 4:07:21 PM PDT by happygrl (we are all plumbers now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black

It’s not possible to divide the country, since the split is more urban-rural than regional. Imagine the split between India and Pakistan, which was really enforced ethnic and religious cleansing that led to millions of deaths. Even if a regional split was the end point, tens of millions of folks “in the wrong region” would have to move, and it would be happening in the midst of a CW. Very ugly.


114 posted on 10/22/2008 4:08:42 PM PDT by Travis McGee (--- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reformedliberal

Thanks for the ping. In my new book I was going to delve into how the Northwest could split apart and succeed, but the plot went elsewhere. The Northwest could only make it if they could take key ports in Washington state and BC, and then reach independent trade agreements with Asian countries. THis seems pretty implausible to me, since Washington is a very liberal state overall, or at least in the key port cities.


115 posted on 10/22/2008 4:11:57 PM PDT by Travis McGee (--- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: happygrl
Is true or a myth that Texas has the right to secede?

My understanding -- and I could very well be wrong on this -- is that Texas has the right to divide itself into 10 (?) separate states.

But that's something I've only heard, never read. Hopefully, somebody here is better able to answer the question. I'm curious about the answer myself.

116 posted on 10/22/2008 4:20:26 PM PDT by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard (democratic socialism is totalitarian communism lying in wait.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: ravensandricks; KeyesPlease
"I think the U.S. should be divided into five geographically separate countries."

Theoretically, we're supposed to be 50 (57 depending on who you ask). If you look at the usage and context of the word "State" prior to the U.S. it was synonymous with "country," while "nation" had a more ethno-linguistic connotation. As KeyesPlease noted, this was the original intent behind Federalism. The Civil War and Reconstruction allowed for some encroachment upon, and undermining of this concept by the FedGov, but nothing like the 17th Amendment. Had it not been for that Amendment, Obama would have never risen above community organizer.

117 posted on 10/22/2008 4:30:21 PM PDT by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Centurion2000

Just America and we keep the flag. They can just use their Che flags or something like it. ;)


118 posted on 10/22/2008 4:32:52 PM PDT by chris_bdba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
"Even if a regional split was the end point, tens of millions of folks “in the wrong region” would have to move..."

Or "be moved."


119 posted on 10/22/2008 4:40:35 PM PDT by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Nowhere Man

IMHO, this nation was meant to be as “one nation under God” as Israel is (including the southern portion known as Judah).

We are separated from most of the rest of the world by two oceans. If we were to divide, each of those opposing nations would, in all probability, be in constant agitation from the other.

We must trust in God, and fight to regain the principles on which this land was founded. Although there may be some shame in this country’s early growth, there were also sacrifices made in Israel to cleanse the land of idolatry and hatred.

We ain’t perfect, but God’s Word has helped us to establish true freedom. We must not let that freedom slip away.


120 posted on 10/22/2008 4:50:25 PM PDT by wizr (Onward Christian soldiers, marching as to war, With the cross of Jesus going on before)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sassy steel magnolia

AMEN!


121 posted on 10/22/2008 4:55:20 PM PDT by wizr (Onward Christian soldiers, marching as to war, With the cross of Jesus going on before)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

ME TOO!


122 posted on 10/22/2008 4:57:06 PM PDT by wizr (Onward Christian soldiers, marching as to war, With the cross of Jesus going on before)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack

First they have to disarm us. I’m betting that they run out of federal jackboots before we run out of deer rifles.


123 posted on 10/22/2008 4:59:57 PM PDT by Travis McGee (--- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard

Sounds like the reversal of the Dust Bowl years. All us Kalifornia Okies movin’ back “home”....Though I was born here, my mom was born in OK. Will that pass the test to prove I ain’t one o’ them rich caretbaggers movin’ in to change your life?


124 posted on 10/22/2008 5:02:37 PM PDT by wizr (Onward Christian soldiers, marching as to war, With the cross of Jesus going on before)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Blade

“A big part of what drives the spending is poverty.”

You know, a lot of us grew up poor, but happy. We didn’t need all the “necessaries” we enjoy today, BIG house, two cars in every garage, daily trips to the market and fast food, too.

We didn’t realize we were poverty stricken until the government told us we were.


125 posted on 10/22/2008 5:19:29 PM PDT by wizr (Onward Christian soldiers, marching as to war, With the cross of Jesus going on before)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

From your lips to God’s ears. My point was the movement of tens of millions of people can be either voluntary or forcible. For those that refuse the latter, someplace to displace to will be needed in order to exercise the former.


126 posted on 10/22/2008 5:24:23 PM PDT by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack

I sure hope it never comes to anything remotely like this.


127 posted on 10/22/2008 5:44:55 PM PDT by Travis McGee (--- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

You and me both brother. I spent four years at Gettysburg College and there are parts of the battlefield where the air still feels heavy with the weight of death. We don’t need anymore fields like that in our nation.


128 posted on 10/22/2008 5:50:26 PM PDT by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack

At least during CW1, most of the dying was done on battlefields between armies.

CW2 more than likely would look like the Spanish Civil War, Bosnia, India-Pakistan etc. A bloodbath at the neighborhood level.


129 posted on 10/22/2008 5:53:19 PM PDT by Travis McGee (--- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
"CW2 more than likely would look like the Spanish Civil War, Bosnia, India-Pakistan etc. A bloodbath at the neighborhood level."

It would not be pleasant.

130 posted on 10/22/2008 6:02:05 PM PDT by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack

Nope. And these types of conflicts leave very deep scars, even worse than post 1865, when both sides for the most part got to “go home.”

In this case, “both sides” will be mixed up in the same neighborhoods.


131 posted on 10/22/2008 6:06:09 PM PDT by Travis McGee (--- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
"In this case, “both sides” will be mixed up in the same neighborhoods."

I'm sure President Obama would have no problem calling in UN peace keepers, and the Chinese would be more than happy to oblige.

132 posted on 10/22/2008 6:12:50 PM PDT by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack

That’s the plot of Foreign Enemies.


133 posted on 10/22/2008 6:21:37 PM PDT by Travis McGee (--- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

Let’s hope it stays in the “fiction” section.


134 posted on 10/22/2008 6:23:58 PM PDT by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard; happygrl
My understanding -- and I could very well be wrong on this -- is that Texas has the right to divide itself into 10 (?) separate states.

That may have been true pre 1865, but texas was required to re-write its Constitution post Civil War. Texas does not have any right to split itself, absent consent of Congress.

135 posted on 10/22/2008 8:15:53 PM PDT by Citizen Blade (What would Ronald Reagan do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: WhistlingPastTheGraveyard

when texas is ready to secede and create a real republic and live by the constitution as it was written. I will be there to defend till death.

Don’t care if it is McCain or Oprah (I mean Obama) I swore in to defend our constitution to the death and that is what I am ready to do. Stop our bullshit government from taking 100% of what honest people earn and giving it to lazy bastards!!!!


136 posted on 10/24/2008 8:35:25 PM PDT by lobo35 (McCain or Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack
I'm sure President Obama would have no problem calling in UN peace keepers, and the Chinese would be more than happy to oblige.

There are 300 million firearms in this country. I think even the Chinese would think long and hard about even doing this.

I also think that this would be cause a HUGE growth in people actually willing to fight for freedom. It a very difficult thing to actually consider dropping the hammer on Jack Tripper liberal types who are still Americans. It's quite another to draw a bead on the soldier in the funny uniform with the blue helmet speaking something like Martian.

137 posted on 10/24/2008 8:43:50 PM PDT by Centurion2000 (To protect and defend ... against all enemies, foreign and domestic .... by any means necessary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: Centurion2000
"There are 300 million firearms in this country. I think even the Chinese would think long and hard about even doing this."

You're no doubt familiar with Admiral Yamamoto's cautionary warning about invading America..."A rifle behind every blade of grass." To some degree, still true, but it's also true this is not the same country it was in 1941. There may be 300 million firearms, but certainly not 300 million firearms owners. Winnow out the collectibles and antiques. Then take out those who would (and currently do) participate in the buy-back programs. Then subtract those who would voluntarily surrender or sell their weapons because of legislatively imposed insurance premiums...what you don't think the government would meddle in private industry? Talk to the folks at AIG. A lot of people would get rid of their weapons rather than lose their homeowners insurance (sure a good number would hide theirs, too). All that puts a big dent in the 300 million, but still leaves a substantial number in private hands. Local and state governments will enact their own bans...think they can't? Check California, NYC, or Morton Grove. Imagine it being done nationwide...there would be resistance, but you'd also have a fair percentage who would fall in line. After all this, we may be talking 100-150 million firearms in the hands of 25-50 million people actually willing to hold on to them. What's worse, you'd have 150 million perfectly happy to report the non-compliant bitter clingers to the authorities....

The more resistance that's put up, the more inclined the sheep would be to support UN intervention...it would be ugly, no matter how it unfolded, and while I agree that our founders built a pretty strong foundation designed to prevent this sort of thing, I'm not going to be lulled into saying, "It could never happen here."

138 posted on 10/24/2008 9:04:01 PM PDT by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black; WhistlingPastTheGraveyard

WPtG, here is one of the most recent threads. I will ping you to the other...

Jack Black here is one of the keepers of the CWII ping list; he can add you.


139 posted on 10/27/2008 1:44:47 PM PDT by cgk (I don't see myself as a conservative. I see myself as a religious, right-wing, wacko extremist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black
I'm all for it...as long as it is amicable and nothing like 1860.

The one thing I would like to see in the separate nation is a fairer, and truly free press that is willing to report rather than propagandize.

To quote Angela McGlowan, America has been thoroughly bamboozled in this election cycle, hence why Barack Obama, one of the most radical Democrats in that party's history, will be sworn in as the 44th President of The United States.

...If secession is doable, then I'm on board. I'd rather live free than under tyranny...even if it means leaving the warm climate of California.

140 posted on 11/04/2008 11:29:02 PM PST by T Lady (Palin-Jindal 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black
If the time has not arrived, it is close. The split needs to be approached as a 'divestiture' -- succession isn't a PC term.

The transfer of populations between red and blue should be handled as an in-kind swap. For example, someone that is Blue in Texas could work out a property swap with someone who is Red in California. A joint agency between the 2 nations could facillitate this.

Also, state boundaries would be rewritten, as this event would transcend the current boundaries, down to the county level (simiilar to the VA/W.VA arrangement).

I would open the discussion up to Canadian provinces as well (red Alberta, blue Quebec) for example.
141 posted on 11/05/2008 12:00:41 AM PST by Dissident1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-141 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson