LucasForums

LucasForums (http://www.lucasforums.com/index.php)
-   Senate Chambers (http://www.lucasforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=445)
-   -   25+ U.S. States Declaring Sovereignty (http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?t=196036)

Yar-El 02-25-2009 10:07 AM

25+ U.S. States Declaring Sovereignty
 
Article - 25 States Considering Sovereignty Legislation

Quote:

These are some of the reasons cited by some of these states and their proposed legislation:

I. Declaring Involuntary Martial Law over any of the 50 States
II. Any kind of "domestic Draft" (Obama's Service Corps)
III. Any kind of required service of Minors (Youth Brigades)
IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government. (UN Millenium Declaration, which Obama supports.
North American Union/SPP agreement.
UN Carbon Taxes)
V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press. (Fairness Doctrine)
VI. Any attempt to further restrict the the Right to Bear Arms
Quote:

States That Already Are Sovereign / Passed 10th Amendement Restatement Legislature:
- California (CA)
- Hawaii (HI)
- Texas (TX)

States Claiming Sovereignty:
- Arizona (AZ)
- Arkansas (AR)
- Georgia (GA)
- Kansas (KS)
- Indiana (IN)
- Iowa (IA)
- Michigan (MI)
- Minnesota (MN)
- Missouri (MO)
- Montana (MT)
- New Hampshire (NH)
- Oklahoma (OK)
- South Carolina (SC)
- Tennessee (TN)
- Washington (WA)

States Planning / Motioning Toward Claiming Sovereignty:
- Alabama (AL)
- Alaska (AK)
- Colorado (CO)
- Idaho (ID)
- Maine (ME)
- Nevada (NV)
- Ohio (OH)
- Pennsylvania (PA)
- West Virginia (WV)
I cleaned up the post. I'm also going to look for some mainstream media reports. Each of the listed states have actual bills in motions, and you can download or read them directly from each of the state's websites. They are legit. Most sites have a .gov web address.

Q 02-25-2009 11:26 AM

And so it begins.

Yar-El 02-25-2009 11:29 AM

Has anything like this happened before? In the last 100 years?

GarfieldJL 02-25-2009 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yar-El (Post 2594601)
Has anything like this happened before? In the last 100 years?

Not to my knowledge, and this is downright scary.

Yar-El 02-25-2009 12:07 PM

Someone can argue that Ron Paul is a nut; however, those links and documents are legit. No one can honestly argue against their credibility. Each link directly comes from the states' websites in question. I see a mess of .gov links.

jrrtoken 02-25-2009 04:23 PM

Funny, why haven't I heard of this on the news? Or on Fox? Hm.

Seeing as a possible secession should at least get a Breaking News spot, then why haven't I heard of this yet? Until I get some proof from almost every news organization on the planet, I'm thinking that this a small clause being blown by anti-Obamaites to scaremongering proportions.

GarfieldJL 02-25-2009 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PastramiX (Post 2594710)
Funny, why haven't I heard of this on the news? Or on Fox? Hm.

Seeing as a possible secession should at least get a Breaking News spot, then why haven't I heard of this yet? Until I get some proof from almost every news organization on the planet, I'm thinking that this a small clause being blown by anti-Obamaites to scaremongering proportions.

The state government websites are the sources, that's kinda hard to argue as far as validity, barring all the states having their government websites hacked.

jrrtoken 02-25-2009 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarfieldJL (Post 2594713)
The state government websites are the sources, that's kinda hard to argue as far as validity, barring all the states having their government websites hacked.

I'm not saying that it's not valid, but interpreting this as a sort of secessionist statement is completely ridiculous.

All of the bills that Yar-El provided claim state sovereignty over the tenth amendment. No where does it say seceding from the Union, overthrowing the federal government, or other nonsense. The Ron Paul article is full of complete warmongering and willful ignorance.

GarfieldJL 02-25-2009 04:53 PM

Well still it is a cause of concern for those states to be saying it is they that are sovereign.

jrrtoken 02-25-2009 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarfieldJL (Post 2594723)
Well still it is a cause of concern for those states to be saying it is they that are sovereign.

The claim is being sovereign only over the tenth amendment, which is more exclusively, the right to bear arms. That does not include complete autonomy within each state, nor does it imply secession from the U.S.

The notion that the status quo is being overthrown by the current administration is pretty baseless, and undoubtedly alarmist.

GarfieldJL 02-25-2009 05:12 PM

The second amendment is the right to bear arms, not the 10th amendment.

jrrtoken 02-25-2009 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarfieldJL (Post 2594736)
The second amendment is the right to bear arms, not the 10th amendment.

D'oh. Nevermind. :argh:

Either way, this does not declare complete freedom, just a reinstatement of the federal system's guarantees to partial soverignty of the states.

Yar-El 02-25-2009 06:12 PM

Quote:

U.S. Constitution - Amendment 10
Amendment 10 - Powers of the States and People
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Whow! Uh...

Astor 02-25-2009 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yar-El (Post 2594771)
Whow! Uh...

If those aren't powers controlled by the Federal Government, what is the problem with the State Legislature, or it's people from controlling them?

Yar-El 02-25-2009 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Astor Kaine (Post 2594772)
If those aren't powers controlled by the Federal Government, what is the problem with the State Legislature, or it's people from controlling them?

I should have put a question mark at the end. :) Old English can sometimes be a little tricky. I get it now due to your question.

Tommycat 02-27-2009 05:17 AM

noted from the original article
Quote:

Originally Posted by ron paul
This type of behavior begins whenever there is uncertainty, and likely won’t amount to much. The fact, however, that this is a time of economic uncertainty and political divisions with many legislators involved in the initiation of these bills should make the movement of particular concern.

Even Ron doesn't think it'll go anywhere, so I don't think it's too much to worry about.

Astrotoy7 03-08-2009 04:31 PM

Ah, what a noble 25 indeed ;)

Were they to sink into the earth, the US would be ready to join the world as a more cosmopilitan nation ;)

What I'd like someone to do next is draw a graph comparing that 25 to the top 25 states by KKK membership estimates ;)

mtfbwya

Darth Avlectus 03-09-2009 05:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PastramiX (Post 2594710)
Funny, why haven't I heard of this on the news? Or on Fox? Hm.

Seeing as a possible secession should at least get a Breaking News spot, then why haven't I heard of this yet? Until I get some proof from almost every news organization on the planet, I'm thinking that this a small clause being blown by anti-Obamaites to scaremongering proportions.

Hmm? Must have been something implicit ya pulled outta there somewhaere...Though it has since been edited and I'm going off of memory, I don't seem to recall anything about secession...Oklahoma? They did it about mid 2008.

Why would it mean secession?

In all seriousness, where did you get that? --I'm trying to be as fair and objective as I can here. VM or PM me if it makes you less comfortable saying it here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarfieldJL (Post 2594713)
The state government websites are the sources, that's kinda hard to argue as far as validity, barring all the states having their government websites hacked.

Good point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PastramiX (Post 2594716)
I'm not saying that it's not valid, but interpreting this as a sort of secessionist statement is completely ridiculous.

Again...where did that (secession thought) come from?


Quote:

All of the bills that Yar-El provided claim state sovereignty over the tenth amendment. No where does it say seceding from the Union, overthrowing the federal government, or other nonsense.
If they were planning it--do you really believe the underground for that sort of thing would t.e.l.e.c.a.s.t their plans on the internet or out in the mainstream press where everyone could see it?

........That would be kind of ...stupid.. of them, don't you think?

Quote:

The Ron Paul article is full of complete warmongering and willful ignorance.
Interesting. He opposed the war in Iraq. :confused:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tommycat (Post 2595539)
noted from the original article

Even Ron doesn't think it'll go anywhere, so I don't think it's too much to worry about.

........Hmm...........

Well, this past weekend (03/6,7,8/2009), since prospects have recently picked up for me, I did a damage appraisal for a $*** heap apartment to assess because the nimrod owner (now foreclosing as a result) decided to shut off heat in the middle of winter and pipes went kaboom. Smooth move, IDIOT

The interesting relevance here? LOCAL laws there are now in accordance with international laws ...according to the condemnation paper posted there.

So at the very least, if I had to take a wild guess: national/federal laws downward are now (and have been since 2006) allowing themselves to be superseded by international laws on some levels.

I have no idea how widespread this actually is, but I don't ever remember anything ever said/asked about it on a national level of attention in 2006 or prior. It completely slipped under my radar. Not that it necessarily means anything... does it?

Yar-El 03-09-2009 06:29 PM

Update - 30 States already are, are now claiming...
 
Article - 30 States already are, are now claiming, or are planning for declaration of sovereignty.

We have some more news. 30 states are now or are in the process of claiming sovereignty. Talk about making some progress. I hope this goes somewhere.

jrrtoken 03-09-2009 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTA:SWcity (Post 2599330)
Why would it mean secession?

In all seriousness, where did you get that? --I'm trying to be as fair and objective as I can here.

The way that people are treating it, it sounds like some sort of uprising. IMO, this whole thing is sort of pointless, it's not like anything major will happen. If Oklahoma has had this for awhile, and there is no sort of controversy about it, then I doubt that the impact will be large enough to change anything.

GarfieldJL 03-09-2009 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PastramiX (Post 2599553)
The way that people are treating it, it sounds like some sort of uprising. IMO, this whole thing is sort of pointless, it's not like anything major will happen. If Oklahoma has had this for awhile, and there is no sort of controversy about it, then I doubt that the impact will be large enough to change anything.

Actually, if it were just Texas this wouldn't be an issue because if I remember correctly they are the only state in the United States to have been it's own country.

Yar-El 03-09-2009 07:00 PM

Too bad mainstream media hasn't taken notice. It would be a good story to dig into.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarfieldJL (Post 2599558)
Actually, if it were just Texas this wouldn't be an issue because if I remember correctly they are the only state in the United States to have been it's own country.

The article said Texas had already declared sovereignty many years ago.

GarfieldJL 03-09-2009 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yar-El (Post 2599561)
Too bad mainstream media hasn't taken notice. It would be a good story to dig into.

Well they are also deliberately ignoring the tea party style protests as well. What do you expect from news sources whose reporters want to have Obama's babies.

jrrtoken 03-09-2009 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarfieldJL (Post 2599558)
Actually, if it were just Texas this wouldn't be an issue because if I remember correctly they are the only state in the United States to have been it's own country.

Then you can say the same with Hawaii, California, and the original thirteen colonies, plus many others.

Yar-El 03-09-2009 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarfieldJL (Post 2599562)
Well they are also deliberately ignoring the tea party style protests as well. What do you expect from news sources whose reporters want to have Obama's babies.

:rofl:
Obamanation all the way!

Serious tone - I don't think the states are doing this to become seperated from the union, but they are trying to send a message to the executive branch. Their reasons are concerns for a large group of people. Manipulation and drafting of the young.

jrrtoken 03-09-2009 07:06 PM

Funny, I haven't seen this on Fox News yet, so I suppose it's not true... yet.

GarfieldJL 03-09-2009 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PastramiX (Post 2599568)
Funny, I haven't seen this on Fox News yet, so I suppose it's not true... yet.

It was on several state government web pages, which I pointed out earlier...

jrrtoken 03-09-2009 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarfieldJL (Post 2599569)
It was on several state government web pages, which I pointed out earlier...

So? If both the mainstream media and Fox News didn't report it, then why attack the mainstream media for not reporting it? Both Fox News and the mainstream media is at fault.

GarfieldJL 03-09-2009 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PastramiX (Post 2599571)
So? If both the mainstream media and Fox News didn't report it, then why attack the mainstream media for not reporting it? Both Fox News and the mainstream media is at fault.

I'm not sure if Fox News is sure what to make of it yet, for the record they have reported on the tea party incidents. Thing is Fox News doesn't have any motive to cover this up like the mainstream media would.

EnderWiggin 03-09-2009 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yar-El (Post 2599564)
Serious tone - I don't think the states are doing this to become seperated from the union

Good thing, considering that would be illegal.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarfieldJL (Post 2599577)
Thing is Fox News doesn't have any motive to cover this up like the mainstream media would.

Doesn't matter. They committed the same act, and share an equal portion of the "blame" (my opinion is actually that there was no reason to report this, but you're the one crying foul.

_EW_

Darth Avlectus 03-09-2009 11:21 PM

Am I missing something? :confused:

GarfieldJL 03-09-2009 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnderWiggin (Post 2599636)
Good thing, considering that would be illegal.

Not necessarily, there is an argument that the Federal Government has been violating the US Constitution.

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnderWiggin
Doesn't matter. They committed the same act, and share an equal portion of the "blame" (my opinion is actually that there was no reason to report this, but you're the one crying foul.

Fox actually reported on the tea party issue, however I'm not sure they have any idea what to make of this yet.

EnderWiggin 03-10-2009 06:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarfieldJL (Post 2599683)
Not necessarily, there is an argument that the Federal Government has been violating the US Constitution.

Irrelevant.

Secession is illegal. Period. No caveats.

_EW_

Yar-El 03-10-2009 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnderWiggin (Post 2599636)
Good thing, considering that would be illegal.
_EW_

Did that stop our founding fathers from creating this nation? We commited treason to seek out and build a better life. By enforcing their rights under the Declaration of Independence, the states are only protectin the rights of it's people. Otherwords, the people are in control at all times.

Declaration of Independance
Quote:

Declaration of Independance
IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America
hen 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 Nature's 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. — 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 present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

— John Hancock

New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

Massachusetts:
John Hancock, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Connecticut:
Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York:
William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey:
Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Delaware:
Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Maryland:
Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia:
George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina:
William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Georgia:
Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton
Quote:

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.
The above quote is important. We are responsible to act through war and/or diplomacy to remove an abusive government.

mimartin 03-10-2009 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnderWiggin (Post 2599750)
Irrelevant.

Secession is illegal. Period. No caveats.

Some of the more conservative elements and crazy elements of Texas would argue that point. However, I agree. Texas was given the right to divide into five smaller states, but not the right to leave the union. President Lincoln would seem to agree with you, but it could be just the beacon of the Republican Party’s liberal bias showing. :D

jrrtoken 03-10-2009 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yar-El (Post 2599765)
Did that stop our founding fathers from creating this nation? We commited treason to seek out and build a better life. By enforcing their rights under the Declaration of Independence, the states are only protectin the rights of it's people. Otherwords, the people are in control at all times.

Okay, only thing is, I don't that I'm being threatened by the government, and there is no reason to think so.
Quote:

The above quote is important. We are responsible to act through war and/or diplomacy to remove an abusive government.
Sorry, but I don't see this "abusive government". Perhaps if you could supply some reason, then maybe I'd actually feel threatened and resort to violent anarchy, as you're proposing.

GarfieldJL 03-10-2009 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mimartin (Post 2599766)
Some of the more conservative elements and crazy elements of Texas would argue that point. However, I agree. Texas was given the right to divide into five smaller states, but not the right to leave the union. President Lincoln would seem to agree with you, but it could be just the beacon of the Republican Party’s liberal bias showing. :D

Study your history, Texas is the only state in the Union that was a country before joining the United States.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PastramiX
Okay, only thing is, I don't that I'm being threatened by the government, and there is no reason to think so.

So attempts to take away your first and second amendment rights don't concern you, that's good to know.


Quote:

Originally Posted by PastramiX
Sorry, but I don't see this "abusive government". Perhaps if you could supply some reason, then maybe I'd actually feel threatened and resort to violent anarchy, as you're proposing.

Let's see:

Attempts to silence criticism of the Democrats. -- Fairness Doctrine

Attempts to raise taxes on everything.

Attempts to do away with the 2nd Amendment.

Attempts to put the census under direct control of the White House which can be used to manipulate voting representation in the Legislature and the Electoral College.

That's off the top of my head.

Yar-El 03-10-2009 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PastramiX (Post 2599772)
Okay, only thing is, I don't that I'm being threatened by the government, and there is no reason to think so. Sorry, but I don't see this "abusive government". Perhaps if you could supply some reason, then maybe I'd actually feel threatened and resort to violent anarchy, as you're proposing.

Don't you though?

(1) They are taking taxpayer's money to bailout companies without the vote of the people.

(2) They are limiting the rights to bare arms.

(3) We left England because of a 7 cent tax rate. We are now up 30% or more in some states.

(4) Politically correctness is here; thus, limiting the freedom of speech.

(5) ...

Just to name a very few.

mimartin 03-10-2009 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarfieldJL (Post 2599777)
Study your history, Texas is the only state in the Union that was a country before joining the United States.

For your information, I know my Texas history and if you would like to challenge me in a Texas history quiz for the championship, I'd be more than willing to accept you offer. I can even recite Travis letter to Sam Houston from memory. For you information I am a Texan.

You need to read the quoted statement and the reply in order to have some context into what you are replying to. Without that your reply makes no sense besides being an attempt at a put down and has nothing to do with the topic.

Groups like Texas Secede believe Texas has the right to secede from the union, but according the March 30, 1870 Act passed by Congress, Texas does NOT have that right.

May I suggest you read the link instead of attempting to bash someone for something you obliviously don’t understand.

What were the Conservatives saying to liberals, like Baldwin, when they were whinnying about President Bush being reelected? Oh yea, if you don’t like our freely elected government you can leave. The shoe on the other foot now, so if you don’t like our elected President, you have the right to leave too. That does not mean you can take your entire state with you though.

GarfieldJL 03-10-2009 10:43 AM

Here's the problem with your argument though, the situation is that Congress is arguably attempting to violate people's first and second amendment rights in violation of the United States Constitution. You could also arguably throw in due process while we're at it. As well as trying to compromise border security, and manipulate the census to turn it into a one-party system.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-gra...dia-interviews

And the left wing media wants the Democrats to do just that:
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/erbe/200...der--away.html


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:31 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.