Secession from the union

[Citizen]

Updated news story.

http://news.yahoo.com/secession-petitions-gain-clicks-fast-202910814--abc-news-politics.html

Hmmm. I wonder if Yahoo knows the difference between a legislature submitting a petition and a citizen submitting a petition purportedly for the state.

Its kinda nuts. How can people petition for their state government to withdraw when the state government itself hasn't petitioned?

Of course, if the state governments see a lot of petitions, maybe they'll think, "Hey, this idea has a lot of public support. Maybe we should try it."

 

[KYKevin]

Hmmm. I wonder if Yahoo knows the difference between a legislature submitting a petition and a citizen submitting a petition purportedly for the state.

Its kinda nuts. How can people petition for their state government to withdraw when the state government itself hasn't petitioned?

Of course, if the state governments see a lot of petitions, maybe they'll think, "Hey, this idea has a lot of public support. Maybe we should try it."

LOL Yahoo is not know for having the best news stories. Some times I think they just put up whatever will draw in the clicks.

 

[Citizen]

LOL Yahoo is not know for having the best news stories. Some times I think they just put up whatever will draw in the clicks.

Good point.

 

[Tucker6900]

Looks like there is one for Iowa now as well...

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pe...ts-own-new-constitutional-government/B8B6P9yP

 

[tcox4freedom]

Posted Elsewhere-

If the FG were smart they would allow red states to form their own country. I'm more than convinced, something beneficial for all concerned can be worked out; "IF" the focus is placed on the right things.

For Instance:
We can focus on a peaceful citizen exchange where the new "Conservative States of America" can get all the "conservative" minded people that currently live in the more socialist areas of the country; and we can give them all the people that voted for Obama.

Obama gets his socialist nation where he can stay in power; and we get to keep a FREE "Constitutional" republic! Those that want the government to care for their every need will get their wish; and People who desire to be more "self-dependent" will be able to do so freely.

(Not to mention, a simple "citizen" exchange would do wonders for cities that have lost their workforce and have bad housing situations.)

It would give a much needed boost the US economy by instantly decreasing the dependence of the VERY expensive entitlement programs. (It would absolutely save Social Security by taking MILLIONS off the rolls!)

By allowing the formation of the "Conservative States of America", it would give the USA additional import/export dollars and give them a strong & effective ally in this part of the world; while decreasing the military spending the administration wants to cut anyway. Selling military bases and government owned lands to the newly formed "Conservative States of America", would give the USA additional needed revenue to boost the economy.

There truly would be a lot of Win-Win for everyone concerned if they would take this seriously; and allow the "Red" states to "peacefully" secede. (If done right Obama would be considered a genius and would surely be inducted as the USA's POTUS Emeritus.)

It's really a win-win for everyone! :banana:

 

[Gil223]

Posted Elsewhere-

That would work for me... and I wouldn't even have to move! Pax...

 

[mpguy]

I may be in the minority in saying this, but I really hope if this does happen, I hope it's peacefully. I know what my family will do...but so many families, who have kids, have yet to live there life yet...It's sad it's come to this, pending if it's true.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[Gil223]

I may be in the minority in saying this, but I really hope if this does happen, I hope it's peacefully. I know what my family will do...but so many families, who have kids, have yet to live there life yet...It's sad it's come to this, pending if it's true.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

Secession is the peaceful solution to disaffection with - and dissolution of our ties to - the federal government. Oddly though, secession requests from a state requires presidential and Congressional approval, and "therein lies the rub". The ball is then in the fed's court. Their response to that "request" will be the determining factor in what further actions are required of/available to We the People. :uhoh: Pax...

 

[Gil223]

Let's See What TJ Thinks About This Secession Idea...

In a letter to William B. Giles on Dec. 26, 1825, when Thomas Jefferson (who already had seen the fight over the states’ separation from England, the rise of a new nation and the tribulations it faced in its first decades) addressed the issue.

In a letter marked “not intended for the public eye,” he wrote that "states should separate from our companions only when the sole alternatives left, are the dissolution of our Union with them, or submission to a government without limitation of powers.”

He continued, “Between these two evils, when we must make a choice, there can be no hesitation.”

His letter, posted in it's entirety online at Constitution.org, sheds new light on the arguments being raised on the Obama administration's online petition site, where dozens of petitions are seeking permission for virtually all of the states to leave the union. IMHO, Thomas Jefferson possessed more intelligence, and had greater insight into the hearts, souls, desires, and motivations of mankind, than all of our elected "representatives" for the past 50 years combined. Either that, or he was just lacking sufficient fear of the infant government to not say what was on his mind. Pax...

P.S. There is a third alternative, which TJ either overlooked, or found outside the realm of possibility at that particular point in time. I'll let y'all figure out what that third unuttered alternative is...

 

[eye95]

Secession is peaceful. It is the armed effort to force States to remain associated that is violent.

 

[Citizen]

In a letter to William B. Giles on Dec. 26, 1825, when Thomas Jefferson (who already had seen the fight over the states’ separation from England, the rise of a new nation and the tribulations it faced in its first decades) addressed the issue. His letter, posted in it's entirety online at Constitution.org, sheds new light on the arguments being raised on the Obama administration's online petition site, where dozens of petitions are seeking permission for virtually all of the states to leave the union. IMHO, Thomas Jefferson possessed more intelligence, and had greater insight into the hearts, souls, desires, and motivations of mankind, than all of our elected "representatives" for the past 50 years combined. Either that, or he was just lacking sufficient fear of the infant government to not say what was on his mind. Pax...

P.S. There is a third alternative, which TJ either overlooked, or found outside the realm of possibility at that particular point in time. I'll let y'all figure out what that third unuttered alternative is...

Regarding the third alternative, we don't have to go there.

First, lets acknowledge a twist in the ballyhoo surrounding this recent development. Everywhere you look, you see it presented as This State or That State petition to secede. Its a lie--the states are not petitioning. Residents within the named states are signing onto a petition for their state to secede. So, its hardly the state petitioning to secede.

But, lets say the state legislatures do start debating the question.

First, if virtually all states seek to leave the union, its no longer secession. Its a dissolution of the union itself. The goons in the fedgov are definitely not going to be in a position to resist forty states dissolving the union. My money says they see the writing on the wall somewhere around the 25th state legislature resolution and hightail it back to their states and try to ensure a place for themselves in that state government, or start working hard to be in a position of power for any regional unions that arise from the dissolution.

Second, something that came up at the time of the constitutional convention comes into play. Not really practical, but a wonderfully liberating theory if you can imagine it strongly and clearly enough. The state of nature. One of the notables at the time remarked that by suggesting the need to replace the Articles of Confederation, the suggester instantly reverted to a state of nature. No government! Its not immediately obvious, but if you think about it, here's how that works. Government by consent only works as long as there is consent. The instant the consenter unagrees, the consent is erased. And, the legitimacy of the government fails. As various people started to decide the Articles of Confederation had to go, they were in essence individually reverting to the state of nature. Of course, the existence of the state governments, and leaving the Articles in force until the constitution was ratified throws a wrench into the daydream. But, its a revealing thought--as soon as enough people think something needs to change, the government resting on acceptance starts to totter.

Have a look at how that last paragraph plays into dissolution of the union.

And, lets not overlook one tiny little thing. If enough people sign onto those petitions, it can reach a point where its not just individuals anymore. If it reaches a volume where a majority of the people eligible to vote in a state have signed a petition, it is going to carry some real weight, perhaps forcing the legislature to begin formal consideration of dissolution or secession.

 

[Gil223]

First, lets acknowledge a twist in the ballyhoo surrounding this recent development. Everywhere you look, you see it presented as This State or That State petition to secede. Its a lie--the states are not petitioning. Residents within the named states are signing onto a petition for their state to secede. So, its hardly the state petitioning to secede.

The "state" is the people, and the people are "the state". The state would not exist without people. The Federal government is neither a state, or the people of a state. It is a collection of way too many people, from all the states, supposedly "working" in federally owned buildings, within the Federal District. The true power in our system rests with the citizens of the states, but they choose not to exert that power for whatever reason. If the people of the state submit a petition for anything, then the state submits that petition... but not the state government. The state government would, in all likely-hood, not be moved to officially petition for secession from the union until a super-majority of the voting citizens had signed such petitions.

So, in a round-about way, we have some degree of agreement on that issue. Regarding the rest of your post, I agree completely. Pax...

 

[eye95]

The people signing the petition are not the "People." They are a handful expressing their individual desires. More power to them.

When the People of a State decide to secede, they will loudly make their collective wishes known to the State legislature and the governor, who will actually implement the secession on behalf of the People, not by a petition, not by asking the feds, but by just doing it.

These petitions are a joke.

 

[david.ross]

The people signing the petition are not the "People." They are a handful expressing their individual desires.

I still say the government should expel them. I only wish they'd go through with their threats and move to Canada/Australia. The ironic part of their threats, those countries are everything those people are against.

 

[OC for ME]

I'll wager the petitions will have a number of signatories that roughly equate to the percentage of votes cast in each state for the losers in this past election cycle.

You do not vote Santa Clause out of office, and you do not brick over your fireplace. The blue and purple states will not be joining the secessionists. The red states are not red in large urban (blue) enclaves. Utah is the only red state. Every other state is various shades of purple, some more blueish than others and some more reddish than others.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2012-election-results/

Click on a state and see the distribution of those who will not join their fellow citizens in secessionists talk. What may occur and should occur is that the states exert their existing powers under the federal constitution and force the federal government to recognize each state's existing "sovereignty." The courts is where the feds will lose.

 

[Hunterdave]

Don't you people get it? These petitions were never expected to succeed ,
but rather to start a conversation about such and matters related to and it has worked!
All 50 states have petitions and people are discussing it, including y'all.

Have you seen the DOW? Have you seen the job numbers this morning? I think one way
or another we states will be on our own sooner or latter!

 

[tcox4freedom]

A prophetic message on the subject-

[video=youtube_share;jvliy8rEJDQ]http://youtu.be/jvliy8rEJDQ[/video]

 

[eye95]

I still say the government should expel them. I only wish they'd go through with their threats and move to Canada/Australia. The ironic part of their threats, those countries are everything those people are against.

Please don't associate me with your hateful bilge.

Please note that I will not ask for you to be expelled even though you are expressing a particularly anti-Liberty POV.

Just leave me out of it when it comes to your despicable rhetoric.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

 

[Freedom First]

Why can't a state "cage" all outgoing funds to the IRS, companies could do the same. The Fed may print the monopoly money but the lion's share of it is electronic credits and debits. The states may fear the loss of income but the central government does not only get it by printing a fiat currency but by robbing Peter to pay Paul until Paul is broke or fed up.

The machine of the Fed is electronic. Your bank and the bank controlling the funds from your State all use the Federal Reserve. At this point, effectively NO FINANCIAL ACTION escapes their touch. For a State to stand on it's own, it would have to IMMEDIATELY implement free banking within it's borders so the people of that State could do any form of business. The Fed would lock them out even as the announcement was made, shutting off their routers, and crippling the economy of whatever State refused to participate in .gov.

It's the bomb that no one knows about and the will use it to destroy the economy of any state that refuses to comply.

Gads, I'm gonna quote a frenchman...

“In order to become the master, the politician (or banker) poses as the servant.” Charles de Gaulle

And now a guy who visited France...

“The central bank is an institution of the most deadly hostility existing against the Principles and form of our Constitution. I am an Enemy to all banks discounting bills or notes for anything but Coin. If the American People allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the People of all their Property until their Children will wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered. ” Thomas Jefferson

Secession is peaceful. It is the armed effort to force States to remain associated that is violent.

Excellent point Sir.

Lincoln taught that lesson well.

 

[Gil223]

I still say the government should expel them.

So, you would deny them their right to express displeasure with the government? Your position reflects the same "tolerance" expressed in your signature line...

I expel anti-gay people off my teams. Tolerance is key to team cohesion and team building.

I'm having difficulty finding the "tolerance" in that statement. If you are truly tolerant, you would not be upset by those intolerants who may choose to "expel gay people" from their teams. Did you get your definition of "tolerance" from Mein Kampf (Adolf vs Jews)? A position of inclusiveness is the key to team leadership, with the example being set at the top. (Acceptance is frequently the fruit borne on the tree of social exposure.) Pax...