Secession is not specifically spelled out in the Constitution. However, there is political precedence (Civil War) and Supreme Court decision precedence (Texas v. White, 1869) which rule that states do not have unilateral authority to secede. Also, it is illegal (treason) by law to take action which would undermine the US government, and I suppose it could be argued that actually attempting a sucession would therefore be illegal and grant authority to the feds to go in and arrest those active in secession plans or actions.

Of course, that is different than a successful break from the union through Civil War too (which failed once).

So if the state decided to get out, the Feds are going in and arresting everyone in Texas except sympathizers ? Theyll need more prisons. It would be a hard fight since the Texas National Guard (Texas Military) has all the same weapons as the US Government, although not as much. The colonies won that same war against England. Im not saying they should do it, im just being the advocate here. Realisticly, what would the US government do ? What if Texas (armed with nukes too) decided to level D.C. with them ? They could even pick somewhere much closer like say New Orleans where any response would only have a few minutes, and the blast/fallout would be downwind from them and not pose a threat.

If it does start (which I believe is unlikely) I believe it will probably be with the Texas legislature, allowing Texas employers to refuse to withhold Federal income tax.

If nothing else, THAT ought to get someone's attention in pretty short order.

quote Originally posted by Formula88: So you believe success is a "right?"

Not even the pursuit of property, really.

[This message has been edited by tbone42 (edited 01-23-2013).]

quote Originally posted by htexans1: However a lot of this succession talk is from people who are simply unhappy with the current government in power.

Got me to thinking.
And who will fill that "power void"?
Texas as their own government.
Who can be trusted to make up that government?
Would they still hold tight to the strict guidance of The Constitution as they envision it, or would they change some things to just kind of clarify what Texas thinks it really means?.
For instance, would this new country (read government) have any use for other religions, say like Muslum?
Is there any reason to allow Democrats to be part of this new country (read government)?
Could a gay parade get a permit?

EPA?
Welfare?
Social Security?
Abortions?

I mean, this is a brand new country.
With the past to learn from, you could really set it up just right this time.
Maybe.
For a while.
I just don't know how you are going to keep politicians out.
And corruption.

If there's money & power to be got, it'll damn sure get got.
Even Texas ain't immune to that.

[This message has been edited by Boondawg (edited 01-23-2013).]

quote Originally posted by Boondawg: Got me to thinking. And who will fill that "power void"? Texas as their own government. Who can be trusted to make up that government? Would they still hold tight to the strict guidance of The Constitution as they envision it, or would they change some things to just kind of clarify what Texas thinks it really means?. For instance, would this new country (read government) have any use for other religions, say like Musum? Is there any reason to allow Democrats to be part of this new country (read government)? Could a gay parade get a permit? EPA? Welfare? Social Security? Abortions? I mean, this is a brand new country. With the past to learn from, you could really set it up just right this time. Maybe. For a while. I just don't know how you are going to keep politicians out. And corruption. If there's money & power to be got, it'll damn sure get got. Even Texas ain't immune to that.

Even if they didn't start out having things like the EPA, they would gain them eventually.
All empirical evidence points to the fact that no matter how limited of a government you start out with, it will grow and grow until the market is destroyed and the empire collapses. Many conservatives like to think that they can use this magical piece of paper known as a constitution and it will 'limit' the government, but it never works.

quote Originally posted by NoMoreRicers: Even if they didn't start out having things like the EPA, they would gain them eventually. All empirical evidence points to the fact that no matter how limited of a government you start out with, it will grow and grow until the market is destroyed and the empire collapses. Many conservatives like to think that they can use this magical piece of paper known as a constitution and it will 'limit' the government, but it never works.

I suspect that as well.
But can it be no other way?
You can't beat it?

quote Originally posted by Boondawg: I suspect that as well. But can it be no other way? You can't beat it?

Maybe it can, but history hasn't shown us any examples. Empires rise and inevitably fall, and those that aren't destroyed by war and destroyed from within.
Human nature is difficult to overcome. That was the driving force behind forming our system of checks and balances - to try to counter natural human failings.

While thinking about this, I just happen to be watching "The Lord of The Flies".

It reminded me that left to our own nature, things fall apart.
The center does not hold.

William Butler Yeats (1865-1939)
THE SECOND COMING

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: a waste of desert sand;
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Wind shadows of the indignant desert birds.

The darkness drops again but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

quote Originally posted by tbone42: Plus, a lot of people died a long time ago to preserve the Union.

Strange that only people on one side dies in that war..... Strange how you didn't mention what the other side was fighting for in your little story...

quote Originally posted by cliffw: ...

Keep in mind Cliff, if you are not in 100% lockstep with whatever the President says you are "Anti-American" in the eyes of the left.

Brad

[This message has been edited by Fats (edited 01-23-2013).]

quote Originally posted by Boondawg: I suspect that as well. But can it be no other way? You can't beat it?

I believe you can. But at this point in the development of humanity, 99 percent of the population think that my peers and I are batshit crazy for advocating a society without a government. Oh well. I believe that long after I'm dead, humans will move along on their journey towards morality; and statism will join slavery, the barring woman's and children's rights, etc. into a black hole.

quote Originally posted by tbone42: As far as I know, the petitioners are not even close to being a majority.

They are not. You only need 125,000 signatures on a petition to compel the White House to answer your concerns, formally.

quote pe·ti·tion 1. a formally drawn request, often bearing the names of a number of those making the request, that is addressed to a person or group of persons in authority or power, soliciting some favor, right, mercy, or other benefit: a petition for clemency; a petition for the repeal of an unfair law. 2. a request made for something desired, especially a respectful or humble request, as to a superior or to one of those in authority; a supplication or prayer: a petition for aid; a petition to God for courage and strength. 3. something that is sought by request or entreaty: to receive one's full petition. 4.Law. an application for a court order or for some judicial action.

You would be better served if you wondered "why would people want an answer".

quote Originally posted by tbone42: Let's discuss their reason for wanting to secede when at least a majority opinion about it emerges. Otherwise, this really all seems like premature speculation and sour grapes over the November election.

Let's not talk about ObamaCare until "at least" a majority opinion emerges, .
Premature speculation and sour grapes over the November election ? It isn't sour grapes over the election, and speculation is premature. You call that discussion ? Sour grapes over an election ? I guess it is. I am not mad that Nobama won, I am mad because of the Democrats and the Republicans.

quote Originally posted by tbone42: Plus, a lot of people died a long time ago to preserve the Union.

A lot more died trying to dissolve it. Your point is ? Why did they die ? Trying to forcibly get something that they wanted. One side wanted freedom, one wanted control.
I still say my right of peaceable assembly, guaranteed by the Constitution, inherently gives me the right to peaceful dis-assembly.

quote Originally posted by tbone42: I am not too keen on Texans pissing all over that just because they are unhappy they're guy lost the election and policy is not going their way.

Just because ? I am not too keen on other people telling me how to feel, or what to do. Do you think you own me/us ? The United States supported the break up of the USSR, (the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics). Union. United. No difference. If the people of a region desire freedom, do they not deserve it ? Why do people have to join a union to get a job ? Does the "one size fits all" US Federal Government really fit all ? It does not seem to do so.
I have often wondered, why do the other nations not see the reason for our success ? Now I wonder, why do the other states which are doing poorly, not realize the reason for success of the other states which are doing good, ?

quote Originally posted by tbone42: The "other side" sat through 8 years of gung-ho foreign policy, hoping he would not get us all killed.

No. The other side bitched and moaned and demagogued Bush. Helped by a complicit media. I don't think the other side should have been made to sit through it. What is your problem with my opinion ? Get us all killed, ? We were getting killed ? When would you step up ?

quote Originally posted by tbone42: Sorry to say it, but we have a chance every 4 years to modify the direction of this country. They blew it and now, since they did not get their way, some want to leave. Go, I say, and don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya.. [b]but dont think you are keeping the land over half a million were wounded or died for the last time this seemed like a "good idea"[/u].

I might not be alive in four years. I might want to modify the direction of this country tomorrow. They blew it ?
We blew it ? How ?
The last time this seemed like a good idea ?
Do you have a problem with freedom ? Again I wonder. What would have happened if the South had won ? Which they almost did. Fact. "Go" you say ? It's the bully which takes his ball and goes home. Texas is not your ball.

[This message has been edited by cliffw (edited 01-23-2013).]

Is it wrong to think that this is the most interesting time of my whole life, America-wise?

Florida asked to secede as well.
http://jacksonville.com/new...her-states-also-have

quote Originally posted by Boondawg: Is it wrong to think that this is the most interesting time of my whole life, America-wise?

You are the judge of your whole life. History has some pretty interesting happenings.

quote Originally posted by tbone42: SURE is a LOT of CAPITALIZATION in that POST. Don't worry doc, I don't need to be led by the hand. Like I cannot hit on the points you made unless you emphasized them. As far as I know, the petitioners are not even close to being a majority. Let's discuss their reason for wanting to secede when at least a majority opinion about it emerges. Otherwise, this really all seems like premature speculation and sour grapes over the November election. Plus, a lot of people died a long time ago to preserve the Union. I am not too keen on Texans pissing all over that just because they are unhappy they're guy lost the election and policy is not going their way. The "other side" sat through 8 years of gung-ho foreign policy, hoping he would not get us all killed. Sorry to say it, but we have a chance every 4 years to modify the direction of this country. They blew it and now, since they did not get their way, some want to leave. Go, I say, and don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya.. but dont think you are keeping the land over half a million were wounded or died for the last time this seemed like a "good idea".

Just want to let you know that the capitalization issue is due to my lack of knowing how to do the italics or color change, and isn't meant to be shouting.

And the emphasis part isn't because I think you need to be led to the main points. It's my textual, non-verbal way for me to express how I would be saying it if we were talking.

So forgive me if it came across as condescending because that is not how I think of you.


Regarding your points, I get what you are saying. I was trying to pro-actively respond to that.


Some people might be interested in doing this because they are upset that "their side lost". I was trying to say that I don't think that it is the predominant mentality. I think cliffw, in my interpretation of his post, was trying to say that it is getting to the point that the current administration and the people that voted in such a government again are evidence of such a fundamental change away from a constitutional republic, that they don't come close to reflecting the dominant mentality of the majority of Texans.


As a way of perspective, "the other side" was in control under Clinton, but I don't remember people feeling there was such a fundamental change in the way citizens wanted their government to be, that they wanted to secede.


I also want to make clear that I was only commenting about that specifically, and wasn't commenting on whether I thought enough Texans felt like seceding, that they should do it; nor whether I thought the government and the kind of government enough of the U.S. would vote for made it worth the DRASTIC measure to secede.


P.S. I tried to see if I could learn to use the italicize button, so we'll have to see if it worked. It takes me longer to do it that way, but I don't want to misinterpret my intent of emphasis to be taken as shouting at anyone (since I know that capitalization is the textual convention for shouting, often.)

The TV series 'Last Resort' shows some insight into possibilities. For those that dont watch it, a captain of a fully armed nuclear US sub basically commandeers it and takes control of a large island and declares a no entry zone around it. To emphasize hes in control, he does drop a nuclear warhead just off the coast of DC at a safe distance. Although the governments made some ill attempts to regain it, hes pretty much got the whole US military and government hostage. Something like that is not so far fetched given present situations.

Texas should hold a vote. And when the majority doesn't agree, what then?

quote Originally posted by rogergarrison: ... Although the governments made some ill attempts to regain it, hes pretty much got the whole US military and government hostage. Something like that is not so far fetched given present situations.

I mentioned this elsewhere, in a different thread.
I remember a caller to a radio program, a couple of years ago. Said that he was "career military". I don't recall which branch, or if he even said which branch.
He said that, historically, the enlisted folks - the "fresh, gung-ho guys", usually make comments about "taking control", for whatever reason. He may have blamed it on youthful exuberance or testosterone. That was the feeling I got, anyway.
He continues that, lately, those rumblings have become more common within the higher ranks. He may have just been blowing smoke. Or he may have been "genuine". Just food for thought.

[This message has been edited by Raydar (edited 01-24-2013).]

quote Originally posted by frontal lobe: Just want to let you know that the capitalization issue is due to my lack of knowing how to do the italics or color change, and isn't meant to be shouting. And the emphasis part isn't because I think you need to be led to the main points. It's my textual, non-verbal way for me to express how I would be saying it if we were talking. So forgive me if it came across as condescending because that is not how I think of you. Regarding your points, I get what you are saying. I was trying to pro-actively respond to that. Some people might be interested in doing this because they are upset that "their side lost". I was trying to say that I don't think that it is the predominant mentality. I think cliffw, in my interpretation of his post, was trying to say that it is getting to the point that the current administration and the people that voted in such a government again are evidence of such a fundamental change away from a constitutional republic, that they don't come close to reflecting the dominant mentality of the majority of Texans. As a way of perspective, "the other side" was in control under Clinton, but I don't remember people feeling there was such a fundamental change in the way citizens wanted their government to be, that they wanted to secede. I also want to make clear that I was only commenting about that specifically, and wasn't commenting on whether I thought enough Texans felt like seceding, that they should do it; nor whether I thought the government and the kind of government enough of the U.S. would vote for made it worth the DRASTIC measure to secede. P.S. I tried to see if I could learn to use the italicize button, so we'll have to see if it worked. It takes me longer to do it that way, but I don't want to misinterpret my intent of emphasis to be taken as shouting at anyone (since I know that capitalization is the textual convention for shouting, often.)

You got my respect, I just like giving you a hard time. Too much of my Dad in me, I can be a big pain. Much of the time, when I want to emphasize something, I capitalize it too. Just yucking it up some, don't take it personally either.

If the belief exists that there is a fundamental change in the way the country is being ran , I highly recommend instead of focusing energies on trying this secession nonsense, those people need to focus energy on finding the right candidate who will help our country rather than hurt it. Romney was not the right candidate.. DOGS know it. Those who claim to so deeply love their country and wrap themselves in a flag whenever the subject comes up? Those people surprise me with how unwilling they are to try again and just give up on our country... and those kind of people are not exactly high on my list for handing out respect after learning they would rather take their ball and go home instead of striving to accomplish something better here. After all, thats what this country should be about.

I have no respect for those who said after 2008 and 2012 elections they want to leave our country. I wish they had. Same with the people who said that after 2004. I will be an American citizen until I die or America dies, and in the meantime I will do what I can as a citizen to make this place better, regardless how the next election goes.

Exactly... How many people who said "I'm moving to Canada if Obama is elected" actually went? They would rather complain, than actually do something productive.

How about taking all of this "Anti-Obama" energy and use it to fix the GOP.

This petition to succeed is like saying "I'm move to Mexico"..... no real intent, only more chest beating. Sigh... and the GOP wonder why they can't win.

quote Originally posted by tbone42: You got my respect, I just like giving you a hard time. Too much of my Dad in me, I can be a big pain. Much of the time, when I want to emphasize something, I capitalize it too. Just yucking it up some, don't take it personally either. If the belief exists that there is a fundamental change in the way the country is being ran , I highly recommend instead of focusing energies on trying this secession nonsense, those people need to focus energy on finding the right candidate who will help our country rather than hurt it. Romney was not the right candidate.. DOGS know it. Those who claim to so deeply love their country and wrap themselves in a flag whenever the subject comes up? Those people surprise me with how unwilling they are to try again and just give up on our country... and those kind of people are not exactly high on my list for handing out respect after learning they would rather take their ball and go home instead of striving to accomplish something better here. After all, thats what this country should be about. I have no respect for those who said after 2008 and 2012 elections they want to leave our country. I wish they had. Same with the people who said that after 2004. I will be an American citizen until I die or America dies, and in the meantime I will do what I can as a citizen to make this place better, regardless how the next election goes.

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: What are those?

Thoughts of sussession, the economy due to Obungles, unworkable gun controls, policies like Obumacare no one wants, foreign powers who no longer respect the US, utter failure to have any semblence of a workable budget (or any at all), putting small business out of business with policies, failure to do ANYTHING about illegal aliens,.....too many reasons to list them all.

quote Originally posted by rogergarrison: Thoughts of sussession, the economy due to Obungles, unworkable gun controls, policies like Obumacare no one wants, foreign powers who no longer respect the US, utter failure to have any semblence of a workable budget (or any at all), putting small business out of business with policies, failure to do ANYTHING about illegal aliens,.....too many reasons to list them all.

Hmm, basically everything you talked about, except for "Obamacare" have existed in the past and have been dealt with. (Economy due to Obama??? Well, that is pretty vague, but we have dealt with multiple recessions and recoveries). I see a country going through difficult times, but it will recover. I see a lot of hate out there and that never helps, but those feelings won't change until Obama is out of the office. Then magically, those people will have a different feeling about this country (if they get their way during the election).

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: Exactly... How many people who said "I'm moving to Canada if Obama is elected" actually went? They would rather complain, than actually do something productive. This petition to succeed is like saying "I'm move to Mexico"..... no real intent, only more chest beating. Sigh... and the GOP wonder why they can't win.

Oh, Im already going...already have a house but south not north. Trouble that Im having is Obumas policies to small business are makeing it near impossible to get a single buyer to even look at my commercial property even though its at less than 1/2 value. I cant afford to just walk away from $450,000. Maybe you can since hes doing so much good for you and the other sheep that believe his BS. As far as me being productive, I paid taxes for 45 years and supported other small businesses by buying from them. I dont have to now, so Im not going to contribute a single dime to the government except sales tax for stuff I buy. Maybe Ill come back if someone with half a brain gets in office down the road. You think I complain now, I can say a lot more when Im out about how the US is going down the toilet. Ill also take everything I can from it that im due like SS and Veterans medical care. If I can find other ways to get government money, Ill take all I can with me to spend there.

[This message has been edited by rogergarrison (edited 01-24-2013).]

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: Exactly... How many people who said "I'm moving to Canada if Obama is elected" actually went?

Approximately the same number of people who said they would move to Canada if Bush was re-elected?


I get the sentiment. The ones that are just whiners because they didn't get their way, and are being blow-hards about seceding should just be ignored. That might be the majority. I don't know.


Still, there are some people that are-in my opinion legitimately-concerned that the percentage of people voting for things that will result in some form of constitutional republic is becoming the minority, and there aren't going to be elected people any more that will actually perform the oath they take.

And are we at that point where there is no likelihood of saving the constitutional form of a United States?


I don't know that we are there yet. I don't think so and I hope not. But the Obama administration will have had eight years to indoctrinate people to socialism instead of a constitutional republic. He knows how to do it. It is part of his process in getting us there.

quote Originally posted by rogergarrison: Oh, Im already going...already have a house but south not north. Trouble that Im having is Obumas policies to small business are makeing it near impossible to get a single buyer to even look at my commercial property even though its at less than 1/2 value. I cant afford to just walk away from $450,000. Maybe you can since hes doing so much good for you and the other sheep that believe his BS. As far as me being productive, I paid taxes for 45 years and supported other small businesses by buying from them. I dont have to now, so Im not going to contribute a single dime to the government except sales tax for stuff I buy. Maybe Ill come back if someone with half a brain gets in office down the road. You think I complain now, I can say a lot more when Im out about how the US is going down the toilet. Ill also take everything I can from it that im due like SS and Veterans medical care. If I can find other ways to get government money, Ill take all I can with me to spend there.

The value of property has dropped, but yet you blame Obama's policies? Hmm, have you seen the real estate market over the past 5 years? There is a house down the street... asking price was $1.5M. Then the market dropped and he is asking $900K.... still hasn't sold it. The house was valued WAY too high and when the bottom dropped out of the market. What you value your property at is what you believe it is worth. What you sell it for is the value to someone else. Maybe your property is not in a growing area, maybe someone is selling their property for less. There are many reasons for value changes in property. You know that, but you want to blame Obama?

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: I don't believe we are even close to socialism, but I know you disagree.

Yes. But how far along we are to it could at least be a discussion between us, and not an argument. I want you to know I have read your viewpoints on it, and don't think you are stupid, blind, foolish, or anything else in coming to a different conclusion. And I'll be the first to readily admit I'm pretty hyper-sensitive about the constitution, and the U.S. being a constitutional republic (like anyone couldn't already tell that).


As I have tried to put it in perspective, I heavily disagreed with Clinton's behaviors as well as his policies. But I honestly can't remember bringing up that he is a socialist, and moving us that way. So I'm at least trying to check myself, to see if I am being objective, am I over-reacting, am I seeing a 'slippery slope' when there really isn't one.


The reason it is relevant to this thread is that if Texans wanting to secede is just due to disagreement in policy in general, then I would consider it a gross over-reaction to the somewhat cyclical nature of policy between liberal and conservative.

If the reason is that they are seeing it is not an issue of liberal vs. conservative flavor of a constitutional republic, and is veering off that map and into socialism, then, whether I agree or disagree with their assessment, I at least understand why it is important enough to them to talk about secession.
I haven't follow it closely enough to even make a personal judgement of where I feel about the Texan's point of view. I've just been speaking in the abstract.

Prime location property may have dropped, but not as much as housing. Business owners are not willing to expand or buy more property under Obuma. This property was appraised not too long ago for $600,000 (3 acres) at the main downtown intersection of the city. I dont even get a phone call in months asking for what a 2 bdrm shack should sell for. So dont tell me commercial property goes down from $600K to less than $200K. No property anywhere around me is selling except for homes that people can trade for dirt or get a handout to buy. Everyweek new places go out of business. All the Hooters here are gone...how do you fail with beer, wings and boobs ? Another almost new office building just a few hundred yards down the street was torn down to make a park with a lake because they couldnt find businesses to rent any of it. Even junk azz KMart across the street has been struggling to stay open the last few years. Theres enough empty paved parking lots to open an airport on. The handles been flushed and all thats left is the last few turds going around the bottom.

Explain to me why after 40 years, my business went to hell as soon as Obuma got elected ? I didnt do anything any different. It really started to go downhill for me when he bailed out auto manufacturers. My big major contracts for 20 years were closed down taking 80% of my business with them. Those dealers were smaller quota dealers that manufacturer had to close to get their handouts. One of them was doing great, been in business since before 1920. They just didnt sell enough for them to stay with the manufacturer, even though they sold more than enough to stay in business for themselves. What do you do when they say their not giving you any more cars....? I hoped I still had enough private business to sustain it, but they were all losing houses and jobs themselves and couldnt afford to spend money on their cars. They dont even fix them with insurance money now....they keep it to pay living expenses instead.

[This message has been edited by rogergarrison (edited 01-25-2013).]

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: Texas should hold a vote. And when the majority doesn't agree, what then?

The majority did not believe in ObamaCare. So, they brought out the community activists, the public relations blitz, the propaganda machines, used procedural gimmicks, bribed Senators, and rammed it down our throats with out reading the bill. Violating promises of transparency and bipartisanship along the way.
If we did hold a vote and the majority agreed, what then ? I am not one of the signers of the petition and frankly did not even hear of the effort before it was submitted. However, I have been sporting a Secede bumper sticker on my truck for years, even before the Nobama regime. A vote may be closer than you think and with some campaigning, it is not far fetched to believe a majority can be reached. After all, we voted in Rick Perry who at one time publicly called for secession.
So, what then ? I am surprised at the attitudes of those against it. They seem akin to a jealous boyfriend/husband who has been dumped and declares he won't allow it. They seem akin to slave owners who thought they owned people and their possessions. The United States has long stood for the rights of all people to be free. We cheered as the USSR broke up and have supported many who wished to stand against their own government. Yet it won't allow it's own citizens this right. ?
Do the gawd almighty opponents of secession not understand the words of their own Declaration of Independence ?

quote 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 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.

Face it. The US federal government is broken. It is bloated, dysfunctional, bought and paid for, and not accountable to the people. It survives for it's own existence. Those in charge, for the most part, crave power and are in bed with special interests and unions. Things need to change. I can think of a few right off the top of my head.

quote Originally posted by tbone42: If the belief exists that there is a fundamental change in the way the country is being ran , I highly recommend instead of focusing energies on trying this secession nonsense, those people need to focus energy on finding the right candidate who will help our country rather than hurt it.

More of a gradual change, which has not been trending well. Enough is about enough. I am close to that point. It is not so much the candidate, or the party. I am fed up with the people who would vote these nimrods in.
We are a country divided. With many an election, and Congressional bills, passing at almost 50/50.

quote Originally posted by tbone42: Those who claim to so deeply love their country and wrap themselves in a flag whenever the subject comes up? Those people surprise me with how unwilling they are to try again and indstead just give up on our country... and those kind of people are not exactly high on my list for handing out respect after learning they would rather take their ball and go home instead of striving to accomplish something better here. After all, thats what this country should be about.

As I said, we seem to have two visions here in the United States. "Should be about" is subjective. I can see where someone might want to give up on their country instead of their way of life if their country veers off course. I am of the mindset that if you think you can do it better, go ahead.
I think a social experiment is in order. Give the unions their turf and see how they succeed. Give the Democrats their turf and see how they do. Give the Republicans their turf and see how they do. Then see which model gets adopted by the people.

quote Originally posted by frontal lobe: Still, there are some people that are-in my opinion legitimately-concerned that the percentage of people voting for things that will result in some form of constitutional republic is becoming the minority, and there aren't going to be elected people any more that will actually perform the oath they take.

I said in another thread, ... (can't find it) that I am not basing my thoughts upon Obama's win, that I am equally pissed at both political parties, and to your point, upset at the very people voting for the idiocy.

quote Originally posted by tbone42: Honestly, I wish there was a way we could ship all people who do not want to be US citizens out. Love it or leave it, as they say.

Yet you would not allow them to secede, ?

quote Originally posted by cliffw:

Well then, we will wait for the vote. Otherwise, it is all talk. Sorry... it is just good for media coverage at this point.

Jealous? Nah.... let them do what they want, but remember... the grass is always greener... and when Texans actually have to pay for everything and have to deal with international trade issues, etc. Fun experiment.

With all of this talk.... why don't people just leave the US... if it is so bad? Because they believe in this country, or the Constitution? Nah, I don't buy that.

[This message has been edited by jaskispyder (edited 01-25-2013).]

quote Originally posted by tbone42: <snip> If the belief exists that there is a fundamental change in the way the country is being ran , I highly recommend instead of focusing energies on trying this secession nonsense, those people need to focus energy on finding the right candidate who will help our country rather than hurt it. Romney was not the right candidate.. DOGS know it. Those who claim to so deeply love their country and wrap themselves in a flag whenever the subject comes up? Those people surprise me with how unwilling they are to try again and just give up on our country... and those kind of people are not exactly high on my list for handing out respect after learning they would rather take their ball and go home instead of striving to accomplish something better here. After all, thats what this country should be about. <snip>

The error in your statement is that you assume all things are fair and equal in our system, which they aren't. There are influences in our electoral system that prevent the election from actually being a representation of what "we the people" want. It's a representation of what the media and influential want via the ignorant, the uninformed, and the misinformed. If I'm surrounded by idiots who are constantly making bad choices, I find new friends.

quote Originally posted by Taijiguy: via the ignorant, the uninformed, and the misinformed..

Let me guess, those are the the ones that thought & voted differently then you?
Why does that atuomaticlly make them those things?

quote Originally posted by Boondawg: Let me guess, those are the the ones that thought & voted differently then you? Why does that atuomaticlly make them those things?

Did I say that? You kind of prove my point by making that assumption.

quote Originally posted by Fformula88: Secession is not specifically spelled out in the Constitution. However, there is political precedence (Civil War) and Supreme Court decision precedence (Texas v. White, 1869) which rule that states do not have unilateral authority to secede.

Not exactly.
Again, I am not in favor of secession but the idea is novel. My "Secede" bumper sticker that my truck has been sporting since before Nabama got in office, is a voice of displeasure with the direction of our country and the politics of it. I also find the topic interesting due to the dissenting opinions voiced here. Which makes the history more interesting.
In Texas vs White, secession was not an issue before the Supreme Court. It was not even a ruling. It was an opinion of Chief justice Salmon Chase in the majority decision. The question before the Supreme Court was one of ownership of Treasury Bonds, which were bought by the State of Texas and sold by the Confederate State of Texas during the Civil War. After the Civil War, the again United States Texas wanted the proceeds back. The majority decision opined that since Texas had no right of secession, that it sold it's bonds and was liable to repay the bond holders.
Chief Justice Salmon Chase's opinion reflects that ...

quote The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation. By these (the Articles of Confederation), the Union was solemnly declared to 'be perpetual.' And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained 'to form a more perfect Union.' It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not?

Red colored text is my interpretation.
Remember, this was a Reconstuctionist Supreme Court. During the days of Carpetbaggers and the like. No matter to my post. I opine that a Union can be made more perfect by being able to be dissolved. It happens in marriage, in business, and in partnerships all of the time. Again, I argue that the right of peaceable assembly inherently gives the right of peaceable dis assembly. I also argue that the 13^th Ammendment prohibits the owning of people and that since the Supreme Court has ruled that businesses are entitled to the same protection as under the Constitution as people, States should be too.
Now, I have not examined the Articles of Confereration, nor the documents admitting Texas into the Union. Nor the transitional bridge between the Articles and the Constitution. I will be though.

quote Originally posted by Taijiguy: Did I say that? You kind of prove my point by making that assumption.

And I only asked that you let me take a guess.
I never said it was fact.
I was guessing (with no less the 3 question marks, even).

[This message has been edited by Boondawg (edited 01-28-2013).]

quote Originally posted by Boondawg: nd I only asked that you let me take a guess. I never said it was fact. I was guessing (with no less the 3 question marks, even).

I wouldn't go that far--I only count 2.

quote Let me guess, those are the the ones that thought & voted differently then you? Why does that atuomaticlly make them those things?

[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 01-28-2013).]

quote Originally posted by Boondawg: I was guessing (with no less the 3 question marks, even).

quote Originally posted by maryjane: I wouldn't go that far--I only count 2.

I would.
There is also one in the title bar of that message.

[This message has been edited by Boondawg (edited 01-28-2013).]