Secession petitions now filed for all 50 states (1 Viewer)

[Mark Davis]

How would the new Red State Nation have any good football teams after they disenfranchise their black people and don't let them go to college?

Their answer would start with s and end with y.

Yep because the south has a stranglehold on racism. I'm glad none exist anywhere else.

no, they're just the best at it.

And you know this because?

Because the South is nothing but stupid rednecks and hillbillies!!!

I know. We stereotype people down here.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

We can't get a substantial portion of a small town to agree on where to put stop signs for the most part, but legitimately breaking up the most powerful nation in human history will be a breeze.

lol

 

[NCCommish]

3. At least you are willing to admit that you, like most leftists, are at heart an imperialist.

I think it's more like most lefties can't imagine a time when a substantial portion of the nation would favor a breakup. I can, however, and think, whenever it happens, that it should occur with some intelligent planning and foresight.

Oh I can believe a small number of loons wants to leave. But I dare the separatists to put their money where their mouth is. Do some polling. I bet Gary Johnson got more votes than seceding would.

 

[Kleck]

Can we form a Great Lakes Country? MN, WI, MI, northern IL & OH. IA can come in too since most of that state is similar to southern WI and MN. We could see if the north west part of PA wants in and then sign a treaty with NY so we can have a waterway to the Atlantic.

I'd ask the Dakotas to join, but Smoo will probably get them to become part of Canada. We'll give the majority of IN to KY. If we have to pay them to take it I'm sure I could wrestle up a few goats.

 

[Kleck]

We can't get a substantial portion of a small town to agree on where to put stop signs for the most part, but legitimately breaking up the most powerful nation in human history will be a breeze.

lol

Screw stop signs, I want more round-a-bouts!

 

[TPW]

You should really know what words mean before you use them - Imperialism - the policy of extending the rule or authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies. Pretty sure American states aren't foreign countries.So let's talk Quebec. The Secession party is so powerful they had to form a minority government. The Party won 31% of the vote. Oh yeah it's a groundswell out there.

Thank you for finally posting some figures. From the same article:

They are the only place where the majority (over 80%) of the people speak French. Along with this language, they believe they possess a distinct culture compared to their Anglophone neighbors. Stemming from these beliefs, separatist movements have always had a strong following in Canada's second most populous province.

But I digress. Despite your attempts to distract, this isn't about Quebec, and you still haven't answered the rest of my questions.As for the defintion of "imperialist" and "imperialism", yours is pretty narrow I'd say most these define you and those who think like you pretty well.imperialism (ɪmˈpɪərɪəˌlɪzəm) — n 1. the policy or practice of extending a state's rule over other territories2. an instance or policy of aggressive behaviour by one state against another3. the extension or attempted extension of authority, influence, power, etc, by any person, country, institution, etc: cultural imperialism4. a system of imperial government or rule by an emperor5. the spirit, character, authority, etc, of an empire6. advocacy of or support for any form of imperialism

 

[TPW]

Serious question:If there are people in certain states who overwhelmingly support leaving the union peacefully, why is that not an option? I've never received a good answer.

. The Union is much older than the Constitution. It was formed, in fact, by the Articles of Association in 1774. It was matured and continued by the Declaration of Independence in 1776. It was further matured, and the faith of all the then thirteen States expressly plighted and engaged that it should be perpetual, by the Articles of Confederation in 1778. And finally, in 1787, one of the declared objects for ordaining and establishing the Constitution was "to form a more perfect Union." But if destruction of the Union by one or by a part only of the States be lawfully possible, the Union is less perfect than before the Constitution, having lost the vital element of perpetuity. It follows from these views that no State upon its own mere motion can lawfully get out of the Union; that resolves and ordinances to that effect are legally void, and that acts of violence within any State or States against the authority of the United States are insurrectionary or revolutionary, according to circumstances. I therefore consider that in view of the Constitution and the laws the Union is unbroken, and to the extent of my ability, I shall take care, as the Constitution itself expressly enjoins upon me, that the laws of the Union be faithfully executed in all the States. Doing this I deem to be only a simple duty on my part, and I shall perform it so far as practicable unless my rightful masters, the American people, shall withhold the requisite means or in some authoritative manner direct the contrary. I trust this will not be regarded as a menace, but only as the declared purpose of the Union that it will constitutionally defend and maintain itself.

Good reply. I am familiar with Lincoln's inaugural address. The question still remains, why does a position taken over 150 years ago have to be maintained in perpetuity?

TPW, just out of curiosity, which state do you live in and do you want this state to succeed?

Not telling and not sure.

 

[Apple Jack]

We can't get a substantial portion of a small town to agree on where to put stop signs for the most part, but legitimately breaking up the most powerful nation in human history will be a breeze.

lol

Screw stop signs, I want more round-a-bouts!

JUGHANDLES OR STF.U!

 

[Jewell]

We can't get a substantial portion of a small town to agree on where to put stop signs for the most part, but legitimately breaking up the most powerful nation in human history will be a breeze.

lol

Screw stop signs, I want more round-a-bouts!

The nation can't agree if they're called round-a-bouts or rotaries. Yet another reason to split the nation.

 

[Apple Jack]

We can't get a substantial portion of a small town to agree on where to put stop signs for the most part, but legitimately breaking up the most powerful nation in human history will be a breeze.

lol

Screw stop signs, I want more round-a-bouts!

The nation can't agree if they're called round-a-bouts or rotaries. Yet another reason to split the nation.

What nation is that? This nation calls them circles.

 

[ren hoek]

But without a strong central government, who would kill all the brown people and bail out the banks?

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Serious question:If there are people in certain states who overwhelmingly support leaving the union peacefully, why is that not an option? I've never received a good answer.

. The Union is much older than the Constitution. It was formed, in fact, by the Articles of Association in 1774. It was matured and continued by the Declaration of Independence in 1776. It was further matured, and the faith of all the then thirteen States expressly plighted and engaged that it should be perpetual, by the Articles of Confederation in 1778. And finally, in 1787, one of the declared objects for ordaining and establishing the Constitution was "to form a more perfect Union." But if destruction of the Union by one or by a part only of the States be lawfully possible, the Union is less perfect than before the Constitution, having lost the vital element of perpetuity. It follows from these views that no State upon its own mere motion can lawfully get out of the Union; that resolves and ordinances to that effect are legally void, and that acts of violence within any State or States against the authority of the United States are insurrectionary or revolutionary, according to circumstances. I therefore consider that in view of the Constitution and the laws the Union is unbroken, and to the extent of my ability, I shall take care, as the Constitution itself expressly enjoins upon me, that the laws of the Union be faithfully executed in all the States. Doing this I deem to be only a simple duty on my part, and I shall perform it so far as practicable unless my rightful masters, the American people, shall withhold the requisite means or in some authoritative manner direct the contrary. I trust this will not be regarded as a menace, but only as the declared purpose of the Union that it will constitutionally defend and maintain itself.

Good reply. I am familiar with Lincoln's inaugural address. The question still remains, why does a position taken over 150 years ago have to be maintained in perpetuity?

TPW, just out of curiosity, which state do you live in and do you want this state to succeed?

Not telling and not sure.

Now if only you could apply this credo to all your posts.

 

[TPW]

Serious question:If there are people in certain states who overwhelmingly support leaving the union peacefully, why is that not an option? I've never received a good answer.

. The Union is much older than the Constitution. It was formed, in fact, by the Articles of Association in 1774. It was matured and continued by the Declaration of Independence in 1776. It was further matured, and the faith of all the then thirteen States expressly plighted and engaged that it should be perpetual, by the Articles of Confederation in 1778. And finally, in 1787, one of the declared objects for ordaining and establishing the Constitution was "to form a more perfect Union." But if destruction of the Union by one or by a part only of the States be lawfully possible, the Union is less perfect than before the Constitution, having lost the vital element of perpetuity. It follows from these views that no State upon its own mere motion can lawfully get out of the Union; that resolves and ordinances to that effect are legally void, and that acts of violence within any State or States against the authority of the United States are insurrectionary or revolutionary, according to circumstances. I therefore consider that in view of the Constitution and the laws the Union is unbroken, and to the extent of my ability, I shall take care, as the Constitution itself expressly enjoins upon me, that the laws of the Union be faithfully executed in all the States. Doing this I deem to be only a simple duty on my part, and I shall perform it so far as practicable unless my rightful masters, the American people, shall withhold the requisite means or in some authoritative manner direct the contrary. I trust this will not be regarded as a menace, but only as the declared purpose of the Union that it will constitutionally defend and maintain itself.

Good reply. I am familiar with Lincoln's inaugural address. The question still remains, why does a position taken over 150 years ago have to be maintained in perpetuity?

TPW, just out of curiosity, which state do you live in and do you want this state to succeed?

Not telling and not sure.

Now if only you could apply this credo to all your posts.

Hilarious. When I want your opinion, I'll give it to you.

 

[Jewell]

We can't get a substantial portion of a small town to agree on where to put stop signs for the most part, but legitimately breaking up the most powerful nation in human history will be a breeze.

lol

Screw stop signs, I want more round-a-bouts!

The nation can't agree if they're called round-a-bouts or rotaries. Yet another reason to split the nation.

What nation is that? This nation calls them circles.

New England

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

TPW, just out of curiosity, which state do you live in and do you want this state to succeed?

Not telling and not sure.

You're not sure if you want your state to succeed?

 

[TPW]

TPW, just out of curiosity, which state do you live in and do you want this state to succeed?

Not telling and not sure.

You're not sure if you want your state to succeed?

I was wondering if someone was going to pick up on that double entendre. Like I said, not sure.

 

[Henry Ford]

TPW, just out of curiosity, which state do you live in and do you want this state to succeed?

Not telling and not sure.

You're not sure if you want your state to succeed?

I was wondering if someone was going to pick up on that double entendre. Like I said, not sure.

This is a single entendre.

 

[Kleck]

We can't get a substantial portion of a small town to agree on where to put stop signs for the most part, but legitimately breaking up the most powerful nation in human history will be a breeze.

lol

Screw stop signs, I want more round-a-bouts!

The nation can't agree if they're called round-a-bouts or rotaries. Yet another reason to split the nation.

What nation is that? This nation calls them circles.

I'll concede to whatever name as long as we can get more. Far west side of Madison/Middleton just put in a couple of huge ones with jughandles!

 

[fatness]

Serious question:If there are people in certain states who overwhelmingly support leaving the union peacefully, why is that not an option?

There aren't any states that overwhelmingly support leaving the union.

 

[NCCommish]

You should really know what words mean before you use them - Imperialism - the policy of extending the rule or authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies. Pretty sure American states aren't foreign countries.So let's talk Quebec. The Secession party is so powerful they had to form a minority government. The Party won 31% of the vote. Oh yeah it's a groundswell out there.

Thank you for finally posting some figures. From the same article:

They are the only place where the majority (over 80%) of the people speak French. Along with this language, they believe they possess a distinct culture compared to their Anglophone neighbors. Stemming from these beliefs, separatist movements have always had a strong following in Canada's second most populous province.

But I digress. Despite your attempts to distract, this isn't about Quebec, and you still haven't answered the rest of my questions.As for the defintion of "imperialist" and "imperialism", yours is pretty narrow I'd say most these define you and those who think like you pretty well.imperialism (ɪmˈpɪərɪəˌlɪzəm) — n 1. the policy or practice of extending a state's rule over other territories2. an instance or policy of aggressive behaviour by one state against another3. the extension or attempted extension of authority, influence, power, etc, by any person, country, institution, etc: cultural imperialism4. a system of imperial government or rule by an emperor5. the spirit, character, authority, etc, of an empire6. advocacy of or support for any form of imperialism

Yeah your definition doesn't change anything. You do realize when they say state they don't mean states right? They mean countries.And I have answered all your questions multiple times. Further you brought up Quebec and nothing you posted here is anyway counter to what I have wrote. They don't have enough juice to form a majority government and only a small minority of them want secession.

 

[dgreen]

Jughandles are stupid.

That is all.

 

[TPW]

TPW, just out of curiosity, which state do you live in and do you want this state to succeed?

Not telling and not sure.

You're not sure if you want your state to succeed?

I was wondering if someone was going to pick up on that double entendre. Like I said, not sure.

This is a single entendre.

"Secede" vs "succeed"

DOUBLE ENTENDREambiguity of meaning arising from language that lends itself to more than one interpretation

Now we're aguing over the dictionary. This thread is degenerating as rapidly as the rest of American public discourse. I'll leave you folks to your nattering.

 

[TPW]

You should really know what words mean before you use them -

Imperialism - the policy of extending the rule or authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies.

Pretty sure American states aren't foreign countries.

So let's talk Quebec. The Secession party is so powerful they had to form a minority government. The Party won 31% of the vote. Oh yeah it's a groundswell out there.

Thank you for finally posting some figures. From the same article:

They are the only place where the majority (over 80%) of the people speak French. Along with this language, they believe they possess a distinct culture compared to their Anglophone neighbors.

Stemming from these beliefs, separatist movements have always had a strong following in Canada's second most populous province.

But I digress. Despite your attempts to distract, this isn't about Quebec, and you still haven't answered the rest of my questions.As for the defintion of "imperialist" and "imperialism", yours is pretty narrow I'd say most these define you and those who think like you pretty well.

imperialism (ɪmˈpɪərɪəˌlɪzəm)

— n

1. the policy or practice of extending a state's rule over other territories

2. an instance or policy of aggressive behaviour by one state against another

3. the extension or attempted extension of authority, influence, power, etc, by any person, country, institution, etc: cultural imperialism

4. a system of imperial government or rule by an emperor

5. the spirit, character, authority, etc, of an empire

6. advocacy of or support for any form of imperialism

Yeah your definition doesn't change anything. You do realize when they say state they don't mean states right? They mean countries.And I have answered all your questions multiple times. Further you brought up Quebec and nothing you posted here is anyway counter to what I have wrote. They don't have enough juice to form a majority government and only a small minority of them want secession.

Again, ASIA - AFRICA - YOUR INCONSISTENCIES ON SCOTLAND AND HAWAII, RE: BINDING UNION WITH NO PRECONDITION FOR SECESSIONAnswer or just shut up.

I'd say #3-#5 suit you and our current master of excutive fiat president to a tee.

I'M OUT.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Jughandles are stupid.That is all.

We have jughandles, 4 way stops, 3 way stops, and circles. Love me some circles.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Don't go away angry...

 

[dgreen]

Jughandles are stupid.That is all.

We have jughandles, 4 way stops, 3 way stops, and circles. Love me some circles.

Yes, I, too, love circles/roundabouts/rotaries. Unfortunately, DC decides to build circles WITH stop lights. There are stop lights heading into the circles and even stop lights within the circles! Craziness!Look kids, Big Ben. Parliament.

 

[Jewell]

Unfortunately, DC decides to build circles WITH stop lights. There are stop lights heading into the circles and even stop lights within the circles! Craziness!

I'm always telling my wife that I'm shocked, simply shocked, that more tourists aren't run over in DuPont Circle. Besides the traffic lights in the circle, you have the whole inner labia-outer labia thing going on, and differing times between when people can walk across the inner labia or outer labia. The whole thing is chaos.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Unfortunately, DC decides to build circles WITH stop lights. There are stop lights heading into the circles and even stop lights within the circles! Craziness!

I'm always telling my wife that I'm shocked, simply shocked, that more tourists aren't run over in DuPont Circle. Besides the traffic lights in the circle, you have the whole inner labia-outer labia thing going on, and differing times between when people can walk across the inner labia or outdoor labia. The whole thing is chaos.

Lived and/or worked just blocks away for the better part of 15 years now, and this analogy had never occurred to me. Mind = blown. I don't know whether to thank you or curse you.

 

[dgreen]

Unfortunately, DC decides to build circles WITH stop lights. There are stop lights heading into the circles and even stop lights within the circles! Craziness!

I'm always telling my wife that I'm shocked, simply shocked, that more tourists aren't run over in DuPont Circle. Besides the traffic lights in the circle, you have the whole inner labia-outer labia thing going on, and differing times between when people can walk across the inner labia or outdoor labia. The whole thing is chaos.

Tourists? Heck, until recently, I didn't understand the purpose of the inner circle. Of course, it's not like I spent much time trying to figure it out. Then again, you shouldn't HAVE to try to figure it out. It should be obvious what to do.

 

[Jewell]

Unfortunately, DC decides to build circles WITH stop lights. There are stop lights heading into the circles and even stop lights within the circles! Craziness!

I'm always telling my wife that I'm shocked, simply shocked, that more tourists aren't run over in DuPont Circle. Besides the traffic lights in the circle, you have the whole inner labia-outer labia thing going on, and differing times between when people can walk across the inner labia or outdoor labia. The whole thing is chaos.

Lived and/or worked just blocks away for the better part of 15 years now, and this analogy had never occurred to me. Mind = blown. I don't know whether to thank you or curse you.

It's always awkward when I'm giving people directions through DuPont and I tell them, "Make sure you stay in the inner labia."

 

[ren hoek]

I think what pisses me off the most is how unthinkable it is to some people that states might want to withdraw their support from a world empire. I noticed these on the petitions.gov page:

Strip the Citizenship from Everyone who Signed a Petition to Secede and Exile ThemMr. President, please sign an executive order such that each American citizen who signed a petition from any state to secede from the USA shall have their citizenship stripped and be peacefully deported.

and

Deport Everyone That Signed A Petition To Withdraw Their State From The United States Of America.Deport Everyone That Signed A Petition To Withdraw Their State From The United States Of America.

People sure do love them some state. Wow.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

You should really know what words mean before you use them -

Imperialism - the policy of extending the rule or authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies.

Pretty sure American states aren't foreign countries.

So let's talk Quebec. The Secession party is so powerful they had to form a minority government. The Party won 31% of the vote. Oh yeah it's a groundswell out there.

Thank you for finally posting some figures. From the same article:

They are the only place where the majority (over 80%) of the people speak French. Along with this language, they believe they possess a distinct culture compared to their Anglophone neighbors.

Stemming from these beliefs, separatist movements have always had a strong following in Canada's second most populous province.

But I digress. Despite your attempts to distract, this isn't about Quebec, and you still haven't answered the rest of my questions.As for the defintion of "imperialist" and "imperialism", yours is pretty narrow I'd say most these define you and those who think like you pretty well.

imperialism (ɪmˈpɪərɪəˌlɪzəm)

— n

1. the policy or practice of extending a state's rule over other territories

2. an instance or policy of aggressive behaviour by one state against another

3. the extension or attempted extension of authority, influence, power, etc, by any person, country, institution, etc: cultural imperialism

4. a system of imperial government or rule by an emperor

5. the spirit, character, authority, etc, of an empire

6. advocacy of or support for any form of imperialism

Yeah your definition doesn't change anything. You do realize when they say state they don't mean states right? They mean countries.And I have answered all your questions multiple times. Further you brought up Quebec and nothing you posted here is anyway counter to what I have wrote. They don't have enough juice to form a majority government and only a small minority of them want secession.

Again, ASIA - AFRICA - YOUR INCONSISTENCIES ON SCOTLAND AND HAWAII, RE: BINDING UNION WITH NO PRECONDITION FOR SECESSIONAnswer or just shut up.

I'd say #3-#5 suit you and our current master of excutive fiat president to a tee.

I'M OUT.

 

[mcintyre1]

I think what pisses me off the most is how unthinkable it is to some people that states might want to withdraw their support from a world empire. I noticed these on the petitions.gov page:

Strip the Citizenship from Everyone who Signed a Petition to Secede and Exile Them

Mr. President, please sign an executive order such that each American citizen who signed a petition from any state to secede from the USA shall have their citizenship stripped and be peacefully deported.

and

Deport Everyone That Signed A Petition To Withdraw Their State From The United States Of America.

Deport Everyone That Signed A Petition To Withdraw Their State From The United States Of America.

People sure do love them some state. Wow.

I love how, now that Barack Obama has won big in elections, twice, the United States is a "world empire" according to right wingers. You don't think liberals were a little bit miffed during Bush's travesty of an administration? Did you see them advocating for secession? You don't just get to take your ball and go home if the Union doesn't always do exactly what you want. Pray it doesn't come to fighting to prove it, again, or things will not end well for the delusional right.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Serious question:If there are people in certain states who overwhelmingly support leaving the union peacefully, why is that not an option? I've never received a good answer. Slavery is gone so any conflict fought today, militarily or otherwise, would be for purely monetary reasons.I look at other nations around the world such as the former Soviet Union and the United Kingdom and see that peaceful dissolution is possible. I also look around and see two ideologies in American conservatism and progressivism that are as far apart right now as they have ever been. Why could this not happen here?

They can just leave the entirety of America. Move on. See ya.

 

[Schlzm]

I think what pisses me off the most is how unthinkable it is to some people that states might want to withdraw their support from a world empire. I noticed these on the petitions.gov page:

Strip the Citizenship from Everyone who Signed a Petition to Secede and Exile Them

Mr. President, please sign an executive order such that each American citizen who signed a petition from any state to secede from the USA shall have their citizenship stripped and be peacefully deported.

and

Deport Everyone That Signed A Petition To Withdraw Their State From The United States Of America.

Deport Everyone That Signed A Petition To Withdraw Their State From The United States Of America.

People sure do love them some state. Wow.

I love how, now that Barack Obama has won big in elections, twice, the United States is a "world empire" according to right wingers. You don't think liberals were a little bit miffed during Bush's travesty of an administration? Did you see them advocating for secession? You don't just get to take your ball and go home if the Union doesn't always do exactly what you want. Pray it doesn't come to fighting to prove it, again, or things will not end well for the delusional right.

Just for my own random curiosity, care to provide what you think would happen in regards to the bolded?Schlzm

 

[GoFishTN]

I think what pisses me off the most is how unthinkable it is to some people that states might want to withdraw their support from a world empire. I noticed these on the petitions.gov page:

Strip the Citizenship from Everyone who Signed a Petition to Secede and Exile Them

Mr. President, please sign an executive order such that each American citizen who signed a petition from any state to secede from the USA shall have their citizenship stripped and be peacefully deported.

and

Deport Everyone That Signed A Petition To Withdraw Their State From The United States Of America.

Deport Everyone That Signed A Petition To Withdraw Their State From The United States Of America.

People sure do love them some state. Wow.

I love how, now that Barack Obama has won big in elections, twice, the United States is a "world empire" according to right wingers. You don't think liberals were a little bit miffed during Bush's travesty of an administration? Did you see them advocating for secession? You don't just get to take your ball and go home if the Union doesn't always do exactly what you want. Pray it doesn't come to fighting to prove it, again, or things will not end well for the delusional right.

 

[rockaction]

I think what pisses me off the most is how unthinkable it is to some people that states might want to withdraw their support from a world empire. I noticed these on the petitions.gov page:

Strip the Citizenship from Everyone who Signed a Petition to Secede and Exile ThemMr. President, please sign an executive order such that each American citizen who signed a petition from any state to secede from the USA shall have their citizenship stripped and be peacefully deported.

and

Deport Everyone That Signed A Petition To Withdraw Their State From The United States Of America.Deport Everyone That Signed A Petition To Withdraw Their State From The United States Of America.

People sure do love them some state. Wow.

But is that really what they're petitioning to secede from? A world empire? Or, given the timing, are they simply upset with an election? Now, if you signed a petition back in 2010 to secede from a world empire on foreign policy grounds, that's different. But this sounds like a knee-jerk reaction to a democratic and peaceful election. To wit: I saw people on the day of the election -- the day of an election -- holding up signs and imploring people to "Impeach Obama." It seemed a bit loopy. I'm guessing the petitions are along these same lines of that sort of Lyndon Larouche-esque mall parking lot instability.

 

[ren hoek]

I love how, now that Barack Obama has won big in elections, twice, the United States is a "world empire" according to right wingers. You don't think liberals were a little bit miffed during Bush's travesty of an administration? Did you see them advocating for secession? You don't just get to take your ball and go home if the Union doesn't always do exactly what you want. Pray it doesn't come to fighting to prove it, again, or things will not end well for the delusional right.

I don't really think in terms of right or left, but I see what you mean. I wish this was timed differently, because I can see where it would look like a knee-jerk response to Obama being re-elected, but realistically this has been a long time coming. I don't like how the Tea Party movement was framed as a bunch of Fox News Republicans (as opposed to civil libertarians and genuine fiscal conservatives), the Occupy thing was painted as unemployed socialists, and I don't like the idea of secession being pidgeonholed into an idea that serves only the "right-wing". Do you realize that freeing up the states from federal rule also grants them the ability to try out other political philosophies? Why would people ever be opposed to that?

 

[BobbyLayne]

Texas has 28,000 signatures!



The population is just under 26,000,000.

Roughly one out of every 915.

Oh, yeah, this has got legs.

Complete list of 1860 slave-holding states who have not filed:

Virginia

 

[ren hoek]

But is that really what they're petitioning to secede from? A world empire? Or, given the timing, are they simply upset with an election? Now, if you signed a petition back in 2010 to secede from a world empire on foreign policy grounds, that's different. But this sounds like a knee-jerk reaction to a democratic and peaceful election. To wit: I saw people on the day of the election -- the day of an election -- holding up signs and imploring people to "Impeach Obama." It seemed a bit loopy. I'm guessing the petitions are along these same lines of that sort of Lyndon Larouche-esque mall parking lot instability.

You might be right. Even if it is a response to that, it's not like it's really unwarranted when you consider Obama was basically a third term of Bush. People certainly weren't this upset the first time he was elected.If they're petitioning to secede for a reason as misguided as believing Romney would have been any better then that's unfortunate, but if it indirectly results in people holding their government accountable for something one time I'll take it.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Complete list of 1860 slave-holding states who have not filed:

Virginia

Well they had their chance, I wouldn't even send them an invite now.

 

[mcintyre1]

I think what pisses me off the most is how unthinkable it is to some people that states might want to withdraw their support from a world empire. I noticed these on the petitions.gov page:

Strip the Citizenship from Everyone who Signed a Petition to Secede and Exile Them

Mr. President, please sign an executive order such that each American citizen who signed a petition from any state to secede from the USA shall have their citizenship stripped and be peacefully deported.

and

Deport Everyone That Signed A Petition To Withdraw Their State From The United States Of America.

Deport Everyone That Signed A Petition To Withdraw Their State From The United States Of America.

People sure do love them some state. Wow.

I love how, now that Barack Obama has won big in elections, twice, the United States is a "world empire" according to right wingers. You don't think liberals were a little bit miffed during Bush's travesty of an administration? Did you see them advocating for secession? You don't just get to take your ball and go home if the Union doesn't always do exactly what you want. Pray it doesn't come to fighting to prove it, again, or things will not end well for the delusional right.

Just for my own random curiosity, care to provide what you think would happen in regards to the bolded?Schlzm

Not really, no.

 

[BobbyLayne]

Complete list of 1860 slave-holding states who have not filed:

Virginia

Well they had their chance, I wouldn't even send them an invite now.

They were pretty slow to join in the first time around as well.

 

[Tchula]

Where do I sign the petition?

 

[mcintyre1]

I love how, now that Barack Obama has won big in elections, twice, the United States is a "world empire" according to right wingers. You don't think liberals were a little bit miffed during Bush's travesty of an administration? Did you see them advocating for secession? You don't just get to take your ball and go home if the Union doesn't always do exactly what you want. Pray it doesn't come to fighting to prove it, again, or things will not end well for the delusional right.

I don't really think in terms of right or left, but I see what you mean. I wish this was timed differently, because I can see where it would look like a knee-jerk response to Obama being re-elected, but realistically this has been a long time coming. I don't like how the Tea Party movement was framed as a bunch of Fox News Republicans (as opposed to civil libertarians and genuine fiscal conservatives), the Occupy thing was painted as unemployed socialists, and I don't like the idea of secession being pidgeonholed into an idea that serves only the "right-wing". Do you realize that freeing up the states from federal rule also grants them the ability to try out other political philosophies? Why would people ever be opposed to that?

This was addressed by someone else already, but I'll echo their sentiments as well, if this was actually a secession movement based on some grand refusal of our intrusive world politics, I think we have something to sit down and talk about as a nation before secession is legitimately on the table. That being said, this movement is not in any way that. This is the right's version of "I'm moving to Canada." They just don't have a place to go to that follows their ideology while also maintaining anything close in terms of standard of living (you'd think this may make them question their ideology, but I digress).To address your second point about breaking up the states resulting in more political experimentation: I'd love political reform. Specifically, I'd love to move from a two party system that forces direct competition between two manufactured groups and toward a system that forces cooperation among differing groups that have to form a coalition to get things done. Right now we're stuck in a cycle of fighting for absolute control between two parties, and when there isn't enough of a clear "mandate" from either side, nothing happens and we all lose. But, I disagree that allowing chunks of the Union to break off is the way to go about this. We'd be taking one step forward and three steps back. Can you even imagine the reaction a "Republic of Amurrica" (I'm not talented with names, forgive me) with a state controlled media machine would have to the rise of a populist, modern-socialist West Coast nation just outside their borders?

 

[Schlzm]

I think what pisses me off the most is how unthinkable it is to some people that states might want to withdraw their support from a world empire. I noticed these on the petitions.gov page:

Strip the Citizenship from Everyone who Signed a Petition to Secede and Exile Them

Mr. President, please sign an executive order such that each American citizen who signed a petition from any state to secede from the USA shall have their citizenship stripped and be peacefully deported.

and

Deport Everyone That Signed A Petition To Withdraw Their State From The United States Of America.

Deport Everyone That Signed A Petition To Withdraw Their State From The United States Of America.

People sure do love them some state. Wow.

I love how, now that Barack Obama has won big in elections, twice, the United States is a "world empire" according to right wingers. You don't think liberals were a little bit miffed during Bush's travesty of an administration? Did you see them advocating for secession? You don't just get to take your ball and go home if the Union doesn't always do exactly what you want. Pray it doesn't come to fighting to prove it, again, or things will not end well for the delusional right.

Just for my own random curiosity, care to provide what you think would happen in regards to the bolded?Schlzm

Not really, no.

Oh ok.Schlzm

 

[rockaction]

But is that really what they're petitioning to secede from? A world empire? Or, given the timing, are they simply upset with an election? Now, if you signed a petition back in 2010 to secede from a world empire on foreign policy grounds, that's different. But this sounds like a knee-jerk reaction to a democratic and peaceful election.

To wit: I saw people on the day of the election -- the day of an election -- holding up signs and imploring people to "Impeach Obama." It seemed a bit loopy. I'm guessing the petitions are along these same lines of that sort of Lyndon Larouche-esque mall parking lot instability.

You might be right. Even if it is a response to that, it's not like it's really unwarranted when you consider Obama was basically a third term of Bush. People certainly weren't this upset the first time he was elected.If they're petitioning to secede for a reason as misguided as believing Romney would have been any better then that's unfortunate, but if it indirectly results in people holding their government accountable for something one time I'll take it.

But it's hard to believe that the foreign policy complaints that drove the opposition to Bush are coming from the same quarters driving these petitions. And in reference to an earlier post of yours, I'd venture there really is a left/right split driving these separate movements. I have a hard time believing most folks (not libertarians, mind you) signed both a Not In My Name petition and these secession petitions. Doesn't really add up. Regardless, that's a minor quibble. I take your points.

 

[St. Louis Bob]

Yous peoples need to smoke a joint.

 

[mcintyre1]

I think what pisses me off the most is how unthinkable it is to some people that states might want to withdraw their support from a world empire. I noticed these on the petitions.gov page:

Strip the Citizenship from Everyone who Signed a Petition to Secede and Exile Them

Mr. President, please sign an executive order such that each American citizen who signed a petition from any state to secede from the USA shall have their citizenship stripped and be peacefully deported.

and

Deport Everyone That Signed A Petition To Withdraw Their State From The United States Of America.

Deport Everyone That Signed A Petition To Withdraw Their State From The United States Of America.

People sure do love them some state. Wow.

I love how, now that Barack Obama has won big in elections, twice, the United States is a "world empire" according to right wingers. You don't think liberals were a little bit miffed during Bush's travesty of an administration? Did you see them advocating for secession? You don't just get to take your ball and go home if the Union doesn't always do exactly what you want. Pray it doesn't come to fighting to prove it, again, or things will not end well for the delusional right.

Just for my own random curiosity, care to provide what you think would happen in regards to the bolded?Schlzm

Not really, no.

Oh ok.Schlzm

I'm sorry to be dismissive, but I don't believe it is in anyone's interest to delve in to the darkness that would be another civil war. If you'd like an incredibly brief summary of my thoughts, it'd be this: the 18-29 age group is pretty important when it comes to fighting wars, and the numbers are decidedly not on the side of those asking for secession.

 

[Warrior]

civil war...