Well, you're the one arguing in favor of using violence against seceding States.
Because it would be a violent secession.
Except, that's not what we'd have on our border in the case of a secession by Texas or any other State. The complaint of people like the Tea Partiers is that the Federal government is too oppressive, not that it's not oppressive enough. The idea that they would secede and form a dictatorship is just silly.
Right now they also want smaller government but more wars, less taxes but more benefits, think the Second Amendment is sacred but the First is flexible, and oh yeah hate the idea of government health care but flip whenever anyone talks about touching Medicare.
Cognitive dissonance has not proven to be a problem with these people.
Your opposition to secession comes down to moving costs?
Yes exactly. That's it. You've cracked the code.
Holy shit are you trolling me? Or is the sky in your world just a different color?
You'd rather force people, at gunpoint if necessary, to stay under your preferred government than peacefully exercise their right of self-determination? No offense, but you're kind of making the Tea Partiers' argument for them. Secessionists may or may not be silly gooses, but they don't actually want to force anyone to live under their favored governmental system.
Uh yes, they do. They just don't have the numbers necessary to win anywhere but on a local level in favorable conditions. So now they want to take the ball and go home because they don't like the rules.
Your arguments consist of a self-fulfilling prophecy- you support using force to put down peaceful secession, then argue that secession would be violent. Well, duh.
Look at that word I highlighted. Yeah that one.
That's not going to happen because of the nature of the populism the tea party is based on. Anyone advocating "peaceful" secession is going to be boo'ed off the stage in favor of someone screaming about the Founding Fathers and the South rising again.
Keep believing in your magical hand waving world though.
EDIT: Reading back I have to wonder why you think these people are peaceful? Where have you been? These are people that carry signs that talk about killing tyrants where the President is speaking, carry around assault rifles at these same rallies, and have been killing police officers and flying planes into federal buildings because radio/television personalities have them seeing ghosts at every corner.
Seriously. What is your basis for assuming anything PEACEFUL about this movement when it is obviously building up to some sort of violent confrontation?
It's a nice thought exercise, but Texas is too valuable to the US to imagine them being able to negotiate (read: buy) their secession. It's #2 in gross state product, and a high-ranking state in a number of economic sectors.
This isn't the 1830s, when Texas was a bunch of nothing and Mexico didn't even care that much about losing it.
This is correct. It fails hard at education, though.
It fails hard at government period. Its got a joke of justice system, they're trying to privatize their roads.
I mean it would be perfectly permissible for a sub-society to secede from a larger society if both sides agreed (see Quebec referendums). Its just never going to happen
It's a nice thought exercise, but Texas is too valuable to the US to imagine them being able to negotiate (read: buy) their secession. It's #2 in gross state product, and a high-ranking state in a number of economic sectors.
This isn't the 1830s, when Texas was a bunch of nothing and Mexico didn't even care that much about losing it.
This is correct. It fails hard at education, though.
It fails hard at government period. Its got a joke of justice system, they're trying to privatize their roads.
I mean it would be perfectly permissible for a sub-society to secede from a larger society if both sides agreed (see Quebec referendums). Its just never going to happen
Two big problems with Texas:
1. We elect almost every government official. This means that uneducated silly geese get to pick the judges, the sheriffs, the county clerks, the JoP, the tax assessor, everyone. More people to vote for is fine and all, but it's simply not possible for the layperson to know anything nuanced about everybody they'll be voting for. In the end it usually boils down to name recognition from signage around town (for nonpartisan elections) or straight party tickets (for partisan elections).
2. The Texas Constitution is just flat out fucked up. It's long as shit and as a lawyer you basically have to specialize in one area of the thing. It was a reactionary document to put more control into the hands of the people and it needs to be rewritten.
Also, the districts have been gerrymandered to shit.
Reading back I have to wonder why you think these people are peaceful? Where have you been? These are people that carry signs that talk about killing tyrants where the President is speaking, carry around assault rifles at these same rallies, and have been killing police officers and flying planes into federal buildings because radio/television personalities have them seeing ghosts at every corner.
Seriously. What is your basis for assuming anything PEACEFUL about this movement when it is obviously building up to some sort of violent confrontation?
You point to the acts of one deranged man with a beef against the IRS and some murder of a police officer (which I'm not familiar with) in order to tar an entire movement of people. So out of, what, hundreds of thousands or millions of tea party supporters, you can point to a couple of violent acts, which may or may not have anything to do with the movement?
Personally, I'm not scared of a group of people 99.9999% of whom have done nothing more sinister than exercise their 1st Amendment and 2nd Amendment rights.
Modern Man on
Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
Rigorous Scholarship
Reading back I have to wonder why you think these people are peaceful? Where have you been? These are people that carry signs that talk about killing tyrants where the President is speaking, carry around assault rifles at these same rallies, and have been killing police officers and flying planes into federal buildings because radio/television personalities have them seeing ghosts at every corner.
Seriously. What is your basis for assuming anything PEACEFUL about this movement when it is obviously building up to some sort of violent confrontation?
You point to the acts of one deranged man with a beef against the IRS and some murder of a police officer (which I'm not familiar with) in order to tar an entire movement of people. So out of, what, hundreds of thousands or millions of tea party supporters, you can point to a couple of violent acts, which may or may not have anything to do with the movement?
Personally, I'm not scared of a group of people 99.9999% of whom have done nothing more sinister than exercise their 1st Amendment and 2nd Amendment rights.
A movement of people who are often advocating violently overthrowing the government or violent secession while saying they'd like to kill the President or making not so obscure threats about killing tyrants.
Its like saying "well there's only been a few cases where abortion providers were shot and killed by members of anti abortion groups and the rest are just peacefully exercising their 1st Amendment rights so what is there to worry about?"
But whatever. Its obvious that we're just not going to see eye to eye here and further debate is just wasting space on the internet. Go ahead and make a rebuttal if you want, but I'm done.
As far as what the Civil War was good for, I thought it pretty firmly established that the Federal Government supercedes the states. But then again I look around at these Tea Party whackos and the nonsense coming from them about "states' soverignty" and "nullification orders" and I wonder if we're going to have to refight this thing in my lifetime.
Are you wiling to fight to force Texas or some other state to remain in the Union? There's no real moral issue worth fighting over- I would personally be opposed to using force against a State or States where the majority of people decided they no longer wanted to be part of the USA.
I would agree with that in general.
Of course, some legal framework would have to be added to the Constitution in an amendment.
And presumably there would have to be a referendum for secession.
It's a nice thought exercise, but Texas is too valuable to the US to imagine them being able to negotiate (read: buy) their secession. It's #2 in gross state product, and a high-ranking state in a number of economic sectors.
This isn't the 1830s, when Texas was a bunch of nothing and Mexico didn't even care that much about losing it.
This is correct. It fails hard at education, though.
It fails hard at government period. Its got a joke of justice system, they're trying to privatize their roads.
I mean it would be perfectly permissible for a sub-society to secede from a larger society if both sides agreed (see Quebec referendums). Its just never going to happen
The funny thing about Quebec is even if they do get a Yes vote on secession, it'll just open up more cans of worms. The First Nations groups inside Quebec would then all want to secede from Quebec and go back to Canada.
As for Texas, as soon as they figure out that secession means the Cowboys would then be kicked out of the National Football League, that'll be the end of that.
It's a nice thought exercise, but Texas is too valuable to the US to imagine them being able to negotiate (read: buy) their secession. It's #2 in gross state product, and a high-ranking state in a number of economic sectors.
This isn't the 1830s, when Texas was a bunch of nothing and Mexico didn't even care that much about losing it.
This is correct. It fails hard at education, though.
It fails hard at government period. Its got a joke of justice system, they're trying to privatize their roads.
I mean it would be perfectly permissible for a sub-society to secede from a larger society if both sides agreed (see Quebec referendums). Its just never going to happen
The funny thing about Quebec is even if they do get a Yes vote on secession, it'll just open up more cans of worms. The First Nations groups inside Quebec would then all want to secede from Quebec and go back to Canada.
As for Texas, as soon as they figure out that secession means the Texans would then be kicked out of the National Football League, that'll... not actually be much of a problem for anyone in Texas.
A movement of people who are often advocating violently overthrowing the government or violent secession while saying they'd like to kill the President or making not so obscure threats about killing tyrants.
A lot of the stuff you've listed is illegal (especially threatening the President). I haven't heard of more than a handful of arrests of people associated with this movement. So, it seems like the prevalence of such illegal activities seems to be all in your head.
Its like saying "well there's only been a few cases where abortion providers were shot and killed by members of anti abortion groups and the rest are just peacefully exercising their 1st Amendment rights so what is there to worry about?"
I'd agree with that statement. Other than a very small handful of deranged people, there really is nothing to be afraid of when it comes to Tea Partiers or Pro-Life activists, anymore than there is a reason to be afraid of members of the Animal Rights or Anti-War movements.
Modern Man on
Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
Rigorous Scholarship
Posts
Because it would be a violent secession.
Right now they also want smaller government but more wars, less taxes but more benefits, think the Second Amendment is sacred but the First is flexible, and oh yeah hate the idea of government health care but flip whenever anyone talks about touching Medicare.
Cognitive dissonance has not proven to be a problem with these people.
Yes exactly. That's it. You've cracked the code.
Holy shit are you trolling me? Or is the sky in your world just a different color?
Uh yes, they do. They just don't have the numbers necessary to win anywhere but on a local level in favorable conditions. So now they want to take the ball and go home because they don't like the rules.
Look at that word I highlighted. Yeah that one.
That's not going to happen because of the nature of the populism the tea party is based on. Anyone advocating "peaceful" secession is going to be boo'ed off the stage in favor of someone screaming about the Founding Fathers and the South rising again.
Keep believing in your magical hand waving world though.
EDIT: Reading back I have to wonder why you think these people are peaceful? Where have you been? These are people that carry signs that talk about killing tyrants where the President is speaking, carry around assault rifles at these same rallies, and have been killing police officers and flying planes into federal buildings because radio/television personalities have them seeing ghosts at every corner.
Seriously. What is your basis for assuming anything PEACEFUL about this movement when it is obviously building up to some sort of violent confrontation?
It fails hard at government period. Its got a joke of justice system, they're trying to privatize their roads.
I mean it would be perfectly permissible for a sub-society to secede from a larger society if both sides agreed (see Quebec referendums). Its just never going to happen
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Two big problems with Texas:
1. We elect almost every government official. This means that uneducated silly geese get to pick the judges, the sheriffs, the county clerks, the JoP, the tax assessor, everyone. More people to vote for is fine and all, but it's simply not possible for the layperson to know anything nuanced about everybody they'll be voting for. In the end it usually boils down to name recognition from signage around town (for nonpartisan elections) or straight party tickets (for partisan elections).
2. The Texas Constitution is just flat out fucked up. It's long as shit and as a lawyer you basically have to specialize in one area of the thing. It was a reactionary document to put more control into the hands of the people and it needs to be rewritten.
Also, the districts have been gerrymandered to shit.
Personally, I'm not scared of a group of people 99.9999% of whom have done nothing more sinister than exercise their 1st Amendment and 2nd Amendment rights.
Rigorous Scholarship
A movement of people who are often advocating violently overthrowing the government or violent secession while saying they'd like to kill the President or making not so obscure threats about killing tyrants.
Its like saying "well there's only been a few cases where abortion providers were shot and killed by members of anti abortion groups and the rest are just peacefully exercising their 1st Amendment rights so what is there to worry about?"
But whatever. Its obvious that we're just not going to see eye to eye here and further debate is just wasting space on the internet. Go ahead and make a rebuttal if you want, but I'm done.
I would agree with that in general.
Of course, some legal framework would have to be added to the Constitution in an amendment.
And presumably there would have to be a referendum for secession.
I live in the Dakotas.
I mean, we didn't even exist.
Hell, it blows my mind that there are people here in west Texas that have those
Or people who are fans of "The South was right!" on Facebook
The funny thing about Quebec is even if they do get a Yes vote on secession, it'll just open up more cans of worms. The First Nations groups inside Quebec would then all want to secede from Quebec and go back to Canada.
As for Texas, as soon as they figure out that secession means the Cowboys would then be kicked out of the National Football League, that'll be the end of that.
They can line up individually to lick my nutsack
I don't care who is playing against the Cowboys, I hope they win
I'd agree with that statement. Other than a very small handful of deranged people, there really is nothing to be afraid of when it comes to Tea Partiers or Pro-Life activists, anymore than there is a reason to be afraid of members of the Animal Rights or Anti-War movements.
Rigorous Scholarship