UPDATE: I heard from somebody who could address Bill Shipp’s assertion about Oxendine. I’ve been told it’s absolutely not true. Oxendine has never mentioned secession as a possibility or something worth considering. The assertion by Shipp is “specious.” Oxendine believes the Federal government’s influence over the States needs to be curtailed and has said that consistently. The source remind me that Oxendine had sent out a press release on this subject. Here’s a portion of it from the campaign’s email:
If Governor, I would support legislation which puts Georgia on record as affirming our sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States and which would serve as notice and demand the federal government, as our agent, cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.
Additionally, I would support legislation which states all compulsory federal legislation that directs states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties or sanctions or that requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding be prohibited or repealed.
Original Post:
Suddenly there seems to be talk of secession. I suppose it’s mostly Texas Governor Rick Perry’s fault, though I can’t find a direct quote by Perry supporting secession. Nevertheless folks like Keith Olbermann, DailyKos and now Bill Shipp are feeding off each other and falling over themselves to bash Southerners in general and the GOP in particular. Shipp takes particular issue with John Oxendine, whom he claims…
…has a team of researchers working on schemes to declare our independence and bid adios to old D.C.
DailyKos meanwhile has a poll of 600 Georgians which declares nearly one-third of Georgian Republicans desire secession. Both Shipp and Olbermann take the Kos polling data as the gospel truth. I would point out that Rasmussen polled Texans and found 18% would vote to secede. That’s a larger number than I would like, but much different that the numbers Kos was showing for Texas. I suspect Rasmussen would find much less support for secession in Georgia as well. That Olbermann swallows this stuff isn’t surprising. That Bill Shipp says he doesn’t like Kos but believes the polling data anyway merely shows the transformation from Conservative Southern Democrat to Radical Kook-Fringe Democrat is almost complete.
Here’s Olbermann’s fair and balanced discussion on all this with some dude from ‘The Nation:’
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
For a while the tip line was buzzing with complaints about SR632. Indeed Olbermann seemed to indicate is was an overt threat of secession. I’ve read it and find nothing to complain about. The power of the Federal Government does need to be rolled back. That some consider this radical shows how far we’ve moved away from the Constitution.
That being said I do want to issue a word of caution: Politicians must be very careful how the speak and act. There is a lot of anger and frustration out there about the political process. I feel like we’re in a very dangerous time. Politicians must act thoughtfully and responsibly so as to not encourage rash behavior. If it’s true that Oxendine is having people research secession, that’s a mistake and he should knock it off (perhaps someone in the know can clear this up).
I love America and want America to remain the greatest nation on earth. Having a discussion about the limits of Federal power and beating that power back to within the limits prescribed by the Constitution is worthwhile. However, I want no part of secession or talk of secession.
{ 56 comments }
Next Comments →
Living in hell would be a better life than living in a country with Keith Olbermann.
“That Bill Shipp says he doesn’t like Kos but believes the polling data anyway merely shows the transformation from Conservative Southern Democrat to Radical Kook-Fringe Democrat is almost complete.”
Stopped reading after that. The stupid was too much.
For all it’s faults the United States of America is the best and freest nation the world has ever known. Any seceded state will very likely be far worse. But don’t take it from me…. Here’s what Alexander Stephens had to say on this topic in 1861 :
Leaving out of view, for the present, the countless millions of dollars you must expend in a war with the North; with tens of thousands of your sons and brothers slain in battle, and offered up as sacrifices upon the altar of your ambition – and for what, we ask again? Is it for the overthrow of the American Government, established by our common ancestry, cemented and built up by their sweat and blood, and founded on the broad principles of Right, Justice, and Humanity? And, as such, I must declare here, as I have often done before, and which has been repeated by the greatest and wisest of statemen and patriots in this and other lands, that it is the best and freest Government – the most equal in its rights, the most just in its decisions, the most lenient in its measures, and the most aspiring it its principles to elevate the race of men, that the sun of heaven ever shone upon. Now, for you to attempt to overthrow such a Government as this, under which we have lived for more than three-quarters of a century – in which we have gained our wealth, our standing as a nation, our domestic safety while the elements of peril are around us, with peace and tranquility accompanied with unbounded prosperity and rights unassailed – is the height of madness, folly, and wickedness, to which I can neither lend my sanction nor my vote.
http://www.famous-speeches-and-speech-topics.info/famous-speeches/alexander-stephens-speech-secession-is-the-height-of-madness.htm
MSNBC doesn’t participate “Fair and Balanced” hypocracy of Fox News. With Olberman you know you’re getting opinion.
““That Bill Shipp says he doesn’t like Kos but believes the polling data anyway merely shows the transformation from Conservative Southern Democrat to Radical Kook-Fringe Democrat is almost complete.”
Until you guys realize you are the radical kook idiots and not the people you criticize, you’re not going to get anywhere. Do you understand that the people with your beliefs just got their asses thrown out of office pretty much everywhere?
Oh right, they weren’t REAL conservatives, right? But you went and voted for them time and time again, anyway, right?
Right…
I think it’s a bit disingenuous for one side to be polling, and who knows about the reliability of the poll, strictly to poke fun at the other side’s expense. I’m not sure Daily Kos or the Democrats would appreciate a GOP group’s sponsored poll of strictly Democrats asking questions like, “Do you think Communism or Capitalism is a better form of Government?” Or pehaps the GOP could do Jay Leno style “Man on the Street” polling. They could release weekly polls, “65% of Democrats could not name the Vice President, 71% of Democrats still think the GOP controls Congress, 74% of Democrats cannot name the three branches of Government” you get the drift.
I certainly hope it hasn’t come down to this Kos style of polling.
Why not do a poll on the PP with Republicans and see how accurate it is? And I am curious how far OX wants to take this issue? My instincts tell me this may be a louder group in the GOP not a bigger group.
Today’s suggested reading:
http://www.ushistory.org/Declaration/document/index.htm
Have at it, folks.
“That Bill Shipp says he doesn’t like Kos but believes the polling data anyway merely shows the transformation from Conservative Southern Democrat to Radical Kook-Fringe Democrat is almost complete.”
Buzz, it’s comments like that which make you no better than those you bash. Seriously. Both sides have a fringe.
Succession is for loonies, but I would certainly support any Californian or New Englander who would like to do it. In fact, why not cede California back to Mexico for past wrongs.
However, I do think that it is time for the states to seriously consider a constitutional amendment. Certainly it has it’s dangers, but it takes 3/4 of the state legislatures to approve anything, and it is better to do that now than wait until the country is on the brink of collapse to do it.
One thing that would easily pass would be term limits for Congress.
I would like to see a state veto of Federal legislation (say 2/3 of state governors can veto any bill within 30 days of signing by the President) and a repeal of the commerce clause. Another I would like to se would be a supermajority requirement (60%) for passage of any bill that raises taxes, spends money or enacts new laws, while keeping the 50% requirement to lower taxes, or repeal laws.
The states need to reign in the Federal government, and realistically, this is the only way it will ever be done in our lifetimes.
Weren’t term limits deemed unconstitutional a few years back? They’re a great idea, I just think they may already be DOA.
How can they be unconstitutional for one position but not for another?
David,
Hence the need for it to be passed at a Constitutional convention.
Congess will never impose it on itself. The states will have no problem since a Constitutional Convention has no Congressional representation, unlike the traditional route of amendment approval.
Or I should say proposition. The approval process is like to proceed as normal with the legislature approving it, as the other method has only been tried once.
I have been thinking about all this nonsense that modern conservatives have been bringing up.
Whether we are talking about a governor, a congressman, a gubernatorial candidates or even a state party…we have this thing called the Supreme Court. It you think something is unconstitutional…take it up with them.
Kellie, you tell me. Seems like the only people b*tching about anything being unconstitutional is the right wing. Heck, the Supreme Court is usually split. It all breaks down to those that believe the Constitution is non-interpretive versus those that believe it is a “living” document. More and more, the vast majority believes the Constitution to be a living document. Scalia is, I think, the last of the strict interpretationist crowd on the SCOTUS. Rhenquist flip-flopped depending on the issue…Thomas sort of does this now (aka Janus Faced Federalism).
I do need to remind everybody that when we are talking about strict constructionists…there is no formal belief in original intent. By the laws of logic, one can not be a strict constructionist and cite the Federalist Papers, any of the delegate journals or even modern political historians and philosophers. This is very well known to Scalia…which is why he very rarely brings up the above listed references. He is, classically, the last conservative on the court
In the end, matters of constitutionality, Kellie, are decided, more or less, based on the parameters that are set by an individuals own intellect and/or sources of information as well as prejudices taken to the bench or to the discussion. Then, on top of that, mere speculation is required. None of the founders dwelled on the 2nd Amendment. In the strictest sense…we would only be allowed to carry bows, arrows and muskets. The 2nd Amendment, for all we know, may have meant the right to bear arms is tied to ones participation in a local militia and allows access to nearly all small arms and artillery.
Serious constitution violations will be apparent. We haven’t had many serious violations in our history.
Succession talk today is silliness but at my Black college we were intrigued by President Grant’s 1870 proposal to annex Santo Domingo and relocate freed slaves to the Caribbean island. I thought Baja California would have been even better because in was a peninsula; I could have graduated from Cabo San Lucas High and the University of Rosarito. Someone sould have understood that former slaves and former masters could not peaceful exist in the same place anytime soon.
But, make no mistakes about it: the American South is my home because my folks help build this place for free since before America was America. And to think someone could arrive in this nation in the 1900s and say “go back to Africa.” Wow, it’s not like we ask to come to this place in the first place.
(Let me calm down before I get my blood pressure up…go to the happy place)
I read Bill Shipp’s column and I was a little puzzled by his understanding of the framework of this nation. To me, the constitutional options exist to vote to change if not dissolve the federal government and those who entertain employing those options are not committing treason.
I watched a PBS document on FDR and at the end of the segment when he was first elected, the voiceover said that if he was not successful in reversing the economic crisis, he could have been the last American president.
GC,
The Constitution should only change by adhering to the amendment process as outlined in the Constitution. This “living document” nonsense that is popular on the left is a means of changing it without the required consensus and thus imperils all political minorities from the tyrannical whims of temporary majorities. Why should we even have a constitution when what is written is not what it means?
The Constitution sets parameters on what the government can and cannot do.
Who is changing the document without amending it?
What was written in the Constitution allows for certain flexibility as time goes on. The advancements in society have been much greater in the past 50 years than they have been in the previous 5000 years.
So, what specifically are you talking about? What issue? Name one.
Oh yeah…what tyranny?
If you have to ask, it is quite clear that you have jumped the shark on using Goldwater ironically in your handle. How about reading your “hero” for once?
For one, Barry didn’t care about a whole lot. This is what made him so attractive to so many people in the late 70s. Do not attempt to usurp his reputation into the modern conservative movement.
The PATRIOT Act was the last real threat of tyranny. Tyranny, or course, is merely a relative term.
The Bailouts are probably the biggest issue regarding consitutionality. Goldwater would have reluctantly supported the last two “bailouts.” The first one, the $600/person check…I can not remember a worse idea from the past 4 years.
That being said, Barry would not have approved a number of the items deregulated since 1998. It is very likely that the deregulation of the sub-prime mortgage and a few other financial instruments have led to the current state of affairs.
If short selling, credit default swaps, debt-backed securities and the sub-prime mortgage were prohibited or strictly regulated starting in 1996, or so, we most likely would not be in the state of affairs we are in. Of course, I wouldn’t have made nearly as much money…but that is not the point. Only about 3 or 4% of Americans (about 1% of humans) are wealthy enough to use these financial instruments. So what if the DJIA never gets to 15000 again…it is better to grow steadily and stabily rather than have a series of bubbles inflating and bursting.
My hero. You make me laugh. We were colleagues for gods sake. I knew Barry better than his books detail him. You can not look at history in only one direction. Things change. Back in 1998, neither Barry nor myself would have approved just handing out cash to failing companies…but there was no systemic risk at the time. Neither him nor myself approved (early on, he died before Bush and the tyranny of the GOP) of what was in store regarding business deregulation in ’97 and ’98. That being said, when mistakes are made things need to be fixed.
That is the major difference between Barry and My generation and yours. We paid off the deficit we incurred. When problems arose from decisions we made,…we fixed them. Perhaps that is why we were the greatest generation.
We didn’t create a party platform form petty and shallow issue positions. We didn’t pass on our problems to our children. We didn’t start wars for political gain. Maybe we coddled you too much. You didn’t live during the depression…you really do not know what fiscal conservatism really is. Perhaps this recession will get so bad that you will learn. It doesn’t look like things are shaping up that way.
*Barry and My Generation from yours. (sent.1 Para. 7)
Count me out of any secessionist movement. These days you have to go to the belly of the beast (DC) in order to combat anything. Plus it didn’t go too well last time. The result was a disasterous invasion by the Yankees.
What Ox and Perry are proposing sounds more like “nullification” than secession. I don’t know how that would be accomplished, but it sounds like a good alternative to secession and, perhaps, a way to start reining in the federal government. It’s described as a constitutional theory that gives an individual state the right to declare null and void any law passed by the Congress the state deems unconstitutional. This theory originated with Madison and Jefferson in the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions that said the states had a right to nullify such laws. In 1828, when S.C. threatened to secede from the Union due to the “tariff of abominations,” John Calhoun promoted nullification as a moderate alternative. The belief was the state could nullify a law but remain part of the Union UNLESS 3/4′s of the states passed the law as a constitutional amendment.
Thoughts?
Shipp needed to check his sources.
Yahoo! Fergit hell! Run that liberal McCain out of the party. Secede and get out from under the thumb of them goat f**ers on the Supreme Court! Dang, you Repubs are trying hard to broaden your base, aren’t you.
Well, no one is really changing the Constitution. They just ignore it.
If we went about their daily lives ignoring the written rule of law, we’d get landed in jail. Congress can violate the Supreme Law of the Land, and they get a pass, repeatedly—regardless of political affiliation.
The Amendment process is specifically designed to be difficult. “Prudence, indeed, will dicate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes” says our D.o.I. Therefore, the 3/4 ratification procedure requires that you must convince all of one side and at least half of the other that such a change is necessary. It is probably the only tried and true method we have to ensure that the change is indeed necessary to the “general welfare” of our republic. But simply because it is a tough process to amend our Constitution, that does not mean that the process should altogether be ignored.
Having said that, I will repeat what I have said many times before about secession. If there were ever a group that operations outside of the contract set forth which makes up our ‘more perfect union,’ it is not the states. They’re pretty much covered to do just about anything, and the 10th protects that. No, Washington, D.C. left the union long ago.
If we went about our* daily lives.
Nullification?
Goldwater Conservative
A very good post all should read! It seems the concept of being conservative has been high jacked by some with a private agenda which is everything but conservative.
Tax cuts without proper spending cots is not conservative it is irresponsible.
Government backed lending and deposits with no rules, regulation and or enforcement is not conservative it is irresponsible.
Policemen of the world foreign policy is not conservative it is irresponsible.
Forcing ones views down the throats of individuals is not conservative.
I could go on and on……
I’ll bet anyone dollars to donuts that Bill Shipp DID NOT write that piece.
I suspect the left completely understands that asserting State soveriegnty under the 10th amendment is a serious impediment to expanding and enhancing the power of the federal government. I think they know they have to oppose it, but opposing it with reason and facts are futile for them.
So, they do what the left does best – redefine the argument with a straw man. They call it “secession”, even though it is nothing akin to secession, because of the common imagery that pulls up in the mind of the average person. It conjures up images of hate, slavery, biogtry, etc. (even though slavery was but a secondary issue in the war). They know people will associate those images with 10th amendment legislation, and be against it.
It is much harder for big-government-minded people to change and control 50 different states than one overarching federal government.
Until the late 19th century, when the term “United States” was used, it was always read as plural, not singular. That is how our founders understood it, and it puts the 10th amendment in context.
It is up to conservatives to help people understand that state sovereignty has nothing to to do with secession.
MSBassSinger
In fairness the “secession” issue going national started in the media when Governor Perry brought it up.
John Konop,
Granted the RINO Perry mentioned it, but almost every article I read or video I see where “secession” is mentioned by liberals, it has nothing to do with Perry’s statement.
Perry gave them the word on which they have fixated, but media coverage on 10th amendment legislation has nothing to do with Perry’s stupid off-the-cuff statement.
How about we just propose an amendment that says the Constitution has to be strictly interpreted. If it passes, thats what the people what and it becomes law. If ti fails, then we know people prefer a little flexibility. I for one would vote for strictness.
*people want not what and if it fails not ti
Sorry, I didn’t read all of the comments since this was brought up, but in case it hasn’t been answered already, term limits imposed on members of Congress by a state legislature were declared unconstitutional. I don’t believe Congress has ever voted to impose term limits on themselves and therefore, have not been subject to a SCOTUS challenge. Term limits was the only part of the Contract with America that failed to pass Congress.
Four years ago after Bush’s re-election… the Vermont succession movement picked up steam, and “moving to Canada” became the buzz phrase of the moment for fringe Democrats. The Republicans either mocked them, called them unpatriotic, or just wished them good riddance. Today, the GOP has it’s own hee-haw wackos out there talking about the same thing. The Democrats either mock them, call them unpatriotic, or just wish them good riddance.
This topic deserves no real discussion on the merits. The only takeaway here is that heavy partisan types include a ton of utter retards… and most political discourse today is mocking the other side’s retards, while doing damage control for your own retards saying the exact same kinds of things. The pendulum swings every 8 years, give or take.
Re: ‘these United States’ v ‘the United States’:
I read a book on the War of 1812 that makes a great point about how truly pivotal that war was. Many of the things we know to be ‘patriotic’, including Old Ironsides, massive flags, The Star Spangled Banner, both form and name of the White House, etc all came out of that war.
It ends with this paragraph:
that last was from 1812: The War That Forged a Nation by Walter R. Borneman
Just wanted to give proper credit, and thought I had done so using the cite attribute of the blockquote tag.
Steve Perkins – I haven’t heard any discussion by conservatives on “secession” (not “succession”). Continuing to talk about it as if it was real is merely liberal FUD.
Dark Knight Begins – one book is not history. It is an opinion on history. If you read works written up through the War for Southern Independence, the phrase “United States” is often used as a plural. That is how our founders understood it, trhat is how Americans understood it, and they were under no delusions about whether we were a nation of sovereign States. Colonial adolescence? Please!
MSBassSinger
This is walking a fine line and it is clear he is pandering to the movement. I am not sure what the numbers are but it is clear a portion of the GOP supports the idea. As I said my guess is it is a small loud group yet politicians pandering to this group demonstrates lack of sound judgment. And that is why I wonder how far OX wants to push the issue?
Gov. Rick Perry says secession is on Texans’ minds
…. Although Perry made it clear that he doesn’t see the need to secede and isn’t advocating it, he said there’s no question that it’s on the mind of some Texans. That was obvious at tea parties around the state, where “Secede” was a popular sign slogan.
“Texas is a unique place,” the governor told reporters in Austin. “When we came into the union in 1845, one of the issues was that we would be able to leave if we decided to do that.
“My hope is that America, and Washington in particular, pays attention,” he said. “We’ve got a great union. There’s absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, you know, who knows what might come out of that? But Texas is a very unique place, and we’re a pretty independent lot, to boot.”…..
http://www.star-telegram.com/state_news/story/1320077.html
FYI
STATE OF OKLAHOMA
2nd Session of the 51st Legislature (2008)
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION 1089
AS INTRODUCED
A Joint Resolution claiming sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over certain powers; serving notice to the federal government to cease and desist certain mandates; and directing distribution.
WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows:
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”; and
WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that specifically granted by the Constitution of the United States and no more; and
WHEREAS, the scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment means that the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states; and
WHEREAS, today, in 2008, the states are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal government; and
WHEREAS, many federal mandates are directly in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and
WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has ruled in New York v. United States, 112 S. Ct. 2408 (1992), that Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states; and
WHEREAS, a number of proposals from previous administrations and some now pending from the present administration and from Congress may further violate the Constitution of the United States.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND THE SENATE OF THE 2ND SESSION OF THE 51ST OKLAHOMA LEGISLATURE:
THAT the State of Oklahoma hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States.
THAT this serve as Notice and Demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.
THAT a copy of this resolution be distributed to the President of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate of each state’s legislature of the United States of America, and each member of the Oklahoma Congressional Delegation.
51-2-9466
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=45342.0
“The South shall rise agin.”
JK, did the OK resolution pass? It just says “as introduced.” Also, these resolutions claim state sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment, not sovereignty in the state’s own right.
The problem is over the past century, states have become so dependent on federal money that the vast majority of states would do nothing if push came to shove and the very, very few who would have the will would seem to be making the proverbial protest where no one showed up. Most state’s are like cigarette smokers, they complain about the effects smoking has on their body, about the price they have to pay to support their habit, the freedoms they no longer have (can’t smoke on planes, in offices, in restaurants, etc), but they continue to smoke year after year.
Passing a resolution like these are like when smokers quit for a day because it is the Great American Smoke Out. For the most part, it means nothing, but for a few days, it makes us all feel good.
Jason Shepherd
I have pointed out the problems with unfunded mandates like No child Left Behind, Drug Prescription bill……while taking hits from both sides. My issue is the pandering to groups and firing them up who will take it to a deferent level. And it is clear that is what Governor Perry is doing. My only point is I hope OX does not do that in the GOP primary. It is dangerous to pander to groups like Republic of Texas.
The Republic of Texas is a group of individuals that claims that the annexation of Texas by the United States was illegal and that Texas remains an independent nation under occupation. The issue of the Legal status of Texas led the group to claim to reinstate a provisional government on December 13, 1995. Activists within the movement claim over 40,000 active supporters; however, there is no widespread popular support for an independent Texas.[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Texas_(group)
A Nation Standing Under God is Re-Born
The republic of Texas Nation 1836-Present
Texas is a North American sovereign Nation standing under God’s law that is alive and surviving after being fraudulently placed in a dormant state on or about 163 years ago and was released from said dormancy in September 2005. The republic of Texas Nation was brought out of dormancy by a National Texian People’s ballot election for the reconstituting of their constitutional Texas republic Government in compliance with the 1836 organic republic of Texas Constitution as amended and accepted by the Texian People and for the Texian People.
How It Started
It started with an unlawful annexation by resolution from the US Congress after a Treaty of Annexation was voted down three to one by the US Senate in 1844. There is no provision in the U.S. Constitution that allows its Congress any authority for annexing a foreign nation, which the Constitutional Texas republic is and was at that time. To accomplish annexation, the U.S. House and Senate passed an unlawful joint resolution using color of law. There was not a quorum present to vote on the matter, so it was passed unlawfully. Further, only the US Senate by a two-thirds majority vote can pass an annexation treaty, and their annexation authority is limited to territories, and therefore, does not extend to nations. Through this fraud, the republic of Texas Nation in 1845 was placed in dormancy and The State of Texas was unlawfully created, by color of law trickery.
Re-claiming Sovereignty
The government of the republic of Texas Nation has now lawfully been vested back into the hands of the people of Texas as a constitutional republic nation. This process is not an act of seceding from the U.S. since history shows that citizens of the republic of Texas never voted to cede their land in the first place.
http://www.texasrepublic.info/
John,
I don’t put much stock in groups like this. It would be like claiming that Louisiana and the states created from the territory were not really part of the United States because the Constitution does not allow for the purchase of lands from a foreign nation. Florida and Alaska would fall under this category as well.
There is nothing in the Constitution about lands obtained through right of conquest like California and much of the West.
As I’m sure there are people who believe in werewolves and elves, allow these people to believe Texas is still a separate nation.
But I agree John, no governor should be pandering to their fantasies any more than an elected official should pander to the fantasies of a group who would believe in werewolves or elves.
For a while the tip line was buzzing with complaints about SR632. Indeed Olbermann seemed to indicate is was an overt threat of secession. I’ve read it and find nothing to complain about.
Did you not read all the way to the end? From the final paragraph:
That should any such act of Congress become law or Executive Order or Judicial Order be put into force, all powers previously delegated to the United States of America by the Constitution for the United States shall revert to the several States individually. Any future government of the United States of America shall require ratification of three quarters of the States seeking to form a government of the United States of America and shall not be binding upon any State not seeking to form such a government.
It would be one thing if the resolution suggested that an extra-Constitutional statute would be deemed void and unenforceable, and that the state of Georgia would not recognize demands by the federal government to abide by its terms.
It’s a wholly different creature to claim that the passage of a single extra-Constitutional statute completely voids the Constitution, and dissolves the USA. It doesn’t actually threaten secession; it makes the erroneous factual claim that the authority of the federal government itself automatically ceases to exist, and all states revert to sovereign, independent entities.
If you can’t see why this is a patently ridiculous position to take, merely consider how often the Supreme Court has to strike down a federal law as unconstitutional. Are we seriously supposed to accept that any of one of those unconstitutional statutes could or should result in the failure of the Constitution itself?
And most strangely of all, whereas the overwhelming majority of the bill is taken straight from a 1798 resolution by Thomas Jefferson, those last few paragraphs about voiding the Constitution aren’t from Jefferson. As best I can tell, they appear to have been written by some present-day New Hampshire legislator, and yet they contain the most extreme language in the entire resolution.
Some of this discussion is pointless. The Supremecy Clause and executive power are apparently only valid when a Republican is President.
Regardless, neither GA nor Texas nor Oklahoma are going to secede. I just hope the trailer park trash doesn’t fall for the rhetoric and show up en masse to vote, again, for an agenda that doesn’t help them out.
Just consider the facts for a second. No Fortune 1000 company will maintain an office in the country of Georgia. No military will be left, the only citizens that will receive any fed. benefits (ie welfare and OASDI) will need to leave the state. Heck, we can’t get the GOP of GA to agree on a method of financing a transportation overhaul…what would happen when the feds stopped sending their check for highway improvements? This state barely functions with the assistance of the federal government…secession? Come on. People like Paul Broun and Tom Price already hate latin american immigrants for being from third-world countries. GA would be a 3rd world country within a generation of secession.
On top of that…what is all this garbage about the Kentucky Resolutions? Nobody signed onto them…and guess what? It was very easy to have a strict constuctionist in the passing few decades after the Constitution was ratified…because not much happened yet. “There was no CNN, there was no CNBC, there was no Internet…” The list of things that were not even conceived by the imagination of the late 18th century goes on.
Also, they were written as a response to the Alien and Sedition Acts!
The PATRIOT Act was close to this, but nothing Obama or the Democrats have even thought of comes close to the Alien and Sedition Acts. Get over it. The GOP lost and it will continue to lose if its followers remain true to the right-wing Cheney/Limbaugh philosophy. Nothing Cheney or Limbaugh wants will help you or this country. Name one thing that a no bid defense contract to Haliburton did for this country!
I hear all this garbage about “nanny state” liberals…look in the mirror. You “conservatives” have become stupid and weak. You follow blindly rather than thinking for yourselves. You obstruct rather than reason. I hope I can see my brand of conservatism come back to life before mine ends. I am disgusted that sycophants like Tom Price are able to beat the John Konops of this America in democratic elections. Good television commercials, tons of campaign signs and a tip of the hat from the right wing preachers are all you need to win. We have become to weak to think for ourselves…and seek out information before making decisions. Even holding elective office in this country is a profession void of merit. It is patronage…plain and simple.
PeewaterConversationalist,
The supremacy clause is only applicable if the Federal Government is adhering to the limits found in the rest of the Constitution, which is the point of the resolutions pointing to the existence of the 10th.
You cannot argue that one part of the document should be followed, when you so flippantly ignore the parts that are contrary to your goals.
Next Comments →
Comments on this entry are closed.
{ 1 trackback }