Michael Stuart Kelly

If At First You Don't Secede, Try, Try Again...

Recommended Posts

If At First You Don't Secede, Try, Try Again...

I made a few posts on another thread, but they deserve their own topic.

I'm putting this thread here in the "Stumping" section because I see this thing more as a partisan issue than a serious attempt at secession.

An irony does come to mind, though. Obama has often said that he takes great inspiration in Abraham Lincoln and seeks to be like him.

That brings to my mind the aphorism that you usually get what you want in life, so you better be real careful about what you want in life.

This power-grab thing by the Obama administration cuts deeper than either side seems to admit.

Here's a signal of how serious this is:

White House website deluged with secession petitions from 20 states

Nov. 11, 2012

Daily Caller

From the article:

On Nov.7, the day after President Barack Obama was re-elected, the White House’s website received a petition asking the administration to allow Louisiana to secede.

If 25,000 people sign the petition by Dec. 7, it will “require a response” from the Obama administration, according to published rules of the White House’s online “We the People” program.

. . .

What began as a pair of parallel stunts appears to have gathered steam. Other than Louisiana and Texas, states with secession-related petitions pending on the White House website now include Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, South Carolina and Tennessee.

Three states — Georgia, Missouri and South Carolina are each represented by two competing petitions.

One interesting thing for me is that Obama invited this with the "We The People" initiative, which exists to provide credibility to his efforts. But I wonder if this thing will backfire like what happened with Sarah Palin, where she, as Governor, was suddenly deluged with a barrage of absolutely absurd lawsuits (all of which she defeated).

Since "We The People" is an official initiative, I see it as grounds for legal measures later down the line.

It seems like Texas already has the requisite 25,000 signatories.

20 states?

I posted that about 12 hours ago.

It's now up to 30 states.

30 States Petition Federal Government to Secede After Election

The Blaze

Note that the time stamp is close to when I posted, but they have since updated their headline.

I just went over to the We The People site and the number of people singing the secession petitions is growing by the hour.

As of this posting, Louisana has the requisite 25,000 signatures (actually it has close to 29,000) and Texas is at a few under 75,000. Alabama, Florida and Tennessee are all somewhere around 20,000 so far.

I think this thing is going to grow into a major embarrassment for the government and, I hope, a wave of lawsuits.

Incidentally, there are a couple of petitions I saw to deport everyone who signed a secession petition, once specifically requesting that the government strip the signatories of their citizenship first. They just started, so they only have a couple of thousand each. But once the Progressive Internet gaming public perception machine latches onto this thing, these peititions should easily get the minimum 25,000. And then, I imagine, even more lawsuits, but ironically from the Progressive side.

This is going to be quite a show after a while. I'm actually enjoying it.

:smile:

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's Scalia's opinion, as if one were needed on there not existing a legal "right" to secede. I thought the Civil War made that crystal clear.

‘There Is No Right to Secede’: See the Alleged Letter Where Justice Scalia Shoots Down Idea of Leaving the Union

The Blaze

But there is a practical value, which is these petitions will hit Obama's credibility right where it hurts--this spreading manifestation (47 states now) is a clear demonstration that he does not represent all Americans in the same way a normal President does.

I think it's a brilliant PR campaign and I have had the privilege of seeing it from the start. Watch where this grows, folks. There is no win in it for Obama. He loses if he does nothing and he loses if he responds.

And imagine the public outcry if he comes down on the signatories with hamhanded government persecution.

The show just keeps getting better and better.

I'm not saying this will not eventually go away. It probably will. But I am saying it will cut deep where it hurts and it will last longer than most people expect.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While channel surfing I caught a few minutes on Hannity in which he was interviewing a Texan. perhaps the official starter of the secession movement in Texas.

The Texan summed up the problem succinctly as follows. The country has been taken over by those who subscribe to the Marxist ideology as opposed to the ideology of Thomas Jefferson. He said that most Texans are staunch advocates of the Jefferson ideology and that is why they are petitioning to secede.

Hannity asked him if he had given up hope of working within the system to change it to what he wants. The Texan said that ship has gone, that the people had four years under Obama to experience the Marxist way and yet they re elected Obama for more of the same.

i think that from a libertarian viewpoint any State does have the right to secede. What makes more sense to me would be for there to be a vote within the State on the issue and each STate might have a rule on the issue in their own constitution on the State level as to what degree of approval would be necessary. If that point were reached then they should make a Declaration of Independence so to speak rather than pleading for permission through a petition.

If they truly believe they have a right to secede they should simply do it on their own without a petition to the government that they want to leave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the petition to deport everyone who signed a petition to secede from the Union.

https://petitions.wh...merica/dmQl1bXL

Why deport these people?

Ba'al Chatzaf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the petition to deport everyone who signed a petition to secede from the Union.

https://petitions.wh...merica/dmQl1bXL

Why deport these people?

Ba'al Chatzaf

The irony is, they are already trying to deport themselves, so the petition actually means nothing outside they want to grant their wish but not let them keep their homes when they go.

So we have reached the point people are trolling a Gvoernment website to do what amounts to snarky comments in the comment section? Brother, you asked for it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i think that from a libertarian viewpoint any State does have the right to secede.

Gulch,

This is my problem with the libertarian viewpoint. If you look only through the lens of individual rights, you can arrive at this conclusion.

But human beings are more than individual rights with feet.

(I cribbed that from Bidinotto's phrase "premises with feet." :smile: )

Human beings have this power thing--an urge to be a goddamn busybody and/or bully--built into their very being.

The problem with power on a massive scale like a government is that if you do not go along with the wishes of the powerful, they simply destroy your life, jail you and/or kill you.

No amount of talk about rights--or standing up for them (even with guns)--works when a power threshold gets strong enough for the powerful.

The ONLY thing that has worked so far, and even then, not perfectly, is the principle of checks and balances. You justify this structure with individual rights, but that's only the intellectual part. In the practical part, you pit one person's power against another's and confine it all to a set of commonly agreed rules (a constitution), which defines how much is the correct amount of power for each function.

In that system, for one person to gain more power, as humans are wont to do when they get some, he has to take it from someone else. That person is usually not friendly to the idea of giving up what he's got, so he pushes back.

In most libertarian discussions I have had on this issue, the hardcore libertarians think checks and balances is a silly principle or evil or not fundamental or something like that. All you have to do is say non-initiation-of-force and it becomes meaningless.

Well, we fought a Civil War, one of the bloodiest wars in history, that kinda proves people will not give up power so easily and just let discourse govern. They prefer to kill each other. I don't think humans have changed in this respect since then.

When people ignore the reality of human nature like that, it makes it difficult for me to sign on 100% with the anarcho party-line. So I go along with what I agree with and discuss what I don't, usually until I piss the hardcore folks off. Just like I do with religious people.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael,

One of my regrets in life is that I focused so much on science courses and premed courses that I had no time to explore other fields in depth in college like history, economics, philosophy and the arts.

When I came across Objectivism I really enjoyed delving into works in those fields and psychology as well.

My point is that I am no expert in much of this but one does wonder how this country started out, the attempt by the Jeffersonians to limit the powers of the central govt they created and how the anti federalists objected to it all for whatever reasons. Right from the start the supreme court claimed the power to interpret the Constitution and all the power seeking groups nibbled away at the living organism pulling it in all directions draining the life blood from its inherent advocacy of individual liberty.

Checks and balances is usually used to refer to the divisions of the legislative, judicial and executive branches and the division of the COngress into the House and the Senate.

We know that Article 1 Section 8 spelled out the powers granted to the COngress but clearly the progressives/socialists have managed to swell govt beyond the limits so enumerated. The electorate has been indoctrinated by the public schools and the university pseudo intellectuals, nurtured by the churches and the politicians resting on the culture of mysticism/ altruism and collectivism to elect such tyrants as the current crop of leaders in the COngress and the presidency.

DId I leave out the role of the media and hollywood?

Still there has been a perceptual, tangible growth of the pro freedom movement with an ideological base unheard of in prior Centuries. For one thing the ANTIDOTE is KNOWN which is Objectivism itself. The means to spread such ideas in the educational establishment exists as never before as well. The efforts of the Institute for Humane Studies, the Reason Foundation, CATO, Foundation for Economic Education and the Future of Freedom Foundation are yielding fruit as more professors have positions all across the country. The Mercatus Center at George Mason U should be mentioned as well as Hillsdale College and others of which I am unaware.

The Students for Liberty and Young AMericans for Liberty and the Campaign for Liberty will continue to enlighten young intelligent students all over the globe.

The internet with so many sources of info including the Ludwig von Mises Institute and many others make the ideas available.

So I am hopeful with reasons to be hopeful. So many seeds of liberty are being sown.

But now I must tend to my garden.

Take heart liberty lovers, things may just get worse before they get better.

GG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In case anyone is interested, Alex Jones is calling for secession and the 2nd American revolution and he is drafting Ron Paul to lead it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with Alex Jones is that he is so quick to judgment, so quick to trash fellow travelers, he discredits himself.

Here's a good example. Glenn Beck recently began to air "Agenda 21" ads on his show. This caused quite a stir. Lots of nasty email from his followers threatening to cancel their subscriptions. Along with that, he has been mock-stonewalling why he has been doing that with mock-hostile banter from Stu and Pat on his radio show.

Alex Jones to the rescue of the country. Except he stepped in it big-time. You can read about it here on The Blaze:

GLENN BECK FINALLY REVEALS THE REASON FOR THOSE ‘AGENDA 21′ ADS ON BLAZE TV (FOR REAL!)

by Jason Howerton

The Blaze

November 13, 2012

From the article:

“The conspiracy theorists among us say I am part of Agenda 21 and this ad is just proof positive to some,” Beck said.

. . .

Furthering the theory that Beck is in cahoots with the U.N., Stu Burguiere, executive producer of the “Glenn Beck Radio Show,” read a portion of a “report” from InfoWars.com, which has since been taken down. However, no correction or apology seems to have been issued.

“Earlier this week there was a thread on the Free Republic about Agenda 21 ads running on Beck’s TheBlaze TV on the Dish Network. People couldn’t believe that Beck would allow the United Nations to run propaganda on his network because he’s a patriot, right?,” Stu said, reading from the report.

Stu went on: “InfoWars has exposed Beck as a globalist operative…assigned to undermine and neutralize the liberty movement.”

“Glenn Beck specializes…in disinformation ops designed to trick his conservative followers and lead them to dead ends and cul-de-sacs that ultimately neutralize the political opposition.”

Finally Glenn came clean. It was a publicity stunt to create buzz for a new product.

Beck finally revealed that he is publishing a fictional book called “Agenda 21.” The ads, he explained, were part of an effort to reach more people and get them interested in learning more about the “terrifying” — and real — United Nations initiative. The host also said TheBlaze TV will be doing a special on the U.N.’s Agenda 21 initiative in the upcoming weeks.

In other words, the ads really were about promoting awareness regarding Agenda 21 along with promoting the upcoming release of the book.

Glenn is actually combating Agenda 21 in an entertaining way, not promoting it. He's creating buzz and I bet this project will do more damage to Agenda 21 than all the efforts of Alex Jones over all the years he has been opposing it combined.

I like Alex Jones and I think he does some important work, but I just don't trust him. Ideologues always trash their friends and loved ones on a dime over ideology, and most often without checking the facts. Jones just proved that he does this straight, no chaser.

At least he took the crap he wrote down. I don't expect a retraction, though. Admitting you're wrong is hard on your vanity. So just how important is fighting Agenda 21 to Alex Jones in relation to his own vanity?

Judging by his acts, his vanity is more important.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are the Alex Jones links if anyone is interested:

Why The States Must Secede To Save America

Ron Paul: The Founders Believed in Secession

This is more gasoline on the fire.

I have my criticisms of Jones, but I like him.

Glenn Beck made the point that the people who signed the secession petitions on the White House website were inputting their info into a data system, thus making themselves automatic easy targets for reprisals. So he called on people to stop doing that for their own safety.

He's got a point, but I'm glad this thing is happening. And I'm glad Alex Jones, bless his heart, is crazy enough to jump into the face of the drooling behemoth called the federal government. He reminds me of that Chinese dude standing in the way and facing down a line of tanks in Tiananmen Square.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue of secession or independence or sovereignty is alive in the world. If the Texans who hope for a separate nation can convince a thumping majority of their people that this is the way to go, the object lessons in how to do it are many (and the lessons of how awfully wrong secession movements can go are also many). I mention Texas because it is apparently the sole state able to muster five times the numbers necessary for a White House written response.

One object lesson in successful and rapid secession is Lithuania. When the chance to depart the Soviet Union was upon the Lithuanians, they voted in a straightforward In/Out independence referendum, and the winning majority was 93%. Another example is Slovenia. Another is Timor Este, another is South Sudan. There are more examples throughout the 20th century.

In the next couple of years, a couple of important independence referendums are likely to be carried out, one in Scotland, and one in Catalonia.

In Canada, there have been only two Quebec referendums related to independence. The first asked voters to approve something called 'Sovereignty-Association.' It failed. The second referendum was based on 'sovereignty' with an optional 'partnership' with Canada. It too failed (but by a narrow margin).

The problem with both referendums in Quebec was the question and the percentage of the vote that should lead to independence (or sovereignty murk mumble**). The Supreme Court later ruled on both issues. A future referendum could certainly deliver a vote that must be respected by the rest of Canada (and lead to a negotiated Quebec secession), but in the Supreme's ruling, the question must be unequivocal, and the process subject to stringent democratic rules. An act of the Canadian parliament laid out the actual means by which a province could vote to depart Canada (see the Clarity Act).

The problem the Supremes reference case hoped to illuminate, of course, was between fifty-percent-plus-one advocates -- and those who believed this was much too narrow a margin of approval. Consistent with long-standing objections to the ambiguous nature of the two referendum questions, the new legal regime lays out reasonably democratic procedures for secession.

Thus, should Quebecers ever vote over sixty percent for a clear call to secede from Canada, the way forward is laid out in law, and the federal government is bound to accede to the wishes of the majority -- and negotiate terms in good faith.

I don't know how this would be accomplished in Texas. It seems an issue of long-standing, but not an issue that has yet even attracted a plurality of voter intent. If and when any US state votes unequivocally for secession in a free and fair referendum, wake me up from my realist slumbers ....

Of more interest to USA-based OLers, I think, are the results from the two tied questions put to Puerto Ricans on the last ballot.It looks like Statehood (which was the preferred alternative) is plausible if not probable. If the desire to become a state of the Union is made clear by a constituent assembly, and legislation enabling statehood in Congress is green-lighted by Obama, the US may welcome a fifty-first state, and its first state with a Spanish-speaking and non-Protestant majority. This is I believe a great advance over the odd arrangement currently in place for the 3.7 million US citizens of the Commonwealth.

But you Americans will decide. What say you? ¿Quién va a ser el amo del estado? ¿Quién tendrá dominio del Estado? (who shall rule/take domination of/be the heart of the state/State)

slide_261993_1734711_free.jpg?1352389800000

_____________

** This was the background 'partnership' that the PQ government thought would be a winner for the separatist cause (from Wikipedia).

  • customs union;
  • free movement of goods;
  • free movement of individuals;
  • free movement of services;
  • free movement of capital;
  • monetary policy;
  • labour mobility; and
  • citizenship.[6]

Of course, this smacks of the same deal that Scotland presently has with the UK (shared citizenship, customs union, etcetera).

I wonder what kind of 'deal' the Texas (or other state) secessionists have in mind. It seems to me that the White House petition project is a stunt, or at best an indication that some folks would like sovereignty but have no concrete notion of how to accomplish it.

When the number of Texan votes on the Texan secession petition reaches above ten million, I'd say it would be time to get excited. Otherwise this just seems a sideshow, with no hope of going anywhere. At the present time the electronic signatures have topped 110,000. Not one of the Texas sponsors of the petition has stepped forward for the fight. There is a long long road ahead.

Consider: how many state representatives/congressional representatives from Texas have been elected on a plank of Texas independence? How many have even attempted? Compare/contrast to the Scottish National Party, the Parti Quebecois or the Bloc Quebecois at its height in Ottawa, when outright secessionists can command hours of the airwaves to weave their spells. If there is will to change a legal regime of sovereignty (the real goal), that will become evident at the highest tables. In my opinion, this is absent in the US.

As for Alex Jones, he is a freak of the conspiracy fringes, to my eyes. Independence is a flavour of the day for his site Infowars. Next week, back to FEMA camps, 9/11 wahoo, UN overlords, Satan Speaks, and whatever seems attractive to the paranoid style of thinking.

For those too worried about 'reprisals' from the powers that be, the White House records your IP address, your email address, whatever name you gave (there are 5 Krusty the Clowns signed up so far), and your claimed postal code.

This could lead to such 'reprisals' as, well, I guess, surveillance, arrest, torture, detention and a midnight burial. Or a spot on Maury. Or at least a database for a future direct-mail assault:

"Dear Texas Secessionist Jason P 90210, have you heard of the All-In-One Family Bunker BBQ and Spa? Follow these links to receive special offers ... "

++++++++++++++++++++

† (from Wikipedia) "In a 2012 status referendum a majority of voters supported statehood over two other non-status-quo options. There is currently an active Puerto Rico statehood movement."

Edited by william.scherk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jerry:

Nice find. He is absolutely correct in his analysis. You do not go groveling to the state for permission, you act for freedom and liberty and you declare your freedom.

Good job.

The Colonists in America did petition the Crown and an outgrowth of that process was the recognition that an individual citizens rights were in the citizens possession all the time.

They then declared their independence.

A...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of you may have seen the headlines on a Public Policy Polling finding yesterday. Here's some of the details:

49% of GOP voters nationally say they think that ACORN stole the election for President Obama. We found that 52% of Republicans thought that ACORN stole the 2008 election for Obama, so this is a modest decline, but perhaps smaller than might have been expected given that ACORN doesn't exist anymore.

Some GOP voters are so unhappy with the outcome that they no longer care to be a part of the United States. 25% of Republicans say they would like their state to secede from the union compared to 56% who want to stay and 19% who aren't sure.

One reason that such a high percentage of Republicans are holding what could be seen as extreme views is that their numbers are declining. Our final poll before the election, which hit the final outcome almost on the head, found 39% of voters identifying themselves as Democrats and 37% as Republicans. Since the election we've seen a 5 point increase in Democratic identification to 44%, and a 5 point decrease in Republican identification to 32%.

And some nasty commentary from MSNBC:

In many states, people are signing openly in public marketplaces out in the street petitions to leave the country. In seven states, the petitions have received enough support to force the White House to respond, actually. Take a look at this map of where the petitions have received the most -- well, that's a big shock -- signatures, Tennessee, North Carolina -- I love North Carolina -- Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Louisiana, and Texas.

The secession movement has the most signatures in Texas, of course, with nearly 120,000 people signing on. According to "The New York Times" - - quote -- "Secession fever has struck parts of Texas. In Texas, talks of secession in recent years has steadily shifted to the center from the fringe."

And what is really going on here? Let`s find out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of you may have seen the headlines on a Public Policy Polling finding yesterday. Here's some of the details:

49% of GOP voters nationally say they think that ACORN stole the election for President Obama. We found that 52% of Republicans thought that ACORN stole the 2008 election for Obama, so this is a modest decline, but perhaps smaller than might have been expected given that ACORN doesn't exist anymore.

Some GOP voters are so unhappy with the outcome that they no longer care to be a part of the United States. 25% of Republicans say they would like their state to secede from the union compared to 56% who want to stay and 19% who aren't sure.

One reason that such a high percentage of Republicans are holding what could be seen as extreme views is that their numbers are declining. Our final poll before the election, which hit the final outcome almost on the head, found 39% of voters identifying themselves as Democrats and 37% as Republicans. Since the election we've seen a 5 point increase in Democratic identification to 44%, and a 5 point decrease in Republican identification to 32%.

And some nasty commentary from MSNBC:

In many states, people are signing openly in public marketplaces out in the street petitions to leave the country. In seven states, the petitions have received enough support to force the White House to respond, actually. Take a look at this map of where the petitions have received the most -- well, that's a big shock -- signatures, Tennessee, North Carolina -- I love North Carolina -- Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Louisiana, and Texas.

The secession movement has the most signatures in Texas, of course, with nearly 120,000 people signing on. According to "The New York Times" - - quote -- "Secession fever has struck parts of Texas. In Texas, talks of secession in recent years has steadily shifted to the center from the fringe."

And what is really going on here? Let`s find out.

If anyone can find out it would be veterans of the Objectivist movement, Rational Secession their Specialty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the petition to deport everyone who signed a petition to secede from the Union.

https://petitions.wh...merica/dmQl1bXL

Why deport these people?

Ba'al Chatzaf

The irony is, they are already trying to deport themselves, so the petition actually means nothing outside they want to grant their wish but not let them keep their homes when they go.

So we have reached the point people are trolling a Gvoernment website to do what amounts to snarky comments in the comment section? Brother, you asked for it!

Actually, that's not ironic at all. That's just the failure to understand the difference in deportation and secession. Secession does not equal "self-deportation". Clever phrasing though!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...