(on Drudge) Ron Paul: 'Secession is a deeply American principle'...

[jct74]

middle column, halfway down

http://drudgereport.com/






direct link to article:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/84058.html

 

[jct74]

retweet it:
https://twitter.com/DRUDGE_REPORT/status/270662771136397315

 

[nasaal]

That sort of thing will not play over well. It will make the liberty movement look like backward people who hate the US.

 

[ILUVRP]

i agree that secession is a american thing to do , but lets see how it would would work .

1) texas is the only red state that gets less back from the feds than it sends to washington , sends $1.00 , gets back 94 cents, all other red states get back more from the feds than they send , some of which get 4-5 times more back than they send.

2) i was in the military 8 1/2 yrs then worked in defence plant for 30 yrs , so what would happen is texas would lose all its defence contracts as all military contracts must be given in america, we could also close all military bases in texas and va hospitals.

3) people in texas would need passports to get out , people going in would need passports.

4) texans would have to keep up their own ==freeways--bridges--dams--.

5) america would be back to 98 senators and less house members and all their staffs.

6) texas could issue their own currency and bonds , i don't know about all the members of the military from texas , i guess they would have to move to a real state in order to stay in the service.

i am sure this list could get much longer .


i think the bottom line is all states need america more than america needs them , what would the governors be then , kings or presidents . they couldn't be governors of a state.

 

[erowe1]

I like how he says that both people and states should be able to secede.

 

[erowe1]

i agree that secession is a american thing to do , but lets see how it would would work .

1) texas is the only red state that gets less back from the feds than it sends to washington , sends $1.00 , gets back 94 cents, all other red states get back more from the feds than they send , some of which get 4-5 times more back than they send.

Would you rather have $1 cash, or $4 worth of something the federal government wants you to have?

2) i was in the military 8 1/2 yrs then worked in defence plant for 30 yrs , so what would happen is texas would lose all its defence contracts as all military contracts must be given in america, we could also close all military bases in texas and va hospitals.

Which would be better for Texas's economy, to have all that capital and labor go toward the production of things that do no one any good, or to make things people actually want in response to the incentives of the free market?

3) people in texas would need passports to get out , people going in would need passports.

Only if Texas decides they want to do that. It doesn't seem very practical to me.

4) texans would have to keep up their own ==freeways--bridges--dams--.

Right. So rather than send your money to Washington DC, to get funneled through layers of federal bureaucracy, just to come back to be spent according to federral dictates on something in your state, you just keep it in your state to spend the way your state wants, and probably more efficiently.

5) america would be back to 98 senators and less house members and all their staffs.

Sounds good.

i think the bottom line is all states need america more than america needs them , what would the governors be then , kings or presidents . they couldn't be governors of a state.

I think that's ridiculous. I can't fathom why anyone wouldn't want to secede from the union. The federal government does nothing good for the states and plenty of harm.

 

[ILUVRP]

i just used texas as an example , america as a union of states is the best if washington was run right , but w/o someone like ron paul as president it will never be run right and i see no one like ron paul stepping up.

 

[erowe1]

i just used texas as an example , america as a union of states is the best if washington was run right , but w/o someone like ron paul as president it will never be run right and i see no one like ron paul stepping up.

I think you have to take for granted that Washington will not be run right. And if by some amazing accident of history someone like RP ever got elected president, his reforms would last a very short time. His successor would bring back business as usual.

 

[specsaregood]

i think the bottom line is all states need america more than america needs them , what would the governors be then , kings or presidents . they couldn't be governors of a state.

what a myopic pov.

 

[Athan]

i agree that secession is a american thing to do , but lets see how it would would work .

1) texas is the only red state that gets less back from the feds than it sends to washington , sends $1.00 , gets back 94 cents, all other red states get back more from the feds than they send , some of which get 4-5 times more back than they send.

2) i was in the military 8 1/2 yrs then worked in defence plant for 30 yrs , so what would happen is texas would lose all its defence contracts as all military contracts must be given in america, we could also close all military bases in texas and va hospitals.

3) people in texas would need passports to get out , people going in would need passports.

4) texans would have to keep up their own ==freeways--bridges--dams--.

5) america would be back to 98 senators and less house members and all their staffs.

6) texas could issue their own currency and bonds , i don't know about all the members of the military from texas , i guess they would have to move to a real state in order to stay in the service.

i am sure this list could get much longer .


i think the bottom line is all states need america more than america needs them , what would the governors be then , kings or presidents . they couldn't be governors of a state.

They would be PRESIDENT of Texas. Everything you wrote isn't bad for Texas. It's just restructuring.

 

[FSP-Rebel]

As much as I am for secession for my own personal reasons it's hard to overlook the fact that state and local police can't compete with the hardware the Feds have if they chose to employ it on us. Plus, the shock to the system of no social security checks, medicare payments, or food stamps/welfare for the unfortunate would be the equivalent to an economic crisis until the lack of burden of taxes and regulations can be flushed in, and even then I'm not so sure. I'd prefer nullification as a safer alternative path.

 

[July]

A state wouldn't necessarily have to actually leave. The idea is just that it creates checks and balances on centralized power. DC would prefer that Texas stay (for example), so that gives Texas some leverage if DC starts overstepping their authority.

The main problem I think is that so many Americans have lost appreciation for a checks and balance system, when it comes to the president and party in power. There is this general attitude that since the President holds the highest office in the land, and since he is elected by the majority, he has ultimate authority... When congress is in gridlock, they are thought to be obstructing business, not checking power. Hence the need for more and more executive powers.

 

[Dutch]

From a European perspective, as one who lives in a country that went through phases of being totally sovereign, to being engulfed into the European Union in Brussels (which can be very well compared to the Federal Govt in the USA) I can tell you that being sovereign is much better. If only for 1 single reason: the multiple layers of bureaucracy are swallowing up billions that are adding to our countries' deficit (which citizens like me have to pay for) and the resulting european laws are very often not locally practicle. Ok, that may be 2 reasons. But bottom line, we pay more for people that know nothing about our lives, and are deciding over our lives.

I say: secede if you can!

Dutch

 

[erowe1]

As much as I am for secession for my own personal reasons it's hard to overlook the fact that state and local police can't compete with the hardware the Feds have if they chose to employ it on us. Plus, the shock to the system of no social security checks, medicare payments, or food stamps/welfare for the unfortunate would be the equivalent to an economic crisis until the lack of burden of taxes and regulations can be flushed in, and even then I'm not so sure. I'd prefer nullification as a safer alternative path.

Yeah, I wouldn't be for fighting a war against the feds to secede.

But that wouldn't be as easy for them to do as it was 150 years ago. They wouldn't have the support of many of their own citizens, and they wouldn't be able to control their access to pro-secessionist information.

 

[PattyFromTexas]

Well I have to say I strongly disagree with the idea of secession, I think it's the mother of all horrible, terrible, awful ideas. One fact seems to elude all of you talking about secession, and that is, that the federal government would never in a million years allow a peaceful secession. Plus there are alot more people who want to stay part of the US, than there are those who want to secede. This is an idea that if acted upon would lead to bloodshed, and you would lose. The federal government has more guns, more body armor, more mortars, more drones, more soldiers, more everything that matters in a fight. Not to mention the fact that they have records of pretty much everyone who even owns a gun. If they show up on your doorstep and demand you give them your guns, you'll do it, or end up, injured, and in handcuffs, or worse. So you see. This really is an atrociously bad idea.

 

[PattyFromTexas]

The federal government would kill you all without blinking an eye, and most of the people in this country would say YAY, those terrorist sympathizers deserve what they get. And they'll react that way because they've been brainwashed by television to think that way.

 

[erowe1]

there are alot more people who want to stay part of the US, than there are those who want to secede.

I think this is true. But I can't fathom why. If we set out to convincing most Americans that secession would be good for them, it should be an easy enough task. There are plenty of reasons to want to get out from under the federal government, and no reasons to want to stay under it.

 

[July]

Actual succession is not going to happen any time soon, not anywhere close. What good might come from discussion about the idea though, is perhaps more people realizing their states do have 10th amendment rights to nullify unconstitutional laws.

 

[erowe1]

Actual succession is not going to happen any time soon, not anywhere close. What good might come from discussion about the idea though, is perhaps more people realizing their states do have 10th amendment rights to nullify unconstitutional laws.

It seems that at some point one of two things is inevitable. Either there will be actual secession, or there will be further expansion and centralization of government until there is finally a single regime over the whole globe.

The current regime in Washington DC can't go on as it is forever. And if something can't last, then it won't.

 

[Tod]

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...w-by-(The-New-American)&p=4740669#post4740669

[h=2][/h]

What if the confederate states had declared secession, but instead of going to war, had just engaged in civil disobedience in the manner of Ghandi? Would they have been more successful?
​