Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: The New USA? Secession Movement Gains Steam

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    19

    The New USA? Secession Movement Gains Steam

    The New USA? Secession Movement Gains Steam

    David Brody CBN News Chief Political Correspondent, Wednesday, March 05, 2014

    "A number of conservative, rural Americans are taking about seceding and creating their own states, meaning a new map of the United States of America could include the following:
     A 51st state called Jefferson, made up of Northern California and Southern Oregon
     A new state called Western Maryland
     A new state called North Colorado

    An 'Amicable' Divorce
    That desire for something different can also be felt in Arizona, Michigan, and in Western Maryland where thousands have signed secession petitions.
    One website reads, "We intend to exercise our right of self-determination and self-governance to better secure our rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
    Scott Strzelczyk, the leader of the Western Maryland movement, is ready to get going.
    "If they are not going to listen or take our needs into consideration and govern in a way that's more in accordance with the way we want to be governed we are seeking an amicable divorce," he said."

    Read more: http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2014/M...Secession-Move...

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,161

    The Balkanization of the US will be resisted by the FedGov paramilitaries.

    Creating a new state isn't easy. The last time a state actually gave up territory was in 1820, when Maine split from Massachusetts. Since then, additional efforts have been unsuccessful.

    http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2014/M...t-Gains-Steam/
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  3. #3
    Regular Member carolina guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Concord, NC
    Posts
    1,790
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Creating a new state isn't easy. The last time a state actually gave up territory was in 1820, when Maine split from Massachusetts. Since then, additional efforts have been unsuccessful.

    http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2014/M...t-Gains-Steam/

    I can think of at least two more off the top of my head that happened later...1850 (Texas) and 1863 (Virginia).
    If something is wrong for ONE person to do to another, it is still wrong if a BILLION people do it.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,011
    The secessionists are just mad because they can't win elections, so they resort to delusional ideas.

  5. #5
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Well duh they are mad, they don't like being governed without consent, they don't like that the Federalist system is not a federalist system anymore.

    A better question to ask is why anybody would want to force others to be slaves ?

    Ballot and bullets are pretty synonymous in a country where there are supposed to be constitutional limits to government and the individual rights are supposedly what matters.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  6. #6
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    Quote Originally Posted by beebobby View Post
    The secessionists are just mad because they can't win elections, so they resort to delusional ideas.
    Yeah, that's it. <_<

    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Well duh they are mad, they don't like being governed without consent, they don't like that the Federalist system is not a federalist system anymore.

    A better question to ask is why anybody would want to force others to be slaves ?

    Ballot and bullets are pretty synonymous in a country where there are supposed to be constitutional limits to government and the individual rights are supposedly what matters.
    Hmm interesting. QFT on the first and second part
    Advocate freedom please

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by beebobby View Post
    The secessionists are just mad because they can't win elections, so they resort to delusional ideas.
    If ya can't beat them, un-join them?


    Nothing wrong with trying

    CA's attempt to split into, what 6? states...would give them 12 senators...eek!

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran Cavalryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    308
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    CA's attempt to split into, what 6? states...would give them 12 senators...eek!
    True, but if you look at a county-by-county map of how California voted in the last two elections, you'll see a lot more red than blue. California is an extreme example of what happens to a greater or lesser degree in many other states -- a few geographically-small areas of high population density essentially render the votes of the rest of the state irrelevant. This happens in state politics as well, with the large population centers dragging the less-populous regions kicking and screaming down paths they don't want to take.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Gallowmere's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    220
    Quote Originally Posted by Cavalryman View Post
    True, but if you look at a county-by-county map of how California voted in the last two elections, you'll see a lot more red than blue. California is an extreme example of what happens to a greater or lesser degree in many other states -- a few geographically-small areas of high population density essentially render the votes of the rest of the state irrelevant. This happens in state politics as well, with the large population centers dragging the less-populous regions kicking and screaming down paths they don't want to take.
    Precisely. California and New York are by far the most extreme examples of this. To be quite frank, I couldn't believe that the people I met in upstate New York (the Watertown area) were governed by the same legislature as Manhattan. It just seems completely ridiculous. The same can be said for Los Angeles versus...well, pretty much everything north of Sacramento.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    Quote Originally Posted by Cavalryman View Post
    True, but if you look at a county-by-county map of how California voted in the last two elections, you'll see a lot more red than blue. California is an extreme example of what happens to a greater or lesser degree in many other states -- a few geographically-small areas of high population density essentially render the votes of the rest of the state irrelevant. This happens in state politics as well, with the large population centers dragging the less-populous regions kicking and screaming down paths they don't want to take.
    That is very true here in Washington, Seattle and the "Greater Eastside," control most of the state politics.
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,011
    Good idea, conservatives. If you can't have your way politically in your state, get out. Based on this premise, I'm ready for the independent Blue states of Houston, Dallas, Austin, San Antonio, New Orleans, Atlanta, Nashville, Memphis, and many more. Today these are Democratic urban strongholds that have to live under the - what was the word? - oh yes, "tyranny" of their Republican governors and legislatures. Tomorrow as independent states they will give the Democrats permanent control of the Senate, the House, and the Electoral College. Thanks for thinking of this!

  12. #12
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by beebobby View Post
    Good idea, conservatives. If you can't have your way politically in your state, get out. Based on this premise, I'm ready for the independent Blue states of Houston, Dallas, Austin, San Antonio, New Orleans, Atlanta, Nashville, Memphis, and many more. Today these are Democratic urban strongholds that have to live under the - what was the word? - oh yes, "tyranny" of their Republican governors and legislatures. Tomorrow as independent states they will give the Democrats permanent control of the Senate, the House, and the Electoral College. Thanks for thinking of this!
    A city state would be a great idea. Because then when the people in the city realize they can't run their socialist programs without the theft of the producers.....
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,011
    Considering all of the secessionists hate government and taxation, it will be interesting to see their new "states" after a couple of years of crumbling infrastructure, no education, no regulation of business and a theocratic government. It will probably look like a scene from The Walking Dead.

  14. #14
    Regular Member conandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    florida
    Posts
    248
    Quote Originally Posted by beebobby View Post
    Considering all of the secessionists hate government and taxation, it will be interesting to see their new "states" after a couple of years of crumbling infrastructure, no education, no regulation of business and a theocratic government. It will probably look like a scene from The Walking Dead.
    They do not hate government or taxation. They want a constitutional government and reasonable taxes. A limited government that stays within there enumerated powers. This idea that without the government running everyone's lives they are doomed is total bs. People live better with less government interference.

  15. #15
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    A city state would be a great idea. Because then when the people in the city realize they can't run their socialist programs without the theft of the producers.....
    what theft? all the income and wealth is made in the cities, rural areas are the number 1 takers of social and infrastructure spending......
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  16. #16
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by Cavalryman View Post
    True, but if you look at a county-by-county map of how California voted in the last two elections, you'll see a lot more red than blue. California is an extreme example of what happens to a greater or lesser degree in many other states -- a few geographically-small areas of high population density essentially render the votes of the rest of the state irrelevant. This happens in state politics as well, with the large population centers dragging the less-populous regions kicking and screaming down paths they don't want to take.
    basically, you're complaining that all 5 people who live in that sea of read don't get to control the vast majority of the people who live in LA and the bay area?
    Last edited by EMNofSeattle; 03-07-2014 at 11:20 AM.
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  17. #17
    Regular Member carolina guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Concord, NC
    Posts
    1,790
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    basically, you're complaining that all 5 people who live in that sea of read don't get to control the vast majority of the people who live in LA and the bay area?

    I believe this goes back to a concept of "the tyranny of the majority" (aka mob rule) per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority
    Last edited by carolina guy; 03-07-2014 at 12:05 PM.
    If something is wrong for ONE person to do to another, it is still wrong if a BILLION people do it.

  18. #18
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    what theft? all the income and wealth is made in the cities, rural areas are the number 1 takers of social and infrastructure spending......
    You have no understanding of income or wealth, and didn't read my statement carefully.

    There are large mines in the cities? Cities are known for the food they produce? Raw materials for textiles magically come up from the paved streets?

    The cities rely on producers for their wealth they make off basically getting a cut of trade a vital service indeed and one I won't condemn. The ironic thing is cities become populated with people who think they are the smartest and the best they wouldn't survive a week without outside help.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  19. #19
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    what theft? all the income and wealth is made in the cities, rural areas are the number 1 takers of social and infrastructure spending......
    Let's approach this again, how long would Seattle survive if it had to pay for all its own projects, streets, stadiums, police, countless busy body officials, if it were isolated as a tax bracket and couldn't steal from the rest of the state?
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  20. #20
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    Let's approach this again, how long would Seattle survive if it had to pay for all its own projects, streets, stadiums, police, countless busy body officials, if it were isolated as a tax bracket and couldn't steal from the rest of the state?
    Seattle itself I don't know.... I would hazard a guess and say "probably"

    If King County were it's own state it would easily be able to fund services.

    the urban population is the primary market for what the miners mine and the farmers grow. not only that, but if the farmers have a bad season or don't sell all their crops, the government will either buy the surplus outright or find an overseas buyer for them, plus a myriad of government programs by those evil statists in DC and Olympia provide insurance for drought, floods, etc that no private insurer would even touch, let alone sell at the price the govt offers.

    the cities are not a bunch of people leaching off the hard work of the poor oppressed farmers. there's lots of money coming from the urbanites to the rural population, either directly in the form of buying their products, or indirectly in highway funding, education subsidies, subsidies for courts and law enforcement. of all the eastern counties the ONLY eastern counties in this state that could fund their own level of services by themselves are Grant, Spokane, and Yakima. maybe the county that the tri-cities are in could do that too........ but I haven't seen recent numbers for them.

    The cities rely on producers for their wealth they make off basically getting a cut of trade a vital service indeed and one I won't condemn. The ironic thing is cities become populated with people who think they are the smartest and the best they wouldn't survive a week without outside help.
    they are not getting a "cut off of the trade" they are PART of the trade, cities are where the textiles products are actually made, where food is processed, or where it's centrally stored to be sent out to customers, where products are imported exported, where the hospitals, banks, shopping, refining of fossil fuels, etc etc etc etc. if there was no strong urban population there would be little market for what the farmers make, in countries where either there is no urban population or the urban population is exceedingly poor, most farmers do subsistence farming, and no subsistence farmer on this planet is doing better then Americas commercial farmers.
    Last edited by EMNofSeattle; 03-07-2014 at 02:38 PM.
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran Cavalryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    308
    One very viable (partial) solution to people in the rural people feeling disenfranchised would be to change the way Electoral College votes are allocated. Virtually all states have a "winner takes all" policy wherein all of the state's electoral votes go to the candidate who got the most votes. The point of this is specifically to keep all the eggs in one basket, to the benefit of the two ruling parties. Now imagine for a moment that we did this instead: Whoever gets the most votes in the state gets 2 electoral votes (which correspond to the state's two senators), meaning that candidate gets a bit of a head-start on the other guys(s) as the prize for getting the most votes statewide. Then the electoral vote corresponding to a congressional district would be given to whoever got the most votes in that district. This process would have significantly changed the outcomes of the last three elections, even if we assume only the current two parties as players.

    However, here is where the big difference would take place: A party would no longer need to carry an entire state to have representation in the Electoral College. The Green Party (for example) can never win an entire state but it's not unreasonable to think they might win 15-20 congressional districts nationwide. Now, all of a sudden they matter because they can give those electoral votes to the candidate who will address their concerns best. They couldn't get the White House but they certainly might be able to get their man appointed Secretary of the Interior. Similarly, other "fringe" parties could achieve enough success to insure that they are heard and their concerns are addressed. Presently the two ruling parties need only address the concerns of their own largest demographic, leaving everyone else wondering how to choose a least-bad candidate.

    Of course, this will never happen because the ruling parties will see that it dies on the vine. Too bad.

  22. #22
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    Seattle itself I don't know.... I would hazard a guess and say "probably"

    If King County were it's own state it would easily be able to fund services.

    the urban population is the primary market for what the miners mine and the farmers grow. not only that, but if the farmers have a bad season or don't sell all their crops, the government will either buy the surplus outright or find an overseas buyer for them, plus a myriad of government programs by those evil statists in DC and Olympia provide insurance for drought, floods, etc that no private insurer would even touch, let alone sell at the price the govt offers.

    the cities are not a bunch of people leaching off the hard work of the poor oppressed farmers. there's lots of money coming from the urbanites to the rural population, either directly in the form of buying their products, or indirectly in highway funding, education subsidies, subsidies for courts and law enforcement. of all the eastern counties the ONLY eastern counties in this state that could fund their own level of services by themselves are Grant, Spokane, and Yakima. maybe the county that the tri-cities are in could do that too........ but I haven't seen recent numbers for them.



    they are not getting a "cut off of the trade" they are PART of the trade, cities are where the textiles products are actually made, where food is processed, or where it's centrally stored to be sent out to customers, where products are imported exported, where the hospitals, banks, shopping, refining of fossil fuels, etc etc etc etc. if there was no strong urban population there would be little market for what the farmers make, in countries where either there is no urban population or the urban population is exceedingly poor, most farmers do subsistence farming, and no subsistence farmer on this planet is doing better then Americas commercial farmers.
    You missed the point.

    Also changed the parameters city to county.

    I never said cities were working off of oppressed farmers.

    Money doesn't come from urban areas, you lack an understanding of what money is, this also changed the parameters of the discussion.

    Your twisted view of the "county" over city folk is wrong.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •