States wanting to Secede from the USA

I dont believe they are acting like whiny children I think they just want a country where the constitution matters and government back in the role it's supposed to be in instead of a government that is trying to control everything you do

 

i think hawaii and alaska should each be their own countries. They are way to cool for us anyways.

 

The republicans are aiding the enemy that attacked the U.S. Embassy in Benghazi, by trying to destroy their own President. The GOP is the best weapon Al Qaeda has.

 

wow really Op your going to neg rep me over a pic.What's wrong don't like to hear how fuck up our government is.

 

The fanatical right wingers sound like a bunch of spoiled brats (well they actually are) that cry and run off with their football when they lose the game. Wish they would all leave and let us enjoy our wonderful country.

 

When we draw arbitrary boundaries on a map, well, they are subject to arbitration.

 

Watch the "liberal lip service" begin the next time any republicans are up for election. They will say what they need to say to WIN,but they won't mean it. It's a matter of changing basic character. Too much history with repubs to fool too many folks. Except the hard core tea partiers. They still don't know why they were rejected and are carrying on exactly the same as before the election.

 

I live is a state that is distinctly divided, east and west by geography. The western half has abundant natural resources and a sprawling urban corridor.
The eastern half has sparse rainfall and land use is mostly irrigated crops. Population density in the east is far lower than in the west. Obviously the weight of voting voice lies in the west, but urban concerns, football stadiums, urban transportation, etc., are not the same as rural concerns so the lions share of tax revenue gets devoted to the majority and the east then feels under represented. So there is a native antagonism of interest, created by geography, the cascade mountains, a natural boundary. Both climes are included in the arbitrary boundary of my state and therefor there is a natural impulse at times for natives of the east to long for their own representational government.

The same can be said of some of the counties in my state that straddle geographical divides. There are local drives at times to incorporate new counties carved from existing boundaries.

 

No takers on my Quebec offer?

 

Same kinda thing happened with the Rainbow Rapid Response kitchen at Waveland Mississippi where they fed not only FEMA workers, but also State Troopers and every other sort of first responder and were asked by FEMA to set up 5 more kitchens....

 

i dont know too much about this; for some reason the "occupiers" seem like a contradiction to me.. im talking about your pic caption.

 

Only 100k have signed the petition to secede in Texas. That's less than 1% of the population of that state. The vast majority of those wanting to secede, are those that just want to get out of paying off the national debt. They're all republi"cons".

 

A lot of them are those.

And a lot of them have little concept of statehood, nationality, government, the federal government (or the fact the texas is intirely complicet with everything it does, and then some) and all that fun stuff. They think that texas will seceede and they can walk around drunk all day and beat their slaves and shoot mexicans and various other ignorant fuckwit's concepts of all the things that you can do without the north running the show.

 

How about Isreal the 51st state pulling out, I mean how much of an embarassing thing can you take? As parents, the USA should be taking away their pocket money.. tut tut..

 

Honestly, when is the last time you really felt that "government that is trying to control everything you do"?

I would encourage/challenge you to take a step back and ask yourself which entity truly has the most influence and/or control on your daily activities - government or the private sector (i.e. energy companies/retailers/the banking and financial sector/the insurance cartel/agribusiness/mass media/)? Think about it. Then ask yourself if you think these sectors would benefit from more or less democratic government oversight (meaning oversight by people that you and I elect, democratically).

 

I've seen a couple of these types of pictures on my Facebook feed. Quite a few of warehouses that 'o' have set up.

I'm not quite sure what to think about it.

In months to come will 'o' take full credit for 'saving' all the victims of H' Sandy - or say 'Good team effort'?

 

8 of those states tried to secede once already, remind them how that turned out.

 

The Declaration of Independence was our secession from England to become United States Of America. So why is secession being made out to be something evil?At least the people pushing for a secession for trying something more then sitting on a couch like most in the United States Of America.

 

I have to take issue with some of this, for one thing, the Supreme Court cannot make anything unconstitutional, as they are not a legislative arm of the government. They can rule that something is unconstitutional, but they cannot make it so.
From wikipedia:
"The United States Supreme Court ruled unilateral secession unconstitutional while commenting that revolution or consent of the states could lead to a successful secession."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secession_in_the_United_States

Rob Vischer, the incoming Dean of the University of St. Thomas School of Law. “The Constitution does not address the question, but the Supreme Court has consistently interpreted the Constitution to have created a union that is in their words, indestructible.”
http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2012/11/14/good-question-can-a-state-secede-from-the-union/
I would argue that, since the Constitution does not address the question, then it is a viable option, since laws have to be worded in a manner that covers the issue in question. If there is no language addressing it, then there is no law in regards to it. Our judicial system is fond of reading what it wants into things.

The supreme court can say what they want, but this country was founded on revolution when the government that was regulating it turned tyrannical. If the reasons became large enough, I could see where the States could break apart. Even though the Declaration of Independence is not part of our law, it is indicative of the thought process that created this country, the pertinent part is:
[SIZE=+1]"W[/SIZE]hen, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
[SIZE=+1]W[/SIZE]e hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. "

I think that the founders found it so obvious that people can change their government when it becomes a necessity that they saw no need to add it to the constitution. Their clear statement here specifically says so. If the people who created the USA could do it, then people now days could also, if the need was great enough.

Obviously it would lead to war again, but the question of whether it is legal or not I think is answered by the Declaration of Independence, regardless of what some judges think.

Added in the edit:
I wanted to comment on the unilateral issue. I think it means that one state could not secede, but if more than one felt it necessary, it could happen.