A Case for Secession

A Case for Secession
  • 876
  • 145
  • 10

My Recent Posts

A Wish?

For over a decade, I have had a Texas Flag sticker on my vehicle… with the word “Secede” clearly printed across its face.  I remember that when I bought the sticker, I ordered two dozen.  I wanted to give a few away and keep a few for when it faded.  Within a few days I had given then all away to friends, family and co-works and had promised to order more.  I’m not alone…

 

 

This statement may lead some to believe that I hate my country; that I lack patriotism.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  But one still has to ask; is this really what I want?  Secession and thus the breakup of the greatest nation that ever was, or ever will be on this earth.

 

The complicated answer is No… and then… Yes.

 

If given a wish, is secession what I'd wish for? The short answer is No.  I would wish for the healing of these United States of America and for us to turn away from the path we're on.  A path of big government, big deep state bureaucracies, socialism, moral decay, and the degradation of individual rights, responsibility, and liberty.  I would have us turn away from the world and again be that shining city on a hill.

 

Not in the Cards

Unfortunately, this can’t happen with the state we find California and the North-East in.  We're even very close to the point of no return in the rest of the country.  If the Republic is to be saved those who hold it in disdain must be jettisoned from it.

 

What I am describing is irreconcilable differences between the left and the right and between regions of the nation.  We’ve grown apart to the point that we no longer even hope to change the other side.  Now we seek to hurt each other for the hell of it; blaming each other for the mess we find ourselves in.  It’s an abusive relationship than can’t be mended.

 

So, given the circumstances (and lack of wishes), I'm forced to instead look for plausible (though still highly unlikely).  From the perspective of the right, I want solutions to save the ideals the founding fathers gave us.  In essence, we can only hope to save the Republic by breaking apart the dyeing shell that remains around her.

 

I know this sounds harsh, with scorn for the left, but the same argument can be (and often is) flipped.

 

Case in point… Unfortunately, healing the nation can’t happen with the state we find Texas, the South, and much of the Mid-West.  They cling to the dead doctrines and bigotry of old, dead, white, men.  They refuse to be woke to the progress and possibilities of an enlightened age.  They are on the wrong side of history.  If progress is to be realized those who hold it in disdain must be jettisoned.

 

 

What I’m Calling For

Am I calling for another civil war and armed conflict to settle the issue? No.  I’m calling for a dialogue to explore the options; to explore what is in the best interest of each state (as they see it).  You might say I’m looking for an amicable divorce.  Various parties simply agreeing that we have irreconcilable differences, wishing each other the best of luck (whether we mean it or not)… and parting ways. 

 

Maybe… after some time apart, we can find it within us to be friends or at least amicable. :)  We’ve made peace and built bonds with our overbearing guardian (England) and our most bitter enemy (Japan); surely, we can eventually do it with our backwards roommates, cousins… whatever the bond.

 

OK… so I want to break apart the Union.  That could take several forms.  Do we just allow each state to decide for themselves?  Do we come up with a plan to break into three or four cultural countries that already exists within the boundaries we call the United States?  I say put all options on the table and see what we’ve got.  Step 1… start a dialogue with debates and state level referendums.

 

The Dialogue – Why the Left Should Support This:

  • You can implement that expanded social agenda you’ve always wanted. Be as European as you like.
  • You can cut the military to your hearts content (in fact, we’ll take it off your hands).
  • Open your borders as wide as you want. Tear those fences down!
  • Allow anyone you want to vote in your elections. No validation of any kind. Vote twice if your not sure how you identify.
  • Guns? Disarm the whole populace. No 2nd Amendment in your Constitution.  Pass out whistles.
  • Drugs? Completely legalize any and everything you like.
  • Israel? No more money for those $%&$%#!
  • United Nations! You’d be popular there again.
  • Climate Change Agreements! You’re all in and then some. Fossil fuels?  Gone!
  • No more 5-4 spit with your Supreme Court… you can start fresh with a 9-0 majority
  • You think you’re paying all the taxes and not getting back what you put in… no more backwards states leeching off you.

 

 

Look how close you are to achieving all of what you’ve been working for.  All you have to do is let go of fly-over country.  Just take that next step.

 

The Dialogue – Why the Right Should Support This:

  • Guys… let’s face it; we’ve lost the culture war. When a society is debating if a guy is a gal because he feels like one, it’s over. There’s no coming back from that.  We’ve got to do this for our posterity.
  • We can return to the founding principles of the founding fathers, as if the Republic were reborn from the ashes… like a phoenix.
  • We say we’re serious about the free market, now is our chance to prove it. Government can ensure fair and equal competition instead of picking the winners and losers.
  • What better way to rid ourselves of the deep state than to completely divorce from it? Let those who love it and embrace it have it. We’ll start from scratch.
  • We say we’re serious about no deficit spending, now is our chance to prove it. Our kids deserve better than enslavement through massive debt. We can start with a balanced budget amendment, day one.
  • The United Nations? Send a representative who will literally stand on his desk and piss on them. :) Then we can respectfully tell that country club of tyrants and socialists to kiss our @#$$.
  • No more race pimping. Affirmative action, racial quotas, white privilege… all that crap is tossed in the trash.
  • We can reform our schools and universities. No more indoctrination or union abuse. We can introduce market competition to ensure quality.
  • Our borders can be controlled by whatever means we see fit. Walls, fences, drones, men? We catch ‘em… we release them… on the side of the border they came from.
  • Our immigration policy can promote merit and contribution. The lottery is gone. Subversion of society through immigration policy is gone.
  • Hopefully it’s not too late and we can return to a little social and moral rationality and objectivity.

 

 

Conclusion:

None of the benefits and arguments on either side of the dialogue is complete.  These points are simply meant to give an understanding of what is possible if we separate but will remain impossible if we stay together.

 

I, for one, give up.  What we have is not fixable.  It’s time we all admit it and do what is best for the children.  A generation of two down the road, we’ll see who was right… if either of us was.

Comments

Bill H. Added Apr 8, 2018 - 9:42pm
 
TL - Looks like your hopelessly caught in the "Bubble" like some out here.
Sorry to see that. Don't allow technology to steer your thinking so much that you are no longer able to see outside of the bubble.
Pardero Added Apr 8, 2018 - 9:48pm
TexasLynn,
I agree and congratulations on a superior article. I regret that I was writing and submitting a slight effort before I saw yours. 
 
One small nitpick that causes some division on the right. We need to return as much as possible to the Founder's vision of avoiding foreign entanglements. We could start with ending all foreign aid, especially advanced weapon giveaways. To be fair, we should end foreign aid to all, with no exceptions. If a private citizen wants to donate to a foreign country, that is their business.
 
 
Johnny Fever Added Apr 8, 2018 - 11:35pm
You make it sound like everyone in California is a liberal and everyone in Texas is a conservative.  Within each state are large swaths of area/people that defy your simplistic view of the states.  Within those swaths are more differences. 
 
So where does secession end?  After we divide the country into a hundreds of little bits and start to resemble the map of Africa or the Middle East? 
 
The fact of the matter is that from a military standpoint alone, we cannot break apart and allow the other large nations of the world to bully everyone around.  Note, that’s only the military argument and an argument you didn’t mention, there are many more you didn’t even think about.
TexasLynn Added Apr 8, 2018 - 11:45pm
BH >> Sorry to see that... [TL is] hopelessly caught in the "Bubble"
 
Sorry to be such a disappointment.  Perhaps you can steer me beyond my bubble, my blind spots, and tell me exactly what I got wrong in my case for secession; and what we should do instead.
 
Am I wrong about irreconcilable differences between left and right?  Between sections of the union (north, south, east, west).  Am I wrong about the benefits (real and imagined) by each side?
 
Any rational, thought out, guidance is always helpful and appreciated.  Generalities, less so.
TexasLynn Added Apr 8, 2018 - 11:46pm
Pardero >> I agree and congratulations on a superior article.
 
Thank you.  I hope you will share your thoughts even if in a separate article.
 
Pardero >> One small nitpick that causes some division on the right. We need to return as much as possible to the Founder's vision of avoiding foreign entanglements. We could start with ending all foreign aid, especially advanced weapon giveaways.
 
These are important details that would indeed require study, debate, and compromise.  I see and share your concern.  I would only caution that in our haste we should not neglect key allies keeping an eye on the long term.  Even the founding fathers were wise enough to seek allies and treaties even before the nation was born.
 
The first intent of this article is to at least plant the seed that breaking up the Union isn't such a heresy.
 
The second is to offer a platform for discussing details (such as this one) that we may not be properly considering.
 
There is a third option.  The possibility that I'm completely mad and that we should continue to try and save the Union.
 
Pardero >> To be fair, we should end foreign aid to all, with no exceptions.
 
Aid (as it exists today)?  Yes.  End it all.  Start from scratch.
 
New mutually beneficial treaties.  Yes, we'll need those.  It's a dangerous world out there.  The leftist states will begin with the advantage of many friends.  The right, not so much.  We should choose and cultivate wisely.
 
Pardero >> If a private citizen wants to donate to a foreign country, that is their business.
 
Depends on the country and its intent towards us.
Thomas Sutrina Added Apr 9, 2018 - 12:07am
What you see is the effect of having a federal government that is one party the 'swamp.'  And within the swam is a wing that are Marxist, the Democratic Party that is driving the destruction of the Constitution and civil government.  The situation is similar to the 1820 to 1860.  The swamp is showing cracks.
 
The Marxist has a history of use the middle class and after achieving there goal discard them and even destroy them.  Well Obama lead party jumped the gun.  They have thrown the middle class union workers that are not government employees under the bus, and Trump won three union rust belt union states.  If Trump keeps reducing black unemployment they may turn also.  This happens by expelling illegal immigrants that lower wages and provide some of the ?Democratic votes.
 
Texas is the recipient of fleeing people from the strong holds of the Democratic party.  They have spend decades building a base built on welfare ghettos black and white and catering the swamp, lobbyist.  And the GOP politicians help in the latter effort.  Neither wants to stop the flood of cheep labor.  Get the border wall will only happen if Trump goes on a campaign to use citizens to demand it.   
 
The push back from California if it continues will break the back of the swamp I believe.  Only a few outside of California will make it seem like a nation decision.  Remember that the Marxist base of the Democratic party is even smaller then the GOP swamp base because the swamp is party independent.    
 
The push for a convention of states to draft Amendments to the Constitution is also driven by the response to Marxism.  The state governments have also been under the boot of the Federal government, part of the succession feeling in Texas.  Obama's failure to complete the transition has just increased the unhappiness with Washington DC.    That is a second front.
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 12:11am
JF >> You make it sound like everyone in California is a liberal and everyone in Texas is a conservative...
 
You're right, that is a generality... even within liberal and conservative states there are bastions of resistance.
 
I'm just saying let's see where we stand.  Californian leftists were seeking a referendum on secession because of Trumps election. Let's encourage that and see exactly what the percentage is.  Let Texas do the same.  Let the U.S., as a whole, discuss if we want to revisit allowing states to leave.
 
I wouldn't even make it easy to secede.  Perhaps a super-majority of the state house and senate or the same ratio in a referendum.  If there are enough conservatives in California (or liberals in Texas), it fails... if not... best of luck to each.
 
Bus is talking about the possibility such a heresy.  Those who think it's a horrible idea can state their case.
 
JF >> So where does secession end? 
 
Perhaps with serf-determination?  I've always been a big proponent of that.
 
JF >> After we divide the country into a hundreds of little bits and start to resemble the map of Africa or the Middle East?
 
If that's what we decide... OK.  I don't think that's where we would end up.  I would suspect three or four nations at the most.  That would be my personal preference.
 
JF >> The fact of the matter is that from a military standpoint alone, we cannot break apart and allow the other large nations of the world to bully everyone around.
 
So, your argument is that we are the worlds police and the rest of the world depends on us.  OK.  I'm actually more sympathetic to that argument than most on WB would be.  But how many times have we heard from both sides (left and right) that we cannot continue to be the world’s police force?  Especially when the world hates us (and attacks us) for it.
 
This would indeed cause waves and pain around the world.  That doesn't mean it's not the right decision for us or the world.  That doesn't mean we can't explore it.
 
JF >> Note, that’s only the military argument and an argument you didn’t mention, there are many more you didn’t even think about.
 
I agree.  BUT if I mentioned EVERY aspect of what this would take (fleshing out minimal details) I would have to publish a book, not an article.  I simply did my best to boil this down as much as possible.
 
Just as Pardero's observation on foreign aid considerations was valid, so is you observation on the disposition of the military.
 
I would not anticipate the process would be an overnight, snap you fingers, event.  %^&*$!  The Brits are exiting the E.U... and exactly how fast is that happening?
 
Deciding military matters could be done.  Easily?  No.  But done?  Yes.
 
Thanks for the observation and comment.
Jeffry Gilbert Added Apr 9, 2018 - 12:21am
I, for one, give up.  What we have is not fixable.  It’s time we all admit it
 
Some of us came to that conclusion earlier than others. It became obvious to me on May 4, 1970. Though just recently for you at least you made it. Acting on one's convictions is the key. 
 
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 12:25am
Thomas,
I don't necessarily disagree with anything you stated.  But boil it down for me.  Are you saying (as someone on the right) we need to continue to fight for the union; that there is hope we'll finally break the back of the deep state and the other ills foisted upon us by the left?
 
I don't see it.  We're not on the cusp of victory... nor is the left.  We're both in for decades of impasse.  Not even a constitutional convention will end this sad state of the union because the sides bickering are still the same two sides who can't even pass a $%&$%ing budget.  And we think these guys can come up with a new Constitution?
 
The Constitution isn't the problem.  The one we have is dam near perfect.  It's our not following it that's the problem.  And one breaking up the union will solve; at least for sizable percentage of us.
 
Break up the union so that the leftists are debating among themselves how to form a more perfect leftist union and the rights is doing the same; and both sides can move on.
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 12:30am
JG >> Some of us came to that conclusion earlier than others. It became obvious to me on May 4, 1970.
 
Such an exact date?  I wasn’t overly aware of much socially or politically in the early 70s.
 
JG >> Though just recently for you at least you made it.
 
I will note and remind you that I’ve been of this opinion for well over a decade.
 
JG >> Acting on one's convictions is the key. 
 
Always
Pardero Added Apr 9, 2018 - 12:51am
TexasLynn,
I am likely to be more of an isolationist. I believe treaties are a big part of the problem. 
Some "allies" are merely troublesome parasites. They deserve the right to stand on their own feet, without getting bailed out from their excesses. Perhaps they should make friends and sign treaties.
Our association with France, to secure our liberty, may have been a necessary evil.
In the words of an obscure alternative band, "We Don't Need Nobody Else."
A couple, or several confederations, forming out of the USA, would still be major economies and powers in a multi-polar world. 
Treaties and foreign entanglements have drawn us into many counterproductive conflicts. Arguably, they have wrecked the economy, and the main reason we are in the Middle East, besides geo-political concerns. We do need a fresh start. At least the progressives function as the brakes on this runaway train, sometimes. I can imagine a right wing war machine with no restraint, coming out of the West and Southwest, that would be worse than this ungovernable mess. Most of my peers are fanatical patriots that don't question the wars. As highly as I think of Wyoming people, I wouldn't want to consider a new country made up of fanatical pro-war patriots. 
We don't have erroneous misreadings of Scripture or other religious dogma causing us to blindly support destructive policies half way around the world, but the effect is the same with a blind belief in the infallibility of a leader.
The useless progressives can't even form a credible anti-war movement because the idiots think the evil Russians cost Hillary her crown. I support a multi-polar world with a strong Russia and Europe. World hegemony ushers in the New World Order, not peace. The US, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and all our lapdogs, are the new axis of evil, but it is never too late to 'repent.'
I think the Founders would be appalled if they saw the USA working towards world hegemony. I believe that they intended for us to mind our own business. We can be defensible without building bases at the borders of countries on the other side of the world. 
Pardero Added Apr 9, 2018 - 12:54am
A Republic, not an empire.
Bill H. Added Apr 9, 2018 - 1:17am
TL-
If we all have been influenced to the point of States wanting to recede, then we have forgotten what has held this country together and made it great for at least 4 generations.
Seems that the "talking heads" on both "sides" have almost reached their goal. Now that we also have a "leader" that divides us even more, that doesn't mean that anyone from either "side" has to heed his weak and feeble words.
We have one last chance in this country to keep it together and truthfully "make it great again". Certainly not by the words of Trump, but by looking outside of the "bubbles" and taking back our country so that it works for everyone. Not just what some FUCKHEAD on the radio or TV says works.
I believe that you are actually more in touch with this than many others out here.
Jeffry Gilbert Added Apr 9, 2018 - 2:37am
I will note and remind you that I’ve been of this opinion for well over a decade.
 
I avoid most of your articles as the preponderance of them are filled with that JAYsus nonsense that makes my eyes roll back. 
 
Okay, for a decade then. What action have you taken? 
 
Dino Manalis Added Apr 9, 2018 - 8:39am
We're the United States of America, we should learn to coexist and solve our problems together, not divided!
Leroy Added Apr 9, 2018 - 9:01am
Another excellent article, Lynn, and you are probably not surprised that I agree with almost all of it.  I saw over the weekend that those crazy people in South Carolina are drafting secession laws in case the federal government does a gun grab.  They're crazy enough to follow through with it.

I see also where the CEO of Twitter says that Republicans have to go.  He uses the Twitter platform to rid the world of Republicans.  He obviously conspires with Facebook and Google to do the same.  Republicans must die.  His view is that we need a supermajority in order to make progress.  The only way to achieve it is to eliminate the conservative view.  I agree with him.  The difference is that I believe in winning the hearts and minds of those with different views.  Given enough time, we will see that California doesn't work.  He does it by eliminating the conservative voices.  He takes advantage of the conservative laissez-faire attitudes.  Perhaps it is time we take off the gloves and declare Facebook, Google, and Twitter monopolies that they are.  We can make it illegal for them to discriminate based on political views.  They went too far declaring Diamond and Silk public enemies.  I think that will bite them in the butt.
Kerem Oner Added Apr 9, 2018 - 9:20am
The United States of America has outlived its intended purpose due in no little part to the progressive scourge that afflicted it for over a century now.  There is nothing wrong with the U.S.A. breaking up in to several smaller but ideologically compatible unions (or even a very loosely organized confederacy).  All deserve to live as they desire.  Let the socialist wannabes be socialists.  And those classical liberals in deep blue states like CA, IL, NY, etc can move in to a better suited state.  Same applies to progressive socialists in states like N. Dakota, WY, etc.
 
I for one am a strong supporter of the idea of exploring how the U.S. can dissolve and reorganize in such a manner to make everyone happy.
Thomas Sutrina Added Apr 9, 2018 - 9:31am
TexasLynn, the founders gave us a way to fight without guns and a civil war. Maybe it is time to try it. That is what convention of states is all about. Thirteen have already filed their state call with coordinated similar focus and climbing, two more getting close.  About 1/3 down, I believe this is the first time Article 5, amending the Constitution process, alternative approach has been taken serious.
 
I think the likelihood of congress approving a state leaving the union will only be a threat if a convention is imminent. And the reason is to create chaos that will stop the convention.  In 1860 the southern states didn't even consider asking congress because when they lost control of the house in 1858 they knew they didn't have a chance.
 
I agree we are not on the cusp of victory, but we have been given a treasure trove of ammunition by Obama and his administration jumping the gun. The belief that Hillary was the next president cause them to leave trails of crumbs everywhere.
 
The deep state is people. Simply keep up the investigations into the corruption in the Obama administration will expose the people. A few going to jail will have a great effect in changing attitudes.  Go back to FDR's rejection of public sector unions, impossible to not have a conflict of interests.   And transfer much of the functions of agencies to the states as intended by the founders, shrink the size of the deep state pool of people and their power.
 
We need to keep the House in the hands of the Republicans to continue the investigations. The Senate is slow to get the message due to the length of their term. Remember that this slow response was planned by the founders. It is a double edge sword. Progress only happens when the people are focused for more then a decade.
 
That is what happened in the 1840s and 50s. Took almost two decades to arrive at a change because the people of the north in growing numbers were against slavery and still much of congress didn't change. Republican party formed in 1854, lost its shirt in the 1856 pres race and congress races. But took the house in 1858 after the original compromise was used as a stepping stone to another compromise ~1857 which would be followed the people knew by coupitulation.
 
Now TexasLynn have we not seen similar stepping stone effect? The loss in 2016 put the Democrat into chaos much like they are today with a radical wing developing. In 1859 four parties put up candidates and Lincoln was the hands down winner as were the Republicans in elections in the northern states. He did not win the majority, 51%.  Reagan came to early and was not followed by others of the same ideology.  Trump doesn't have the ideology but understands the threat.   That is sufficient, however; Texas or Utah the leading conservative states needs to put up the next conservative candidate.  TexasLynn that should be your focus. 
Jeff Jackson Added Apr 9, 2018 - 11:24am
The idea that California needed to split into Northern California and Southern California was proposed decades ago, and none of the political class wanted much to do with it.  Splitting the state would allow the southerners to embrace the diversity they love and they could hand out all of the money until they were broke and then face the consequences, and the northerners could live happily ever after. Split the state, the time has come and is long past time it happened.
Kerem Oner Added Apr 9, 2018 - 11:27am
The problem with CA splitting in to two is that it would give Dems 2 more senators because the progressive split is not north and south in CA.  It is the coast versus the inland areas.
rycK the JFK Democrat Added Apr 9, 2018 - 11:51am
I am in for secession. [CA person in exile.]
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 12:02pm
Pardero >> I am likely to be more of an isolationist.
 
Agreed, I've never gone completely libertarian on the issue of foreign relations.  We can't ignore the troublemakers in the world until they're on our doorstep.  We were doing that prior to WWII until the Japanese made the mistake of bloodying our nose a little too soon.  Imagine they hadn't and we had just sat it out.
 
Pardero >> I believe treaties are a big part of the problem. Some "allies" are merely troublesome parasites. They deserve the right to stand on their own feet, without getting bailed out from their excesses. Perhaps they should make friends and sign treaties.
 
Still, I do see your point and sympathize with those concerns.  We have moved to another extreme when it comes to treaties and foreign aid.  I would at least concede that in 90% of these cases we are getting a raw deal; and it needs to stop.  By definition, starting new nations hits a giant reset button.
 
You and I would still probably have disagreements on new treaties (assuming we ended up in the same nation. :)  But I think we could work it out.
 
You are correct that some allies have suckled on the American tit for way too long.  Sometimes the best thing you can do for a slacker is give them a kick in the ass.
 
Pardero >> Our association with France, to secure our liberty, may have been a necessary evil.
 
I have no illusions that the French were looking after the best interest of the French at the time.  Thank goodness things have progressed so that we all have the best interest of each other in mind now. :)
 
Pardero >> A couple, or several confederations, forming out of the USA, would still be major economies and powers in a multi-polar world.
 
Exactly.  Did Russia cease to be a formidable power after the breakup of the USSR?  No.  Diminished? Sure.  But look how far they have come since.  Under Obama’s lack of leadership, they quickly filled in voids.  Today we're practically their puppets… if the leftist’s conspiracies are true. :)
 
Pardero >> Treaties and foreign entanglements have drawn us into many counterproductive conflicts. Arguably, they have wrecked the economy, and the main reason we are in the Middle East, besides geo-political concerns.
 
I agree that things are bad, though again I do see some involvement as needed.  We have done a poor job in selecting and executing our involvement.
 
Pardero >> At least the progressives function as the brakes on this runaway train, sometimes. I can imagine a right wing war machine with no restraint, coming out of the West and Southwest, that would be worse than this ungovernable mess.
 
I can see your concern.  It would be a valid consideration if/when new nations are formed.
 
Pardero >> Most of my peers are fanatical patriots that don't question the wars. As highly as I think of Wyoming people, I wouldn't want to consider a new country made up of fanatical pro-war patriots.
 
I'm probably in the middle between you and your fanatical peers; as I am between isolationists and
 
This discussion does show us that even as a new nation is build on the conservative side; there will be contention; no less than probably existed with the first constitutional convention.
 
Pardero >> We don't have erroneous misreadings of Scripture or other religious dogma causing us to blindly support destructive policies half way around the world, but the effect is the same with a blind belief in the infallibility of a leader.
 
Agreed.  I've never subscribed to that belief; mostly because my religious leanings teach of the fallibility of all men and my political beliefs that recognize that nature.
 
Pardero >> The useless progressives can't even form a credible anti-war movement because the idiots think the evil Russians cost Hillary her crown.
 
I have never seen nor ever imagined the total derangement the left is now displaying.  They make the birthers and 911 conspiracy guys look absolutely sane.
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 12:02pm
Pardero >> I support a multi-polar world with a strong Russia and Europe. World hegemony ushers in the New World Order, not peace.
 
I agree with your assessment of what hegemony brings.  I care less about who makes up the powers that prevent it; than the character of those who rule those powers.  Right now, Europe is a socialist oligarchy (and we’re not far behind), and Russia (and China) a totalitarian one; not a good omen for peace, prosperity, or liberty.
 
I forget who said it, but I hope for and look forward to the day when the lamb can lie down with the lion... as long as we are that lion. :)
 
Pardero >> The US, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and all our lapdogs, are the new axis of evil, but it is never too late to 'repent.'
 
Here we would have a bit more disagreement.  We and our allies are not perfect by any means... but in comparison to Russia, Iran, Syria and the like, we’re saints.
 
Pardero >> I think the Founders would be appalled if they saw the USA working towards world hegemony.
 
They would be appalled by many things.  The Republic was lost decades ago.  They would recognize that.
 
Pardero >> I believe that they intended for us to mind our own business. We can be defensible without building bases at the borders of countries on the other side of the world.
 
Again, thanks for the comments.  I agree that we've gone way too far in our entanglements around the world... but I can't subscribe to complete isolation.  The world is big and evil; and if we decide we just don't (or won't) care about it; the fact still remains that it cares about us.
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 12:06pm
Bill >> If we all have been influenced to the point of States wanting to recede, then we have forgotten what has held this country together and made it great for at least 4 generations.
 
What has held this nation together for at least 4 generations?  This is a sincere question. 
 
Bill >> Seems that the "talking heads" on both "sides" have almost reached their goal.
 
I can see the idea that the "talking heads" want division... but not to the point of breaking up the Union.  None (on either side) that I know of have pushed that idea.  I don't think that is "their" goal at all.
 
Bill >> Now that we also have a "leader" that divides us even more, that doesn't mean that anyone from either "side" has to heed his weak and feeble words.
 
This is part of my point concerning irreconcilable differences.  I hated Obama.  I thought he was one of the most inept Presidents to ever hold the office.  I promise you that I hated him as much as you hate Trump.  But we (the right) never went THIS nuts over the fact that he held office.  The birthers were sane in comparison to this.
 
Bill >> We have one last chance in this country to keep it together and truthfully "make it great again".
 
Would that chance include impeaching (and convicting) Trump?  What about Pence if that happens?  What other things must happen if we are to take advantage of this last chance?  Again, this is a genuine question... but I suspect your answer is more of same stuff that makes my point.  In your mind, our "one last chance" is the total surrender of the right to the left.  That's no less valid than the opposite outcome.  Both desires and struggles are again, proof it's time to go our separate ways.
 
As long as you think your side is on the cusp of winning (or even a chance of winning in the long run), there is no need to go the route I'm advocating for.  Why settle for half or part of the pie when you can have the whole thing.  Thomas too believes as you do, but for the right.  If only we can get a constitutional convention.  I was with him for decades, being very active in Republican politics in my youth.
 
But well over a decade ago, I realized the Republicans were never going to be a part of the solution; and thus, victory and setting the nation back on the right track was very, very improbable as things are.  When you give up that last hope for total victory (left or right), you can take that step towards winning a smaller victory within a smaller separate nation.
 
>> I believe that you are actually more in touch with this than many others out here.
 
Thank you.  We all have our biases, blind spots, and bubbles.  I submit that maybe one of those bubbles is in pretending there is any hope of reconciliation.
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 12:09pm
JG >> I avoid most of your articles as the preponderance of them are filled with that JAYsus nonsense that makes my eyes roll back.
 
Sorry to hear that.  I can assure you that will not abate any time soon. :)
 
JG >> Okay, for a decade then. What action have you taken?
 
Did I mention that sticker on my vehicle? :)
 
Probably not as much as I should/could have.  I didn't leave the country for sure... there is no place to go.  And I'm not quite ready to storm the capital with torches and pitchforks (since I’m looking for a peaceful transition).
 
I worked within the system for some time trying to put the right people in office and will continue to do that.  I'll also add my voice to those who advocate for going our separate ways.
 
Was leaving the country your solution?  Or was there more?
 
Any suggestions as to what you think I should do?
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 12:09pm
Dino >> We're the United States of America, we should learn to coexist and solve our problems together, not divided!
 
We should, but haven't.  When do we say (after how many decades) ... OK, let’s try something else.  Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 12:20pm
Leroy >> Another excellent article, Lynn, and you are probably not surprised that I agree with almost all of it. 
 
Thank you.  And yes, your agreement does not surprise me. 
 
Leroy >> I saw over the weekend that those crazy people in South Carolina are drafting secession laws in case the federal government does a gun grab.
 
I saw that too.  Good for them.  It does add to the debate.  But notice that their efforts will be depicted by the media as a bunch of ignorant hicks.  Leftist doing the same thing (like in California) will be depicted as a natural reaction to Trump's election and policies.
 
Leroy >> They're crazy enough to follow through with it.
 
Good for them.
 
Leroy >> I see also where the CEO of Twitter says that Republicans have to go.
 
Good for him.  He believes his side can still have the whole pie.  When he reaches the point where he realizes his side will get very little pie (as do all of us) then we can move on to the possibility of secession.
 
Leroy >> He uses the Twitter platform to rid the world of Republicans.  He obviously conspires with Facebook and Google to do the same.  Republicans must die.  His view is that we need a supermajority in order to make progress.  The only way to achieve it is to eliminate the conservative view. 
 
He (the CEO of Twitter) as well as the CEOs of Facebook and Google and Microsoft and Apple... have all created these little leftist monopolies that they use for economic and political goals. If anyone is in a position to win this culture/political war for the left, it's them.
 
Leroy >> I agree with him.  The difference is that I believe in winning the hearts and minds of those with different views... He does it by eliminating the conservative voices.  He takes advantage of the conservative laissez-faire attitudes.
 
The difference between his view and yours is this...
 
“To understand the workings of American politics, you have to understand this fundamental law: Conservatives think liberals are stupid. Liberals think conservatives are evil.” -- Charles Krauthammer
 
Stupid is cured by shedding light and opening minds to the truth.  Evil is cured by destroying it.
 
If the CEO of Twitter were right about conservatives being evil, then his reaction would be valid.  But he's not right... he's stupid (in that regard).  The fact that he (and his counterparts at other tech companies) seek to silence instead of persuading should point him to the fact that he is the monster he envisions others to be.
 
Leroy >> Given enough time, we will see that California doesn't work.
 
Agreed, but I'd just as soon they do that on their own time and dime as the Peoples Republic of California.
 
Leroy >> Perhaps it is time we take off the gloves and declare Facebook, Google, and Twitter monopolies that they are.  We can make it illegal for them to discriminate based on political views.
 
It is.  But why do I think the left will not see it our way?  And since they will be in charge of the House (if not the Senate) is a couple of years we will find ourselves in deeper stagnation.
 
Sure, the Republicans could do it between now and then; but do we really think they have the balls to act.  It would require, doing away with the filibuster rules in the Senate.  The Republicans will never be the solution to any of this.  They’re pussies (always have been).  If I give any compliment to the left, they are ruthless in their pursuit of power.
 
Leroy >> They (Facebook) went too far declaring Diamond and Silk public enemies.  I think that will bite them in the butt.
 
Was it morally wrong?  Yes.  But "too far" is a matter of subjective definition.
 
There will be a slight stink raised.  They may even reverse the decision (though I doubt it)... but what price will they actually pay?  A real bite to the butt?  I doubt it.  We'll see.  I sure hope you come back here and write me an "I told you so".
 
If there is any backlash and butt biting to happen to Facebook, it will come from the lefts irrational lashing out.  Facebook got caught up in the false narrative of the Russian collusion.  They also got caught up in allowing firms to data mine for political purposes.  Facebook's mistake was allowing both side
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 12:21pm
Facebook's mistake was allowing both sides (left and right) to do it.  Obama doing it was technical savvy... the right doing it was just short of treason.  Zuckerberg was a fool not to see that coming.  But what conservative doesn’t enjoy watching the left blindly eat their own.
Bill H. Added Apr 9, 2018 - 12:46pm
 
TL - I do not take "sides". I have voted for candidates from both parties in the past. Lately we are all presented with highly polarized candidates and all we seem to hear is highly polarized views and topics, many of which really have no political basis, but are polarized anyway to try and gain support, most of which will end up satisfying those on the very top.
I have always stated that both parties are out of touch with logic and reality, forcing all of us into convenient and comfortable bubbles. The obvious problem is the hate and division it produces as a byproduct.
We must either divert to a party that supports what is best for all people, along with the required sacrifices and tradeoffs, or watch this country dissolve into a wasted junkheap.
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 1:01pm
Bill H >> We must either divert to a party that supports what is best for all people, along with the required sacrifices and tradeoffs, or watch this country dissolve into a wasted junkheap.
 
Bill, I really do appreciate the reasoned response.  Do you really mean "a party" as in singular?  I've never considered a one-party system or a dominate party (left or right or in-between) to be a good solution.  The idea is too susceptible to abuse and corruption in my opinion.
 
I also question what is meant by "best for all the people".  How does a society come to agreement as to what that is?  For many it means socialism; for others equal opportunity through capitalism.  The definitions in-between are endless, equally diverse, and often mutually exclusive.  Speaking generally, your party that supports what is best for all the people is likely not the same as my party seeking what is best for all.
 
It gets back to when those visions are mutually exclusive and no sign of resolution is imaginable (what we have now).  We can waste away as Rome did… or let both have some measure of victory in their own state and hope something good grows from one or even both.
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 1:10pm
KO >> The United States of America has outlived its intended purpose due in no little part to the progressive scourge that afflicted it for over a century now. 
 
We agree.  And the other side believes it's all our fault for not evolving and embracing progress.
 
One of us is likely more right that the other.  But we're not going to debate this to an agreement or conclusion.  So, let's wish each other luck and move on.
 
KO >> There is nothing wrong with the U.S.A. breaking up in to several smaller but ideologically compatible unions (or even a very loosely organized confederacy).  All deserve to live as they desire. 
 
Yes!  Self-determination.
 
KO >> Let the socialist wannabes be socialists. 
 
Yes!  No hard feelings.  Best of luck to you (socialist)… hope you feel the same.
 
KO >> And those classical liberals in deep blue states like CA, IL, NY, etc can move in to a better suited state.  Same applies to progressive socialists in states like N. Dakota, WY, etc.
 
Loving my home state and country, I can see how that would be hard to do.  It would be a tough decision that all would have to make.
 
I will say that we Texans are a welcoming bunch; especially if you come here to work and contribute.
 
KO >> I for one am a strong supporter of the idea of exploring how the U.S. can dissolve and reorganize in such a manner to make everyone happy.
 
Glad you’re with me. :)  Thanks for the contribution to the thread.
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 1:23pm
Thomas,
OK... so, you're saying don't break up... there is still hope... continue the fight.  I get that.  It (that mind set) is where I was mentally for a long, long time.  Please understand that I'm no longer there and failing some massive social/political change will never return.  I would even go so far as to say I believe a change in the opposite direction is much more likely.
 
That said... I assure you that as long as I am a citizen of this nation I will fight for those things we believe in.  I think it's a doomed fight; but I will fight.
 
It gets back to my Christian beliefs (this is for your JG :) )  God does not command us to win.  He just commands us to fight and run the good race not matter what.  He has taken care of the winning part.
 
>> Texas or Utah the leading conservative states needs to put up the next conservative candidate.  TexasLynn that should be your focus.
 
I tried that last time and will again next time.  But have you noticed what we keep getting.  McCain?  Romney?  Trump?  (This is not meant to disparage Trump... I'm just saying he is no conservative… nor were the other two).
 
I'll never vote for another non-conservative candidate.  I've been told (by the Republicans) that I, as a conservative, have to settle for what they give me for way too long.  I'm done.  If the country is to go to hell, let the Dems take us there at a dead run.  I’m tired of supporting Republicans doing it at a trot.
 
And, as I stated in the article, I'm so done, I'm ready to call it quits and see if something else works.
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 1:27pm
Jeff & Kerem,
California (or any state) breaking up is a separate (if not related) issue.  I can’t say if I would support it based specifically on the Senate count.  Plus, I don’t know what the law is on the process.
 
Even if we did break up the state… we will still be in the same boat of stagnation and malaise.
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 1:29pm
RTJKKD >> I am in for secession. [CA person in exile.]
 
God bless you! I knew I could count on you.
Kerem Oner Added Apr 9, 2018 - 1:30pm
TL >> "the other side believes it's all our fault for not evolving and embracing progress"
 
Well, they are wrong.  There is no room for subjectivity here.  Embracing collectivism, which inevitably implies sacrificing individual liberties to a great extent at the expense of collective goals, has nothing to do with "progress" as they may call it.  Progressivism originally came from the Enlightenment Era, implying freedoms gained by empowering and unchaining individual greatness.  These people are downright regressive.  They have just hijacked the lexicon.
You may be too gentlemanly to call them what they are, but I will:  They are despicable locust!
Kerem Oner Added Apr 9, 2018 - 1:35pm
TL, however if CA broke off the union (as in becoming an independent country), that would be a game changer as a) Dems would not control the executive branch again for a long, long time, and b) when (not if) the state goes bankrupt, it will not drag the rest of the country down with it.  In fact, we need to encourage CA to convince IL and NJ to do the same as those also are closer to insolvency than any other state.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Apr 9, 2018 - 1:59pm
I also think that the US is somewhat lucky in that people of different persuations live largely in different areas. If there ever be another civil war, the fronts will be clean and the thing will be settled along the lines. It won't be a terrorism trail that drags on forever. Better would be  a peaceful split of course. It's also possible that the leftist cult simply mitigates, but I don't see this happen. I rather expect the US to split somewhere in the next decades. Europe will be more like Iraq with constant car bombs and stuff and people mistrusting each other as they hog in the same areas going at each other's throats.
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 2:18pm
KO >> Well, they are wrong... These people are downright regressive.  They have just hijacked the lexicon.
 
Of course, they are... but we're never going to convince them of that.  And unfortunately, they hold enough power to thwart our goals, and in reality, keep us moving in the wrong direction.  If they lacked such power, I would have not need to write this article.
 
KO >> You may be too gentlemanly to call them what they are, but I will:  They are despicable locust!
 
Yeah... that's me... gentlemanly.  If I had a nickel every time someone associated me with that particular adjective... I'd have a nickel.
 
I'm only being gentlemanly so as to persuade our leftist cousins that separation is indeed in their best interest.  If their world view where right (and I don't think it is); then it would be.  If it's wrong, they are setting themselves up for disaster.  I'm OK with that.  You reap what you sew.
 
What is important for secession to be considered is that both sides believe it's in their best interest.  If gentlemanly words help foster that belief… I’ll be gentlemanly.
 
KO >> However if CA broke off the union (as in becoming an independent country), that would be a game changer...
 
@#$%! Kerem! What are you doing!  Don't spell out the PERFECT scenario to the ones who might pull it off.  When your enemy announces his intentions to shoot himself in the foot, you smile and nod and make no reference to the pain or lack of forethought. :)
 
Now that the cat's out of the bag... I fully support California seceding all on its own.  Logistically it is the perfect solution to the woes of the nation, for all the reasons you mentioned.  If I thought the Calexit movement had any hope of success, I (and many Texans) would send them money... lots of it.  I (and many Texans) would make a pilgrimage to CA to vote in the referendum.  I would instruct my national representatives to do whatever they could to make it happen on a federal level.
 
Insolvent leftist states would be fools to leave the union; but, I've never accused the left of not being fools.  Bailouts are likely as things are now and will be even more likely as things "progress".
Jeffry Gilbert Added Apr 9, 2018 - 2:34pm
Probably not as much as I should/could have. 
 
Clearly
 
Was leaving the country your solution?
 
The solution to my needs. Others may have solutions more suitable to their circumstances. 
 
Any suggestions as to what you think I should do?
 
I can't/won't advise you for one very important reason which is your religious indoctrination. I don't understand religious people therefore any guidance I might proffer won't be helpful. I would be morally bankrupt to do so. 
 
You'd have to change your entire life and you simply are unable to do so. 
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 2:35pm
BG >> I also think that the US is somewhat lucky in that people of different persuations live largely in different areas.
 
That is still largely true, but less so every day.  Texas for example has Austin, or as those outside the capital call it, the Peoples Republic of Austin.  If Texas ever does secede we will need a controlled escort of Austin residents out of the state. :)
 
BG >> If there ever be another civil war, the fronts will be clean and the thing will be settled along the lines... Better would be a peaceful split of course.
 
I don't think this will ever reach a war stage.  We'll either do it peacefully or slouch into the Gomorrah the left is leading is down.  Like Rome, we'll mostly just collapse from within.  Barbarians (maybe the Canadians), like vultures, will swoop in and clean up the rotting remains.
 
BG >> It's also possible that the leftist cult simply mitigates, but I don't see this happen.
 
Nor do I.  It is much more likely they achieve total victory and send us hicks to re-education camps.
 
BG >> I rather expect the US to split somewhere in the next decades.
 
We won't survive that long based on the clip and direction we are headed.  Separate or die.  Now or never.
 
BG >> Europe will be more like Iraq with constant car bombs and stuff and people mistrusting each other as they hog in the same areas going at each other's throats.
 
I hate to admit it, but that's the way I see Europe going too.  It's already begun.
 
Thanks for that depressing European perspective.  Your doomed, we’re doomed… we are all in this together…
Rick W. Added Apr 9, 2018 - 2:44pm
I know this has been a long-time passion of yours, and of many Texans in particular. 
 
The first thing that comes to mind for me is: What would this new Rebel Alliance do about Medicare and Social Security? 
 
Assuming the answer is "nothing..." how would the Rebel Alliance secure all the cheap, foreign labor it would need, when 1/2 of the middle class and all of the lower class who typically fill these roles have fled to New Socialist America?
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 2:51pm
JG >> Others may have solutions (not moving away from the problem) more suitable to their circumstances.
 
Clearly. :)
 
JG >> I can't/won't advise you for one very important reason which is your religious indoctrination... You'd have to change your entire life and you simply are unable to do so.
 
Fair enough.  We all have free will.  I'm comfortable with my choices as you seem to be also.  It seems we'll judge each other accordingly.
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 3:48pm
RW >> I know this has been a long-time passion of yours, and of many Texans in particular.
 
I think it's an Republic of Texas thing, a "come and take it" thing, an Alamo thing :)
 
RW >> The first thing that comes to mind for me is: What would this new Rebel Alliance do about Medicare and Social Security?
 
From your perspective, wouldn't we be the Empire? :)
 
Medicare and Social Security (and the military and foreign relations mentioned earlier) are all details the new nations would have to work out on both sides.
 
But if I were king (which wouldn't be a bad way to start this off) ... what would I do with them?  Social Security is a Ponzi scheme which I (and anyone younger than me) find myself on the wrong end of.  Medicare is a medical welfare system. 
 
Social Security?  I'd implement a social safety net that meets basic needs regarding food, shelter, and medical.  Plan and save if you want to.  It's all part of the new "personal responsibility" initiative.  We'll even encourage you to save through the tax code and other incentives.  But, in old age (or any age) if you find yourself destitute (for whatever reason), you won't starve, freeze, or die in the gutter.  But you won't be receiving monthly cash payments/deposits either.
 
Medicare?  I would implement market solutions that would make lower levels of medical services pervasive and cheap.  Have a cold or a broken arm (or 98% of other medical needs) go to one of the many facilities (not requiring a fully licensed doctor) to get treated.  Pay the reasonable charge for the service yourself (thus restoring the connection of the person who receives the service to the person paying for it).  Need brain surgery or cancer treatment... THAT is what (now much cheaper) catastrophic insurance is for.
 
I can't write a book on the subject here and now... but I hope I've communicated the gist of what I would like to see implemented after I abdicate my throne/rule.
 
RW >> Assuming the answer is "nothing..."
 
I hope the above wouldn't be interpreted as "nothing..." but I never know what mark I’m expected to hit.
 
RW >> how would the Rebel Alliance secure all the cheap, foreign labor it would need, when 1/2 of the middle class and all of the lower class who typically fill these roles have fled to New Socialist America?
 
With the 1/2 of the middle and lower class that are industrious, entrepreneurial, and smart enough to know opportunity when they see it... who flee the New Socialist America to TexasLynnistan. :)
 
If there is a shortage (and there won't be)... it can be easily solved with targeted and controlled work visas and immigration.
 
Thanks for the comment.
Bill H. Added Apr 9, 2018 - 4:09pm
TL - At least a third party that actually looks out for the people. I would think that the ideal system would be the best of both some real old time "capitalism" with enough socialism to keep things centered. I have relatives in NZ, and it seems to me that they live in an ideal situation. Both your party and the Dems have in reality sold out to the Corporations, so everything we deal with revolves around their priorities. If people who side with either party can't see this, then they are either blind or refusing to believe.
Kerem Oner Added Apr 9, 2018 - 4:13pm
Rick W:
Medicare and SS would be privatized for future generations (with strict rules of the game enforced so those funds cannot be invested in very risky asset classes).  As to cheap foreign labor, we can import them as needed, using temporary work permits which have to be renewed every year.
John Minehan Added Apr 9, 2018 - 4:16pm
There is a US Supreme Court decision from 1869 that supports (in dicta) the right to peaceful, negotiated secession but not unilateral secession (White  v. Texas, 74 US 700).
 
Intelligent people like Thomas Wood, Jr. raise the valid point that the States, at the time of Ratification, that they could leave the Union. 
 
However, as funds are intermingled and the Federal government built works on the land of the departing state it makes absolute sense that could not be a unilateral event.
 
During the period when the Scots Independence Referendum was pending, I wondered what that would mean for my cousin Nigel's British Army pension.  If the Scots left, there would be a lot of Nigels.  If Texas leaves, there would be a whole lot of Nigels (although, more likely "Hanks" or "Sues" or "Bubas").
 
This is a lot like unwinding a common law partnership on the withdrawal of a partner or a divorce.        
Dave Volek Added Apr 9, 2018 - 4:22pm
Lynn
Excellent article. I really like the way you were able to see both sides of the fence.
 
Johnny had a good point in that nearly all states have their fair share of diehard D's and diehard R's. And Jeff and Karem suggested that California is actual three different cultures. Maybe you need to take this split further by letting each county decide which neighboring counties it wants to align to form the new nation(s).
 
But maybe Americans should give my Tiered Democratic Governance a go first. The nation need not be broken up.
Rusty Smith Added Apr 9, 2018 - 4:57pm
I think if you did what you want you'd have a lot of trouble with your borders and even national defense.
 
I'd imagine if the borders are secure enough to stop illegals  commerce will be slowed down a lot to prevent illegal immigration.  The checkpoint that currently exists between Mexico and the US is much more cumbersome than the border between any of our states and its a pain in the rear.
 
Regarding national defense, I'd imagine California might be the first not only refuse to contribute towards the evil national defense machinery, but might even allow countries like China, Russia and South Korea to have military bases on their soil, as a gesture of goodwill and trust.  You might not be comfortable with that.  You might also not be comfortable with the new government which is likely to be an extension of Mexico's government, complete with all the cultural attributes they are so well known for like massive endemic corruption.
 
I also think most of the blue states think they want to live by their own rules, but would quickly change their minds if they were forced to live within their own means.  Red states might do much better since most indigents and illegals would flock to the blue states, relieving the red states of that burden...  Well at least until the blue states were forced to admit adding poor people is not a fiscal blessing.  
 
Blue states might also end up in quite a crunch if their more affluent citizens left once they were free to tax them to death.  Chances are they will take their money with them when they leave.
 
However there is good news too, California can scream all they want and you can ignore them all you want, because they will render themselves quite defenseless by getting rid of all the guns law abiding citizens have.  
 
 
Doug Plumb Added Apr 9, 2018 - 5:04pm
The Federal Reserve is not part of the country now, its in Delaware. The problem isn't in the country and divide and conquer is a favorite strategy. It never fails.
Educate, speak in terms of law, think in terms of law and hear in terms of law. This is the voice of reason within you. Accessing this with purity is why people deprogram. Walking in the path of Christ is to do this, that is what Christ did, its what every wise man does.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Apr 9, 2018 - 5:07pm
Regarding national defense, I'd imagine California might be the first not only refuse to contribute towards the evil national defense machinery, but might even allow countries like China, Russia and South Korea to have military bases on their soil, as a gesture of goodwill and trust.  You might not be comfortable with that.  You might also not be comfortable with the new government which is likely to be an extension of Mexico's government, complete with all the cultural attributes they are so well known for like massive endemic corruption.
I wouldn't bother about that, but that is spot on. They also will have the Hamas on their ground shooting rockets across the borders. *shrug* Sorry, we didn't mean to shoot rockets. *shrug*
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 5:23pm
Bill H >> At least a third party that actually looks out for the people.
 
OK... a third-party vs a single party seems more reasonable.  I'm not sure if that was a clarification or a rethinking...
 
I personally would like to see the two-party system broken into many parties.
 
Bill H >> I would think that the ideal system would be the best of both some real old time "capitalism" with enough socialism to keep things centered.
 
I think those two terms are mutually exclusive... but understand the desire for something different.  It stands to reason that I would not be a member of the middle-of-the-road party alternative.
 
Bill H >> Both your party ...
 
Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa... I don't have a party.  I abandoned the GOP long ago; touting myself as a Constitutional Conservative.  I'm so disgusted with the GOP, I wouldn't even support their last Presidential nominee against the devil herself (Hillary Clinton).  My bonafides as an independent are secure.
 
Bill H >> ...[the GOP] and the Dems have in reality sold out to the Corporations, so everything we deal with revolves around their priorities.
 
Corporations and ideologies... with a lot of overlap.  But, yes, both parties are the problem.  And again, maybe a perfect unsolvable reason to break up the union?
 
Bill H >> If people who side with either party can't see this, then they are either blind or refusing to believe.
 
I see it Bill!  You and I at least have consensus on that.  How to go forward seems to be where we diverge.  You see a white knight (third party) coming to save the day.  I gave up on those, and want to figuratively burn it all down and see if a phoenix rises.  One (or both) of us is believing in fairy tales.
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 5:25pm
JM >> There is a US Supreme Court decision from 1869 that supports (in dicta) the right to peaceful, negotiated secession but not unilateral secession (White  v. Texas, 74 US 700).
 
Great addition.  I was aware that the court ruling existed (and knew Texas was involved), but didn't bother to research and quote it for the article.
 
JM >> Intelligent people like Thomas Wood, Jr. raise the valid point that the States, at the time of Ratification, that they could leave the Union.
 
I think that was the case and unquestioned.  For how long, I don't know.  It was then the North decided this would be an apt punishment for the South after the civil war to declare no secession was possible.  Does that settle the matter?  Obviously not.
 
JM >> as funds are intermingled and the Federal government built works on the land of the departing state it makes absolute sense that could not be a unilateral event.
 
Well... the only way it could be unilateral is for one party to essentially confiscate the property of the other.
 
I hope I've made it clear I'm only seeking peaceful, negotiated secession.
 
JM >> If Texas leaves, there would be a whole lot of Nigels (with pensions, benefits, etc).
 
Absolutely, the logistics to making it happen are enormous; but also, not an excuse to throw our hands up and declare the process impossible.  Too much paperwork and negotiation (in my opinion) is not a reason to stay together.
 
JM >> This is a lot like unwinding a common law partnership on the withdrawal of a partner or a divorce.
 
I know I used that analogy to make the point of irreconcilable differences.  It by no means infers simplicity. 
 
Perhaps we can better compare this to the divorce of two independently rich one percenters after a very long and intertwined marriage.  The kids and the dogs are the least of the negotiations. :)
Rick W. Added Apr 9, 2018 - 5:31pm
>From your perspective, wouldn't we be the Empire? :)
 
Not at all! New Socialist America would be the Empire. Centralized power, lots of meaningless jobs in support of a bloated military, cool uniforms.
The Rebel Alliance (Texas et al) would be a bunch of poorly-organized groups with charismatic leaders, more like gangs than states. Parts would be wonderful, parts would suck. (We should write a campaign on this...)
 
>But, in old age (or any age) if you find yourself destitute (for whatever reason), you won't starve, freeze, or die in the gutter. But you won't be receiving monthly cash payments/deposits either.
 
Money is remarkably efficient at meeting needs. Much easier to cut a check than arrange for rice and bean delivery. But, I hear ya. :)
 
>I hope the above wouldn't be interpreted as "nothing..." but I never know what mark I’m expected to hit.
 
No no, it's not nothing. I was assuming a more Libertarian ideal (you're on your own), and it sounds like you're pitching a more compassionate conservative thing (the church will help you, within limits, but don't get used to it).
 
>If there is a (labor) shortage (and there won't be)... it can be easily solved with targeted and controlled work visas and immigration
 
That's what we thought. :)
My main point: Running a modern country is a massively complex thing that none of us fully understand. I admire the spirit of what you propse -- sincerely -- but I think it would be a miserable century for those on either side of such a move.
For example: Where you see Medicare as a Ponzi scheme, I see it as a surprisingly efficient heath insurance agency (2% operating cost, way lower than any private insurer). Better to shore it up than throw it away, in my opinion. Privatization is no guarantee of improvement. In fact, much of the current high cost is due to the dozens of private insurers, who are incapable of negotiating lower rates, privately. Medicare, like Wal-Mart, has the biggest stick. But that's a whole 'nother conversation. :)
John Minehan Added Apr 9, 2018 - 5:32pm
I don't do contested divorce work, but colleagues that do tell me you spend a lot of time  (and the client's money) "fighting over swing sets."
 
Which is why (on top of the tyranny of the status quo) that I think we will default to a "norm of nullification" where the states will just ignore Federal Law they don't like.  The AG's attempt to enforce Federal Marijuana Laws is the test case as to how that will go.  
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 5:41pm
Dave >> Excellent article. I really like the way you were able to see both sides of the fence.
 
A few digs aside... I tried.
 
Dave >> Johnny had a good point in that nearly all states have their fair share of diehard D's and diehard R's.
 
I would hope and expect that relocation to your nation of choice is a given.  I would personally encourage the leftists to leave whatever nation Texas was part of and encourage the conservatives to relocate here.  It could work.  Of course, I don’t anticipate being the one moving…
 
Again, I would put a requirement on leaving the union at a super-majority vote of the state's voters or legislature.  It's that important of a decision.
 
Dave >> And Jeff and Kerem suggested that California is actual three different cultures.
 
I would do it on a state by state level... but allowing border and larger states to decide if they want to split as part of the process.  Again... everybody agreeing with super-majority support.
 
Dave >> But maybe Americans should give my Tiered Democratic Governance a go first. The nation need not be broken up.
 
I might have considered that an option a few days ago... but then heard that the author did not support the concept of inalienable rights.  Acknowledgment that such exists and what they are is kind-of-important when putting trust in a political system. :)
John Minehan Added Apr 9, 2018 - 5:49pm
"I would hope and expect that relocation to your nation of choice is a given.  I would personally encourage the leftists to leave whatever nation Texas was part of and encourage the conservatives to relocate here.  It could work.  Of course, I don’t anticipate being the one moving…"
 
A couple of analogous historical events come to mind, one that did not work too well (but things settled over time) and one that has seemed to work: 1) Tories fleeing to lower Canada after the Revolution;  2) the Dayton Conference in '95 where people displaced by ethnic cleansing in Bosnia got resettled and compensated.  
 
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 5:49pm
Rusty >> I think if you did what you want you'd have a lot of trouble with your borders and even national defense....
 
I do to.  Anybody who thinks this will be a cake-walk on either side (red or blue) is a fool.  I'm not saying it will be easy... just worth it in the long run.  And that's just an opinion from someone who is absolutely sure what we have isn't working and never will again.
 
Secession would go a long way in resolving a lot of problems that won't be resolved any other way.  It will also create new and even unforeseen problems.  I'm not deluding myself of this reality or trying to delude others.
 
My case is simply that, we've reached a point where we need to consider it.
John Minehan Added Apr 9, 2018 - 5:53pm
The Historian Michael Vlahos is doing a lot of work on this, although he sees conflict as likely.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Apr 9, 2018 - 6:01pm
The problem is a bit that left-wing ideology, like Islam, cannot accept other thought besides the own. So a retreat in separate areas won't happen without a fight. You think that they are good natured, but Brexit has shown that they really have a hard time to let territories go. We see it also in Spain right now. The Catalan had a vote to secede and those who initiated it are in prison or in exile now. (BTW to all who think Trump is a tyrant - would you have thought that Spain throws people into prison for organizing a ballot - they could've ignored it, but they even persecute - huh!)
Bill H. Added Apr 9, 2018 - 6:04pm
I remember very well when I was a kid that JFK managed to unite both parties. All of my friends parents loved him, even if they were staunch Republicans. Being that everyone was glued to the TV whenever he spoke, I never heard a word from his mouth that sounded partisan, and he never put down ideals of the opposing party.
This is the kind of leader I could get behind. The only candidate that I thought was even close to being reasonable in the last election was Kasich.
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 6:17pm
Rick W >> Money is remarkably efficient at meeting needs. Much easier to cut a check than arrange for rice and bean delivery.
 
My vision would be free rice and beans (figurative) would be available to everybody.  We don't have a bureaucracy to see if your "eligible".  The exorbitant cost and abuse and corruption associated with the bureaucracy can be saved.  I would even like to consider administering the benefit through churches and charities and thus a gateway to other services.  Societal norms would police the system and still provide as needed.
 
Rick W >> No no, it's not nothing. I was assuming a more Libertarian ideal...
 
I love libertarians... for their fiscal understanding... but you know I'm no libertarian.
 
Rick W >> Running a modern country is a massively complex thing that none of us fully understand. ... I think it would be a miserable century for those on either side of such a move.
 
As I stated to Rusty... I'm not deluding myself into thinking we have instant utopia or simplicity.  That will never exist on this earth.  There will be major problems but at least we can break through the log-jam we're in and give it a try.
 
Rick W >> Medicare as a Ponzi scheme.
 
No... I didn't say that did I?  I just checked... no...
 
Social Security is literally a Ponzi scheme.  Medicare is medical welfare.
 
It's a completely different topic... but a detail that would have to be worked out by new nations.
 
I think the whole problem with our medical system is government and business created.  I also think everybody is trying to solve it via the wrong avenue... insurance.  We don't have an lack of insurance problem.  We have a lack of affordable health care problem.  Why?  Because the government and the corporations have stifled the market to create this lack of affordable health care.
 
The government forces medical care to be dispensed through doctors who all have massive and expensive degrees.  There should be multiple levels of doctors... some requiring as little as an Associate’s degree in my opinion (to give shots, set bones, give basic physicals, draw blood). 
 
Well over 90% of all medical needs could be taken care of by these practitioners at much lower costs.  And there should be one of these practitioners in every other shopping center in the nation.  Given enough of them... the free market would drive down most medical costs to the point that we could afford it out of pocket.
 
The added bonus to this is that we re-introduce the relationship that is essential for the market to work.  The guy receiving the service is the guy paying for it and thus... looking for the best value for his money.
 
More specialized doctors could take care of the other 10 percent... with much more affordable insurance covering catastrophic care.  What insurance is supposed to do.
 
Rick W >> But that's a whole 'nother conversation.
 
If is... but nominally relevant to the discussion at hand.
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 6:23pm
John M >> I don't do contested divorce work, but colleagues that do tell me you spend a lot of time  (and the client's money) "fighting over swing sets."
 
A contested divorce would be the unilateral option.  That’s not on the table as far as I’m concerned. 
 
This should be more of negotiations to split the assets equitably process.
 
John M >> Which is why (on top of the tyranny of the status quo) that I think we will default to a "norm of nullification" where the states will just ignore Federal Law they don't like.
 
Yes... that is where we are heading.  Let's not go there.  Separate and we don't have to.  We each redefine the federal law to our liking. :)
Doug Plumb Added Apr 9, 2018 - 6:46pm
You can't get away from the beast by running. Its faster and more sophisticated. The beast will follow a succession and is hoping for one. Herded prey is hard to deal with - they wait until one separates from the herd and attack it. USA is still better off than Germany or England.
John Minehan Added Apr 9, 2018 - 6:47pm
"Yes... that is where we are heading.  Let's not go there.  Separate and we don't have to.  We each redefine the federal law to our liking. :)"
 
I'm not being critical, but I think brute necessity and lack of consensus is going to functionally bring us back to something like the Articles of Confederation in practice if not based on the letter of the law.
 
I think you have  a very good, rational idea but I wonder if there is enough consensus to get us to the state you suggest.
 
I tend to think we will avoid either the negative outcome of civil war as with Yugoslavia in the 1990s (which people like Michael Vlahos see as possible, if neither likely or imminent) or the positive outcome of something like the Czechoslovakians "Velvet Divorce" of the 1990s (as you suggest here).
 
It might be worth looking at those examples for TTPs and Lessons Learned.    

 
Dave Volek Added Apr 9, 2018 - 7:14pm
Lynn
The early TDG builders will put whatever inalienable rights or humanistic principles they think is required for their local TDG. I have not dictated to them what they should be. I anticipate some very interesting and useful "rights" that neither you nor I can see from this building process.
 
 
 
 
Jeff Michka Added Apr 9, 2018 - 7:34pm
Now we get Tex ass Lynn out in the open, on top of his hypocrisy, he's a traitor, not this "lovable, bulbous patriot" in love with the 2nd amendment.  He has no answers, so want the states divided to suit his political views, someone doesn't want to live with a pack of fascists like Lynn boy? Then they'd better move.  Volek hopes: The early TDG builders will put whatever inalienable rights or humanistic principles they think is required for their local TDG-What makes you think a pack of lazy fascists will empliment TDG.  I realize you need people to do this, but doubt Lynn's crowd will be interested in anything but domination and power.
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 7:40pm
BG >> The problem is a bit that left-wing ideology, like Islam, cannot accept other thought besides the own.
 
While I agree in principle to the nature of the left, I think we can get them to agree to separation if we can convince them that the cost/benefit is in their favor.  Failing that, no... they won't go for it.
 
Thus, the narrative of why the left should support it.  If I'm honest, I believe most of what they seek will be ruinous to a society.  But it's not important what I believe in this equation but rather what they believe and want.  And I am being honest in the assertion that they likely get very little of it as long as they cling to the status quo of the union.
 
BG >> You think that they are good natured, but Brexit has shown that they really have a hard time to let territories go.
 
Yeah, even the leftist Brits are ready to toss the whole thing aside for one reason or another.  The vote means nothing if they lose… everything if they win.  And loss causes reason and honor to be cast to the wind and wild conjecture to be adopted as dogma.
 
BG >> We see it also in Spain right now. The Catalan had a vote to secede and those who initiated it are in prison or in exile now.
 
I would say tsk, tsk, if not for the the rest of Europe and the U.S. and Canada... being just a step or two behind them.
 
Would it surprise me to end up a political prisoner or in a re-education camp before the end of my life... not at all.
Jeff Michka Added Apr 9, 2018 - 7:40pm
John M sez: I think you have  a very good, rational idea but I wonder if there is enough consensus to get us to the state you suggest.-looking for a general's appointment in the "new patriot army," John.  Somewhat surprised but not amazed.  How many stars you want so Lynn can promise them?  Lynn needs to get together with Billy the Nazi and his crowd of storm troopers.
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 7:51pm
Doug >> You can't get away from the beast by running. Its faster and more sophisticated. The beast will follow a succession and is hoping for one. Herded prey is hard to deal with - they wait until one separates from the herd and attack it.
 
So, that's a no to secession? :)
 
Doug >> USA is still better off than Germany or England.
 
Isn't that like saying my pig is cleaner than your pig? :)
 
I am messing with you Doug... I do appreciate the comment.
 
And now a Warning Jeff G... read no further Jaysus stuff ahead...
 
Perhaps Doug you can appreciate what I'm advocating based on what Jesus advised...
 
Matthew 18:8 (NIV) If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life maimed or crippled than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire. 9 And if your eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell.
 
Our feet are taking us (as a nation) to hell.  We need to rid ourselves of that which is causing us to stumble... however painful.  Otherwise the beast won't have to catch us... we're running straight too him.
John Minehan Added Apr 9, 2018 - 8:09pm
'John M sez: I think you have  a very good, rational idea but I wonder if there is enough consensus to get us to the state you suggest.-looking for a general's appointment in the "new patriot army," John.  Somewhat surprised but not amazed.  How many stars you want so Lynn can promise them?  Lynn needs to get together with Billy the Nazi and his crowd of storm troopers."
 
I think Lynn is suggesting something like the Czechoslovakian  "Velvet Divorce" from 1993.  As with the Scots Independence Referendum, it makes sense to seriously think about the issue.  
 
However, I'm not sure we have the consensus to do what Lynn suggests.  It seems like the Federal government will not be overthrown in a civil war nor will we come to some kind of  "Velvet Divorce," it will be cancelled for lack of interest.
 
Finally, I had enough problems with being a Field Grade!
TexasLynn Added Apr 9, 2018 - 10:54pm
JM >> I think Lynn is suggesting something like the Czechoslovakian  "Velvet Divorce" from 1993.  As with the Scots Independence Referendum, it makes sense to seriously think about the issue.
 
Thank you for getting it.
 
JM >> I think you have a very good, rational idea but I wonder if there is enough consensus to get us to the state you suggest.
 
There's not.  Not yet.  Not even in Texas right now.  It wouldn't even pass by a majority.
 
That is because the subject is still more or less taboo.  But I think bringing the subject out in the open in an honest and genuine manner might change that.  I could be wrong.  It's just a last gasp hope… something I'd like to see at least considered. 
 
If it were openly discussed and debated... and then rejected... it would still be a process of self-determination and I'd be OK with that.
 
JM >> It might be worth looking at those examples for TTPs and Lessons Learned.
 
Honest review of history is always beneficial.  Especially since we repeat it so often.
 
JM >> ... it [could] be canceled for lack of interest.
 
If it is... then 200+ years was a good run for a Republic.  I wish the next one well, if there is a next one.  :)
Doug Plumb Added Apr 10, 2018 - 7:24am
Everyone should be pointed at the problem, the Fed, rather than just running away. Successionists will get a new Fed, else not do business in the USA.
The problem is unlawful money and the solution is monetary reform, it always has been and always will be.
Kerem Oner Added Apr 10, 2018 - 8:16am
Rusty Smith:
"I'd imagine if the borders are secure enough to stop illegals  commerce will be slowed down a lot to prevent illegal immigration."
 
Does not have to slow down at all.  Heck we do not even need border wall or stringent controls to prevent illegal aliens crossing. Just eliminate welfare and replace with workfare.  Then simply institute a fool-proof national I.D. for working, voting, etc..  And finally increase penalties for hiring any illegals by 10x or more so that employing an illegal means assured bankruptcy. 
Kerem Oner Added Apr 10, 2018 - 8:22am
Benjamin:
"The problem is a bit that left-wing ideology, like Islam, cannot accept other thought besides the own. "
 
Of course they cannot accept other points of view.  No collectivist ideology can.  You see, individualism and collectivism cannot possibly coexist for too long before collectivism dominates and crushes individualism. Individual rights, as in unalienable ones, always get in the way of the collective goals.  It really is all very logical if you sit and think about it.
TexasLynn Added Apr 10, 2018 - 8:49am
Doug >> Everyone should be pointed at the problem, the Fed, rather than just running away.
 
I'll concede that the Fed is a problem... but not the only problem by a long shot justifying my cause.
 
Doug >> Successionists will get a new Fed, else not do business in the USA.
 
We don't do a lot of business with lots of nations for one reason or another.  So why would doing business with the new Peoples Republic of California be so important to us as to "get a new Fed".
TexasLynn Added Apr 10, 2018 - 8:54am
Kerem,
Very solid points on border security and control of illegal immigration.  The whole reason that the current problem exists is because the two parties benefit from illegal immigration.  The GOP for the cheap labor and the Dems for the votes.
 
I’m all in for increasing the penalties for hiring illegals… but with one caveat.  Business is required to verify legal status through the government.  It is the government’s responsibility to clear the individual for employment.  As long as the business does that, they are not liable.
 
Great comment…
TexasLynn Added Apr 10, 2018 - 8:58am
Kerem, Also, great observation on collectivism.  We’re we stand on the concept of unalienable rights today (in the U.S. and in general) is scary.  This concept so vital to freedom and liberty is now completely foreign to many.
 
When it comes right down to it, all this is about cutting out the cancer of collectivism so that the Republic can survive.
Kerem Oner Added Apr 10, 2018 - 9:13am
"I’m all in for increasing the penalties for hiring illegals… but with one caveat.  Business is required to verify legal status through the government.  It is the government’s responsibility to clear the individual for employment.  As long as the business does that, they are not liable."
 
Exactly why my steps include elimination of welfare and a national I.D. as first steps before enforcing stringent penalties on businesses.
Kerem Oner Added Apr 10, 2018 - 9:15am
Collectivism is an existential threat as an ideology.  Fabian progressives have made it that much more despicable by their methods....methods that they have perfected over the past 134 years.
Rick W. Added Apr 10, 2018 - 12:47pm
TexasLynn>Social Security is literally a Ponzi scheme.  Medicare is medical welfare.
 
My bad. It's a common conservative refrain, and I misapplied it to you. Many conservatives have called both Ponzi schemes (Rick Perry, et al). You singled out Social Security.
 
On that... no, Social Security is not a Ponzi scheme. :) A Ponzi scheme is a voluntary, misleading investment in which fake profits are paid out by new investors until the new ones can't be found, and the system collapses. The original Ponzi scheme didn't last a year. Social Security is mandatory entitlement (legal term, not derogatory term), paid for by a separate payroll tax, which has been in continuous successful operation since 1935. It's the most popular government program in American history, across party lines. 
 
And... no, Medicare is not welfare, it's socialized health insurance. You don't get the benefits for free. If you don't pay the required amount of payroll taxes into the system before you turn 65, you will not get the premium-free Part A of Medicare, and will have to pay for your coverage. 
 
You could argue that Medicaid is welfare, since the people benefiting from it typically haven't invested much in the system, but really it's a federally funded insurance plan. 
 
TexasLynn>We don't have an lack of insurance problem.  We have a lack of affordable health care problem.  Why?  Because the government and the corporations have stifled the market to create this lack of affordable health care.
 
Yeah, that's just a fundamental disagreement between us. I think we have overpriced meds and medical procedures because there's no single, heavy-hitting price negotiator, like a national health service, to drive down prices. This is why Americans drive to Canada to buy meds, and why no one can give me an estimate on what surgery will cost: It all depends on which "free market" insurer the provider is negotiating with. We need a single, heavy hitter, who can drive down prices, like a Wal-Mart. The free market has its limits. 
 
But, I'll admit, I'm not an economist or a health policy expert. This is just what makes sense to me.
 
Big picture: Kids and old people are money-losers. Always will be. A society has to figure out how to support them -- even a new Southern Utopia. :)
 
TexasLynn Added Apr 10, 2018 - 1:23pm
Rick >> On that... no, Social Security is not a Ponzi scheme. :) A Ponzi scheme is a voluntary, misleading investment in which fake profits are paid out by new investors until the new ones can't be found, and the system collapses.
 
My bad... about the only part of that description that doesn't apply to Social Security is "voluntary".
 
The key to Social Security being a Ponzi scheme is the fact that up front "investors" will get the benefits as the system slowly collapses and goes bankrupt (or more taxes or more national debt... but eventually bankrupt).  It's socialism... and it works... until you run out of other people's money; which is where we are heading very quickly.
 
Want to see the diminishing investor count with social security?  Hey you go...
 
Rick W >> The original Ponzi scheme didn't last a year.
 
Is that (less than a year) a requirement for a Ponzi scheme?  So, this one is more drawn out thanks to Uncle Sam.
 
Rick W >> Social Security is mandatory entitlement (legal term, not derogatory term), paid for by a separate payroll tax, which has been in continuous successful operation since 1935.
 
Mandatory?  Agreed.
 
Entitlement?  The word is a political term invented by the left years ago for indoctrination purposes. It’s practically newspeak. One would never challenge an "entitlement".  I guess it's legal since it has by now been written into law.
 
Paid for by a separate payroll tax?  Sure...
 
Continuous successful operation?  Meaning it hasn't gone bankrupt... yet.
 
Rick W >> It's the most popular government program in American history, across party lines.
 
So, what you're saying is that the guys on the front end of the Ponzi scheme have been happy with it?
 
Eventually, the kids paying for this thing are going to say to us old dudes... I didn't sign up for this crap and end the whole thing; probably about the time you and I are ready for our "entitlement" payments.  Then we’ll see just how legal and lawful that word really is.
 
Rick W >> And... no, Medicare is not welfare, it's socialized health insurance.
 
potato... potahto. :)
 
Rick W >> I think we have overpriced meds and medical procedures because there's no single, heavy-hitting price negotiator,
 
Yeah... we're far apart on this one.  We have overpriced everything involving health-care because the market has been completely taken out of the equation.  How can it only go so far when it's not even in the game?  When the guy receiving the product has no say, clue, interest, or input on the price of the product... you get what we have.
Rick W. Added Apr 10, 2018 - 2:03pm
TexasLynn>Want to see the diminishing investor count with social security?  target="_blank">Hey you go...
 
Yep. That's a legit concern. You're not going to like my suggestion for shoring it up. :)
TexasLynn Added Apr 10, 2018 - 2:45pm
Rick W >> Yep. That's a legit concern.
 
Yep... all my concerns are legit. :)
 
Rick W >> You're not going to like my suggestion for shoring it up. :)
 
I shudder to think. :)
rycK the JFK Democrat Added Apr 10, 2018 - 3:01pm
Texas Lynn
 
"The key to Social Security being a Ponzi scheme is the fact that up front "investors" will get the benefits as the system slowly collapses and goes bankrupt (or more taxes or more national debt... but eventually bankrupt).  It's socialism... and it works... until you run out of other people's money; which is where we are heading very quickly."
 
Precisely
 
"Social Security " will eventually encompass and eclipse all tax  revenues. That is not social and also not secure. 
Rick W. Added Apr 10, 2018 - 3:08pm
TexasLynn>I shudder to think. :)
 
Maybe not too shuddery. But I'm just in a good mood and assuming the best. 
 
We need more laborers on the tax rolls. The legit tax rolls. The kind that pay into SS/Medicare. So, we need to get the 12 million folks who are already here into the system. But, we can't even get DACA done, so I expect no progress with the current players. Maybe in 2021. 
 
Before the flame-throwing starts... I do not support citizenship for illegals. Temporary residency? Sure, as long as no felonies. Maybe a 2 year card, renewable. Permanent residency? Eventually, after screening and penalties. No citizenship, ever.
TexasLynn Added Apr 10, 2018 - 3:28pm
Rick W >> Maybe not too shuddery...
 
That could have been worse... but I also think it would be a band-aid at best... Delaying the inevitable for a year or two.
 
If I'm not mistaken, many (I'm not saying all) illegals already pay into these programs.  Fake IDs get you the job... not exclusion from the taxes. 
 
Rick W >> But, we can't even get DACA done, so I expect no progress with the current players. Maybe in 2021. 
 
DACA shouldn't get done... by itself.  I'm with Trump on this one.  You want DACA?  Then compromise.
 
Rick W >> Before the flame-throwing starts...
 
I've already suffered the slings and arrows on your behalf.  I offered a compromise immigration plan (that included DACA) much more generous than you have presented here... and was generally shot down by both sides.
 
See: A Comprehensive Immigration Compromise
 
Again... A perfect example of irreconcilable differences.
 
I fee like Dave pushing TDG about now. :)
 
Rick W. Added Apr 10, 2018 - 5:58pm
OK, OK, fine. We'll all move to Colorado and California. But no more musical theater for you. We're taking it all with us.
TexasLynn Added Apr 10, 2018 - 6:25pm
Rick W >> OK, OK, fine. We'll all move to Colorado and California.
 
Colorado?  We'll see how the negotiations go.  We may need you to keep going.  But California?  Yes.  Definitely.
 
Rick W >> But no more musical theater for you. We're taking it all with us.
 
Enjoy Hamilton and CATs to your hearts content.
 
You can have it all... but Les Misérables. 
 
That's ours.  (Of course we initially won't have anyone to perform it... though I do a pretty good Javert.) :)
 
"Do you hear the people sing?
Singing the songs of angry men?
It is the music of the people
Who will not be slaves again!
When the beating of your heart
Echoes the beating of the drums
There is a life about to start
When tomorrow comes!
 
Will you join in our crusade?
Who will be strong and stand with me?
Somewhere beyond the barricade
Is there a world you long to see?
 
Then join in the fight
That will give you the right to be free!" 
from Les Misérables (Do You Hear the People Sing?)
 
Rick W. Added Apr 10, 2018 - 6:44pm
Oh God, no, not Cats. Hamilton? I'm not really into rap. Maybe we can share Wicked.
 
Jokes aside, you hit on a funny aspect of secession (as did someone else in here... too long back to look for it): Colorado is half hippies (Boulder) and half rednecks (Colorado Springs). Texas, while not half hippie (Austin), is certainly half city-boy (Dallas-Houston-San Antonio-etc). How do you split the baby?
 
Tamara Wilhite Added Apr 10, 2018 - 6:56pm
Since California and several other states have declared themselves "sanctuaries" from both federal immigration and drug laws, other states could declare themselves sanctuaries from any other federal laws they don't like.
 
TexasLynn Added Apr 10, 2018 - 7:09pm
Rick W >> Oh God, no, not Cats.
 
See?  Be careful what you wish for. :)

Rick W >> How do you split the (diverse) baby?
 
Engage in a long and honest debate, then hold a referendum and let the chips fall where they may.  Like Brexit.
 
Assuming it passes, give the undesirables fair warning to self-deport.  I’m OK with anybody staying as long as they have the understanding that we’re not going to put up with the bullshit anymore.
 
Austin would be a special case… we’ll need to cut off all traffic out of the city so as to have an organized and mandatory relocation. :)
 
TexasLynn Added Apr 10, 2018 - 7:31pm
TW >> Since California and several other states have declared themselves "sanctuaries" from both federal immigration and drug laws, other states could declare themselves sanctuaries from any other federal laws they don't like.
 
Great point…
 
If you think about it what California is doing they are trying to have their cake (secession and not following federal laws they don’t like) and eat it too (but not really, we still get all the benefits of statehood).
 
California should have the integrity to just say “We secede, and take the good and the bad that comes with that decision.”
 
What do you want to bet the California (and the left) doesn't see it that way... Hypocrisy and double-standards are their bread and butter.
 
If we followed the lefts “logic”… imagine this alternate universe.  Texas has decided to ignore background checks for guns purchases altogether.  The governor has also shuttered all abortion clinics for not meeting medical standards imposed by state law (despite the Supreme Court ruling against the state).  This is obviously just a natural reaction to the national travesty of Hillary Clinton’s election, nay… her very existence.
 
The left believes in the rule of law and free speech in the same manner.  All is well as long as it's their rules and their law being enforced.  Other than that, the rules don't apply.  Same with speech... you're free to speak as long as they like what you say.  Stray beyond that just a little bit that they protest, riot and/or physically attack you.
 
Hillary Clinton is the perfect embodiment of the left.  Rules and laws... are for the little people.
 
Returning to the rule of law is one of the points I missed for why conservatives should support secession.
rycK the JFK Democrat Added Apr 10, 2018 - 7:55pm
TL
 
"What do you want to bet the California (and the left) doesn't see it that way... Hypocrisy and double-standards are their bread and butter."
 
They will want foreign aid and debt relief from Washington.
Katharine Otto Added Apr 10, 2018 - 8:08pm
TexasLynn,
How's about this?  Let's just evict New York and Washington DC from the union, and the rest of us can live in peace.  The Empire State and the State of Emergency produce nothing of value but consume way more than their share of food and other resources.
 
California, to me, is a coin flip.  I like the way they are standing up to the feds, myself, and they do produce food, at least.  
 
I believe there are several states that have started secession movements.  I think Vermont is another one.
 
You prompted me to re-read the Constitution.  I suggest you re-read it, too.  It is an economic document that presumes all taxpayers are federal government property.  It establishes the structure of the government and mechanism for funding, through control of all "economic narrows."  It does not obligate the government in any way to the citizens who pay its way.  The result is not a democracy or republic because of the electoral college and the Supreme Court.  The Supreme Court is not elected or representative, but it has the final word in all US law.  
rycK the JFK Democrat Added Apr 10, 2018 - 8:12pm
KO
 
"How's about this?  Let's just evict New York and Washington DC from the union, and the rest of us can live in peace."
 
You left out the Left Coast. MA, NJ and MD. We do not need to put up with their debt and social failures. 
Pardero Added Apr 10, 2018 - 9:25pm
TexasLynn,
Thank you for your detailed reply.
I was gloomy about another war looming and the evil our CIA has been up to, when I wrote that.
You have given me some optimism that a revamped Union could work, because you are far less interventionist and war hawk than the bunch that seem to run the country,no matter who is elected president.
P.S. Be sure to see Tucker Carlson's anti-Syria intervention rant on Fox or Y tube.
Pardero Added Apr 10, 2018 - 9:27pm
TexasLynn,
The right wing is the only hope to prevent more wars. Deranged progressives are blaming Russia for the witch's loss.
Jeff Michka Added Apr 10, 2018 - 9:47pm
Texass Lynn the Traitor sez: Same with speech... you're free to speak as long as they like what you say.  Stray beyond that just a little bit that they protest, riot and/or physically attack you.-Or insists the people saying things YOU don't like are "off their meds," embraces the rightist presumption supposedly knowing what meds people are on and how awful they are when not kow towing to fascist clowns like you, Texass. AND Would it surprise me to end up a political prisoner or in a re-education camp before the end of my life... not at all.-Yeah!! And while you're interned, you be forced into a same sex marriage and have a forced abortion performed on you right after your "wedding night" in the non-seg barracks. LOL
Jeff Michka Added Apr 10, 2018 - 9:56pm
Rick W sez: Oh God, no, not Cats. Hamilton? I'm not really into rap. Maybe we can share Wicked.-Hmmm...but what will be even funnier is how these breakaway nations will have things like economies, jobs...money.  After they've killed all the people that aren't just like them, they will have a hard time making it.  "Buy New Texas ego.  A bottle a day keeps common sense away."  Both John M and belatedly, Tex ass, have talked about the Czechoslovakian  "Velvet Divorce"-Hey, remember the Yugo and how it was produced in old Czecho?  May want to more closely examine the terms of divorce.
Jeffry Gilbert Added Apr 11, 2018 - 2:39am
It is the government’s responsibility to clear the individual for employment.  As long as the business does that, they are not liable.
 
Yet more business demand for gov't resources they hate and hate even more paying for.
 
Put another way, socialization of costs to ensure/enhance private profit. 
 
Hypocrites.
 
TexasLynn Added Apr 11, 2018 - 8:45am
Pardero >> ... you are far less interventionist and war hawk than the bunch that seem to run the country,no matter who is elected president.
 
See, Rick W... I'm the moderate. :)
 
I'm no isolationist by a long shot... BUT making decisions of literal life and death (our guys and their citizens) is very important.  You have to be sure (or dam close).
 
Also of paramount importance is our interest in the matter.  It is any of our business.  You and I would probably disagree on some of these questions... but it is always an important decision that needs to asked and I'm not sure it is.
 
Pardero >> Be sure to see Tucker Carlson's anti-Syria intervention rant on Fox or Y tube.
 
Don't have to.  Saw it live... and immediately thought of you and your article.  Another False Flag in Syria
 
I was particularly interested in various politicians response to him simply asking questions.  It indicated to me the willingness to assume and run into the situation blind.  MORE information is always a good thing.
 
TexasLynn Added Apr 11, 2018 - 8:55am
No Jeffery... it simply is the government's job to define and document who is a citizen and who is not for any number of reasons (voting, working, benefits, etc...).
 
The government does have responsibilities and this is one of them.  It's the 10,000 to 1 things they do that they shouldn't that is the problem.
 
You would have business punished for hiring a non-citizen that they didn't verify?  Other than asking... How would you suggest they do that outside asking the government to verify it?  And if the government says "yes" and later we find out the guy is illegal the business should still be punished?  Absurd!
TexasLynn Added Apr 11, 2018 - 8:59am
Pardero >> The right wing is the only hope to prevent more wars. Deranged progressives are blaming Russia for the witch's loss.
 
That's not much of a hope, I'll admit.  Both parties are a too far gone.  One more than the other.  They're dragging us all down... so best to just cut them loose.
 
I always knew that progressives were irrational... but I never expected this irrational.
wsucram15 Added Apr 11, 2018 - 10:09am
As Ive told you..I have family in east Texas and I have a copy of that Texas divorce decree somewhere. It was great, I had it on the bulletin board in my office for awhile and one of the supervisors made a big deal out of it ..calling it a political statement.    Which was a big no no at my company.
But you know I disagree with your idealism on the right wing thing.
Im pretty intelligent and cant go with either extreme.  I think they are both going around the bend.
TexasLynn Added Apr 11, 2018 - 10:30am
Katharine Otto, I apologize for the delay in replying to your comment.  I had to finish my homework, re-reading the Constitution. :)
 
I suspect your suggestion to evict New York and Washington DC is tongue-in-cheek that also infers that much of the nation’s problems emanate from those two places.  I couldn’t agree more.
 
As I've stated in the article, I don't want the bad roommates evicted.  I want them to voluntarily leave believing it is in the best interest of all (them in particular). :)
 
California does indeed contribute food (they are the land of fruits and nuts after all).  I just question if on the scales their contribution is a net positive.  I stated that the perfect scenario is for California to secede on its own.  The North East doing the same would be equally preferable.
 
I'm not aware of all the secession movements in various states.  The problem is that none of them are taken seriously or honestly debated.  Honest debate on the matter is where I would like to get to.  I think that would start a process that would make it happen.
 
And on the Constitution (my homework)... There are indeed many economic components to the document.  The main goal of the original document was structural with the added intent of creating checks and balances.
 
I would disagree that it does not create a Republic (a representative democracy with power in the hands of the people).  It just creates one with lot of checks and balances; not strictly concentrating on the representative side of things.  A lot of this was done through compromise.  The electoral college I believe was one of those compromises.  There were many, many others.
 
The problem is that we evolved like all democracies do... for the worse.  Less and less power is found in the hands of the people as the government grows beyond the size and scope the founders intended.
 
I think the obligation of government to citizens is found in the Bill of Rights (the first 10 Amendments).  And most of that obligation is found in the form of prevention of government abuse.  Again... we've gotten away from those founding principles.  It is well known that the Original Constitution would not have been ratified if the Bill of Rights had not been promised well in advance.  Many signers wanted the Bill of Rights codified in the original document.  Again... we see a compromise.
 
The Bill of Rights is an example of honor and integrity that existed then that we have lost.  Men said give me this (the basic Constitution) and I'll give you what you want (the Bill of Rights) later.  And they followed through on that promise strictly because of their word.
 
THAT is lost to us today.  No wonder we're in such bad shape.
 
Thank you for the comment, it forced me to delve a little deeper. :)
Dave Volek Added Apr 11, 2018 - 11:44am
Lynn
I have been thinking about this a lot. If the USA were to split based on the blue/red culture divide--and blue and reds could do their own thing, then both sides would not have benefit of a counter political movement to keep itself in some kind of balance.
 
For example, you have laid out possible consequences of the blue USA no longer being caged by red ideas. I would say the opposite is also true. For example, red USA would be more prone to let a big companies pollute to attract more investment. And in red USA, with fewer rules, would be more likely to create a culture where personal disputes are resolved by guns.
 
It may be a bad marriage, but maybe the reds and blues really need each other.
 
TexasLynn Added Apr 11, 2018 - 11:44am
Jeanne,
Yes, we've conversed enough that I remember your East Texas family.  I hope they find themselves as blessed as I am.
 
I think I've seen the "Texas divorce decree" somewhere before.  You know how stuff like that makes the rounds. If you come across it somewhere... share a link.  :)
 
When I worked for big corporations, I stepped on a lot of toes in the manner you speak.  Now that I work for a small company... I'm just one of the guys.
 
I've suspected you weren't on board with my right-wing idealism but it's nice that you finally confirmed my suspicions. :)
 
You... are my Rick W (a new recent contributor) of WB, a wild eyed moderate. (And I mean that as a compliment).  I appreciate each of you cutting me a little slack with I come down hard on you.
 
I'm OK with the my extreme bent...
 
"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." -- Barry Goldwater
 
As for interpreting "going around the bend" in a different manner.  We are all going around the same bend for now and nobody likes the direction.  I want us to self-determine our own different bends/paths; wishing each other luck as we part ways. :)
Rick W. Added Apr 11, 2018 - 11:56am
Sincere question... found myself thinking of this, over coffee:
 
I'm assuming you'd model the new Rebel Alliance's Constitution off the American Constitution, yes? If that's the case...
 
1. What would you do differently?
2. If the answer is "nothing/not much," what makes you think you won't end up with the same results, eventually?
 
Every society has conservatives and liberals, theists and atheists, city folk and rural folk. Do you imagine some kind of rural conservative plutocracy, where no liberals exist? I guarantee you, the surest way to end up with a generation of hyper-liberals is to raise them by a generation of hyper-conservatives. The 1940s created the 1960s. I say this as a parent. Everyone gets sick of their daddy's b.s., at some point. :)
TexasLynn Added Apr 11, 2018 - 12:00pm
Dave,
I'm glad I instigated a bit of reflection on the subject.  I can see the logic of your argument that we need each other.  I may not agree with it, but I can see it, entertain it, and respect it.
 
One thing that I think mitigates that argument is that even within red/blue there are shades of moderation.  And those will still exist in both environments offering influence.
 
If we honestly debate the issue of secession... I think many would support your argument and in the end, it may win out.  If it did, we would still be the better for having the discussion in the first place.
TexasLynn Added Apr 11, 2018 - 12:18pm
Rick W >> I'm assuming you'd model the new Rebel Alliance's Constitution off the American Constitution, yes?
 
Oh Yes...
 
Rick W >> 1. What would you do differently?
 
Not much... clean up (modernize) the language a bit... removing what some keep stumbling over. 
 
The 2nd Amendment would be about half its current length for example.
 
Start from scratch with Amendment 11.
 
Rick W >> 2. If the answer is "nothing/not much," what makes you think you won't end up with the same results, eventually?
 
Let me assure you of one thing that I am absolutely certain of.  We would end up with the same results (or worse), eventually.  Why... because of the fallible nature of man.  That said, if we achieved half the longevity the first experiment gave us, it would be worth it.  And maybe... maybe... the process could be repeated a third time.
 
Rick W >> Every society has conservatives and liberals, theists and atheists, city folk and rural folk. Do you imagine some kind of rural conservative plutocracy, where no liberals exist?
 
No... I envision a coming together of people whose ideas are at least close enough to each other to compromise and make the system work.  Something we no longer have.
 
I have no illusions that everybody is going to agree on everything and utopia will ensue.  The price of liberty and a functioning system is eternal attention (and vigilance).  Something else we no longer have.
 
Rick W >> I guarantee you, the surest way to end up with a generation of hyper-liberals is to raise them by a generation of hyper-conservatives. The 1940s created the 1960s.
 
I willing to take that chance based on the rut we're in.  If we create a bunch of hippies to tear it all down in the next generation... it's our own dam fault.  At least then we took a chance.  With what we have now... no chance, none.  So, what do we have to lose?  A little comfort and security?
 
Rick W >> I say this as a parent. Everyone gets sick of their daddy's b.s., at some point. :)
 
Yep... my parents were the dumbest people on the face of the planet when I was a teenager.  It's amazing how they've gotten so much smarter as I've grown older. :)
Rick W. Added Apr 11, 2018 - 12:28pm
TexasLynn>That said, if we achieved half the longevity the first experiment gave us, it would be worth it.  And maybe... maybe... the process could be repeated a third time.
 
A little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical.
 
>Yep... my parents were the dumbest people on the face of the planet when I was a teenager.  It's amazing how they've gotten so much smarter as I've grown older. :)
 
Mine too. And my dad voted for Goldwater when my mom voted for LBJ. If they can work it out, maybe we can, too.
Flying Junior Added Apr 12, 2018 - 3:15am
Secede faster, Texas.
Jeffry Gilbert Added Apr 12, 2018 - 5:00am
Secede faster, Texas.
 
Calm down FJ, you have a lot of problems right there in the land of the fruits and nuts to attend to. Get a grip. 
 
Jeff Michka Added Apr 12, 2018 - 7:31pm
Rick W sez: I'm assuming you'd model the new Rebel Alliance's Constitution off the American Constitution, yes?-Rebel Alliance is just United States of White People, and their constitution will be lifted from the current, but much shorter: just the 2nd amendment, but only for "good white people," since anyone of a different shade that's left will try and kill the good white people in their beds.  Lynn boy is just spewing body gas.  He doesn't want anything to work out but his traitorist ideas.  He smells a sucker crowd here on WB.
Jeff Michka Added Apr 12, 2018 - 7:35pm
Traitorous Tex ass Lynn sez: As I've stated in the article, I don't want the bad roommates evicted.  I want them to voluntarily leave believing it is in the best interest of all (them in particular).-Why lie to Katherine, Tex ass? Will she stop believing in your good reasoning about everything? LOL You want them to leave at gun point from your United States of White People. If they don't you'll ensure nice mass graves for not taking your advice, right, rightist?
Flying Junior Added Apr 13, 2018 - 2:38am
I was kidding about secede faster...  It was just a throw-away.  Something I read probably ten years ago.  Just last month on my Dad's birthday, I reminisced with him about a beautiful book on Walter Cronkite that I gave him for his eighty-third birthday.  Like my father, Walter Cronkite was raised in Houston Texas.  Cronkite attended the University of Texas.  Dad attended the University of North Texas, known today as NTU.  Dad was born in his father's home on 1410 Munger Street, Houston Texas in 1931.  His older brother, Glenn was born in 1926.  His little sister was born in 1936.
 
I visited the campus of NTU in 2008.  Denton is a fairly liberal town.  O/T, I just happen to be aware of at least some liberal Texans.  Democrats in Texas are a going concern.  Unless the republican crazies somehow make some inroads into the Mexican-American population, (this does not include ethnic Mexicans who have been living in Texas pre-dating the Lone Star Republic,) there is little chance of Texas remaining a red state for even eight more years.  The ethnic Mexican and Guatemalan Evangelicals may tend toward republican, I can't be sure.  That may be more of a problem in California than it is in Texas.
 
Bottom line, even if Texas and California could somehow band together and try to enlist the support of as many other Southwestern States as possible, it still would be a really shitty idea.
 
Maybe not that bad an idea?  We could call it the Lone Bear Republic.
 
Yeah man.  No kidding.  Such talk is treason just as was the Confederacy.  We need to stay together now more than ever.
Jeff Michka Added Jul 10, 2018 - 5:05pm
Ah, saving this rant from bit bucketing and it should remind people TraitorLynn earned that handle with this article and his comments.  TraitorLynn won't acknowledge his treason, and now folks will be reminded.  TraitorLynn is just a traitor.  Note:  his big move of rebellion was a bumper sticker, not romantically manning the barricades to fight the US army off over 2nd amendment "rights".  TraitorLynn needs some planning.  Where are these latter day confederates going to come up with the $$ to buy off infrastructure, public facilities they don't "own," and why would the US government not just crush the rebels as oppose to giving them military bases and weapons in there shining little nation of Traitors.  These people will be spending all their time trying to cover their own backs from people that see them as traitors, or are less than inclined to just leave this new little shithole country.  "By day, slaving for the new country, at night, killing their soldiers and appointed reps."  You stupid people think this will be "safe and peaceful???"  Or think "everybody will play along?"
TexasLynn Added Jul 10, 2018 - 5:14pm
~“. _^_ "~
~“ (____) ”~
~“(______) ”~
“ (________) ”~
(____________) ”
This has been another Jeff Michka contribution...
TexasLynn Added Jul 10, 2018 - 6:22pm
Wow... I think the Michka actually "liked" this post in an effort to get it back at the top of the WB list.  I sure hope that gives a few more people who missed it a chance to read it. :)
 
How does one thank a hate-filled moron for being a moron?  I mean, he accomplished what he intended but is too stupid to know that what he intended works out great for me (not him).
 
Go "like" all my other articles... moron. :)
 
James E. Unekis Added Jul 10, 2018 - 8:50pm
Tex,
Maybe we should attempt a balanced budget amendment again before going our own ways.  The left would shrink and die without the ability to borrow.
TexasLynn Added Jul 10, 2018 - 9:00pm
James,
Absolutely... We should try any and everything.  I'm not an optimist; too many states are well beyond hope.  Too many to ever pass such a common sense solution.
 
Such attempts are good in two ways.  If they pass we save the union.  If they fail, they prove it's time to save the ideals of the union by cutting off the cancerous regions.
Luther Wu Added Jul 10, 2018 - 11:17pm
Pardero Added Jul 10, 2018 - 11:23pm
Luther Wu,
That is hilarious!
TexasLynn Added Jul 10, 2018 - 11:48pm
LU, It is pretty funny.  It also looks a little photo-shopped to me... but then again.  I can't spell to save my life. :)
 
There was a rather lengthy debate on if we've reached the point of my prescribed medicine.  Even James U. thinks we should try something else (a balanced budget amendment) first.  He’s right that if it passed it would indeed fix the problem.  He’s wrong that we still exist in a state where it would ever pass.  I can’t blame James (or anyone else clinging to those hopeful straws) … that was where I was a decade ago.
 
I'll fight for our republic and the ideals of the founding fathers until my dying breath.  It is the least that I owe to my God and my posterity.  But, that includes realizing that if a limb is rotten with gangrene you lose the limb or die.  Pretending it’s not dead already would simply be foolish and counterproductive.
 
Certain malcontent trolls think, this realization is traitorous and cling to this post as proof.  I'd be more concerned if said person wasn't the most retarded prick I've ever encountered.
 
I invite anybody to read it and reach their own conclusion.   Leftist socialist who only seek to enslave and globalize would doubtlessly be against such action.
 
If they thought any other way about me or my ideas... THEN I'd be concerned.
rycK the JFK Democrat Added Jul 11, 2018 - 9:11am
Let us kick out some failed states from our union: MA, CA. IL, OR, MD and more. 
Luther Wu Added Jul 11, 2018 - 9:19am
"But, that includes realizing that if a limb is rotten with gangrene you lose the limb or die.  Pretending it’s not dead already would simply be foolish and counterproductive."
---
Well, up here North of the Red, we do have our opinions about you boys down there, but didn't realize you were so far gone.
Oh, wait... did I read that right?
 
 
Don't worry.
You'll have another decent football team show up, one of these days.
Atom Rider Added Jul 11, 2018 - 11:55am
My solution is to replace all the elected politicians with virtual avatars, = one person, one vote, informed voters only. Next we need to "kill all the lawyers" -Shakespeare. Next, create an interest free sovereign dollar. Next, we need to dismantle all the robots and AIs. Here's a riddle I wrote, "There's no problem without solutions ridden."
opher goodwin Added Jul 11, 2018 - 11:58am
I think we've found with Brexit that it is a. not an easy process (everything is so intertwined) b. extremely expensive c. Leaves you out in the cold with greatly diminished power d. only satisfies the lawyers and nationalists.
I wouldn't recommend it at all.
TexasLynn Added Jul 11, 2018 - 12:52pm
RtJFKD >> Let us kick out some failed states from our union:...
 
Or just let then decide to stay or go...like we do all the other states/regions.
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
Luther Wu >> Well, up here North of the Red, we do have our opinions about you boys down there, but didn't realize you were so far gone.
 
We're probably not that far gone.  I don't think my suggestion here would pass right now in any state... So maybe it's just me and a few other crazies that are this far gone.
 
But, I do think it could gain support is presented and voted on.  If that ball ever got rolling… watch out.
 
The republic (and likely western civilization) is lost... we're just in the death throws.  Secession (as described in this post) would just be a last-ditch effort to save a semblance of it.
 
Luther Wu >> You'll have another decent football team show up, one of these days.
 
I have a great team every year... fantasy football (The Angry Heisenbergs). :)
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
Atom R. >> My solution is...
 
There are lots of things/solutions that could save the union.  There are none, that the union (in its current devolved state) will ever implement.
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
Opher >> I wouldn't recommend it at all.
 
Thus, my statement "If they thought any other way about me or my ideas... THEN I'd be concerned."  So... no concerns... full steam ahead. :)
 
Opher >> I think we've found with Brexit that it is a. not an easy process (everything is so intertwined)
 
Didn't say it would be easy... just necessary for survival.  Not easy doesn't bother me in the least when it's the right thing to do.  Of course, those who are against it in the first place will always point to "not easy" as a reason to cease and desist.
 
To help you see my point... globalization won't be easy (especially with guys like me fighting it every step of the way)... should we therefore not do it in your opinion?
 
Opher >> ... b. extremely expensive
 
So, I choose between short term "expensive" or eventual insolvency (based on our current path) ... hmmmmm....
 
Opher >> ... c. Leaves you out in the cold with greatly diminished power
 
So, I choose between short term "diminished power" or eventual collapse and thus no power... hmmmmm....
 
Opher >> d. only satisfies the lawyers and nationalists.
 
I assume you just threw lawyers in there for effect unless you want to provide some detail.  In TexasLynnistan there would be a lot fewer lawyers.
 
Of course, the globalists aren't going to be happy.  That’s kind-of the point.  The other side of any decision made generally isn't.  But as a wise man once said, "Elections have consequences... so %$#@'em!" :)
Dino Manalis Added Jul 11, 2018 - 1:06pm
 Secession would be tragic, states should be prioritized, but not secession.  We just need pragmatic centrists to bring us together.
TexasLynn Added Jul 11, 2018 - 1:16pm
Dino M >> Secession would be tragic...
 
No less so than collapse.
 
The tragedy has already occurred... this is just a response to it.
 
Dino M >> ... states should be prioritized
 
Don't know what that means.
 
Dino M >> ...but not secession. 
 
Again, secession is a last ditch effort.  It's time (past time actually) for last ditch efforts.
 
Dino M >> We just need pragmatic centrists to bring us together.
 
Because history has proven that has worked before.  Centrists have never been the drivers of anything.
 
We'll have to agree to disagree on this one, Dino.
 
The Burghal Hidage Added Jul 13, 2018 - 10:01am
Tex - Texas, I think, is a unique case. Would it not simply be a reassertion of Texas National Sovereignty?
TexasLynn Added Jul 13, 2018 - 10:47am
TBH >> Texas, I think, is a unique case.
 
It is... simply because Texas, was the only state that was ever its own nation before joining the union.
 
And then again it isn't (a unique case)...
 
TBH >> Would it not simply be a reassertion of Texas National Sovereignty?
 
No, because I think Texas gave up that right when it became a state.  I do not support such an action.
 
I do support (and believe the founding fathers supported) the rights of states to leave the union.  I do not think the subject should be taboo and that we should (as a nation) discuss possibly going down that road for the good of all.
 
That said, I also think the civil and amicable process of separation should be a very deliberative and tough process... equivalent to adding a Constitutional Amendment with super majorities and all that.
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
Note that while Texas is mentioned a couple of times in the post, it's not specifically about Texas seceding.  Secession is not the goal... saving the ideals of the republic given to us by the U.S. founding fathers is the goal.  On the path we're on, those ideals will most certainly be lost.  Secession is just a desperate, last ditch effort to save those ideals in a subset of what was once the United States; and even that is no guarantee.
 
Thanks for the comment and the opportunity to expand on my proposal.
The Burghal Hidage Added Jul 13, 2018 - 1:31pm
I am agreement with you Tex. I just think that the break up is inevitable and I believe that it is already underway. I believe that rather than by some orderly and deliberative fashion it will instead occur as what happens while trying to clean up the leftovers. Those who preside over the status quo would happily drag down the republic rather than relinquish one ounce of their power. It is happening as we speak
rycK the JFK Democrat Added Jul 13, 2018 - 2:44pm
TX would make a grand republic as it once was. 
The Burghal Hidage Added Jul 13, 2018 - 4:42pm
They could demonstrate how to effectively manage immigration and secure the border. What a concept!
TexasLynn Added Jul 13, 2018 - 4:55pm
RtJFKD >> TX would make a grand republic as it once was. 
 
Amen brother.
 
"Y'all can go to hell and I will go to Texas." -- Davy Crockett said this angrily after losing his Tennessee bid for the U.S. Congress.
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
TBH >> They could demonstrate how to effectively manage immigration and secure the border. What a concept!
 
Yep... but just think, where would we start?  Now that Northern border has to be secured too. :)
 
The Burghal Hidage Added Jul 13, 2018 - 5:39pm
Well of course! Which border did you think I was talking about?
The Burghal Hidage Added Jul 13, 2018 - 5:42pm
I would envision a Tex-Ark-Oma Republic. I don't know about them coonass (that means cajun, before any of you racist police pop out). I think those boys would be better with MS and that lot. Ain't no Texan stupid enough to build a city below sea level
Mustafa Kemal Added Jul 15, 2018 - 5:08pm
Luther, how bout
This
Jeff Michka Added Jul 16, 2018 - 10:07am
Mustafa: LOL, waiting for TraitorLynn to pick up that "moran" thing and call me a moran.  Almost as good as the tea party weenines with signs saying "Keep government hands off my Medicare,"  Morans. 
TexasLynn Added Jul 16, 2018 - 10:39am
TBH,
You know, it’s a big problem in Texas in that the river just isn’t wide enough and there is little border protection to speak of.  It’s to the point that those people think they have a right just to walk on over any time they feel like it.  Don’t get me wrong, some of those people are hard workers, but some are downright dumbasses.  But then there’s their food… now THAT is something they figured out.
 
Still, if the Feds aren’t going to fix the problem then maybe we Texans need to take a stab at it.  We need check points (if not a wall) all along… the Sabine River. :)
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
Sometimes when I say I’m from East Texas, someone will ask me how close to Louisiana do I live.  My reply is generally “Close enough that we can throw rocks at Louisiana… and often do.”
rycK the JFK Democrat Added Jul 16, 2018 - 5:01pm
TexasLynn
 
The rabid left wing of the party of Democrats [sic] want chaos and drugs and sex workers from Mexico and to stuff ballot boxes for leftist candidates. They love crime and what it brings to them. 
 
 I spent some 17 years on the original Salon.dotcom/table talk as the undisputed Head Troll according the folk there and  particularly the Thread Nanny and I finally published this "jewel" as it was called by many. It has some interesting comic elements and ruffled many feathers. I received much praise for this comment despite its humorous but obvious unsavory content.
 
Liberalism is like probing a baboon's sphincter for diamonds. There is little hope of success but there are many opportunities for anger and frustration. 
 
A little mirth and sport lightens the discussions here. 
 
Liberals think and act like that. 
 
TexasLynn Added Jul 16, 2018 - 6:20pm
RtJFKD >> Liberalism is like...
 
The best humor combines a splash of derision with a kernel of truth.  Thus, that quote was of the best humor. :)  Loved it.
 
Though my comment is not so eloquently articulated; it does remind me of my observation concerning Jeff Michka... with the same flare of derision, truth, and unsavory content.
 
Jeff Michka commenting on your post is like a dog #$@%ing on your article.
 
Reading a Jeff Michka comment is like inspecting a pile of dog #$@% for something of value.
 
Replying to a Jeff Michka comment is like intentionally stepping in dog #$@%.
rycK the JFK Democrat Added Jul 17, 2018 - 10:53am
TX
 
3 great lines..........!!

Recent Articles by Writers TexasLynn follows.