AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

@Cycloptichorn,

I have been paying attention, and I quoted you exactly.
You did not specify STATE, you said GROUP.

Now, if you are talking about the Confederate States, nothing would have happened to them if they had not fired on Fort Sumter first.
By doing so, they started armed conflict, not the north.

There would have been no war if the south had not started it.

1 Reply

@mysteryman,

mysteryman wrote:

I have been paying attention, and I quoted you exactly.
You did not specify STATE, you said GROUP.

Now, if you are talking about the Confederate States, nothing would have happened to them if they had not fired on Fort Sumter first.
By doing so, they started armed conflict, not the north.

There would have been no war if the south had not started it.

You guys keep telling yourselves that. The first time push came to shove, the war would have started.

Ican and I were discussing States seceding; you need to look farther back in the conversation than that. See, when you jump in to things in the middle, you often get the wrong impression about what is being discussed.

Also, you are factually incorrect; the Lakota tribe did not Secede, they declared themselves a sovereign power. Standing up and stating that you are not bound by authority is nowhere near equivalent to actually denying that same authority.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Would you instruct your soldiers (what soldiers?) to resist the federal troops, stationed in Kileen and San Antonio, to stand down when they marched into the Capital building in Austin to seize it? Texas, large as she is, has no independent ability to resist the Federal government in any way when it comes to military force. There would be no confrontation, b/c your side has nothing to fight with.

It's pretty obvious you haven't thought this through very well.

One more time! I previously posted:

ican711nm wrote:

If I were to convince the Texas state legislature to vote to secede, I would simultaneously convince them not to fire any shots at any federal fort after declaring their secession.

What I mean by that is: If I were to convince the Texas state legislature to vote to secede, I would simultaneously convince them not to fire any shots at ANYONE WHATSOEVER, after declaring their secession. In particular, I would convince them not to employ the Texas State Guard, or the Texas Rangers, or anyone else to resist any MAL-Obama assaults. I would encourage them to file their plea with the US Supreme Court simultaneously with their announcement of secession. If I have my way, Texas will do its fighting by arguing its case in the US Supreme Court.

By the way, the US troops in Fort Hood and at Robert Gray Air Field are likely to resent being ordered to conquer Austin when they know no one there will resist them.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

The first time push came to shove, the war would have started.

And you know this how?

I know you were discussing states seceding, but I responded to what you said, not what you meant.
You need to choose your words more carefully.

And if withdrawing from all treaties with the US, issuing your own passports, and The new country would issue its own passports and driving licences, and living there would be tax-free -- provided residents renounce their US citizenship, Means said.

that sure sounds like secession to me.

1 Reply

@parados,

So is it your claim that non- citizens have no right to file in federal courts?

1 Reply

@mysteryman,

mysteryman wrote:

Quote:
The first time push came to shove, the war would have started.

And you know this how?

I know you were discussing states seceding, but I responded to what you said, not what you meant.
You need to choose your words more carefully.

Well, if you knew what I meant, than your comment was useless and beside the point of the discussion - which you knew before you wrote it. A waste of time for both of us.

Quote:

And if withdrawing from all treaties with the US, issuing your own passports, and The new country would issue its own passports and driving licences, and living there would be tax-free -- provided residents renounce their US citizenship, Means said.

that sure sounds like secession to me.

Perhaps it sounds that way to you, but it isn't.

I will also remind you that your point re: the British was ill-thought out. To circle back to the original topic, Texas has no ability to maintain a secession if the US doesn't wish it to happen.

Not that this matters in the slightest, b/c the people of Texas as a whole have no desire whatsoever to secede!

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@djjd62,

djjd62 wrote:

see if i ran the circus that's not how it would work, any texans that wanted to secede could pack their bags and get the **** out of the country, the land belongs to america and therefore all those who still call themselves americans

i kinda like that idea.

1 Reply

@ican711nm,

ican711nm wrote:

Joe, the federal government does indeed have some "final say" regarding votes in federal elections.

I never said it didn't. Here's what I said:

Quote:

The Florida Supreme Court has the final say when it comes to interpreting Florida law, and the recount was purely a state matter.

Do you disagree?

1 Reply

@DontTreadOnMe,

it's gonna be my solution for quebec if i'm ever elected prime minister of canada

1 Reply

@djjd62,

The Innu of Northern Quebec are already a step ahead of you.

Since they got control of the hydro and a lot of the mineral rights in the land claims settlements, they've said they'll secede from Quebec if Quebec secedes from Canada. Quebec will have no money, in effect no economy.

The Innu plan to stay with Canada and cut Quebec loose to float away with no money. Brilliant I think.

1 Reply

@ehBeth,

Knowing all this, are Quebecois still talking about seceding from Canada?

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

it's an issue that always seems to be just under the surface

0 Replies

@parados,

Parados, If Texas were to secede, and MAL-Obama were to do nothing about it, then you would be right. But then there would be no reason for Texas to appeal to the Supreme Court. Only if MAL-Obama were to bring charges against the state legislature and/or governor would Texas have a case to bring to the USSC. I'm betting that MAL-Obama would not do nothing. I'm betting he would bring charges. If he were to do nothing, then I bet lots of other states would join Texas and also secede. Then bye, bye USA!

But if MAL-Obama is not impeached and removed, then bye, bye USA anyway!

By the way, without asking Foxfyre to agree, I've changed the meaning of my use of the acronym MAL from Modern American Liberal to Malicious American Liberal.

0 Replies

@joefromchicago,

Yes, jfc, I agree that: "The Florida Supreme Court has the final say when it comes to interpreting Florida law. However, I disagree that "the recount was purely a state matter." As I have previously posted, the 14th Amendment makes that clear:

Quote:

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_amendments_11-27.html
Amendment XIV (1868)
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Recounting some voting districts' votes, while not recounting others constitutes a denial to some voting districts the "equal protection of the laws."

1 Reply

@ican711nm,

ican711nm wrote:

Recounting some voting districts' votes, while not recounting others constitutes a denial to some voting districts the "equal protection of the laws."

Where in the fourteenth amendment does it say anything about equal protection for voting districts?

1 Reply

@joefromchicago,

joefromchicago, you asked: "Where in the fourteenth amendment does it say anything about equal protection for voting districts?"

Where in the Constitution does it say voters in voting districts are excluded from equal protection of voting laws?

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

WRONG in the extreme. The entire American way of life is based on equality, justice, and freedom, not the existence of a supreme being. You don't know much about American history, do you?Cycloptichorn

I don't know what American history class you took, but you may wish to read the Declaration of Independence, the entire declaration or foundation of the country is indeed based upon the belief in a supreme being, and what that supreme being endowed us with. A government is only instituted to assert those things intended for us by God.

The Declaration of Independence:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

You may wish to also consider the fact that our laws spring from a Judeo-Christian philosophy, which holds man to be superior to animals. In Genesis, man is instructed to have dominion over the animals and plants, we have a soul, which lower kingdoms do not have, if you believe in this basic philosophy, which it is now apparent you do not. You believe killing a worm is as bad as killing a man, evidently. You probably should not swat a mosquito, or take an antibiotic to kill germs either.

It is also interesting that one of the reasons Hitler despised Jews was their belief system was as I described above, and he also associated capitalism as the evil perpetrated onto us by the Jews, the ability to own property, etc. After all, in this belief system, man can own property, have dominion over it as described in Genesis, and herein lies the evil that Hitler considered needing eradicating. He therefore saw the need to not only eradicate the evils of greed, but the race that gave it to the world. Unless the race was also eradicated, he figured the system they brought to the world would again rear its head. His belief, only the State could be the correct arbitor and the solution for greed, to bring social justice and correct all the wrongs of the past. In short, he was the one to to do it. The saviour of Germany, and probably all of mankind.

Does this not sound familiar again in today's world? Hitler is no longer alive, but the same ideas are rearing their ugly heads again, similar with slightly different twists, but very similar indeed. Alot of it is wrapped up in the environmental / liberal movement, of which cyclops fits to a tee, he has no belief in God, he believes animals have as many rights as humans, and he believes the State is the ultimate and appropriate arbitor of social justice.

Isn't that also what Obama is all about, the Audacity of Hope, the hope in the almighty State to bring social justice, to correct all the wrongs, to fix the greed of all the evil multi-national corporations, landowners, rich people, and confiscate their ill-gotten wealth and give it to the "people," the "working class," etc. The liberal mind is becoming pretty transparent, and very predictable. And it is worlds apart from what this country was founded upon, and the people that made it great and a wonderful place to live.

0 Replies

Well done, Okie! Cyclops must be extremely uncomfortable when he views the ideas of Obuma's former pastor--The "Reverend" Wright, whose famous comment-God Damn America was followed by equally insane and typical left wing black pronouncements such as the charge that Jewish Doctors created Aids to wage war against Black people.

I wonder if Cyclops and his left wingers will petition Obuma to change the wording on the coins--In God We Trust.

If radical Socialists like Cyclops could take over the USA, we might face a scenario described so well be George Orwell in "1984"---the bizarre procedure of casting old history and writings down the "memory hole. This, of course, was an old Stalinist procedure. A picture taken in 1923 included several people which, when the picture was reproduced, mysteriously disappeared from the photo.

But, Okie, Cyclops must be stymied when he reads polls like the one below:

.

1 Reply

@genoves,

More Believe In God Than Heaven
Friday, June 18, 2004

More Americans believe in God than in angels, miracles, and even heaven. And while half attend worship services on a regular basis, a majority thinks religion plays too small a role in people’s lives today.

Fully 92 percent of Americans say they believe in God, 85 percent in heaven and 82 percent in miracles, according to the latest FOX News poll. Though belief in God has remained at about the same level, belief in the devil has increased slightly over the last few years " from 63 percent in 1997 to 71 percent today.

The national poll, conducted by Opinion Dynamics Corporation (search), shows that about a third of Americans believe in ghosts (34 percent) and an equal number in UFOs (34 percent), and about a quarter accept things like astrology (search) (29 percent), reincarnation (search) (25 percent) and witches (24 percent).

There is a gender gap on many of these subjects. Women are more likely than men to believe in almost all topics asked about in the poll, including 12 percentage points more likely to believe in miracles and eight points more likely to trust there is a heaven. The one significant exception is UFOs, with 39 percent of men compared to 30 percent of women saying they accept the existence of unidentified flying objects.

Young people are much more likely than older Americans to believe in both hell and the devil. An 86 percent majority of adults between the ages of 18 to 34 believe in hell, but that drops to 68 percent for those over age 70. Similarly, 79 percent of young people believe in the devil compared to 67 percent of the over-70 age group.

Republicans are more likely than Democrats to say they believe in God (by eight percentage points), in heaven (by 10 points), in hell (by 15 points), and considerably more likely to believe in the devil (by 17 points). Democrats are more likely than Republicans to say they believe in reincarnation (by 14 percentage points), in astrology (by 14 points), in ghosts (by eight points) and UFOs (by five points).

Overall, most Americans think religion plays too small a role in people’s lives today (69 percent), with only 15 percent saying it plays too large a role and seven percent saying “about right.”

The poll finds over a third (37 percent) say they attend church, synagogue or other place of worship at least once a week, 13 percent almost every week, 12 percent about once a month and 19 percent seldom attend. Three percent attend on holidays and 15 percent never attend

0 Replies

@mysteryman,

ican and okie have made that claim when it comes to "terrorists". Since they aren't citizens or on US soil they have no access to US courts.
If Texas seceded from the Union they would not be on US soil and not be US citizens. They would have the same rights that ican and okie claim terrorists at Gitmo have if they are correct.

2 Replies

AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know