Skip to main content

View Diary: White House Responds: No Secession Today Boys (211 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Succession might be worth discussing (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    raboof, Gary Norton, George Hier, DavidHW

    Any way you slice it, saying something exists in perpetuity is just an agreed upon convention. There are no physical or other unalterable constraints.

    Nowadays, the difference between conservative and liberal world views are so far removed from each other that they really define different kinds of existence. I would absolutely love it if I could live in a country without religion, evolution deniers, climate change deniers etc. Our form of representative government is so profoundly stupid that sometimes I can barely stand it.

    On the flip side, if someone wants to live their life ignoring plain facts about reality, let them form their own state and directly experience the consequences of living in that world. Why fight them?

    With today's rapid communications and rapid information dispersal, we could easily create a system of government where people vote directly for issues rather than the crap shoot of voting for a representative and hoping they don't screw you over too badly when they get to Congress. Ditch the middlemen. We don't really need them anymore.

    •  I think you may have missed the point (8+ / 0-)

      The Supreme Court was making in Texas v White. The court said that under the Constitution as it then existed the union was perpetual. That of course leaves open the option for amendments to the Constitution that could change the arrangement.

      As far as the frustrations of the operation of our government, few would disagree. However I think it is worth noting that there is no other government on the planet that has existed as long and has performed as well. Or in the words of the wag whose name escapes me now, we have the worst form of government, except for all the others.

      Further, affiant sayeth not.

      by Gary Norton on Sat Jan 12, 2013 at 01:28:47 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The Constitution is still just an agreement (6+ / 0-)

        Most Americans are born into a 225 year old system in which they had absolutely no input and exert almost no influence on it's laws or direction.

        As to change through amendments, when you strip away the jargon, amendments are really just "super" laws. A far more rational method for establishing such laws would be some sort of time based system. If a law gets majority vote for a specified number of years, it should automatically becomes an amendment. To phase out an amendment would require the opposite. Voting for its repeal by the majority for a specified number of years.

        Something like that would smooth over destructive momentary mob passions and direct issue voting would render Congress obsolete. The time based approach to laws would reduce the power of the supreme court. A people's veto could override the president, congress and the courts.

        We really could do much better.

        •  As bad as this Congress and Supreme Court are (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Gary Norton, OregonOak, a2nite, I love OCD

          I have little faith that direct democracy would be any better. After all, who put this Congress into power?

          Let us all have the strength to see the humanity in our enemies, and the courage to let them see the humanity in ourselves.

          by Nowhere Man on Sat Jan 12, 2013 at 03:16:21 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Same goes for a New Constitutional Convention (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Gary Norton, rsmpdx

            Can you imagine the nutjobs who would come out of the woodwork for THAT. Even the Founders paused when asked if they should have a New Constitutional Convention to address personal rights. They said, um, no. Let's just add the Bill of Rights as the first 10 Amendments.

            No, we are stuck, for good and ill,  with this Constitution. Anyone who doesn't like it should write up an Amendment. Easy enough to do.

            Figures don't lie, but liars do figure-Mark Twain

            by OregonOak on Sat Jan 12, 2013 at 04:09:10 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Um no we aren't stuck with anything; things arent (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              Working for the majority of people, only the evil rich just like they planned in 1789. We the people=evil rich pale males.

              •  That's a pretty CT outlook. Maybe you need (9+ / 0-)

                a moment to reflect on the fact that we've amended the Constitution in some excellent ways, including voting rights for enough women to keep the Todd Akins of the world out of office and enough POC to keep Obama in office.

                I'm really curious when people focus on how awful the world is today.  I'm on a very limited income and I have a TV, a car, a cozy little house, food, money for gas, a piano I can play anytime of the day or night, a really nice bed, a fabulous shower with hot and cold running water, heat in the winter and AC in the summer, a library full of books, a rather old Kindle, a really old iPod with 2000 of my favorite songs, lots of silence because my landlords own 10 acres, lots of wildlife to amuse my parrots, clear enough air so the stars at night can bring me to near tears and the full moon is so bright I can walk in the woods by it's light.  I'm pretty sure I have a better life than 90% of the people in the world, and you probably do too.  I'm also pretty sure I'm happier than the denizens of Wall Street are, and I really don't envy them the money and power they sell their souls to possess.  

                If everything's hopeless, why bother to worry about climate change or income inequality?  If it's that awful to live in this country, why fight for progressive candidates?  If all we do is complain about how awful it is, we deserve the awful.  If we want better, we're grownups with skills, we can make things better.

                I'm not looking for a love that will lift me up and carry me away. A love that will stroll alongside and make a few amusing comments will suffice.

                by I love OCD on Sat Jan 12, 2013 at 06:47:03 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

        •  Are you thinking of the Churchill quote? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Gary Norton, JayRaye

          "Many forms of Gov­ern­ment have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pre­tends that democ­racy is per­fect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democ­racy is the worst form of Gov­ern­ment except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…"  from Churchill by Himself page 574

          while trying to get the exact quote (which you notice Churchill actually attributes to some anonymous sage), I came across this article and these great quotes by Churchill:

          At the bot­tom of all the trib­utes paid to democ­racy is the lit­tle man, walk­ing into the lit­tle booth, with a lit­tle pen­cil, mak­ing a lit­tle cross on a lit­tle bit of paper—no amount of rhetoric or volu­mi­nous dis­cus­sion can pos­si­bly dimin­ish the over­whelm­ing impor­tance of that point. —House of Com­mons, 31 Octo­ber 1944

          How is that word “democ­racy” to be inter­preted? My idea of it is that the plain, hum­ble, com­mon man, just the ordi­nary man who keeps a wife and fam­ily, who goes off to fight for his coun­try when it is in trou­ble, goes to the poll at the appro­pri­ate time, and puts his cross on the bal­lot paper show­ing the can­di­date he wishes to be elected to Parliament—that he is the foun­da­tion of democ­racy. And it is also essen­tial to this foun­da­tion that this man or woman should do this with­out fear, and with­out any form of intim­i­da­tion or vic­tim­iza­tion. He marks his bal­lot paper in strict secrecy, and then elected rep­re­sen­ta­tives and together decide what gov­ern­ment, or even in times of stress, what form of gov­ern­ment they wish to have in their coun­try. If that is democ­racy, I salute it. I espouse it. I would work for it.” —House of Com­mons, 8 Decem­ber 1944

          Give your heart a real workout! Love your enemies!

          by moonbatlulu on Sat Jan 12, 2013 at 07:31:15 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  "or through consent of the States." (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Gary Norton, JayRaye
        There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States.
        Texas v. White explicitly left open the opportunity for a state to leave the union by consent of the other states.

        Finding a coastal state the rest of the U.S. would be willing to let go, then positioning that state for secession by consent would require so many years, so much money, so much loyalty and cohesion, and such willingness to cause the rest of the Union so much heartburn that we'd be glad to let the bastards go -- it essentially can't be done. Much too astronomical a cost in time and money for almost no benefit.

        But White did leave the possibility open fwtw.


        by raincrow on Sat Jan 12, 2013 at 06:47:54 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Texas v. White also didn't say what "consent (0+ / 0-)

        of the other states" meant.  It is entirely possible that it would be sufficient for CONgress to pass a law permitting Texas to secede under certain conditions and for the President to sign it.  Then it would be up to someone who has standing (and who would have standing if both the federal and state governments both agree on secession anyway?) to challenge it and get a ruling from the supreme court.

        You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

        by Throw The Bums Out on Sun Jan 13, 2013 at 04:26:15 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  That's an interesting theory. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      gffish, a2nite, fromcascadia

      Especially since we don't really have a representative government anymore. Everyone is bought as soon as they announce they're going to run. Like right now, our super representatives want to destroy our economy and our planet because that's what their benefactors want. I wonder if the media, without benefactors, would start providing useful information so that our votes would be pure.

      •  Your outlook is so hopeless, why do you bother to (5+ / 0-)

        be on a political blog?  Do you remember how impossible it was to win in a post-CU world?  Do you remember the gloom and doom, how many seats we would lose in Congress, how unlikely even Obama could run and win against the Kochs and the corporatists?

        Somehow the people managed to elect a really large number of very good candidates, Sheldon Adelson and the Koch's pissed away a fair amount of money, and we, the people were still heard.

        Social media, blogs, the online world is actually doing a pretty damn good job of getting the news out there, despite Fox and CNN.  

        I'd sure like to see some focus on what we're doing to win the House back in 2014, what we're doing to help get sane gun laws passed, what each of us is doing to curb global warming, how we're helping to create an economy outside the corporate structures of the last century.

        I'm not looking for a love that will lift me up and carry me away. A love that will stroll alongside and make a few amusing comments will suffice.

        by I love OCD on Sat Jan 12, 2013 at 06:54:42 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  It's a commonly understood concept (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Smoh, a2nite, shigeru, bontemps2012, tobendaro

      that rebellion, revolution and secession are morally permissible only in the face of a tyranny so great and unyielding as to give one no other way out of it. In what universe would that be the case today? Only one in which facts and logic don't apply, and you can make yours up as you please. Sorry, global warming is an undeniable fact. Evolution is an undeniable fact. The need for a robust social welfare system is an undeniable fact. Gun violence is an undeniable fact. Racism and sexism are undeniable facts. Rebelling against any of these simply isn't something that one legitimately does. Sorry, but Jeffersonian FAIL.

      "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

      by kovie on Sat Jan 12, 2013 at 01:40:18 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Um, no. (13+ / 0-)

      Individuals who want to leave the US are welcome to do so.  

      What they don't get to do is to take an entire state with them.  Aside from the fact that we fought a war over this very issue, it's also the case that no state is going to have a population that unanimously agrees on leaving the US -- and why should those of us who want to stay be held hostage by the nutcases who want to seceded?

      And that's true whether you're talking about the Republic of Texas or about Ecotopia.

      Political Compass: -6.75, -3.08

      by TexasTom on Sat Jan 12, 2013 at 03:54:24 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Secession. And I am happy if they succeed. (0+ / 0-)

      If... the machine of government... is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law. ~Henry David Thoreau, On the Duty of Civil Disobediance, 1849

      by shigeru on Sat Jan 12, 2013 at 05:25:51 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site