Skip to main content

View Diary: The Neo-Confederates Among Us (23 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  These folks want to refight the civil war (5+ / 0-)

    Or at least bring back the Articles of Confederation.

    "When dealing with terrorism, civil and human rights are not applicable." Egyptian military spokesman.

    by Paleo on Thu Apr 24, 2014 at 11:21:54 AM PDT

    •  I really feel that if (6+ / 0-)

      they want to hold onto 18th century theories of government that they should have to exchange their AR-15s for muskets.

      by ManfromMiddletown on Thu Apr 24, 2014 at 11:26:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  So far they don't control any state governments (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      And I suppose that secession is nowhere near a majority proposition in even the reddest of Red States.

      But if by war we mean armed conflict, I fear they're likely to get it. Push seems to keep creeping closer to shove. And at some point it's likely to get very ugly. I don't look forward to it.

      "The smartest man in the room is not always right." -Richard Holbrooke

      by Demi Moaned on Thu Apr 24, 2014 at 11:34:47 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Umm (6+ / 0-)

        that "The States: The Highest Level of Government" comes from ALEC's issue bible.  ALEC dominates the legislatures of a number of states, and has been critical in pushing the nullification, sagebrush rebellion, and other neo-confederate legislation that has wound these fools in Nevada up. There's a list of known legislative members on Sourcewatch.

        by ManfromMiddletown on Thu Apr 24, 2014 at 11:38:47 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  No doubt you're right (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          And the issue is cause for grave concern.

          Even so, I don't think the idea of secession is a truly popular idea in a single state.

          This drama is far more likely to play out as civil disobedience, which is already very bad.

          "The smartest man in the room is not always right." -Richard Holbrooke

          by Demi Moaned on Thu Apr 24, 2014 at 12:05:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Nullification (4+ / 0-)

            is a very real manifestation of this compact theory that doesn't involve armed conflict.  It's totally nuts, and totally unconstitutional.  Yet, it's something that's been on the agenda in a number of states because of ALEC.  Why try to have a rebellion when you can simply pass state laws that say federal law doesn't apply if you don't like it?  The agenda is the same, it's only the means, and they degree to which it's obvious, that differ. I didn't even mention the push for an Article V Convention.  Google it, and think about what happens if the people who believe in this neo-confederate claptrap get their hands on the Constitution.


            by ManfromMiddletown on Thu Apr 24, 2014 at 12:19:39 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I accept your overall argument (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              DavidMS, LiberalLoner

              Though I'm not that afraid of an Article V convention. The products of such a convention would still need to be ratified by 3/4 of the states.

              But the nihilism of the right wing in this country is frightening.

              "The smartest man in the room is not always right." -Richard Holbrooke

              by Demi Moaned on Thu Apr 24, 2014 at 12:38:54 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  There are no procedures in place for an Article V (0+ / 0-)


                That's the catch.  If they follow the procedures followed that the 1787 convention, that means that states will vote as  equal blocks, and delegations will be appointed by state legislatures.

                Yes, amendments require 2/3rds approval.  2/3rds of states.  Which given 2012 figures means that states with less than a 3rd of the nation's population will enough.  Moreover, as delegations will likely be chosen by legislatures, you're really only talking about whatever fraction of the state population voted in the legislature.  And even that is misleading, because we know that elected officials are more likely to honor the wishes of their donors than the people that elected them.  The devil is in these details.


                by ManfromMiddletown on Thu Apr 24, 2014 at 02:17:17 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I think you're misunderstanding (0+ / 0-)

                  It requires 2/3 approval to pass the convention, but then it needs 3/4 of the states to ratify what comes out of the convention.

                  "The smartest man in the room is not always right." -Richard Holbrooke

                  by Demi Moaned on Thu Apr 24, 2014 at 04:48:28 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  I've seen people on here advocating (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              VClib, WakeUpNeo

              for an Article V convention.  

              •  It's the details that are the problem. (0+ / 0-)

                The procedures adopted for the convention can lead to very undemocratic outcomes where small minority rewrite our nation's basic law.


                by ManfromMiddletown on Thu Apr 24, 2014 at 03:23:06 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I doubt it (0+ / 0-)

                  I think that given the electoral math, provided its right after a Democratic sweep in state legislatures a better constitution would result provided that no one slips anything too stupid in.  The right wants a constitutional convention but their entire plan relies on controlling far more state legislatures than they could realistically have majorities in.  

                  What is much more likely to happen is a long painful convention that results in a compromise that is workable but nobody loves.  

                  The best opportunity for a Constitutional Convention was during the civil war.  Afterwords the Traitor States would have been forced to sign it at bayonet point.  

                  I'm a 4 Freedoms Democrat.

                  by DavidMS on Thu Apr 24, 2014 at 07:30:26 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  did you see Rachel's show on this tonight? (0+ / 0-)

          She links it all up ...

          LBJ, Van Cliburn, Ike, Wendy Davis, Lady Bird, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, Molly Ivins, Sully Sullenburger, Drew Brees: Texas is NO Bush League!

          by BlackSheep1 on Thu Apr 24, 2014 at 09:47:22 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (150)
  • Community (65)
  • Elections (43)
  • Civil Rights (38)
  • 2016 (32)
  • Culture (32)
  • Baltimore (28)
  • Economy (27)
  • Texas (27)
  • Law (27)
  • Bernie Sanders (26)
  • Environment (26)
  • Hillary Clinton (24)
  • Labor (23)
  • Health Care (21)
  • Rescued (21)
  • Barack Obama (20)
  • Republicans (18)
  • International (18)
  • Freddie Gray (17)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site