Associated Press
I'd like to think most reasonable people can agree that casual discussion of secession is unsettling.
Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) said Monday that secession was a "deeply American principle," amid a growing number of people petitioning the White House to let their states secede from the U.S.
"Secession is a deeply American principle. This country was born through secession. Some felt it was treasonous to secede from England, but those 'traitors' became our country's greatest patriots," the former presidential candidate wrote in a post on his House website. "There is nothing treasonous or unpatriotic about wanting a federal government that is more responsive to the people it represents."
He continued: "If the possibility of secession is completely off the table there is nothing to stop the federal government from continuing to encroach on our liberties and no recourse for those who are sick and tired of it."
I suppose it's inevitable during times of intense ideological strife that, once an election season ends, those dissatisfied with the results will react with excessive rhetoric. It's not uncommon, for example, to hear isolated voices talk about moving to another country, rather than suffering through four years of elected leaders they disapprove of.
But casual talk about secession -- from elected officials, no less -- is more disconcerting. In Ron Paul's case, there's nothing especially "American" about breaking up America. It happened that one time, and if memory serves, the results were fairly devastating.
"If the possibility of secession is completely off the table there is nothing to stop the federal government from continuing to encroach on our liberties and no recourse for those who are sick and tired of it"? Actually, the recourse is called an election, and they happen in the United States with great frequency.
If voters disapprove of a governmental direction, they don't need to secede; they need to vote for candidates who'll approve a different direction. If those candidates come up short, there's another election on the horizon.
Leave a Comment:
AND is this in response to BO getting back into office as opposed to Romney??!?!? Just how much closer to RP's ideals is Romney?? I daresay Paul needs to just leave, I hear Guam is nice
It's the (very) last frontier; Stupid!
There was a satirical video about how Puerto Rico voted to become a state and the idea was to let all the Puerto Ricans come over here and let everyone who wants to "secede," to go to Puerto Rico and set up whatever government they wanted. Makes sense to me, and it would free up a lot of jobs for people who need them. Ron Paul can be their leader. They can all have their AK-147s when they walk the streets and whatever. Try his "ideas" for government and see how well it works.
Can I say how happy this post made me?? I posted on fb basically the same thing about a week ago (ok my words were a little harsher) but you'd have been amazed at how many ppl got upset and mad. Sure they were mostly from Tx & Tn but it was sad to see how so many ppl believe that seceding is their right as an american and they truly believe it would be peaceful as if the civil war never happened. Lets also bring up how militia groups have increased 10 fold since Obama got in office-be weary of those waiting for oppurtunity. That being said thank you Austin for making us remember not everyone is off their rocker in Tx.
I can understand why a Libertarian would feel estranged, especially after being shut out by the republicans at their last convention. Guess that's what they get for caucusing with conservatives. However, stamping your feet and holding your breath like a 5 year old will get you nowhere. In fact, it makes you look kinda stupid.
I don't understand the hatred for people that suggest this. When both candidates support the Patriot Act, indefinite detention of american citizens through NDAA 2012, the TSA, a bloated military industrial complex that wastes billions of dollars per year killing many people around the world, all you really have to choose from is a guy that wants to raise taxes or a guy that wants to lower them. Not too much difference, at least, not in what is very important to me. It amazes me that people were concerned with stuff like "killing big bird" whenever drone strikes are known to kill innocent civilians and even children. As much as I love Rachel for her amazing reporting, I have to disagree with her and most people commenting. I'm worried about specific freedoms that have been removed: habeas corpus is gone if you're suspected of terrorism; rights to privacy are thrown out which is made evident by the policy of social media, text and phone surveillance which the federal government carries out. The federal reserve prints money to fund the wars and other programs of the government, which causes inflation by raising the money supply, which in turn leads to every dollar being worth a little bit less. So yes, there are specific freedoms that are being encroached upon, if you pay attention.
I'm curious: how much has inflation raised since Obama became president and how much is attributable to unwarranted printing of money and how much of it is attributable to natural growth within the market? How have the invasion of privacy rights by the federal government affected you or anyone you know? When have they been exercised and how often? When was habeas corpus suspended for you and how often does this happen? And why is the NDAA a big deal when we were already doing this under the Bush Administration by Executive Order?
Honestly you're worried about government intrusion to your privacy? Sorry, but this one annoys me the most. Private businesses have been invading and negating your privacy for almost 2 decades and yet it's the big bad government- who barely ever does this- that you're afraid of? I'm more worried about the fact that Target can selectively pin advertisements to put into it's mailers and send to me (which it does) even though I haven't shopped there in years simply because they've bought all the information available about me on the Internet and compiled it. Or how about the fact that if I hack into your cell phone I can track where you've been for the past year? Or how about the fact that I can, right now in real time, figure out your name, your social security number, your address, where you work, how many children you have, relatives you're associated with, your insurance company for your home/car/apartment/healthcare, any accidents or medical conditions you have, whether you've been jailed or ever charged with a crime, whether you've changed your name, what medications you take, and the foods you consume on a daily basis- ALL from the comfort of my own home and for about $120. Oh! And don't forget sex toys! Yep I can even figure out what naughty things you do in your spare time! Again all from the comfort of my own home and WITHOUT hacking into your system. And all of this by the way is entirely legal.
Sorry I just don't get why we freak out about the government exercising invasion of privacy on a handful of issues that mostly affect criminals or terrorists, but we DON'T freak out about the constant intrusion by private business. It's a red herring if I ever saw one. You're looking at the government while the private industry sneaks into your home. Neither should be allowed in without a warrant and that's the way it should stay: so do I agree with your overall sentiment about the invasion of privacy being bad? HELL YES. But I disagree that you think suddenly and magically it's going to get better by seceding OR by complaining about government intrusion and not corporate.
The ultimate Entitlement condition...I get what I want or I leave. So in Four years they re-enter? I think Kindergartners have a better concept of the world then these jokers.
Paul has always been an idiot but now he's just crazy. Good thing he's retiring, a Congressman for how many terms and he still doesn't know secession is treason? Glad he's leaving the stage, once he's gone can we please stop paying attention to his faux libertarianism?
here's a thought. Treat all those recommending succesion as illegal immigrants - which technically they will be. Let us see how they like self-deportation.
humm, I was just wondering how much federal money Texas gets each year ? i.e: medicare, medicaid, food stamps, money of education, money for new roads/bridges, student loans to Texas residents, money for Texas national guard units, money for military bases in Texas, FEMA money, money for DOD contracts ??? I wonder how Texas would react to taking away ALL that money ?
: o
Oh yea! http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/16/derrick-belcher-alabama-secession-petition-topless-carwash_n_2143456.html
TRAITORS!
How would a state that seceeds deal with a Hurricane Sandy or a terrorist attack. What would NY and NJ have done without the Federal Government.
We all learn to deal with disappointments in life like candidates that don't get elected. Hey, I want George Clooney but I've learned to deal with the fact that he doesn't want me!
For all of you throwing around the term "treason"
trea·son/ˈtrēzən/
Noun:
So, how is attempting to leave a group considered an act of aggression or betrayal?
I'll admit, most of the people suggesting it are probably doing it out of stupid reasons. However, the fact that some of you are talking about charging them with treason makes me wonder why you feel so aggressively. I can only assume you are equating this with the civil war. But none of the states are trying to pursue racist legislation. Many are probably doing it because of the rate of spending by the federal government, which is also a silly reason.
I think that there is no political hope for getting the US to end its assault on personal liberties through the Patriot Act, NDAA 2012 or FISA, if you don't know what those are, try googling them before you say there are no attacks on personal liberty.
As others have said here (in this and other threads) nobody would call it treason just because they want to leave, the problem comes when they want to take the land and the Federal assets (like military bases) with them. And, of course, leave behind their part of the national debt.
Where to begin...
Let's start with your definition of treason. It's wrong. The definition of Treason in the US is defined by the Constitution. It is defined in Article 3 Section 3 Subsection 1 as such: "Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."
Two: There is no exit clause from the Constitution. There are ways to join, but no ways to leave. Therefore any secession is open insurrection and rebellion against the US Government. It's not hard at all to get to treason as defined by the Constitution from there. Especially as these states are going to demand the 'return' of lands that do not actually belong to them any more as the Constitution give the Federal Government to be a independent land owner.
Three: Your understanding of the Civil War is pitiful at best. The Civil War was started over slavery, but it was fought over much much more. It was fought as the armed conflict portion to resolve the ideological conflicts from the original Federalist Movement. The states in secession believed that they did not have to obey the laws Federal Government, and indeed the Constitution itself at times, if they did not like the laws of the Federal Government and rules in the Constitution. Indeed the issue of slavery might not even have been resolved by the Civil War if the it had ended before The Emancipation Proclamation and the 13th Amendment were issued or passed respectively.
Not to mention that your grievances with the federal government don't amount to you having the right to take political land from the federal government or other assets belonging to the government.
The Southern antebellum states are the strongest advocates of secession from the union, and have been since the Civil War. Ron Paul should be flying Rebel Colors when he says that it is normal! Long live the South!!!
Ron Paul is cool. Fact is though that if Texas succeeded, or the south for that matter.,. I for one would be glad! Let them have their way, no unions, no abortion, no evolution, no federal subsidies for their oil or its clean-ups... the religious right running everything and the cool people move up north... it wouldn't take even 15 years for them to regret it and rejoin.
The last time Secession was talked about in a real sense (1860 - 1864) it cost the lives of over 500,000 Americans to settle the issue. And it was settled, we are ONE country. Many thousands of Americans died to keep it that way. Just because you do not like the way an election turned out is no reason to talk about secession in such casual terms. Oh, I think I'm going to succeed from the Union because I did not like the result. You do a disservice to and dishonor all those who fought in all our wars so you have your right to vote.
Just an opinion of a veteran.
Over 600,000 folks died to settle the question of secession. That's over and done. Rep. Paul better think up a better "deeply American principle."
A G.I will die somewhere in the world so Ron Paul can spout this crap.
Hangin' rustlers and traitors is also a "deeply American principle".
The case was Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1869). The issue was whether or not U.S. Government bonds owned by Texas before the state attempted to secede from the Union could be endorsed by the Confederate government and sold. After the Civil War, the state of Texas, in desperate need of money, sued the putative owners on the grounds that the Confederate government was not authorized to endorse and sell those bonds. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the State of Texas based on the principle that Texas could not secede because the Union is indissoluble. Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase wrote per curiam:
"The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation. By these, the Union was solemnly declared to 'be perpetual.' And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained 'to form a more perfect Union.' It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not?
...
When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States."
These ARE the United States. There is no secession.
Ron Paul has been one of the cagiest closet idiots that this country has had the misfortune to endure. The colonies did not Secede from the British Empire. The Colonies were never part of the empire in that none of its citizens had any say in their territorial government nor did they have any redress when hit with usurious taxes meant to keep the Colonies broke and dependent. To secede means to have given one's oath as a citizen to form a governed body and then to break that oath because of some presumed impasse. If Paul the ignoramus, could read he would see the impeccable legal brief that Jefferson wrote that took into account the fact that Magna Carta was law, the klng did not rule by divine right, and his actions towards British colonists were ipso facto tyranny, plain and simple. By this indisputable argument, the Colonies had recourse to dissolve and breached social contract with England, and create their own principles that would give them fairness and equality under the law with means of redress. Ron Paul, do you understand that Lincoln considered secession the highest, most unforgivable act of treachery, the breaking of a sacred oath of allegiance and the refusal to sit down and work out any problem no matter how fractious was the most contemptuous derision of the very ethos of these United States and the ridicule of the indivisible truth of our liberty as one nation, with liberty and justice for all. If anyone attempts or even considers secession, they are by this very action declaring war on this Nation and if necessary they will be slaughtered, every man,woman, and child, and their land will be burnt to ash. That is how far Lincoln almost went, and how far he was prepared to go.. So you Mr.Paul are a fool and a traitor. My family died for this great people, but you stand their and say they died in vain. They did not. You had better be prepared to die in vain.
This whole Ron Paul thing should be ignored and never even mentioned on tv...the sore losers should not be mentioned as well...kinda like a petulant child...be kind but ignore the temper tantrums...
I believe Texas will go blue in 4-10 years as the Latino/Hispanic voters there grow in numbers and the redistricting due to the census creates more blue than red Congressional seats. I don't think the Texas Democrats will want secession to happen with such a huge prize in their future. I also think Julian(?) Castro will be the next Governor of Texas. Ron Paul is the most negative of all the Presidential candidates in the 2012 election season. He has no stocks in his financial portfolio and maintains a pessimistic attitude on the future of the USA. I don't think America needs Ron Paul in our political discourse any longer.
I find it interesting that the idea of secession is due to an unresponsive government. You mean like the Republicans who try to block EVERYTHING that isn't their idea? If our federal government isn't working the way it's supposed to it isn't because the democrats aren't willing. It's because the republicans aren't willing. Democrats aren't the problem and secession is not the solution.
To be fair, I live in Texas. I can actually understand why some people might feel the way they do. But unfortunately the uninformed voter is much to blame here. They feel powerless because their government isn't working the way it should. Unfortunately, most people don't follow politics in general and don't realize that much of what is preached as gospel by their beloved republican party is often lies and rhetoric. Add to that, the one way to change the situation is to vote and the republicans are making that increasingly more difficult for their opposition.
So, what other viable options are there?
I can tell you, as a native Texan, I have no desire to leave the state. But if the fool hearty folks of the Lone Star State decide to seceed from the U.S....I'm outta here. That's lunacy! I suppose they'd want these same officials to run their "country?" Gov. Perry would be our national leader? Uh, no thanks.
It's bad enough we live in a state that cast its electoral votes red and we live with government leadership in our state that cares more about the wealthy than it does middle class people or the poor - the majority of voters, mind you. But to think we'd trade what is bad as it is for something worse? I won't move to Canada, but the best run blue state might be on my radar!
Is anyone else concerned about people on here calling for other human beings to die or be "slaughtered" over this? Are you kidding me? That's psychotic.
I think you just don't understand the very visceral legacy of secession in large areas of the country. We have already had one war over this and it is supposed to be settled and never raised as a possibility again.
People feel the ideal of secession spits on their ancestors and friends who fought and/or died to protect the Union in all of the wars and conflicts from the Civil War on. If the protection of the legacy of patriots and heroes is not worth killing over, then what are we doing still calling ourselves a country?
Who called for people to be slaughtered? Who called for people to be killed? People are pointing out that it would lead to a Civil War and if that happened people would die. The bloodiest war the US has fought in- in terms of the percentage of the population lost- is still to this date the Civil War. It's something to keep in mind when throwing around the secessionist talk. If you're taking away from that the idea that people want you to die then you're completely missing the point.