Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Texit:

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Texit:

    https://kylebiedermann.com/texit-faq/

  • #2
    It's an interesting notion...a sovereign Texas. Taken to what I think would be the likely outcome in a future where Texas moderates see independency as the answer to the ever-present encroachment of progressive radicalism within the USA, we'd see multiple other states decide to join fortunes with Texas.

    I think too, we'd also see multiple drives for separation on the state level...such as Northern California fleeing California proper, Michigan losing the UP, NYS splitting from NYC...and others.

    America's chickens coming home to roost.

    Comment


    • #3
      Yup. And the states leaving the U.S.S.A. could join together and name themselves...the United States of America...

      Comment


      • #4
        More than just Texas are looking into this. But I think Texas is the more aggressive state thus far. Here is an article that lists all the states contemplating secession.

        Northern Colorado Residents Seek Secession To Join Wyoming – Def-Con News

        Good article to read.

        With this country so polarized it may be a good move and it could, if peacefully done, stop the civil war that seems to be nipping at our heels.

        Federation of American States should be the new name for the red state coalition. Interesting times for sure.

        Comment


        • #5
          Talk about states leaving the Union and Civil War and such matters is stupid talk. States cannot leave the Union, that was one of Pres Lincoln's central arguments. We had a Civil War already that settled that issue. We do not want warfare on our streets, putting brother against brother, family against family, and neighbor against neighbor.

          This is silly talk because people feel butt hurt that they lost a fair and secure election. Our own intelligence agencies stated that fact on the record. They were fed lies from the White House feeding that hurt and anger. Just because your party loses the election doesn't mean you get to pack up and leave the Union.

          Comment


          • tanksoldier
            tanksoldier commented
            Editing a comment
            So we decide “right” by force of arms? The Union proved that is was economically and militarily more powerful than the Confederacy, not that it was legally correct or morally right. Texas was an internationally recognized independent nation before it joined the United States... and the treaty
            annexing Texas into the United States specifically allowed Texas to withdraw, a provision the Union violated when it went to war to keep Texas in the Union.

            ...and there is ample evidence of voter fraud. Whether it was enough to sway the election we will never know, but it happened.

            ...and out country was founded by those who were unhappy with the completely legal behavior of their rightful sovereign and rebelled, founding a new nation. King George’s laws and acts that upset our forefathers were completely legal, and common, for the time. Taxes, quartering of troops in private homes, confiscation of arms and other war making materials... which were owned by the Crown anyway... all completely usual and legal.

            When tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty. Perhaps it’s time to found another nation.

            The question isn’t really whether they are willing to die to leave... they leave either way.

            The question is whether you are willing to die to make them stay... which you can’t, because if they win they leave... and if they die they have left anyway.
            Last edited by tanksoldier; 01-31-2021, 12:09 AM.

          • scotty_appleton814
            scotty_appleton814 commented
            Editing a comment
            Tanksoldier. You make points. Are you willing to take up arms to overthrow the government of the United States and make up a new country? If not, you probably shouldn't spread that kinda thinking and rhetoric.

            And a lot of folks can miss me with that widespread voter fraud. Trump lost in part because of widespread increased voter turn out.

          • retired137
            retired137 commented
            Editing a comment
            Let's see the ample evidence of voter fraud. My vote for Trump was counted.

        • #6
          Eastern Oregon has been shining on becoming West Idaho for as long as I can recall.

          Various states have been entertaining the notion of breaking lose and establishing their own sovereign nation going back to the first civil war. Sounds great but then the bean counters in Mississippi and Kentucky crunch the numbers and realize New York and Minnesota are largely paying for their food stamps and agriculture subsidies and suddenly the breakaway rhetoric cools down.

          How much federal funding each state receives from the government (usatoday.com)

          But are the sands are shifting as we are standing on the beach? Maybe. Be careful what you wish for though. I worked in a big city that was practically Third World poor and definitely as violent as any Third World country, except for South Africa. I also worked in the rural south and saw people living in tar paper shacks eating bowfin caught on cane poles. Sever the umbilical cord to these places and we may not be ready for what happens next.
          Quickness is the essence of war.

          -Sun Tzu

          Comment


        • #7
          Urban states don't send agricultural subsidies and highway funds to rural states for any reason but to benefit those urban states.

          Ag. subsidies keep food prices down, rural highways allow more efficient trade between urban centers. Sure, maybe part of the cost comes at the expense of things like SNAP...but, mark no doubt, when it comes to building a wind farm, a solar farm, a new prison or a nuclear missile silo...these things don't get build in rural America to primarily benefit rural folk.

          Comment


          • Levithane
            Levithane commented
            Editing a comment
            DM206 So that's what is said on paper. Full disclosure I'm not one of the people advocating for secession of states. What you should probably understand is that a lot of this talk has been going on for years, and not because of the most recent election. Sounds great to vote on everything, however there is a large number of people who now believe that the system is a joke and votes don't really matter. Thats not because of the recent election, its because every time people do vote it seems like local, state, and the federal government problems persist despite having a different face in office.

            And if anything has destroyed peoples faith, its been the pandemic. Criminals with serious crimes get let out of jail early, and meanwhile business owners get threatened or sent to jail for merely operating.
            Last edited by Levithane; 01-31-2021, 02:57 AM.

          • Aidokea
            Aidokea commented
            Editing a comment
            America is not a democracy. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Mob rule.

            America is a constitutional republic- we are guided by principles, as documented by the U.S. Constitution...

          • Aidokea
            Aidokea commented
            Editing a comment
            Words mean things...

          • scotty_appleton814
            scotty_appleton814 commented
            Editing a comment
            The United States is a constitutional republic whereas our government operates on representative democracy ideals. Another half truth from Aidokea. Not surprised.

        • #8
          Personally, I'd look more towards a shifting of states as opposed to any segment of the US breaking away to become independent.

          We already have calls for DC and Puerto Rico statehood from the radical left. That just fuels calls for state-level succession/merger as centrists will push back against further progressive extremism.

          Comment


          • merlin436
            merlin436 commented
            Editing a comment
            My thoughts...

            DC shouldn't be granted statehood as it runs counter to America's welfare and the wisdom of the Founding Fathers.

            PR is welcome to become a state. However, let's be real...politics leads the drive for PR statehood.

          • scotty_appleton814
            scotty_appleton814 commented
            Editing a comment
            DC is treated very similar to how the Colonies were treated by England circa 1776....And those Colonies became States.

          • Bing_Oh
            Bing_Oh commented
            Editing a comment
            Scotty, Madison's concern was two-fold. Yes, he was concerned that DC being a state could open it up to untoward influence over Federal processes, but he also believed that, as a state, DC would be beholden to its own state concerns/welfare over that of the country as a whole.

            And, yes, that was without Google...as a student of history, I believe the adage, "those who forget the part are doomed to repeat it."

          • scotty_appleton814
            scotty_appleton814 commented
            Editing a comment
            Thanks for your response to this and I can see that logic now.

        • #9
          Bing_oh the question was rhetorical. 10 miles square.
          Last edited by retired137; 01-31-2021, 01:45 PM.

          Comment


          • Bing_Oh
            Bing_Oh commented
            Editing a comment
            Didn't sit well that there are legitimate, non-political reasons, eh?

          • retired137
            retired137 commented
            Editing a comment
            You're too easy. What is the reason for constitutional amendments? Don't bother digging a deeper hole.

          • Bing_Oh
            Bing_Oh commented
            Editing a comment
            The reason for Constitutional amendments is...to change the Constitution! Because the Founding Fathers were smart enough to know they didn't know everything (something this country desperately needs today), they built in the ability to alter the Constitution.

            Of course, the Founding Fathers hoped that people would use common sense when doing this, so they didn't destroy the core of the document (and, with it, the foundation of the country). And, with all due respect, the arguments against making DC a state back then are as a sound as they are today.

            And, I'll "dig a deeper hole" whenever I like, thank you very much. Ask a question, and I'll answer it with logic, reasoning, and facts...even if you don't want me to.

          • retired137
            retired137 commented
            Editing a comment
            Keep answering with your version of reasoning, your version of logic, and your version of facts. You're version of reasoning, logic and facts are one persons only. Yours.

        • #10
          Originally posted by merlin436 View Post
          Urban states don't send agricultural subsidies and highway funds to rural states for any reason but to benefit those urban states.

          Ag. subsidies keep food prices down, rural highways allow more efficient trade between urban centers. Sure, maybe part of the cost comes at the expense of things like SNAP...but, mark no doubt, when it comes to building a wind farm, a solar farm, a new prison or a nuclear missile silo...these things don't get build in rural America to primarily benefit rural folk.
          You must talking about paying farmers not to grow crops also. Rural folks don't want prisons? They're lining up for the steady employment.

          Comment


          • merlin436
            merlin436 commented
            Editing a comment
            A subsidy is pretty much a subsidy.

            I won't deny there's some rural support for prisons and the like. A majority of such support?...meh.

            Check out NY for a state who pumped the local rural economies cheerleading prisons and then screwed over the rural population as far as increased crime, representation and, eventually...prison closures.

          • retired137
            retired137 commented
            Editing a comment
            We can pretty much cherry pick to find something to our liking.

        • #11
          The problem with making DC and Puerto Rico a state makes it a guaranteed win for a democrat election outcome. That's why democrats want that to happen, its all about control. It stacks the deck for them.

          You all talk about how America is a democracy, it wasn't meant to be so. You will basically have a California on steroids if that were to happen.

          The reason we have three branches of government and parties to choose from, keeps us from being a one party system and too much control being allowed to be given to one party. It is always better to have partisan gridlock, because it keeps onerous control and laws from being imposed on the public and keeps lawmakers in check.

          You all may not like republicans and or their ideology, but you all won't like a one party system either. Why do you think people are fleeing California and New York? The people fleeing are democrats. They have decided to flee due to the onerous COVID restrictions and the continual tax increases. Even if you believe in paying your fair share, you don't want to at a certain point. It gets to be too much.

          A one party system is no longer a democracy and if you truly love democracies you would be against the inclusion of DC and Puerto Rico. But if you want a one party rule of America you would be on board with making DC and Puerto Rico a state.

          California and New York are not a democracy anymore and they are ruled by one party. If you like that, then move there. See where your tax dollars go. Those who don't work and the rich are the only ones who benefit from living there, cops don't benefit at all. In fact its the POSs that I arrest all day long that don't work, have three or more children with three or more girlfriends that you and I are supporting through free medical insurance, free food, free rent and so on.

          Just a reminder, a great quote by a democrat:

          "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."

          Comment


          • scotty_appleton814
            scotty_appleton814 commented
            Editing a comment
            Living somewhere where you are the opposite of the supermajority party is not voter suppression. I live I suburban Chicago. Whenever I vote red, I know that my vote just doesn't matter or doesn't carry enough weight. Because there aren't enough red voters in my area, that's not voter suppression that's just the demographics. Now who sounds like they are playing the dreaded victim card?

          • SOCAleo
            SOCAleo commented
            Editing a comment
            The flooding of illegal votes is voter suppression. One illegal vote cancels a legitimate vote. Voter suppression can be accomplished through illegal or fraudulent voter turnout. Hence why an unregulated vote process is so dangerous. That is what I'm trying to say, also, voter apathy and voter disenfranchisement leads to voter suppression as well.

            You should ask some of your Chicago conservative colleagues if they even go and vote anymore. I bet you there are a few who will tell you that they haven't voted in years.

            Now you may argue that that type of apathy or disenfranchisement is not enough votes to change Chicago blue to red, but take into consideration all the factors being put into play, i.e fraud, illegal votes etc. and it just might be enough. The problem is, we don't know for sure.

          • scotty_appleton814
            scotty_appleton814 commented
            Editing a comment
            SoCal I'm gonna assume you really don't know how local Chicago politics work. We have a lot of unions still and a few social programs folks love. Among other reasons. Chicago is really blue. And it ain't even close. To the tune of almost supermajority heights. We have a very different outlook on what voter suppression is. Show me evidence where it's so much voter fraud that it's out there effecting the results of elections. Cook County IL Democratic Machine gets a lot of flak for its past of making sure dead people vote and rightfully so. But nowadays dead people aren't voting. The few who got arrested for that voted for Trump this time around.

          • Bing_Oh
            Bing_Oh commented
            Editing a comment
            Hence why an unregulated vote process is so dangerous
            You're missing one of the most serious reasons unregulated voting process are so dangerous...deterioration of confidence in the validity of the system itself. We now have TWO presidential elections where the validity of the outcome was questioned by a good number of voters (of each party). That is an extremely serious issue in any democracy or republic. When people stop trusting the validity of a government that's supposed to be "by the People, of the People, and for the People," then the country itself is at risk. At such a time, the government should do everything in its power to restore confidence in the system, not do more to make people question it (especially for partisan political reasons).

        • #12
          Originally posted by Ratatatat View Post
          Various states have been entertaining the notion of breaking lose and establishing their own sovereign nation going back to the first civil war. Sounds great but then the bean counters in Mississippi and Kentucky crunch the numbers and realize New York and Minnesota are largely paying for their food stamps and agriculture subsidies and suddenly the breakaway rhetoric cools down
          Same with Cascadia. The dry side of the mountains keeps saying that that the people on the wet side of the mountains are getting too much of a say in what happens in Olympia. The thing is that not only does the wet side have a much larger population than the dry side, it also produces much more of the funding of the government through taxes. If the dry side wants to break away from the wet side they'll have to find a way to fund themselves in a commensurate fashion or they're going to be in a world of hurt.

          I also highly doubt that my state of California will break up, but I do find the issue of water rights to be an interesting issue when it comes to breaking up the state.
          This Space For Rent

          Comment


          • #13
            Originally posted by SOCAleo View Post
            The problem with making DC and Puerto Rico a state makes it a guaranteed win for a democrat election outcome. That's why democrats want that to happen, its all about control. It stacks the deck for them.

            You all talk about how America is a democracy, it wasn't meant to be so. You will basically have a California on steroids if that were to happen.

            The reason we have three branches of government and parties to choose from, keeps us from being a one party system and too much control being allowed to be given to one party. It is always better to have partisan gridlock, because it keeps onerous control and laws from being imposed on the public and keeps lawmakers in check.

            You all may not like republicans and or their ideology, but you all won't like a one party system either. Why do you think people are fleeing California and New York? The people fleeing are democrats. They have decided to flee due to the onerous COVID restrictions and the continual tax increases. Even if you believe in paying your fair share, you don't want to at a certain point. It gets to be too much.

            A one party system is no longer a democracy and if you truly love democracies you would be against the inclusion of DC and Puerto Rico. But if you want a one party rule of America you would be on board with making DC and Puerto Rico a state.

            California and New York are not a democracy anymore and they are ruled by one party. If you like that, then move there. See where your tax dollars go. Those who don't work and the rich are the only ones who benefit from living there, cops don't benefit at all. In fact its the POSs that I arrest all day long that don't work, have three or more children with three or more girlfriends that you and I are supporting through free medical insurance, free food, free rent and so on.

            Just a reminder, a great quote by a democrat:

            "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."
            If your real reason to deny statehood to DC and Puerto Rico is mainly that it will give more congressional seats to the DEMs, that's a pretty crappy argument. It also really drives home the point that as-is, the GOP is a dying party. As someone said here, whenever greater or more access to voting occurs, GOP candidates tend to suffer. You can only play their tired tropes so many times before folks get tired of it.

            Comment


            • Aidokea
              Aidokea commented
              Editing a comment
              Bing_Oh, the politically correct term for illegal aliens is "undocumented Democrats"...

            • scotty_appleton814
              scotty_appleton814 commented
              Editing a comment
              Keep on showing that ignorance Aidokea. The only thing better would be you publishing whatever ignorant organization's card you happen to carry. You know, just to be honest and all

            • Bing_Oh
              Bing_Oh commented
              Editing a comment
              Scotty, I think my examples were pretty straightforward regarding Democrats wanting to grant people rights they were never meant to have. But, I'll go ahead and expound for you on one of the examples I gave...

              The Democrats want to count illegals during the national census. Now, the outcome of the census has lots of financial and other repercussions, but its primary Constitutional purpose is determining representation in the House of Representatives. Since representation in the House is determined by population, the census is extremely important in our political process and helping to ensure that CITIZENS (if you couldn't tell by the emphasis, that's an important word) are properly represented in our Federal government.

              Now, however, we have a political party who wants non-citizens who have entered the country in violation of our laws to be counted in the census. Because population is used to determine representation in government, you would essentially, by counting illegals, be giving criminal non-citizens political representation that is Constitutionally-restricted to citizens. You are (...wait for it) granting people rights they were never meant to have!

              EDIT - Oh, I almost forgot...census-determined population also effects electors under the Electoral College (thereby effecting the Presidential election).
              Last edited by Bing_Oh; 02-01-2021, 08:23 AM.

            • scotty_appleton814
              scotty_appleton814 commented
              Editing a comment
              DM206, wish I could "like" your comment. I couldn't have said it better myself.

          • #14
            Originally posted by scotty_appleton814 View Post

            If your real reason to deny statehood to DC and Puerto Rico is mainly that it will give more congressional seats to the DEMs, that's a pretty crappy argument. It also really drives home the point that as-is, the GOP is a dying party. As someone said here, whenever greater or more access to voting occurs, GOP candidates tend to suffer. You can only play their tired tropes so many times before folks get tired of it.
            That's not my reason to deny it, but it is the reason democrats want it to happen.

            The GOP is not a dying party, 74 million Americans voted GOP and increased the number or representatives in congress this last election. Most Americans if you get down to their base beliefs are believers in the GOP ideas. Think about it, here are some of the ideas that the GOP espouse:

            Individualism
            Self determination
            Reliance on self rather than government
            Freedom
            Low taxes
            The value of marriage and family
            The exceptionalism of America and the constitution

            A great way to explain the differences between Republicans and Democrats is this:

            If a Republican doesn't like guns then he/she will choose not to own one, but if a democrat doesn't like guns then he/she will force everyone not to be able to own one.

            Greater access to voting is all well and good, but you can't have greater access to voting without checks and balances. The mail in voting allowed greater access, but did not have the usual checks and balances like absentee voting, so fraud is easier to commit and occurred on a wider scale than ever before.

            But you are talking about DC and Puerto Rico voter access, I say let it happen, but also lets let the GOP ideas of voter ID laws occur too. You must have some form of government ID and proof of domicile before placing a vote. Absentee voting should be very limited and highly scrutinized. And if you want to vote you can only do so at a polling place on election day.

            That is what I call compromise/democracy. Two opposite sides agreeing on something and getting and giving something in return. Checks and balances folks.

            To also expound on the vote thing. The original idea of who was allowed to vote was those who owned property and actually paid taxes. Basically a person who had some sort of stake in the game.
            Last edited by SOCAleo; 02-01-2021, 12:03 PM.

            Comment


            • scotty_appleton814
              scotty_appleton814 commented
              Editing a comment
              Socal, I know was voter fraud. Every election has a few people who always are charged with some degree of voter fraud. It happens. But no, there is not anywhere near enough rampant voter fraud going on to justify the level of propaganda being perpetuated by the GOP that our election was rigged and stolen.

              And the Supreme Court has been ruling on the constitutionality of state laws since the dawn of the new nation.

              Why do you think Pres Trump's impeachment lawyers quit when he double downed on using the stolen election defense? Hint, because they cannot lie at trial when defending their client.

            • SOCAleo
              SOCAleo commented
              Editing a comment
              Well Scotty we agree on the fact that there was voter fraud. So why can't states make up their own mind on passing laws to ensure the integrity of their election votes. Dems just won't allow it to happen.

            • scotty_appleton814
              scotty_appleton814 commented
              Editing a comment
              SoCal, that's because some states have shown in the past that left to their own devices, they'll infringe on the right to vote for certain populations. Tell me why a majority of the polling places closed in Wisconsin were in the majority DEM and highly brown Milwaukee County?

            • SOCAleo
              SOCAleo commented
              Editing a comment
              Scotty explain to me how requiring people to show ID to ensure the actual person voting is the actual person, is infringing on certain voter's rights. The Montgomery County thing is unfortunate, but does not speak to the GOP as a whole, if in fact it can be traced to GOP activities and those activities were nefarious. From what I read on it, they did not have enough volunteers to work the polls. But hey, there is always an excuse on both sides when shady crap is going on so.....

          • #15
            Originally posted by SOCAleo View Post

            That's not my reason to deny it, but it is the reason democrats want it to happen.

            The GOP is not a dying party, 74 million Americans voted GOP and increased the number or representatives in congress this last election. Most Americans if you get down to their base beliefs are believers in the GOP ideas. Think about it, here are some of the ideas that the GOP espouse:

            Individualism
            Self determination
            Reliance on self rather than government
            Freedom
            Low taxes
            The value of marriage and family
            The exceptionalism of America and the constitution

            A great way to explain the differences between Republicans and Democrats is this:

            If a Republican doesn't like guns then he/she will choose not to own one, but if a democrat doesn't like guns then he/she will force everyone not to be able to own one.

            Greater access to voting is all well and good, but you can't have greater access to voting without checks and balances. The mail in voting allowed greater access, but did not have the usual checks and balances like absentee voting, so fraud is easier to commit and occurred on a wider scale than ever before.

            But you are talking about DC and Puerto Rico voter access, I say let it happen, but also lets let the GOP ideas of voter ID laws occur too. You must have some form of government ID and proof of domicile before placing a vote. Absentee voting should be very limited and highly scrutinized. And if you want to vote you can only do so at a polling place on election day.

            That is what I call compromise/democracy. Two opposite sides agreeing on something and getting and giving something in return. Checks and balances folks.

            To also expound on the vote thing. The original idea of who was allowed to vote was those who owned property and actually paid taxes. Basically a person who had some sort of stake in the game.
            If you are GOP and you believe in individualism, low taxes, and self determination, you are falling for the long con. How can you say you believe in those things and GOP policies really do nothing to help you in those respects. The financial well being deck is stacked against you because GOP don't believe in adequately funding public schools. Education is probably the most important tool and measure for long term success. So you can rely on your individualism or self determination, but won't have the best education to do so.

            Their tax policies send the federal government into huge amounts of national debt. Look up DEMs and GOP presidential tax policy and effects since like 1970 or 1980 and take a look at data. The effects are obvious. So the GOP is willing to give their big business and rich folks huge tax breaks, that will send the national debt growing or will be offset by a increase on the general tax rate for us regular folks. All in the name of trying to starve out Social Security. That's the current GOP tax policy at play right now.

            How can you really say you want limited government? How can you have effective limited government when you don't make corporations pay their fair share and give a blank check to the military every year? Do you know what that extra money could be used for? Better schools, better roads, maybe our bridges wouldn't be in a constant state of disrepair. And there is more.

            And that 74 million you mention as voting is probably the upper limit of the number of GOP voters and that number is probably not going to have a dramatic uptick compared to new DEM voters come 2030, especially in states like Arizona or Texas, that are on the verge of becoming majority minority. And we all know GOP fear black, brown, and other POC voters like the plague (that same fear manifests itself on this forum). Speaking of voters, there's not been any evidence that mail in voting is ripe with fraud. Also, who are you to tell another HOW and WHEN they can vote? How many of us here on this forum or shift workers, or work a 9 to 5 Monday through Friday and really can't get that time off? Who are you to say that voters shouldn't have access to early voting because early voting because it helps 1 party more than the other and I should only vote on the one day?

            The Constitution also stated that black people weren't a whole person and women had no right to vote, do you believe we should go back to that type of voting block eligibility?

            I know that the DEMs have their own version of the long con. The difference is they at least do it under the guise of trying to help more people as opposed to being punitive towards people. As far as your gun example, call me whatever you want. But for logical reasons, IMHO, not everyone should have easy access to gun ownership to any kind of guns. Before you guys go off on your 2nd Amendment rants I've heard every "shall not be infringed" argument and I'm over it. And this is coming from a Center-left leaning liberal with a safe and house full of guns with needed 1000s of rounds of ammo needed for that stash too.

            Comment

            MR300x250 Tablet

            Collapse

            What's Going On

            Collapse

            There are currently 4750 users online. 324 members and 4426 guests.

            Most users ever online was 158,966 at 04:57 AM on 01-16-2021.

            Welcome Ad

            Collapse
            Working...
            X