First time visitor? Learn more.

What’s The Tipping Point?

by Flyovercountry ( 205 Comments › )
Filed under Economy, Politics, taxation at November 30th, 2012 - 3:00 pm

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

It may be right here.

What you are reading, when you click the above link is the two year old plan, brought to you by the Marxists at Hillary Clinton’s Center for American Progress, is a plan to confiscate the private 401k accounts of American Citizens and to compensate the robbed citizenry with Government debt. You know, because the government’s track record of making good on its debt has been so good recently. Normally, I would never have given something so insanely bad the benefit of taking up one nanosecond of my time. The problem now is two fold. One, these imbeciles have just won Presidential reelection, and two, this very plan received an actual hearing in two Senate subcommittees today.

What we are talking about here is not a tax on earned income, which is bad enough, but the government actually granting itself permission to reach into your bank account and take your money, based on nothing more than the fact that your elected representatives feel that they deserve your money more than you do.

We are decades past the tipping point where our government no longer feels constrained by anything the citizenry has to say about how we are governed. We are decades past the tipping point where government feels as though anything that is ours, actually belongs to them, and what we have at our disposal is merely what they have graciously allowed us to keep. On November 6, 2012, it became possible that we’ve passed another tipping point. That one was the point at which Americans in general may actually agree with the government’s position that they ought not be constrained by trite little things like what we the people actually feel about their growing scope and power. The proverbial tipping point at which the takers outnumber the makers in our society, when we have more people riding in the wagon than we have pulling it.

The third tipping point will be the point at which private citizens, in sufficient numbers feel as though they’ve had enough. When you reach a point in time, when the government, or their armed agents just start appearing in your home, or your bank and begin removing your personal belongings simply because they have run out of their own, then we have reached that point in time, that the very same conditions that caused this document to be written in the first place, are once again in existence. If those who are advocating for this, get their way, that will literally mean the end of all rights to individual property in our nation.

I recognize that we started down this path long ago, with Eminent Domain, but this move would put that evil practice on steroids. Two weeks ago, I wrote a tongue in cheek piece based on the, “We The People Secession Petitions.” Perhaps it’s time to pull my tongue back out of my cheek. Individual Property Rights are not just some silly experimental pipe dream that some old white cranks once believed would be a good idea, it is the entire point behind the founding of our nation. Those Secession movements are going to become more than a joke intending to force Barack Obama and his administration answer some uncomfortable inquiries. This is precisely the sort of thing which places torches and pitchforks in the hands of the masses, and gets them out in the fields searching for a bureaucrat to dress up in tar and feathers.

Exit question for the good people of Texas: When you make the move to become your own independent nation, separate once again from the United States of America, (as you are the only state allowed to do so,) will you be accepting open immigration from those of us who live in Ohio?

Cross Posted from Musings of a Mad Conservative.

Comments

Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.

Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.

Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.

We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.

Play nice!

205 Responses to “What’s The Tipping Point?”
( jump to bottom )

  1. RIX
    1 | November 30, 2012 3:13 pm

    The march continues to make American citizens chattels
    of the Government.
    What is really to prevent them? The American electorate has
    signaled their approval of this model in successive presidential
    elections.


  2. 2 | November 30, 2012 3:16 pm

    Yes, it is definitely time.


  3. 3 | November 30, 2012 3:27 pm

    @ 1389AD:
    Secession is the only answer now. Unless you are still thinking of expatriating?


  4. lobo91
    4 | November 30, 2012 3:36 pm

    Exit question for the good people of Texas: When you make the move to become your own independent nation, separate once again from the United States of America, (as you are the only state allowed to do so,) will you be accepting open immigration from those of us who live in Ohio?

    Can we please stop putting false information in posts?

    Texas has no such special power to walk away from the union. I don’t know where people came up with this idea, but it’s not true.


  5. Speranza
    5 | November 30, 2012 3:43 pm

    Fred Thompson ‏@fredthompson

    Mayor Rahm:Dems should view Chicago as role model of “innovative financing tools”. Yes & watch “The Godfather” for horse-grooming tips #tcot


  6. 6 | November 30, 2012 3:55 pm

    CzechRebel wrote:

    @ 1389AD:
    Secession is the only answer now. Unless you are still thinking of expatriating?

    We’ll see what happens in the next few weeks/months. Still thinking of leaving. I’m having a hard enough time just trying to survive here now. Not sure what use I’d be. If secession is officially declared and it ends up turning violent and our side is looking for soldiers, I doubt they’d let me enlist, on account of age. Though I’d certainly volunteer.


  7. citizen_q
    7 | November 30, 2012 3:58 pm

    Wondering IF 401K nationalization is attempted, if it might be worth the tax hit to just cash them out. Assuming of course, that the grabbermint has not locked out that possibility.


  8. lobo91
    8 | November 30, 2012 4:00 pm

    citizen_q wrote:

    Wondering IF 401K nationalization is attempted, if it might be worth the tax hit to just cash them out. Assuming of course, that the grabbermint has not locked out that possibility.

    You know they will, if it come to that.


  9. Da_Beerfreak
    9 | November 30, 2012 4:03 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    Exit question for the good people of Texas: When you make the move to become your own independent nation, separate once again from the United States of America, (as you are the only state allowed to do so,) will you be accepting open immigration from those of us who live in Ohio?

    Can we please stop putting false information in posts?

    Texas has no such special power to walk away from the union. I don’t know where people came up with this idea, but it’s not true.

    Truth has lost its value. “Truth” is whatever folks want to believe. :evil:


  10. RIX
    10 | November 30, 2012 4:05 pm

    Perhaps we do under appreciate Obama.
    He is selflessly headed to Hawaii for three weeks,
    where he will contemplate what more he can do for the
    people.
    He is willing to endure perfect weather, beautiful scenery,
    great food and fantastic beaches.
    He gives too much


  11. lobo91
    11 | November 30, 2012 4:05 pm

    @ Da_Beerfreak:

    I’ve been hearing that claim since I was a kid. It’s probably something they told people when they were debating statehood, but it’s just not true.


  12. Speranza
    12 | November 30, 2012 4:08 pm

    citizen_q wrote:

    Wondering IF 401K nationalization is attempted, if it might be worth the tax hit to just cash them out. Assuming of course, that the grabbermint has not locked out that possibility.

    Oh I am certain they are floating the idea of taxing 401K’s.


  13. RIX
    13 | November 30, 2012 4:10 pm

    Off to see Lincoln.
    See ya later.


  14. heysoos
    14 | November 30, 2012 4:12 pm

    RIX wrote:

    The march continues to make American citizens chattels
    of the Government.
    What is really to prevent them? The American electorate has
    signaled their approval of this model in successive presidential
    elections.

    tax revolt…let them throw you in jail…I did and they backed off
    I hate the IRS


  15. 15 | November 30, 2012 4:14 pm

    @ lobo91:

    That was part of Texas’ deal upon joining the Union in the first place. I have heard many intelligent residents of Texas state this, including by the way her current Governor. Whether enough of the citizens of Texas wish to make this so is another matter entirely.

    I have seen it written and heard it stated that the Civil War ended the special deal Texas got, but I have seen nothing official written down to support that theory.

    Yes, Texas is special.


  16. heysoos
    16 | November 30, 2012 4:14 pm

    Da_Beerfreak wrote:

    lobo91 wrote:
    Exit question for the good people of Texas: When you make the move to become your own independent nation, separate once again from the United States of America, (as you are the only state allowed to do so,) will you be accepting open immigration from those of us who live in Ohio?
    Can we please stop putting false information in posts?
    Texas has no such special power to walk away from the union. I don’t know where people came up with this idea, but it’s not true.

    Truth has lost its value. “Truth” is whatever folks want to believe.

    it’s value is exactly the same as ‘false’…


  17. Da_Beerfreak
    17 | November 30, 2012 4:14 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    @ Da_Beerfreak:

    I’ve been hearing that claim since I was a kid. It’s probably something they told people when they were debating statehood, but it’s just not true.

    I know it’s not true, but facts are not something a lot of folks care about now days. Inconvenient facts are the first to be ignored… :roll:

    It’s a lot easier to lie to someone than it is to convince them that they are being lied to. :evil:


  18. heysoos
    18 | November 30, 2012 4:18 pm

    Flyovercountry wrote:

    @ lobo91:
    That was part of Texas’ deal upon joining the Union in the first place. I have heard many intelligent residents of Texas state this, including by the way her current Governor. Whether enough of the citizens of Texas wish to make this so is another matter entirely.
    I have seen it written and heard it stated that the Civil War ended the special deal Texas got, but I have seen nothing official written down to support that theory.
    Yes, Texas is special.

    a lot of myth surrounding the history of Texas…in this case both they and the feds looked the other way….it’s my understanding the language in the Texas con still stands….but it is way beyond practical these days….fear not, no state is gonna cut out…the notion is simply moronic


  19. 19 | November 30, 2012 4:23 pm

    @ lobo91:
    lobo91 wrote:

    Texas has no such special power to walk away from the union.

    You are right. It is not a “special power” that Texas has; it is a general power available to all States. True Texas has used its that power twice, once to leave its union with Mexico and once to leave the US.

    You might want to check out a guy named Thomas Jefferson. He wrote this great document called The Declaration of Independence. Ol’ Tommy Jefferson calls is duty to leave a cursed union. In fact, he said when you run into something like the Obama Administration “it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government. . .”

    Please check out that Jefferson fellow. He founded a major university, wrote a lot of great stuff and even worked for the government for a while. If you read his stuff, you know that there is a right to secede under these circumstances.


  20. lobo91
    20 | November 30, 2012 4:24 pm

    Flyovercountry wrote:

    @ lobo91:

    That was part of Texas’ deal upon joining the Union in the first place. I have heard many intelligent residents of Texas state this, including by the way her current Governor. Whether enough of the citizens of Texas wish to make this so is another matter entirely.

    I have seen it written and heard it stated that the Civil War ended the special deal Texas got, but I have seen nothing official written down to support that theory.

    Yes, Texas is special.

    The intelligence of the people who believe it has nothing to do with it.

    It’s simply not true.


  21. AZfederalist
    21 | November 30, 2012 4:25 pm

    Yes, this could be the tipping point. Particularly given the moronic idea being floated by these marxists where they want to take it all and then guarantee some amount in the future along with a more “fair” [gad's I'm tired of hearing that poor word abused so] approach of a $600 [gasp! That much!? We are not worthy] per year tax credit for everybody.

    Punishing the people who were responsible and did the right thing seems to be all the rage these days. From those who bought the house they could afford now to those who have given up instantaneous gratification to set money aside for the future.


  22. lobo91
    22 | November 30, 2012 4:26 pm

    @ CzechRebel:

    Oh, look…another troll.


  23. lobo91
    23 | November 30, 2012 4:27 pm

    @ AZfederalist:

    Punishing the people who were responsible and did the right thing seems to be all the rage these days. From those who bought the house they could afford now to those who have given up instantaneous gratification to set money aside for the future.

    It’s called equality of outcomes. Standard thought on the left for quite awhile.


  24. heysoos
    24 | November 30, 2012 4:27 pm

    @ CzechRebel:

    Jefferson aside, to you propose that Texas secede?….would that indicate that Texas is hostile toward the Union?


  25. 25 | November 30, 2012 4:28 pm

    @ lobo91:

    Texas has no such special power to walk away from the union. I don’t know where people came up with this idea, but it’s not true.

    It’s an urban legend.


  26. 26 | November 30, 2012 4:29 pm

    @ heysoos:

    I’m not so sure, and that was the point of this post. America is not just a locale, it is an ideal. Our nation was founded on several revolutionary concepts, and one of the most important of these was the concept of individual property rights. Whole sale confiscation of property from the citizenry by a federal behemoth will not sit well, no matter if states have the right to secede or not. That’s the third tipping point. When our government reaches that point in time when the citizens realize, that the very conditions that caused the Declaration of Independence to be accurate and relevant the first time around, are in existence again.

    You can call it silly, but for the first time in my life, I see that happening. Not just in wholesale theft of our wealth, but in the stripping of our Second Amendment Rights, First Amendment Rights, and really, all of the guarantees in the Bill of Rights.

    Think about this for just a moment, a man was put in jail for making a video which was considered insulting to Muslims. We are no longer a free society, it is only a matter of time until people realize that.


  27. Lily
    27 | November 30, 2012 4:30 pm

    Da_Beerfreak wrote:

    lobo91 wrote:
    Exit question for the good people of Texas: When you make the move to become your own independent nation, separate once again from the United States of America, (as you are the only state allowed to do so,) will you be accepting open immigration from those of us who live in Ohio?
    Can we please stop putting false information in posts?
    Texas has no such special power to walk away from the union. I don’t know where people came up with this idea, but it’s not true.
    Truth has lost its value. “Truth” is whatever folks want to believe.

    Yep …damn the facts …the TRUTH is under water at this point in time.


  28. 28 | November 30, 2012 4:31 pm

    heysoos wrote:

    RIX wrote:

    tax revolt…let them throw you in jail…I did and they backed off
    I hate the IRS

    You are a true American patriot.


  29. Lily
    29 | November 30, 2012 4:33 pm

    RIX wrote:

    Perhaps we do under appreciate Obama.
    He is selflessly headed to Hawaii for three weeks,
    where he will contemplate what more he can do for the
    people.
    He is willing to endure perfect weather, beautiful scenery,
    great food and fantastic beaches.
    He gives too much

    :lol: :lol: :lol:

    The sacrifices he has done for this country are amazing!!! And we paid for all of it!!! Unreal.
    /honestly I don’t think he understand the term sacrifice unless he is thinking about how other people other than himself…need to sacrifice for the good of him transforming this country into what he deems to see it as.


  30. 30 | November 30, 2012 4:34 pm

    heysoos wrote:

    @ CzechRebel:
    Jefferson aside, to you propose that Texas secede?….would that indicate that Texas is hostile toward the Union?

    No, Texas would a good neighbor, just like Canada. Ever been there? If, not you have to go. Texas is a great place and the good people of Texas deserve their independence.


  31. 31 | November 30, 2012 4:35 pm

    heysoos wrote:

    no state is gonna cut out…the notion is simply moronic

    People thought the USSR would stay together for a lot longer than it did.


  32. 32 | November 30, 2012 4:36 pm

    Here’s a great Pat Caddell piece over at Breitbart about the possibility of Republicans going the way of the Whigs.

    We don’t need a circular firing squad, finger pointing or endless recriminations. We need a bloodbath, a changing of the guard by force, if necessary. McConnell, Boehner and that hideous Priebus creature should get the ball rolling by resigning their posts.


  33. Lily
    33 | November 30, 2012 4:38 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    @ CzechRebel:
    Oh, look…another troll.

    That was a bit demeaning I must say what she/he wrote. *shakes head*


  34. Da_Beerfreak
    34 | November 30, 2012 4:38 pm

    Here’s an interesting article by one of the morons.
    Parting Company by Walter E. Williams


  35. 35 | November 30, 2012 4:38 pm

    CzechRebel wrote:

    Texas is a great place and the good people of Texas deserve their independence.

    Texas is a wonderful place…..but secession is crazy talk.


  36. heysoos
    36 | November 30, 2012 4:38 pm

    @ Flyovercountry:
    well, you’re a late bloomer…I have always instinctively rejected authority…I was stupid for it when I was younger, and wiser for it in my waning years…I have always had a huge mistrust of the feds, the state, and even the gd school boards…govt is a bloated vampire that is coming for you…sooner or later people are going to get restless and I can’t imagine what comes after that


  37. dwells38
    37 | November 30, 2012 4:38 pm

    @ citizen_q:
    A lot of plans already do not provide an option to take a full payout from their 401k until age 59.5, termination or retirement. Most have loan options but these are capped at 50% of balance up to $100,000.

    For those that do though, I agree with you, I’d rather take the 10% add’l tax hit than send any of it to DC corruptocrats to be foolishly squandered, divvied out to cronies or to pay for someone else to sit on their ass while I work.


  38. Lily
    38 | November 30, 2012 4:39 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ lobo91:
    Texas has no such special power to walk away from the union. I don’t know where people came up with this idea, but it’s not true.
    It’s an urban legend.

    Yep..I live right next to Texas and it just isn’t true. That Texas is the only state able to secede.


  39. heysoos
    39 | November 30, 2012 4:41 pm

    CzechRebel wrote:

    heysoos wrote:
    @ CzechRebel:
    Jefferson aside, to you propose that Texas secede?….would that indicate that Texas is hostile toward the Union?

    No, Texas would a good neighbor, just like Canada. Ever been there? If, not you have to go. Texas is a great place and the good people of Texas deserve their independence.

    I have spent much time in both places…I live in NM and have many friends over in Texas…I’m pretty familiar with Canada as well, but as a tourist….Texas is my back yard


  40. 40 | November 30, 2012 4:42 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    @ CzechRebel:
    Oh, look…another troll.

    Where, where? I thought that “lobo” means “wolf”, not “troll.”


  41. Lily
    41 | November 30, 2012 4:42 pm

    MacDuff wrote:

    CzechRebel wrote:
    Texas is a great place and the good people of Texas deserve their independence.
    Texas is a wonderful place…..but secession is crazy talk.

    Really it is….true it is basically a protest to how the election turned out but that is all it is.


  42. 42 | November 30, 2012 4:43 pm

    MacDuff wrote:

    CzechRebel wrote:
    Texas is a great place and the good people of Texas deserve their independence.
    Texas is a wonderful place…..but secession is crazy talk.

    Labeling a statement as crazy talk is not an acceptable debating technique. It’s a disguised ad hominem attack that does nothing to refute the statement that you disagree with.


  43. heysoos
    43 | November 30, 2012 4:45 pm

    calm down everyone…if Texas seceded it would really mess up the football scene, we cannot allow that


  44. Lily
    44 | November 30, 2012 4:46 pm

    1389AD wrote:

    MacDuff wrote:
    CzechRebel wrote:
    Texas is a great place and the good people of Texas deserve their independence.
    Texas is a wonderful place…..but secession is crazy talk.
    Labeling a statement as crazy talk is not an acceptable debating technique. It’s a disguised ad hominem attack that does nothing to refute the statement that you disagree with.

    Uhhh some things are just what they are *crazy talk*. Let’s say that I am leaving the United States because obama got re-elected and I’m going to live on the moon and damn the United States to hell for re-electing obama it is no longer my country anymore.”
    That is crazy talk.


  45. heysoos
    45 | November 30, 2012 4:46 pm

    have to start the TIC…
    Texas International Conference
    Bay-LOR!
    Bay-LOR!


  46. 46 | November 30, 2012 4:47 pm

    Lily wrote:

    Really it is….true it is basically a protest to how the election turned out but that is all it is.

    When the economy finally tips over the brink -- which is a matter of simple mathematics -- that’ll change.


  47. 47 | November 30, 2012 4:47 pm

    1389AD wrote:

    Labeling a statement as crazy talk is not an acceptable debating technique. It’s an ad hominem attack that does nothing to refute the statement that you disagree with.

    That’s pretty damned sanctimonious considering your dubious record of presenting unsubstantiated “facts” in a post on this blog earlier today.


  48. 48 | November 30, 2012 4:48 pm

    heysoos wrote:

    ]
    I have spent much time in both places…I live in NM and have many friends over in Texas…I’m pretty familiar with Canada as well, but as a tourist….Texas is my back yard

    Land of Enchantment. Cool! I have not been there in almost a decade. The only state with two official languages, English and Spanish! Ever been to that church in Santa Fe where the locals claim that St. Joseph built the stairway to the balcony?


  49. Lily
    49 | November 30, 2012 4:49 pm

    @ CzechRebel:

    I have …it is no longer a functioning Church or Chapel. It was awesome.


  50. 50 | November 30, 2012 4:49 pm

    Lily wrote:

    1389AD wrote:
    MacDuff wrote:
    CzechRebel wrote:
    Texas is a great place and the good people of Texas deserve their independence.
    Texas is a wonderful place…..but secession is crazy talk.
    Labeling a statement as crazy talk is not an acceptable debating technique. It’s a disguised ad hominem attack that does nothing to refute the statement that you disagree with.
    Uhhh some things are just what they are *crazy talk*. Let’s say that I am leaving the United States because obama got re-elected and I’m going to live on the moon and damn the United States to hell for re-electing obama it is no longer my country anymore.”
    That is crazy talk.

    The part about living on the moon is the only crazy part of that statement. As far as the United States being damned to hell, seems to me it already did that to itself.


  51. Lily
    51 | November 30, 2012 4:50 pm

    1389AD wrote:

    Lily wrote:
    Really it is….true it is basically a protest to how the election turned out but that is all it is.
    When the economy finally tips over the brink — which is a matter of simple mathematics — that’ll change.

    We have no idea what is going to happen. Anything can happen. What will happen is really up for grabs in my opinion.


  52. 53 | November 30, 2012 4:52 pm

    MacDuff wrote:

    1389AD wrote:
    Labeling a statement as crazy talk is not an acceptable debating technique. It’s an ad hominem attack that does nothing to refute the statement that you disagree with.
    That’s pretty damned sanctimonious considering your dubious record of presenting unsubstantiated “facts” in a post on this blog earlier today.

    Hey, I know you harbor a personal dislike of me, and that’s your privilege.

    There’s a rule against carrying over disputes from one thread to the next. But if you doubt what I said, you can check easily enough on your own. You can do that by writing to Mr. Boehner and asking him whether he has taken any stand against that proposed tax, and if not, why not. Let me know what answer you get. I’ll publish it.


  53. 54 | November 30, 2012 4:53 pm

    Da_Beerfreak wrote:

    Here’s an interesting article by one of the morons.
    Parting Company by Walter E. Williams

    Yes, having morons like Dr. Walter Williams agreeing with me has me ashamed to post my opinions. Thank you for the link.

    Crazy or not, there is always a tipping point as to how much shit people are willing to tolerate. Realize it or not, and believe me, I’d rather fight this evil than run from it, what I am saying is that if this maneuver is successful, and that possibility looks more likely today than it did two years ago, than we are only cognizant of the very tippy top of the shit ice berg. These people have made far to great an encroachment into our daily lives, and have taken far greater control of our culture than should ever have been allowed.

    At least half or our country still values freedom, and if we all continue to value that freedom, something drastic may have to happen in order to preserve it. The alternative may be surrendering and trying to just get along, the choice of course will be yours individually. I imagine these same conversations took place during the latter quarter of the 1700′s. Have no illusions though, we now live in a country that only partially resembles the land of the free and the home of the brave.


  54. Lily
    55 | November 30, 2012 4:53 pm

    @ 1389AD:

    No it is what it is crazy talk. Where I’m I to go? We are the last beakoning light…we either stay here and fight or we roll over. Where is there to go??? No where. I have children and grand-children. I’m not leaving them.


  55. 56 | November 30, 2012 4:53 pm

    The only possibility of secession I see is the liberal states secceding after the second revolution.

    Last Friday set a new one-day record for so-called “Brady background checks” for firearms purchases.


  56. heysoos
    57 | November 30, 2012 4:54 pm

    CzechRebel wrote:

    heysoos wrote:
    ]
    I have spent much time in both places…I live in NM and have many friends over in Texas…I’m pretty familiar with Canada as well, but as a tourist….Texas is my back yard

    Land of Enchantment. Cool! I have not been there in almost a decade. The only state with two official languages, English and Spanish! Ever been to that church in Santa Fe where the locals claim that St. Joseph built the stairway to the balcony?

    yes, a couple of times…but I avoid SF like the plague


  57. Lily
    58 | November 30, 2012 4:54 pm

    @ heysoos:

    A roller-coaster ride? Seems very apt. And yes we are all in it together.


  58. 59 | November 30, 2012 4:57 pm

    @ 1389AD:

    But if you doubt what I said, you can check easily enough on your own. You can do that by writing to Mr. Boehner and asking him whether he has taken any stand against that proposed tax, and if not, why not. Let me know what answer you get. I’ll publish it.

    Sorry, but that’s not how it works. You made the assertion, it was challenged, so it’s up to you to prove the assertion. You must have gotten it from somewhere, so put it up.


  59. Lily
    60 | November 30, 2012 4:57 pm

    @ Flyovercountry:

    Have no illusions though, we now live in a country that only partially resembles the land of the free and the home of the brave.

    Oh I agree when you can’t eat what you want to..something is very wrong in Denmark.


  60. lobo91
    61 | November 30, 2012 5:00 pm

    @ Mike C.:

    Sorry, but that’s not how it works. You made the assertion, it was challenged, so it’s up to you to prove the assertion. You must have gotten it from somewhere, so put it up.

    It’s in the same lockbox as Texas’ special right to walk away.

    And the Social Security trust fund…


  61. heysoos
    62 | November 30, 2012 5:02 pm

    Lily wrote:

    @ heysoos:
    A roller-coaster ride? Seems very apt. And yes we are all in it together.

    that coaster will give you a heart attack, and I’m not kidding…going straight down at 100mph is not a normal thing…you adrenaline is maxed out, blood pressure up, heart rate elevated, short of breath, vision blurred, sound distorted, certain death…I love it


  62. 63 | November 30, 2012 5:04 pm

    1389AD wrote:

    Hey, I know you harbor a personal dislike of me, and that’s your privilege.

    Honestly, I don’t think about you enough to have an opinion.

    1389AD wrote:

    There’s a rule against carrying over disputes from one thread to the next.

    Fine. Punish me.

    1389AD wrote:

    But if you doubt what I said, you can check easily enough on your own. You can do that by writing to Mr. Boehner and asking him whether he has taken any stand against that proposed tax, and if not, why not. Let me know what answer you get. I’ll publish it.

    It’s not incumbent upon me to research statements that you publish, that’s your job. Get back with me when you have a link, OK?


  63. Lily
    64 | November 30, 2012 5:06 pm

    heysoos wrote:

    Lily wrote:
    @ heysoos:
    A roller-coaster ride? Seems very apt. And yes we are all in it together.
    that coaster will give you a heart attack, and I’m not kidding…going straight down at 100mph is not a normal thing…you adrenaline is maxed out, blood pressure up, heart rate elevated, short of breath, vision blurred, sound distorted, certain death…I love it

    I am not riding it. Already have heart problems.


  64. 65 | November 30, 2012 5:07 pm

    Mike C. wrote:

    @ 1389AD:
    But if you doubt what I said, you can check easily enough on your own. You can do that by writing to Mr. Boehner and asking him whether he has taken any stand against that proposed tax, and if not, why not. Let me know what answer you get. I’ll publish it.
    Sorry, but that’s not how it works. You made the assertion, it was challenged, so it’s up to you to prove the assertion. You must have gotten it from somewhere, so put it up.

    You are not the admin of this blog and you don’t make the rules. This was a dispute from an old thread and should not have been carried to this thread, per Blogmocracy policy.

    The article that I got it from is on the old thread. It’s already up.

    You want to know the funny part? I actually got the article from YOU!


  65. huckfunn
    66 | November 30, 2012 5:08 pm

    Had to share this.


  66. 67 | November 30, 2012 5:10 pm

    1389AD wrote:

    You are not the admin of this blog and you don’t make the rules. This was a dispute from an old thread and should not have been carried to this thread, per Blogmocracy policy.

    I can just see the riding crop in your hand, Impressive authoritarianism!


  67. heysoos
    68 | November 30, 2012 5:10 pm

    huckfunn wrote:

    Had to share this.

    thanks for dropping that Hiatt vid a while ago…I’m a major fan myself, and that song was some really good stuff…some slide guitar and white soul…oh yeah


  68. Lily
    69 | November 30, 2012 5:10 pm

    This is crazy talk….

    Pelosi Supports Giving Obama “Unilateral Control” To Put America Into As Much Debt As He Pleases…

    http://weaselzippers.us/2012/11/30/pelosi-supports-giving-obama-unilateral-control-to-put-america-into-as-much-debt-as-he-pleases/


  69. 70 | November 30, 2012 5:11 pm

    Lily wrote:

    Texas is a wonderful place…..but secession is crazy talk.
    Really it is….true it is basically a protest to how the election turned out but that is all it is.

    Look, the election has been a wonderful catalyst, but not the reason for the secession movements. The Vermont Free State movement wouldn’t dry up had Romney been elected. Alaska has an actual secession party that often wins elections! It had a major delegation during the Reagan administration, which refused to stand for the pledge or national anthem. Of course, Hawaii’s secession movement was in place long before Obama got into politics. (Wonder what State Obama would have claimed to have been born had Hawaii been able to leave the union.) Here in Dixieland, it is almost spooky to get to know some of the Unreconstructed types. They have never given up the faith, but only the like-minded ever hear that.

    No, secession happens all over the world. Heck, if my cousins didn’t let the Slovaks go, I would have had to use the moniker CzechoslovakRebel.


  70. 71 | November 30, 2012 5:11 pm

    @ heysoos:

    I can’t do “dip” roller coasters anymore -- not even the silly little one for the canival. It’s embarrassing. I used to be the Coaster Queen at Great America.


  71. 72 | November 30, 2012 5:12 pm

    Later (assuming I’m not banned by the big bad admin) , this place is smelling a little fascistic for my tastes.


  72. 73 | November 30, 2012 5:12 pm

    @ 1389AD:

    I read that thread, and I never saw anything to back up your statement, which was in the thread title. No, I am not an admin on this blog. More importantly, I don’t think it’s a blog rule. But it is a rule of logic.

    But hey -- I could be wrong. Happens with astounding frequency. Here’s how you fix it and shame us all -- go grab your link to the House Majority leader making such a stement, post it here, and force us to start with the mea culpas. Simple, yes? I for one will apologize.


  73. 74 | November 30, 2012 5:12 pm

    MacDuff wrote:

    Here’s a great Pat Caddell piece over at Breitbart about the possibility of Republicans going the way of the Whigs.
    We don’t need a circular firing squad, finger pointing or endless recriminations. We need a bloodbath, a changing of the guard by force, if necessary. McConnell, Boehner and that hideous Priebus creature should get the ball rolling by resigning their posts.

    We should listen Caddell.


  74. AZfederalist
    75 | November 30, 2012 5:14 pm

    Da_Beerfreak wrote:

    Parting Company by Walter E. Williams

    Hmm, who do I go with, some blogger, or Walter E Williams? I’m going with Walter Williams on this one.


  75. huckfunn
    76 | November 30, 2012 5:15 pm

    heysoos wrote:

    huckfunn wrote:

    Had to share this.

    thanks for dropping that Hiatt vid a while ago…I’m a major fan myself, and that song was some really good stuff…some slide guitar and white soul…oh yeah

    Great! I’m glad somebody liked it. I’ve been a Hiatt fan for a long time. One of his best is Little Village, a CD he did with Ry Cooder, Nick Lowe and Jim Keltner. If you like Hiatt, I strongly recommend. You can click that link and listen to some of it.


  76. Lily
    77 | November 30, 2012 5:15 pm

    @ CzechRebel:

    I’m not a fool and have heard the talk…it’s been around ever since the Civil war. But what is going on now…is basically a protest.


  77. 78 | November 30, 2012 5:15 pm

    Lily wrote:

    That was a bit demeaning I must say what she/he wrote. *shakes head*

    Demeaning? How so?


  78. heysoos
    79 | November 30, 2012 5:16 pm

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    @ heysoos:
    I can’t do “dip” roller coasters anymore — not even the silly little one for the canival. It’s embarrassing. I used to be the Coaster Queen at Great America.

    I’m a coaster freak…better than sex…well, sort of
    I love amusement parks and all the stupid stuff that goes with them…I like the fun of it all…Disney World is like Mecca to me


  79. Lily
    80 | November 30, 2012 5:16 pm

    MacDuff wrote:

    Later (assuming I’m not banned by the big bad admin) , this place is smelling a little fascistic for my tastes.

    Don’t go MacDuff…


  80. lobo91
    81 | November 30, 2012 5:17 pm

    Lily wrote:

    This is crazy talk….

    Pelosi Supports Giving Obama “Unilateral Control” To Put America Into As Much Debt As He Pleases…

    http://weaselzippers.us/2012/11/30/pelosi-supports-giving-obama-unilateral-control-to-put-america-into-as-much-debt-as-he-pleases/

    Gee…Pelosi saying something crazy. That almost never happens.
    //

    Fortunately, there’s no possibility of her desires becoming reality, so it’s a moot point.


  81. Lily
    82 | November 30, 2012 5:18 pm

    CzechRebel wrote:

    Lily wrote:
    That was a bit demeaning I must say what she/he wrote. *shakes head*
    Demeaning? How so?

    Are you from N. Carolina?
    You treated the poster like he has never heard of Jefferson or history. You know that little thing about ummmmmm history.


  82. Lily
    83 | November 30, 2012 5:19 pm

    @ heysoos:

    Disney World is fun.


  83. 84 | November 30, 2012 5:20 pm

    Mike C. wrote:

    The only possibility of secession I see is the liberal states secceding after the second revolution.

    Works for me.


  84. Lily
    85 | November 30, 2012 5:20 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    Lily wrote:
    This is crazy talk….
    Pelosi Supports Giving Obama “Unilateral Control” To Put America Into As Much Debt As He Pleases…
    http://weaselzippers.us/2012/11/30/pelosi-supports-giving-obama-unilateral-control-to-put-america-into-as-much-debt-as-he-pleases/
    Gee…Pelosi saying something crazy. That almost never happens.
    //
    Fortunately, there’s no possibility of her desires becoming reality, so it’s a moot point.

    Like I said crazy talk! LOL! Pelsoi needs to just retire and go home. Really.


  85. AZfederalist
    86 | November 30, 2012 5:20 pm

    MacDuff wrote:

    Texas is a wonderful place…..but secession is crazy talk.

    … and rebelling against King George was crazy talk back in 1775.

    Not saying that this is going to happen, but we are looking at government tyranny coming the likes of which haven’t happened since 1776. … and no Lilly, this isn’t abandoning our children or grandchildren, it is trying to preserve some remnant of our land as a constitutional republic. The alternative here is to accept and bow to the tyranny coming from Obama and the democrats.


  86. 87 | November 30, 2012 5:21 pm

    Mike C. wrote:

    @ 1389AD:
    I read that thread, and I never saw anything to back up your statement, which was in the thread title. No, I am not an admin on this blog. More importantly, I don’t think it’s a blog rule. But it is a rule of logic.
    But hey — I could be wrong. Happens with astounding frequency. Here’s how you fix it and shame us all — go grab your link to the House Majority leader making such a stement, post it here, and force us to start with the mea culpas. Simple, yes? I for one will apologize.

    First of all, the article link came from YOU. I even gave you a hat tip for it! See: [LINK] to the previous thread.

    Second, in that article, I highlighted the part referring to Boehner.

    Third, I have already emailed Boehner asking him whether he has taken a stand against this proposed tax, and if not, why not. I don’t expect any answer other than perhaps a meaningless form letter, but I’ll publish whatever I get.


  87. lobo91
    88 | November 30, 2012 5:21 pm

    AZfederalist wrote:

    Da_Beerfreak wrote:

    Parting Company by Walter E. Williams

    Hmm, who do I go with, some blogger, or Walter E Williams? I’m going with Walter Williams on this one.

    Professor Williams is an economist, not a Constitutional scholar.

    I frequently agree with his views, but he’s spitting in the wind on this topic. Whether people like it or not, the question of whether or not states can secede was settled in the 1860s.

    Do you seriously believe that people are going to look at a debate from 1789 and say, “Huh…I guess they were wrong about that whole Civil War thing. Oops.”?


  88. heysoos
    89 | November 30, 2012 5:26 pm

    huckfunn wrote:

    heysoos wrote:
    huckfunn wrote:
    Had to share this.
    thanks for dropping that Hiatt vid a while ago…I’m a major fan myself, and that song was some really good stuff…some slide guitar and white soul…oh yeah

    Great! I’m glad somebody liked it. I’ve been a Hiatt fan for a long time. One of his best is Little Village, a CD he did with Ry Cooder, Nick Lowe and Jim Keltner. If you like Hiatt, I strongly recommend. You can click that link and listen to some of it.

    am familiar with it, and all his stuff…met him a couple of times, him and Sonny…I still think my favorite thing would be Walk On…that is just so good it’s apart from anything else he’s ever done…as a complete record that is


  89. 90 | November 30, 2012 5:28 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    AZfederalist wrote:

    Da_Beerfreak wrote:
    Parting Company by Walter E. Williams
    Hmm, who do I go with, some blogger, or Walter E Williams? I’m going with Walter Williams on this one.

    Professor Williams is an economist, not a Constitutional scholar.
    I frequently agree with his views, but he’s spitting in the wind on this topic. Whether people like it or not, the question of whether or not states can secede was settled in the 1860s.
    Do you seriously believe that people are going to look at a debate from 1789 and say, “Huh…I guess they were wrong about that whole Civil War thing. Oops.”?

    Saying that the question of secession was settled in the 1860s is the same as saying that might makes right.

    What we call the “American Revolution” was not actually a revolution, but rather, a war of secession from the British Empire. Should we go back and say that our Founders were wrong in 1776?


  90. Calo
    91 | November 30, 2012 5:29 pm

    heysoos wrote:

    calm down everyone…if Texas seceded it would really mess up the football scene, we cannot allow that

    Y’all know it is a joke we Texans like to make, right?

    Well, except maybe for a few of our citizens, it is an idea that is not even entertained by most.


  91. waldensianspirit
    92 | November 30, 2012 5:30 pm

    Mike C. wrote:

    Last Friday set a new one-day record for so-called “Brady background checks” for firearms purchases.

    Shit like Democratic Rep: Amend Constitution To Allow Control Of Speech brings that on


  92. lobo91
    93 | November 30, 2012 5:30 pm

    @ 1389AD:

    Saying that the question of secession was settled in the 1860s is the same as saying that might makes right.

    No, it’s not. It’s called accepting reality.

    You can disagree with it on principle all you like, but it doesn’t change the facts.


  93. AZfederalist
    94 | November 30, 2012 5:31 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    Do you seriously believe that people are going to look at a debate from 1789 and say, “Huh…I guess they were wrong about that whole Civil War thing. Oops.”?

    I can certainly see that coming if the alternative is to surrender what remains of our freedoms. Frankly, it won’t be the red states seceding from the union, but the red states reclaiming the Constitutional Republic and excluding the blue states that have adopted statist policies.

    Will this happen? I have no idea; it’s not going to be from a bunch of people signing a “petition” on the White House website. It’s going to come from individual states and the governments and people in those states looking at what is happening and determining how to preserve their freedoms.


  94. Lily
    95 | November 30, 2012 5:31 pm

    @ AZfederalist:

    I understand…but I just don’t know what in the hell is going to happen in the future. Right now it is crazy talk now will it turn in to something different? Who knows…maybe…no one knows yet.


  95. waldensianspirit
    96 | November 30, 2012 5:32 pm

    DC, NY and California need to secede with enthusiasm by all the rest. Give them only the burbs in the coastal plains and all their debt


  96. lobo91
    97 | November 30, 2012 5:32 pm

    @ waldensianspirit:

    That was clearly a joke.

    Everyone knows that Democrats don’t believe in amending the Constitution. They just ignore the parts they don’t like, and invent new ones out of thin air.


  97. Lily
    98 | November 30, 2012 5:33 pm

    Calo wrote:

    heysoos wrote:
    calm down everyone…if Texas seceded it would really mess up the football scene, we cannot allow that
    Y’all know it is a joke we Texans like to make, right?
    Well, except maybe for a few of our citizens, it is an idea that is not even entertained by most.

    Ah yep and hey {{Calo}}!


  98. 99 | November 30, 2012 5:33 pm

    @ lobo91:

    I thought this was settles back in 1865?


  99. Calo
    100 | November 30, 2012 5:34 pm

    @ Lily:
    {{Lily}}

    Sorry, had to put my two cents in.


  100. unclassifiable
    101 | November 30, 2012 5:37 pm

    @ Calo:

    Calo is right. Y’all have to understand that it is our way of rattling everyone’s cage.

    When we take Fort Hood then you will know we are serious. Until then, it’s all just jaw jacking.


  101. 102 | November 30, 2012 5:37 pm

    I don’t know how secession became the major topic of this thread, except that I included a joke about Texas seceding as an afterthought at the end of the post. The point was not so much about specific secession, as it was about the fact that we’ve reached a point in our history where the things that caused our founding fathers to write the Declaration of Independence are once again prevalent in our society. The undeniable fact is that when that happens, that those conditions that caused a revolution 239 years ago are here, once again, that does not bode well for that society. The government, who has not taken this step yet by the way, they’re only talking about it, will be traveling farther down that road should they confiscate our 401k’s. My question, posited for the purposes of getting people thinking, which it looks like success has been achieved, was whether that would be the tipping point at which we collectively have had enough.


  102. Da_Beerfreak
    103 | November 30, 2012 5:38 pm

    @ lobo91:
    Yes.


  103. Lily
    104 | November 30, 2012 5:41 pm

    Calo wrote:

    @ Lily:
    {{Lily}}
    Sorry, had to put my two cents in.

    Don’t blame you…it’s kinda of a running joke really. You could say the same of all the southern states….The South Will Rise Again joke…and no it has nothing to do with slavery…but everything to do with the north crushing the south.


  104. 105 | November 30, 2012 5:41 pm

    Lily wrote:

    CzechRebel wrote:
    Are you from N. Carolina?
    You treated the poster like he has never heard of Jefferson or history. You know that little thing about ummmmmm history.

    And you don’t find that a little funny and a little lighter than a nasty, “Well Jefferson wrote blah, blah, blah”?

    There is a whole lot of history and no one knows all of it. A real Jefferson buff would get a kick out of part where I described his lengthy service, ambassador, VP, two terms in the White House as “worked for the government for a while.” Jefferson demanded that he only be remembered for three things, founding the University of Virginia, writing the Declaration of Independence and a religious tolerance law for his home state.

    Lighten up. I is supposed to be a friendly debate. Humor is a part of that.


  105. huckfunn
    106 | November 30, 2012 5:41 pm

    I also think secession is crazy talk and it ain’t gonna happen. However, I do think the time has come for wide spread, non-violent civil disobedience, particularly when it comes to mandates on matters of religion and conscience. Cardinal Dolan has essentially told Catholics to ignore the contraception mandates in Obamacare.


  106. Lily
    107 | November 30, 2012 5:42 pm

    @ unclassifiable:

    Indeed..I live too close to Texas and know it’s just talk and not true.
    ;)


  107. 108 | November 30, 2012 5:43 pm

    @ lobo91:
    @ Rodan:
    That still amounts to the statement that might makes right. We can and must accept evil as a fact -- but only for the time being, not forever. We must never condone it.


  108. Lily
    109 | November 30, 2012 5:44 pm

    @ Flyovercountry:

    Who knows what will be the tipping point. I thought four years of obama was the tipping point and I was very, very wrong.


  109. unclassifiable
    110 | November 30, 2012 5:44 pm

    @ Flyovercountry:

    Actually flyover I have a 401k but I think I will just go “old school” and work until I can’t.

    I always thaought Social Security was a faulty scheme predicated on an ever expading populus with an ever-increasing per capita wealth.

    Now we know that is not going to be the case at all. And in retrospect one wonders why anyone would have thought this way but then again political minds are a little hard for me to grasp.


  110. AZfederalist
    111 | November 30, 2012 5:44 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    No, it’s not. It’s called accepting reality.

    … and quietly going along with the Stamp Act, quartering acts, and Tea Tax were also accepting reality. As would the recognition of what happened to those who opposed the king. Yet, somehow, the founders weren’t willing to live with that reality.

    hat to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

    I’m not seeing in there anything that says, “except when the debate has been settled by the Civil War”

    Now,

    Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

    The real question is when that threshold has been tripped. Where does the tyranny of the state cross the threshold of no longer being sufferable?

    But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism,

    I would submit that we are getting close to that when a young girl can get an abortion without telling her parents but can’t open a lemonade stand without the state coming down on her. … or when the government institutes a gun trafficking scheme in order to make a case for more draconian gun control laws. … or when that same government imprisons someone for making a stupid movie by using trumped up charges of parole violation.

    When that same government now wants to seize the savings of those who set money aside for their retirement and give it to others who did not; we are treading that line very closely.

    If we still had a Republic, we could argue that this was because we selected representatives who have imposed those policies by our permission. However, we no longer have a Republic, we have a near pure democracy where the biggest voting block in a state gets all of the electoral votes for President and selects the state’s senators. The only representation we have is the House and that is shaky at best.


  111. 112 | November 30, 2012 5:45 pm

    @ 1389AD:
    @ Rodan:
    @ lobo91:

    Please see my number 102.


  112. Lily
    113 | November 30, 2012 5:46 pm

    @ CzechRebel:

    Didn’t answer all my questions though. You offended another poster…that is the one you need to be posting to. But you waited to come back on after he left.
    Trust my I am lightened.


  113. heysoos
    114 | November 30, 2012 5:47 pm

    @ unclassifiable:
    grasp this…the govt is not your friend


  114. 115 | November 30, 2012 5:48 pm

    @ unclassifiable:

    Know what’s really sad, a good percentage of retirements are involuntary. People who wanted to work longer, but for some reason were not able to do so. 401k’s represent a major portion of many people’s wealth. Rightly or wrongly, in many American households, this is the lion’s share of what many people have salted away for themselves. If this dark thing happens, it will be a major blow to our national well being, on many levels.


  115. Lily
    116 | November 30, 2012 5:49 pm

    @ Lily:

    Pimf MY = ME


  116. Da_Beerfreak
    117 | November 30, 2012 5:51 pm

    Lily wrote:

    @ Lily:

    Pimf MY = ME

    Dern Commie keyboards and Marxist mice… :wink:


  117. unclassifiable
    118 | November 30, 2012 5:51 pm

    @ Flyovercountry:

    And a little more to the point, the fact that one set of politicians established 401k’s as a dandy way to make up for Social Security shortcomings does not preclude another set of politicians in the future thinking that it is a whole shit pile o’ money to be appropriated for the common good.

    And if you ever wnated to know what authoritarian statism is, it starts with that “common good” crap.

    In the end (one way or another) folks will come to realize that letting government do any more than a few simple task (like the specific ones in the Constitution) is folly.


  118. huckfunn
    119 | November 30, 2012 5:51 pm

    I’m not sure if this counts as civil disobedience, or not, but as of 11/25, there were 16 states that have informed HHS that they will not be setting up health exchanges to comply with Obamacare. There will be more before it’s all over.


  119. 120 | November 30, 2012 5:52 pm

    @ unclassifiable:

    A great point!


  120. Lily
    121 | November 30, 2012 5:53 pm

    Da_Beerfreak wrote:

    Lily wrote:
    @ Lily:
    Pimf MY = ME
    Dern Commie keyboards and Marxist mice…

    Don’t you know it! Sneaky little bastages..they are. 8-)


  121. unclassifiable
    122 | November 30, 2012 5:53 pm

    @ heysoos:

    I have grasped it and it has grasped me…

    …and is sqeezing real hard right now.


  122. Speranza
    123 | November 30, 2012 5:55 pm

    Secession is one of the most reactionary and treasonous things I have ever heard of.


  123. 124 | November 30, 2012 5:57 pm

    @ Speranza:

    Please see my number 102.


  124. unclassifiable
    125 | November 30, 2012 5:58 pm

    @ Speranza:

    Oh you need to hang around a sketchier crowd for a while.


  125. Lily
    126 | November 30, 2012 5:59 pm

    @ Speranza:

    I think with so many people in so many states signing that thing is basically a protest against the Federal Government. You are right we don’t need another civil war. What is the tipping point concerning the federal gov..who knows but we are spiraling that tipping point. But then again I could be wrong…I thought we had reached that tipping point after 4 years of obama. Apparently 52% of the people who voted for him wanted more of the same. Tragic. Who knows what lies ahead with obama at the helm for another four years..I take one day at a time.


  126. Da_Beerfreak
    127 | November 30, 2012 6:01 pm

    huckfunn wrote:

    I’m not sure if this counts as civil disobedience, or not, but as of 11/25, there were 16 states that have informed HHS that they will not be setting up health exchanges to comply with Obamacare. There will be more before it’s all over.

    It’s a good start, telling the Orcs in Mordor on the Potomac to go pound sand. :twisted:


  127. Lily
    128 | November 30, 2012 6:01 pm

    unclassifiable wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    Oh you need to hang around a sketchier crowd for a while.

    Who is this crowd that you speak of??? Saying a lot of things aren’t they?
    /curious and all that. ;)


  128. Da_Beerfreak
    129 | November 30, 2012 6:04 pm

    Lily wrote:

    Da_Beerfreak wrote:

    Lily wrote:
    @ Lily:
    Pimf MY = ME
    Dern Commie keyboards and Marxist mice…

    Don’t you know it! Sneaky little bastages..they are.

    Don’t overlook those Socialistic spell checkers too… :shock:


  129. huckfunn
    130 | November 30, 2012 6:04 pm

    Da_Beerfreak wrote:

    huckfunn wrote:

    I’m not sure if this counts as civil disobedience, or not, but as of 11/25, there were 16 states that have informed HHS that they will not be setting up health exchanges to comply with Obamacare. There will be more before it’s all over.

    It’s a good start, telling the Orcs in Mordor on the Potomac to go pound sand.

    Yep. With fully 1/3rd of the states saying they won’t comply, that monster simply won’t fly. Only need 9 more to make it 50%.


  130. Lily
    131 | November 30, 2012 6:05 pm

    @ Da_Beerfreak:

    Oh my indeed!!!! :oops:


  131. 132 | November 30, 2012 6:06 pm

    @ Lily:
    Here again…I am not all that sure that this government truly enjoys the consent of the government. Sure doesn’t look that way to me.

    Until we have a secure voting system, it will be impossible to get our Republic back.


  132. 133 | November 30, 2012 6:07 pm

    huckfunn wrote:

    Da_Beerfreak wrote:
    huckfunn wrote:
    I’m not sure if this counts as civil disobedience, or not, but as of 11/25, there were 16 states that have informed HHS that they will not be setting up health exchanges to comply with Obamacare. There will be more before it’s all over.
    It’s a good start, telling the Orcs in Mordor on the Potomac to go pound sand.

    Yep. With fully 1/3rd of the states saying they won’t comply, that monster simply won’t fly. Only need 9 more to make it 50%.

    That is, in fact, slow motion secession.

    These movements always seem to start over taxation.


  133. 134 | November 30, 2012 6:07 pm

    @ 1389AD:

    Secession is not the answer. The goal is to defeat the Left. I’m not with any secession.


  134. Lily
    135 | November 30, 2012 6:08 pm

    @ 1389AD:

    I agree the voting system needs to be reworked.


  135. Lily
    136 | November 30, 2012 6:08 pm

    @ Rodan:

    It’s not the answer.


  136. huckfunn
    137 | November 30, 2012 6:09 pm

    All of those wishing to may secede to the new thread.


  137. Da_Beerfreak
    138 | November 30, 2012 6:09 pm

    Lily wrote:

    @ Da_Beerfreak:

    Oh my indeed!!!!

    Folks are missing the real conspiracy to take over the World… :cool:


  138. Lily
    139 | November 30, 2012 6:10 pm

    @ Da_Beerfreak:

    Indeed they are …the have been warned!!!! 8-)


  139. Lily
    140 | November 30, 2012 6:11 pm

    @ Lily:

    Look that made me look stupid… PIMF THE=THEY
    /darned keyboard.


  140. huckfunn
    141 | November 30, 2012 6:12 pm

    1389AD wrote:

    That is, in fact, slow motion secession.

    No it’s not. It is refusal to comply with a specific law or rule. Secession is withdrawal from the Union and an act of insurrection.


  141. lobo91
    142 | November 30, 2012 6:13 pm

    @ Lily:

    I think we’re far more likely to see something more like the country flying apart than a true seccession, anyway.


  142. unclassifiable
    143 | November 30, 2012 6:14 pm

    @ Lily:

    Oh gawd Lily where do I begin?

    I got some wanting to liquidate $15 million in business and go to the Bahamas

    I got some teaching themselves all sorts of way to make things go boom

    I got some turning into mountain men (not a lot of those around here so that makes me go hmmmmm)

    You got that T. Jefferson guy watering his liberty tree with blood

    You got folks thinking space is looking good (even though we barely made it to the moon)

    And that’s just the folks I know

    Sometimes you just got to allow for the usual anger and gnashing of teeth to play itself out.

    Is it crazy talk? Well it is unsettling but it is just talk right now.

    As for tipping points, I have a gut feeling that you get an accumulation of personal tipping points. The you get a few that stand up and advocate drastic measures to address their tipping point. And then a few others go “hell yeah” and how about this… and a few more go “hell yeah” and so on. Pretty soon you have a document with a set of tipping points and an identified reason for all of it. Then you got people say, hey I didn’t think about things this way but hell yeah — all of that. Now you got some folks primed for action and anything can happen. In so far as this thread, we are just talking about a particular tipping point so it has not even made it to the first sentence of this paragraph.


  143. Lily
    144 | November 30, 2012 6:15 pm

    @ lobo91:

    Have to agree the country is already divided….I don’t see any co-hesion going on.


  144. Da_Beerfreak
    145 | November 30, 2012 6:15 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    @ Lily:

    I think we’re far more likely to see something more like the country flying apart than a true seccession, anyway.

    Most likely of the many possible outcomes.


  145. 146 | November 30, 2012 6:16 pm

    @ Lily:
    Rodan wrote:

    @ 1389AD:

    Secession is not the answer. The goal is to defeat the Left. I’m not with any secession.

    Whether it’s the answer or not is a moot point. It’ll happen because some States will refuse to be dragged down into the abyss. The only other alternative will be to go down the toilet with everybody else.


  146. 147 | November 30, 2012 6:16 pm

    Flyovercountry wrote:

    I don’t know how secession became the major topic of this thread, except that I included a joke about Texas seceding as an afterthought at the end of the post. The point was not so much about specific secession, as it was about the fact that we’ve reached a point in our history where the things that caused our founding fathers to write the Declaration of Independence are once again prevalent in our society. The undeniable fact is that when that happens, that those conditions that caused a revolution 239 years ago are here, once again, that does not bode well for that society. The government, who has not taken this step yet by the way, they’re only talking about it, will be traveling farther down that road should they confiscate our 401k’s. My question, posited for the purposes of getting people thinking, which it looks like success has been achieved, was whether that would be the tipping point at which we collectively have had enough.

    Might I respectfully suggest that you have gotten people thinking and a lot more of them are thinking about secession, as the British colonists of that 1770s thought, as people behind the Iron Curtain thought during the Cold War, as Slovaks that a few years ago, when my cousins in the old country refused to spell Czechoslovakia with a capital “S.”

    My crystal ball is broken, so I have no idea whether the US will ever break up or not. However, discussion of the secession has become an everyday topic. Perhaps, let me respectfully suggest that D Nile is more than a river in Egypt.


  147. lobo91
    148 | November 30, 2012 6:17 pm

    Da_Beerfreak wrote:

    lobo91 wrote:

    @ Lily:

    I think we’re far more likely to see something more like the country flying apart than a true seccession, anyway.

    Most likely of the many possible outcomes.

    Think “Hostess Brands” more than “Fort Sumter.”


  148. 149 | November 30, 2012 6:17 pm

    huckfunn wrote:

    1389AD wrote:
    That is, in fact, slow motion secession.
    No it’s not. It is refusal to comply with a specific law or rule. Secession is withdrawal from the Union and an act of insurrection.

    Withdrawal from the Union is not an act of insurrection.

    Insurrection is an effort to take over the seat of the federal grabbermint. Nobody, least of all me, is suggesting that.


  149. 150 | November 30, 2012 6:18 pm

    @ heysoos:

    Every so often the Travel Channel has these “10 greatest roller coasters” and I swear, I’d need the paramedics just watching some of them from the ground. We’ve come a long way from the days of the Cyclone at Coney Island or the Big Dipper at the Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk. Hell, I remember when I was wondering if I was going to be okay on “Space Mountain”.


  150. Lily
    151 | November 30, 2012 6:18 pm

    @ unclassifiable:

    WOW!!! They really are chattering aren’t they? Space? Thanks for the reply. I have only heard what obama voters think…in the real world..and they are gloating. They have no idea what they have done.


  151. 152 | November 30, 2012 6:20 pm

    waldensianspirit wrote:

    DC, NY and California need to secede with enthusiasm by all the rest. Give them only the burbs in the coastal plains and all their debt

    Great idea! See, that secession thing isn’t so bad after all.


  152. 153 | November 30, 2012 6:21 pm

    @ huckfunn:

    :lol:


  153. Da_Beerfreak
    154 | November 30, 2012 6:21 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    Da_Beerfreak wrote:

    lobo91 wrote:

    @ Lily:

    I think we’re far more likely to see something more like the country flying apart than a true seccession, anyway.

    Most likely of the many possible outcomes.

    Think “Hostess Brands” more than “Fort Sumter.”

    The first thing that made me think of is that the Old USA becomes part of China Inc. with a new management plan… :shock:


  154. 155 | November 30, 2012 6:21 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    Da_Beerfreak wrote:

    lobo91 wrote:
    @ Lily:
    I think we’re far more likely to see something more like the country flying apart than a true seccession, anyway.
    Most likely of the many possible outcomes.

    Think “Hostess Brands” more than “Fort Sumter.”

    In national terms, Chapter 7 would amount to hyperinflation followed by a nearly complete shutdown of economic activity. Welcome to sunny Zimbabwe.

    One can only hope that some States, or maybe even some parts of States, will refuse to go along with being punished for indebtedness incurred in their name, but against their will.

    The entirety of the USA cannot now be salvaged. That ship sailed (or perhaps sank) in 2008. Best-case scenario is restoring some part of it under a renewed constitutional government.


  155. 156 | November 30, 2012 6:23 pm

    Lily wrote:

    @ lobo91:
    Have to agree the country is already divided….I don’t see any co-hesion going on.

    OK, help me out here. If the country is already that divide, why not make it official and let one side secede from the other?


  156. AZfederalist
    157 | November 30, 2012 6:23 pm

    @ huckfunn:

    AZ joined that group yesterday.

    … and no, it’s not civil disobedience. That’s how the law is written. One of the good things about the shenanigans the democrats pulled in their rush to cram this abortion of a bill down the throats of Americans is that they missed a few details here and there in the rush to tyranny. It is perfectly legal for states to not implement the exchanges, and apparently it will not be legal to enforce the penalties in those states for those not enrolled or against employers. There are also issues about how much the feds can do in a federal exchange.

    /absolutely critical to keep the House and take the Senate in 2014, or those flaws will be fixed in a manner we don’t want to see.


  157. Lily
    158 | November 30, 2012 6:24 pm

    @ CzechRebel:

    I don’t mean secession. Another civil war…no. We are divided in how we think as a country. Don’t put words in my posts. I agreed with lobo that you will see it more flying apart than any thing like a secession.


  158. Da_Beerfreak
    159 | November 30, 2012 6:25 pm

    CzechRebel wrote:

    Lily wrote:

    @ lobo91:
    Have to agree the country is already divided….I don’t see any co-hesion going on.

    OK, help me out here. If the country is already that divide, why not make it official and let one side secede from the other?

    Can’t happen. The Parasites can’t exist without a Host to suck dry.


  159. AZfederalist
    160 | November 30, 2012 6:25 pm

    1389AD wrote:

    That is, in fact, slow motion secession.

    These movements always seem to start over taxation.

    But ObamaCare isn’t a tax.

    Oh, wait a minute, per Benedict Roberts, it is.


  160. heysoos
    161 | November 30, 2012 6:25 pm

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    @ heysoos:
    Every so often the Travel Channel has these “10 greatest roller coasters” and I swear, I’d need the paramedics just watching some of them from the ground. We’ve come a long way from the days of the Cyclone at Coney Island or the Big Dipper at the Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk. Hell, I remember when I was wondering if I was going to be okay on “Space Mountain”.

    Space Mountain is a lazy family ride…the coasters at Ceder Point can kill you


  161. 162 | November 30, 2012 6:27 pm

    @ heysoos:

    Kennywood and King’s Mountain have some great coasters as well. My personal favorite at Cedar Point is Mean Streak.


  162. 163 | November 30, 2012 6:27 pm

    @ Lily:

    Oh, you should work in Marxism Central -- the Bay Area. We had an office lunch yesterday and they were snotting about Romney’s lunch with Obama and I couldn’t take it anymore. I left the lunch.


  163. huckfunn
    164 | November 30, 2012 6:27 pm

    1389AD wrote:

    Withdrawal from the Union is not an act of insurrection.

    Heh. Any state declaring that they have seceded would find out differently, in a hurry.
    Under the “Insurrection Act”…

    § 333. Interference with State and Federal law

    The President, by using the militia or the armed forces, or both, or by any other means, shall take such measures as he considers necessary to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy, if it—

    (1) so hinders the execution of the laws of that State, and of the United States within the State, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or
    (2) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.
    In any situation covered by clause (1), the State shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the laws secured by the Constitution.

    Anyhow, I’m done with the argument. Carry on.


  164. 165 | November 30, 2012 6:29 pm

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    @ heysoos:
    Every so often the Travel Channel has these “10 greatest roller coasters” and I swear, I’d need the paramedics just watching some of them from the ground. We’ve come a long way from the days of the Cyclone at Coney Island or the Big Dipper at the Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk. Hell, I remember when I was wondering if I was going to be okay on “Space Mountain”.

    I’m a brain surgery survivor and am forbidden to go on carnival rides.

    I don’t really care about that but what sort of bothers me is that I am not allowed to scuba dive. Fluid pressure issues. Could blow some major gaskets.


  165. Lily
    166 | November 30, 2012 6:29 pm

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    @ Lily:
    Oh, you should work in Marxism Central — the Bay Area. We had an office lunch yesterday and they were snotting about Romney’s lunch with Obama and I couldn’t take it anymore. I left the lunch.

    I’m lucky I’m only hearing it over the phone and not in person. Dear heavens I would have left too. I swear they don’t realize the election is OVER!


  166. 167 | November 30, 2012 6:30 pm

    @ AZfederalist:

    The good news here is that more challenges to Obamacare are emerging. You cannot challenge a tax until they start collecting on it -- until then it is a hypothetical. They’re collecting it now. Also, the challenges coming now focus on violation of the First Amendment re the provision of contraceptives against your religious beliefs. The Supreme Court, I believe, quietly requested some rebriefing and argument and it may be that Roberts will reverse Roberts, now that he gets a second bite of the apple, and the voters DIDN’T do what he, in his heart of hearts, hoped they would.

    Who knows….I do know Scalia is as controlled PISSED OFF as he can be over this.


  167. heysoos
    168 | November 30, 2012 6:31 pm

    Flyovercountry wrote:

    @ heysoos:
    Kennywood and King’s Mountain have some great coasters as well. My personal favorite at Cedar Point is Mean Streak.

    Mean Streak is not for rookies…that ride will kick your ass…probably the most intense wooden ride out there….whoa


  168. 169 | November 30, 2012 6:33 pm

    @ huckfunn:
    IOW, an insurrection is anything the president calls an insurrection? Don’t think so. As long as nobody is trying to overthrow either the government of any State, or the federal government itself, it’s no insurrection.

    Of course, they can lie and call it anything they want, and use that as an excuse to invade, but that’s another case of “might makes right.”

    As I’ve predicted, we’ve already exhausted the other three boxes of freedom -- soap, ballot, and jury -- and we’re left with the last one.

    Whether anybody likes it or not.


  169. 170 | November 30, 2012 6:34 pm

    1389AD wrote:

    Mike C. wrote:
    @ 1389AD:
    I read that thread, and I never saw anything to back up your statement, which was in the thread title. No, I am not an admin on this blog. More importantly, I don’t think it’s a blog rule. But it is a rule of logic.
    But hey — I could be wrong. Happens with astounding frequency. Here’s how you fix it and shame us all — go grab your link to the House Majority leader making such a stement, post it here, and force us to start with the mea culpas. Simple, yes? I for one will apologize.
    First of all, the article link came from YOU. I even gave you a hat tip for it! See: [LINK] to the previous thread.
    Second, in that article, I highlighted the part referring to Boehner.
    Third, I have already emailed Boehner asking him whether he has taken a stand against this proposed tax, and if not, why not. I don’t expect any answer other than perhaps a meaningless form letter, but I’ll publish whatever I get.

    Okay, my turn. First of all, thanks for the Hat Tip, but it is misplaced, beacuse I don’t read CFP. Sorry.

    Secondly, the author of that article on CFP simply asserts that the Speaker of the House said he would support this measure. What McDuff has been asking for is some link to a statement by the Speaker of the House where he actually said that. Do you have one? So far, all we have is a simple assertion, and since, as McDuff has pointed out, this is a stalled Senate bill, it seems rather unlikely that the Speaker of the House would be “jumping the shark” on it. But it’s not impossible, so it may be that there is proof of this assertion. Just roll it out. Don’t bother writing the Speaker; write the author of the article.

    Just a few comments above my first one, you accused somebody of a logical fallacy, yet you want to persist in an even greater logical fallacy yourself. You made the assertion in the title of your thread, so one would logically assume you have information to make that assertion. I don’t think you got that CFP link from me, but whether you did or not is irrelevant. Did the Speaker make such a statement, yes or no? If he did, let’s see it.

    This is really quite simple, you know -- not exactly rocket science.


  170. AZfederalist
    171 | November 30, 2012 6:36 pm

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    Who knows….I do know Scalia is as controlled PISSED OFF as he can be over this.

    Yeah, I’ve seen some clips of interviews with him. Benedict Robert’s actions were not received well by that wing of the court and were not really very well received by the marxists on the court either because by calling it a tax, he caused them some issues.

    So many things wrong with the law, including the unlawful taking of private business by the federal government. But Benedict Roberts was just fine with this.


  171. 172 | November 30, 2012 6:36 pm

    Rodan -- unlike previous weeks, Our Lady of the Gridiron has her column in early.


  172. 173 | November 30, 2012 6:37 pm

    Lily wrote:

    @ CzechRebel:
    Didn’t answer all my questions though. You offended another poster…that is the one you need to be posting to. But you waited to come back on after he left.
    Trust my I am lightened.

    Well, I am sorry if the poster found it offensive. OK, I have been to North Carolina, but it is one of the few places (hyperbole alert) that I have not actually lived.


  173. lobo91
    174 | November 30, 2012 6:40 pm

    @ Mike C.:

    So far, all we have is a simple assertion, and since, as McDuff has pointed out, this is a stalled Senate bill, it seems rather unlikely that the Speaker of the House would be “jumping the shark” on it.

    Exactly. There are literally thousands of bills introduced in the House and Senate each session. The vast majority of them never even get a committee hearing. Why would Boehner bother to offer an opinion on one of them?

    The fact that someone as powerful as Schumer can’t even get his bill heard in the Democrat-controlled Senate says something about it’s chances of becoming law.


  174. 175 | November 30, 2012 6:49 pm

    @ Mike C.:

    Thank you. This is the very point that he would not address, even after several comments to that effect, on the thread in question. Unsubstantiated assertions in a front page post degrade the integrity of the blog. It would seem that “the admin” would want to exhibit some integrity, but I can only assume not.

    The people on this blog deserve better. I’m done with this subject.


  175. 176 | November 30, 2012 6:57 pm

    Mike C. wrote:

    1389AD wrote:
    Mike C. wrote:
    @ 1389AD:
    I read that thread, and I never saw anything to back up your statement, which was in the thread title. No, I am not an admin on this blog. More importantly, I don’t think it’s a blog rule. But it is a rule of logic.
    But hey — I could be wrong. Happens with astounding frequency. Here’s how you fix it and shame us all — go grab your link to the House Majority leader making such a stement, post it here, and force us to start with the mea culpas. Simple, yes? I for one will apologize.
    First of all, the article link came from YOU. I even gave you a hat tip for it! See: [LINK] to the previous thread.
    Second, in that article, I highlighted the part referring to Boehner.
    Third, I have already emailed Boehner asking him whether he has taken a stand against this proposed tax, and if not, why not. I don’t expect any answer other than perhaps a meaningless form letter, but I’ll publish whatever I get.
    Okay, my turn. First of all, thanks for the Hat Tip, but it is misplaced, beacuse I don’t read CFP. Sorry.
    Secondly, the author of that article on CFP simply asserts that the Speaker of the House said he would support this measure. What McDuff has been asking for is some link to a statement by the Speaker of the House where he actually said that. Do you have one? So far, all we have is a simple assertion, and since, as McDuff has pointed out, this is a stalled Senate bill, it seems rather unlikely that the Speaker of the House would be “jumping the shark” on it. But it’s not impossible, so it may be that there is proof of this assertion. Just roll it out. Don’t bother writing the Speaker; write the author of the article.
    Just a few comments above my first one, you accused somebody of a logical fallacy, yet you want to persist in an even greater logical fallacy yourself. You made the assertion in the title of your thread, so one would logically assume you have information to make that assertion. I don’t think you got that CFP link from me, but whether you did or not is irrelevant. Did the Speaker make such a statement, yes or no? If he did, let’s see it.
    This is really quite simple, you know — not exactly rocket science.

    Your comment did, indeed, refer to this same article in CFP.

    Rather than dealing with this issue second-hand, I would rather put Boehner on the spot to get him to take a stand on this issue one way or another. It’s his duty, not only to withhold support from this proposal, but to condemn it publicly and put the kibosh on it. It isn’t ENOUGH for Boehner to just sit there like a spineless SLUG and let the Dems turn our country into a train wreck.

    Be that as it may, I just sent an email to the author of that article, asking where he got the information.

    I am prepared to publish whatever answers I get (if any), with my name removed of course!


  176. 177 | November 30, 2012 6:58 pm

    @ MacDuff:

    “She”, not “He.”


  177. 178 | November 30, 2012 7:01 pm

    lobo91 wrote:

    @ Mike C.:
    So far, all we have is a simple assertion, and since, as McDuff has pointed out, this is a stalled Senate bill, it seems rather unlikely that the Speaker of the House would be “jumping the shark” on it.
    Exactly. There are literally thousands of bills introduced in the House and Senate each session. The vast majority of them never even get a committee hearing. Why would Boehner bother to offer an opinion on one of them?
    The fact that someone as powerful as Schumer can’t even get his bill heard in the Democrat-controlled Senate says something about it’s chances of becoming law.

    If a bill has to do with any form of taxation, it behooves Boehner to take a stand on it.

    I know, the dude has been a complete invertebrate thus far, but still…he’s a key spokesman of the GOP. It’s his job to muster the GOP reps, get everybody on the same page, and make it clear to everyone that this stuff ain’t gonna happen. He needs to CONDEMN these things vociferously.


  178. 179 | November 30, 2012 7:02 pm

    Mike C. wrote:

    @ MacDuff:

    “She”, not “He.”

    The English language desperately needs a gender-neutral pronoun for when you just don’t care enough to even know one’s gender.


  179. 180 | November 30, 2012 7:06 pm

    huckfunn wrote:

    1389AD wrote:
    Withdrawal from the Union is not an act of insurrection.
    Heh. Any state declaring that they have seceded would find out differently, in a hurry.

    Under the “Insurrection Act”…
    § 333. Interference with State and Federal law
    The President, by using the militia or the armed forces, or both, or by any other means, shall take such measures as he considers necessary to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy, if it—
    (1) so hinders the execution of the laws of that State, and of the United States within the State, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or
    (2) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.
    In any situation covered by clause (1), the State shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the laws secured by the Constitution.

    Anyhow, I’m done with the argument. Carry on.

    I guess you are NOT a lawyer, are you?

    First of all, ANY State that has seceded would not be part of the US and NOT under the jurisdiction of the US.

    More importantly, all the conversation regarding secession--and I have been following it for the last fifteen years--is focused on an agreed secession. Oh, I know, you can find guy with a tinfoil hat that thinks he is going to raise an army and fight it out. But, the serious talk by serious people has all been about peaceful secession.

    Of course, it is not likely that such a law applied to secession would be Constitutional. Jefferson Davis appeared in court, ready for trial, several times. The federal government sought and got a continuance each time. Finally, he was cleared on a general amnesty. The simple reason is that secession was both Constitutional and legal.

    Methinks your federal statue is a red herring.


  180. 181 | November 30, 2012 7:07 pm

    @ 1389AD:

    Ah. Now see, I was wrong in asserting that you did not get the article link from me, and I will admit that. To be perfectly honest, I do not remember even noting the part about the Speaker supposedly supporting the measure. You will note that I only empasised one small portion of the article, and that was the historical reference to Washington. My purpose there was to counter the (IMHO) insane idea that conservatives should violate their most basic principles by urging arbitrary taxes on “enemies”, a tactic that has been strongly (and wrongly, IMHO) urged on this forum in recent days.


  181. 182 | November 30, 2012 7:07 pm

    @ MacDuff:

    It used to be that the default was “he.” Now idiots like Sandra Fluke and the Society of Ugly Feminists find it offensive.


  182. 183 | November 30, 2012 7:07 pm

    MacDuff wrote:

    Mike C. wrote:
    @ MacDuff:
    “She”, not “He.”

    The English language desperately needs a gender-neutral pronoun for when you just don’t care enough to even know one’s gender.

    Now THAT’s rude.


  183. 184 | November 30, 2012 7:10 pm

    Mike C. wrote:

    @ 1389AD:
    Ah. Now see, I was wrong in asserting that you did not get the article link from me, and I will admit that. To be perfectly honest, I do not remember even noting the part about the Speaker supposedly supporting the measure. You will note that I only empasised one small portion of the article, and that was the historical reference to Washington. My purpose there was to counter the (IMHO) insane idea that conservatives should violate their most basic principles by urging arbitrary taxes on “enemies”, a tactic that has been strongly (and wrongly, IMHO) urged on this forum in recent days.

    My purpose is not to argue with you.

    I genuinely want to get to the bottom of this.

    Even to make such a revenue proposal is truly disgusting.


  184. 185 | November 30, 2012 7:11 pm

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    @ MacDuff:
    It used to be that the default was “he.” Now idiots like Sandra Fluke and the Society of Ugly Feminists find it offensive.

    I’m not ugly and I’m not a feminist. Getting on in years, yes, but quite presentable for my age. If someone mistakes me for a male in print media, I correct them politely, taking no offense.


  185. Lily
    186 | November 30, 2012 7:13 pm

    @ 1389AD:

    But you and CzechRebel have been rather rude to MacDuff…why does his link go to your blog?


  186. 187 | November 30, 2012 7:15 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ 1389AD:

    Secession is not the answer. The goal is to defeat the Left. I’m not with any secession.

    Secession not only is the answer, but the best way to defeat the left. Look how well it worked at defeating the left in the former Soviet Union.


  187. 188 | November 30, 2012 7:16 pm

    Lily wrote:

    @ 1389AD:
    But you and CzechRebel have been rather rude to MacDuff…why does his link go to your blog?

    MacDuff’s link goes to his own blog: http://theweeksreview.blogspot.com/

    WordPress might be having some hiccups.


  188. Lily
    189 | November 30, 2012 7:17 pm

    @ 1389AD:

    Sorry talking CzechRebel..is he your husband?


  189. 190 | November 30, 2012 7:18 pm

    @ 1389AD:

    I used to use “Barbarian at the Gate” as my blog title. I ran into the same thing. It may be that your “bear” in your avatar is decidedly male in appearance -- I thought you were a man as well.


  190. Lily
    191 | November 30, 2012 7:20 pm

    @ Carolina Girl:

    Yes it is rather hard to know if someone is male or female if their nic or avatar can go either way…especially on the net.


  191. 192 | November 30, 2012 7:21 pm

    There is no constitutional right to secede, according to Justice Scalia (this was written in answer to someone who wanted to feature secession in a screenplay). I have seen the PDF of the letter this quote comes from:

    I am afraid I cannot be of much help with your problem, principally because I cannot imagine that such a question could ever reach the Supreme Court. To begin with, the answer is clear.

    If there was any constitutional issue resolved by the Civil War, it is that there is no right to secede.

    (Hence, in the Pledge of Allegiance, “one Nation, indivisible.”) Secondly, I find it difficult to envision who the parties to this lawsuit might be. Is the State suing the United States for a declaratory judgment? But the United States cannot be sued without its consent, and it has not consented to this sort of suit.


  192. Lily
    193 | November 30, 2012 7:22 pm

    @ Carolina Girl:

    So it is insurrection if a state secedes…..hmmmm. I thought the civil war had settled it.


  193. 194 | November 30, 2012 7:22 pm

    1389AD wrote:

    Now THAT’s rude.

    No, that’s the truth.


  194. 195 | November 30, 2012 7:26 pm

    @ Lily:

    Well, I figure if anyone knows, it’s Mr. Originalist.
    Ever met him? I used to work with his son and was afforded the opportunity when the Justice came to take him to lunch.

    Only verifiable time in my life when I was, needless to say, speechless.


  195. Lily
    196 | November 30, 2012 7:30 pm

    @ Carolina Girl:

    Nope never met him …but I would think secession would mean a civil war just like the last time. I don’t want to live through that…and I don’t think many people do either. I think all those people signing that petition in all the states is more of protest than anything else…unless everything goes side-ways on us all of a sudden. With obama at the helm it is really hard for me to predict what lies ahead.


  196. 197 | November 30, 2012 7:32 pm

    @ Lily:
    Rude to McDuff? Come on! He is one of my favorite Shakespeare dudes. Let me see if I can quote him:

    “Despair thy charm and thy angel that still doth serve thee that McDuff was from his mother’s womb untimely ripped!”

    Hopefully, a fond memory of his words in MacBeth will make him feel less insulted.


  197. Lily
    198 | November 30, 2012 7:36 pm

    @ CzechRebel:

    Well it isn’t me to which you should post that. You will have to ask him instead of me.


  198. 199 | November 30, 2012 7:38 pm

    Well well, well, it looks like somebody in the Senate GOP took his balls out of the lock box —

    Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), who will soon be the second-ranking Republican in the Senate, on Friday panned a proposal by the White House that would allow President Obama to raise the debt ceiling without congressional approval.

    Cornyn was referring to a plan Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner presented to Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) on Thursday that was meant to avoid the “fiscal cliff” of tax increases and spending cuts.

    The plan, which sparked strong Republican criticism, included a provision allowing the White House to raise the debt ceiling without the consent of Congress.

    “Well, it’s outrageous,” Cornyn said on Fox News.

    “It’s like saying we maxed out our credit card so I’m going to get a new credit card with no limit so I can keep spending. There needs to be some accountability here and, so far, we’re spending 42 cents out of every dollar in Washington and that’s borrowed money. And that’s money that our kids and grandkids are gonna have to pay back.”

    “It’s profoundly irresponsible,” Cornyn said. “So that’s a crazy idea and I’m amazed that Secretary Geithner had the courage to float that yesterday.”


  199. Da_Beerfreak
    200 | November 30, 2012 7:44 pm

    @ Carolina Girl:
    Add to that this bit of interesting news from yesterday.
    Boehner -- Filibuster rule change bills ‘dead on arrival’

    House Speaker John Boehner, Ohio Republican, made it clear that any bill that came to the House from the upper chamber as a result of Senate Democrats changing the rules on the filibuster would be “dead on arrival.” In a statement released from Speaker Boehner’s office, the Ohio GOP’er remarked:

    “Senate Democrats’ attempt to break Senate rules in order to change Senate rules is clearly designed to marginalize Senate Republicans and their constituents while greasing the skids for controversial partisan measures. I question the wisdom of this maneuver, especially at a time when cooperation on Capitol Hill is critical, and fully support Leader McConnell’s efforts to protect minority rights, which are an essential part of our constitutional tradition. Any bill that reaches a Republican-led House based on Senate Democrats’ heavy-handed power play would be dead on arrival.”


  200. 201 | November 30, 2012 8:03 pm

    @ Da_Beerfreak:

    Well well well Johnny Boy -- who knew you had it in ya!?


  201. randian
    202 | December 1, 2012 1:06 am

    citizen_q wrote:

    Wondering IF 401K nationalization is attempted, if it might be worth the tax hit to just cash them out. Assuming of course, that the grabbermint has not locked out that possibility.

    Why would they lock that out? The government wants a piece of your 401k. I have no doubt they’d be happy with you cashing out your 401k, since that’s a big chunk of cash for them right now. Indeed, the more people who cash out their 401ks, or don’t start them, the better off the government is.


  202. 203 | December 1, 2012 7:38 am

    @ randian:

    Section 1035 exchange. Zero tax liability, as money would still be qualified under the rules which apply to individual IRA.


  203. 204 | December 1, 2012 7:44 am

    @ Flyovercountry:

    Up kinda early for a Saturday, aren’t ya flyover? As I recall you’re in the Central Time Zone…….


  204. 205 | December 1, 2012 12:17 pm

    @ MacDuff:

    work to do!


Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By David