Articles of Secession, Anno 2012?

Miles of column inches have been spent on discussing Roberts’ abortion of a legislating from the bench ruling, but not a whole lot of hay has been made out of the possible consequences of ObamaTaxCare’s threat to withhold all federal Medicaid funds from states refusing to expand Medicaid having been deemed unconstitutional by the Court and what it might mean to the whole pile of statist, tyrannical shite if enough states decide to say “fuck you.”

26 states sued to overturn ObamaTaxCare. Presumably those same 26 states are right now righteously pissed off that the Court’s liberal fascists, with Benedict Roberts in front, decided that the law means whatever they say it means, whether or not it says anything of the sort or not.

That’s a lot of states potentially lined up to kick ObamaTaxCare in the nuts. And it would be one giant kick, to be sure, because without the states, ALL of them, joining the Medicaid expansion, ObamaTaxCare becomes even more unsustainable than it is, which is saying quite a bit. And now they have the Supreme Court’s blessing to do so.

Some states have already extended their middle finger to Comrade Ogabe and his tyranny, and more are sure to follow.

So what’s a tyrant federal government to do? Keep in mind that OgabeTaxCare simply cannot survive for more than a few years without the states voluntarily assuming most of the costs of it, i.e. the Medicaid expansion which is how Ogabe and his NSDWP fascists came up with the “savings” of their scheme to control the peasants’ lives down to the last detail. The money isn’t “saved” at all, it’s just that the expense is moved from federal accounts to state ones.

And that’s how His Imperial Majesty started wondering whether this is the equivalent of 1861. Because clearly the ever-expanding federal behemoth in DC is not going to just sit down and let those darn hillbillies, rednecks and Tea Partiers still believing in States’ Rights get away with sticking a steel rod in the spokes of the imperial federal government’s wheels.

Obviously, all of this may die down and become irrelevant in November, depending on the outcome of the election, and it’s most likely the real reason why the legislatures of all of the 26 states haven’t already said “fuck you” — why draw a line in the sand unless you know it’s needed? — but it pays to think ahead. What if, Heaven forbid, the NSDWP and Ogabe manage to squeak out a “win” through fraud, intimidation and other means in November?

The states, at least the 26 that aren’t already liberal shit holes drowning in red ink and therefore actually have something to lose, can then choose between committing financial suicide or basically telling DC to get off of their lawn, and they will have the Supreme Court’s authority behind such a declaration. And don’t shrug it off either, because they’ll be faced with a choice that is in every way as existential for the states as all of the issues leading up to 1861 were, if not more so.

Because FedGovCo, if they’re still in the hands of Comrade Ogabe and his NSDWP, will not let their signature take-over die without a fight, just because those pesky states won’t follow suit, leaving the states with no choice but to sever their ties with a government that is no longer governing with their consent. Or to die, leaving our Union and Constitution as nothing more than another failed experiment.

Could be interesting times ahead.

Thatisall.

28 comments

  1. 1
    angrywebmaster growls and barks:

    Succession is the last step of course. First would be a Constitutional convention with proposed amendments to strip power away from the Feds. I’m not sure how may states are needed to call a ConCon, but I know we’re close to that number.

    I’ve seen discussions on what may happen if a convention is actually called. Some say they could rewrite the constitution to make the EU constitution look like the paradigm of brevity and conciseness. They always seem to forget that anything that came out ConCon would still have to be voted on by the states.
    :em03:
    I always love the reactions by the Beltway Bandits on the talk shows when a ConCon comes up. Blind panic ensues.
    :em05:
    They understand that a successful ConCon that does strip power away from DC would kill their golden goose. They wouldn’t be important any more.
    :em07:
    BTW

    How does it feel to be on the DHS potential terrorist watch list? :em01:

  2. 2
    Emperor Misha I growls and barks:

    angrywebmaster says:

    Succession is the last step of course. First would be a Constitutional convention with proposed amendments to strip power away from the Feds.

    What’s the point? We’re not in this mess because there’s anything wrong with the Constitution that we already have, we’re in it because it’s being utterly ignored. So what’s the point in writing up another document that will be ignored too? We don’t need “amendments to strip power away from the Feds”, because they don’t have those powers under the current Constitution. But try to tell that to the Supreme Whores.

    angrywebmaster says:

    How does it feel to be on the DHS potential terrorist watch list?

    Under the current fascist regime I have only this to say: If you AREN’T on that list already, you need to get your shit together because you’re doing it wrong.

  3. 3
    rickl growls and barks:

    Emperor Misha I says:

    Under the current fascist regime I have only this to say: If you AREN’T on that list already, you need to get your shit together because you’re doing it wrong.

    :em05:

    Seriously, I’m afraid of a Constitutional Convention. What makes anybody think today’s political class can improve on what the Founders gave us? We’re liable to end up with some monstrosity like the EU constitution.

  4. 4
    LC Sir Rurik, K.o.E. growls and barks:

    I remind you of another solution. I took the trouble to reread the actual text of Article III, and lo! … I disovered that Justices are not appointed for life. They are appointed to serve “in good behaviour”. Are you willing to assure me that what Roberts did and the manner in which he did it, was compassed within good behaviour? If no, then there is a plausible solution, no less feasible than secession. It is a solution which should have been exercised with several of his predecessors. Does the name Abe Fortas ring a bell?

  5. 5
    Secondmouse growls and barks:

    No Constitutional Convention. We don’t have a design issue. We have a problem with execution, which we may have to solve with more. Execution, that is.

  6. 6
    HempRopeAndStreetlight growls and barks:

    Secession is the last step.

    You’re Right.

    And we are THERE.

    I pledge my life, my limbs, fortune, and my honor in defense of any state that leaves this festering corpse of a nation. I will travel there and join the common defense of free men standing against tyrants, and any price I must pay in that act will be worth-while.

  7. 7
    Tallulah growls and barks:

    Meanwhile, the state of UTAH is SUING the Federal Government for Acting Like an environmentalist law (proposed by a New York congressperson, apparently) is actually a Law that has been passed already …

    when it hasn’t been passed.

    The Bureau of Land Management, under the Fascists’ instructions, is denying right of way to roads, denying drilling permits, etc., in a ten-million acre parcel of land, apparently following the dictates of the un-passed environmental law.

    I love nature: I’m in favor of preserving wilderness and not unnecessarily trashing God’s creation. But this stretch of land is really out in the middle of nowhere, very arid and not terribly scenic: I dunno. They posted about it at Ace.

    The common theme is the lawlessness of this gang of thugs. Whatever they feel like doing, they do, and the peasants can lump it.

  8. 8
    Tallulah growls and barks:

    BTW, do any of you remember ANY states suing the federal government when George Bush was in charge? Did I just miss something?

  9. 9
    angrywebmaster growls and barks:

    rickl @ #:

    Seriously, I’m afraid of a Constitutional Convention. What makes anybody think today’s political class can improve on what the Founders gave us?

    What makes you think the political class will be allowed to participate?
    :em07:

    In any case, I’ve heard that the states, when passing the enabling legislation for a CC, can limit the CC to only consider the draft amendments. They can’t add or remove new ones.

    I have no idea if this is true or not.
    :em03:

  10. 10
    LC Ogrrre growls and barks:

    … leaving the states with no choice but to sever their ties with a government that is no longer governing with their consent …

    According to a recent Rasmussen poll, only 22% of respondents said the government had the consent of the governed.

  11. 11

    Secondmouse says:

    No Constitutional Convention. We don’t have a design issue. We have a problem with execution, which we may have to solve with more. Execution, that is.

    :em03:
    :em01:

  12. 12
    angrywebmaster growls and barks:

    LC cmblake6, Imperial Black Ops Technician @ #:
    We should give it a shot I think. How about:

    1) term limits for senate, house and judicial with no grandfathering and no benefits once out of office. Once the amendment is ratified, they pack up and get out.

    2) Restore senatorial elections back to the state legislatures with a recall provision if they screw up. Maybe add a recall provision for federal judges like some states have.

    3) rewrite the commerce clause limiting it only to ensuring the smooth flow of goods, services and information between the states. Federal govt still handles international trade agreements. (This will need careful writing)

    4) some sort of amendment preventing federal taxes from being redistributed. Kill welfare so to speak. Also preventing federal mandates that people buy/don’t buy things.

    I think these 4 would fix a lot of problems and if tightly written even traitors like Roberts won’t be able to screw with it.

    Any thoughts? or opinions? (Who am I kidding?) :em05:

  13. 13
    LCSgtmech growls and barks:

    About time to bring the old warrior out of hibernation…and it ain’t gonna be pretty.

  14. 14
    Darth Venomous growls and barks:

    3) rewrite the commerce clause limiting it only to ensuring the smooth flow of goods, services and information between the states. Federal govt still handles international trade agreements. (This will need careful writing)

    5) Rewrite Article VI such that no treaty shall ever – ever – violate a tenet of the new constitution. The Constitution to be the Supreme Law of the Land, and that’s it. Inferior laws and/or treaties to be crafted accordingly.

  15. 15
    angrywebmaster growls and barks:

    Darth Venomous @ #:

    Rewrite Article VI such that no treaty shall ever – ever – violate a tenet of the new constitution. The Constitution to be the Supreme Law of the Land, and that’s it. Inferior laws and/or treaties to be crafted accordingly.

    Thanks, I forgot about that. looks like we’re working on the next ten bill of rights. Or do we want to call it the bill of restrictions?

  16. 16
    LC Ogrrre growls and barks:

    I agree with Venomous: no treaty with any country or organization may violate the Constitution, nor may a treaty amend the Constitution.
    Also a balanced budget clause that prohibits Congress from raising taxes to balance the budget. Any new taxes and all increases in tax rates must be passed by 2/3 majority of both houses, then must be ratified by 2/3 majority vote of the citizens who will be required to pay the tax.
    A budget clause that if Congress does not pass a budget by a specific immutable date, the entire federal government, with the exception of those functions of the Department of Defense dealing specifically with war fighting and armed national defense, will be immediately shut down. There will be no continuing resolutions to keep the government open. No appropriations bill, nor any other bill can be “deemed” to be passed. Each bill must be passed by a full recorded vote by each house of Congress
    A clause that all bills passed by congress shall deal with only one subject. That the Senate may not introduce taxation or spending amendments into bills.
    A clause that Congress cannot, may not, shall not establish any deparment, agency, or bureau that has the power to make rules or regulations that have the force of a law, nor may such department, agency, or bureau have the power to establish any fine or penalty. Only Congress may impose such regulation or rule, or fine or penalty, and all such bills must originate in the House of Representatives.
    A clause that prohibits the President from claiming executive privelege in order to attempt to hide the President’s involvement in any matter that is being investigated as a possible criminal matter by Congress.
    A clause that will remove from office all members of any political party if one or more of their members institutes a criminal probe of the Office of the President, or any department, agency, or bureau of the Executive branch for the sole purpose or main purpose of harrassing the President of the United States in the execution of his/her duties.
    A clause that will immediately remove an elected official from office if that official violates his/her oath of office. This is particularly applicable to the President of the United States, if that individual refuses to enforce the laws of the United States, including, but not limited to, immigration law, voting rights law, or any law such as the Defense of Marriage Act.
    A clause that requires the Supreme Court to consider ONLY the Constitution of the United States and English Common Law in their deliberations on the Constitutionality of laws passed by Congress and signed by the President. Any judge or justice that attempts to use the constitution of any other country, or sharia law in their deliberations shall be deemed unfit for office and immediately removed from the bench. Such a judge or Justice will be ineligible for any pension benefits.
    A clause that makes the death penalty madadory for an elected or appointed federal official, or any civil service employee, to accept a bribe, and makes the death penalty mandatory for any individual to offer a bribe to such elected or appointed federal official, or civil service employee.
    A clause that will immediately remove from office any federal judge or justice who attempts to impose a tax from the bench, attempts to amend the Constitution from the bench, or attempts to rewrite an otherwise unconstitutional law.

  17. 17
    Mattexian growls and barks:

    I’m more in favor of secession, especially for Texas! It’s an Olympic Games year again, and I’m tired of watching as pissant little islands that are smaller than Galveston get to march and have a team (of two players, and a borrowed flagbearer), while Texans have to participate with the rest of the uS’s players, under their flag, instead of our own. One of my coworkers is moving next week to New Fucking York, and I warned her that the next time she comes back to visit, she might need a passport!

  18. 18
    LC Gladiator growls and barks:

    Congress may not make a law that applies to the people but not to Congress.

    Congress may not give itself a pay increase in the current session, and any future increases must pass with a 75% Super Majority

    Any Congressperson who cannot attend at least 75% of official sessions must step down. (No more brain dead Tim Johnsons or Gabby Giffords holding a seat)

  19. 19
    LC Gladiator growls and barks:

    Line item veto

    No more earmarks

  20. 20
    angrywebmaster growls and barks:

    Just a minor aside. I have a racist commie who has crapped in my comments section. Anyone care to virtually punch Comrade Cortney in the face?

    http://angry.net/blog2/?p=8336#comment-577549834

    http://angry.net/blog2/?p=8336

  21. 21
    Fa Cube Itches growls and barks:

    If Seccession comes, just remember to raise a small obelisk commemorating those of us trapped behind enemy lines who went John Mosby/John Hunt Morgan/William Quantrill for as long as we could.

  22. 22
    Fa Cube Itches growls and barks:

    HempRopeAndStreetlight @ #:

    “I pledge my life, my limbs, fortune, and my honor in defense of any state that leaves this festering corpse of a nation. I will travel there and join the common defense of free men standing against tyrants, and any price I must pay in that act will be worth-while.”

    What if the state leaves because we aren’t Lefty enough? Some idiots tried to start a secession drive in one of the New England states during the Jorge Bush years for that very reason.

    In the end, I suspect Secession or Balkanization is inevitable – we just don’t want to live with each other anymore, since there is so little common ground.

  23. 23
    Fa Cube Itches growls and barks:

    angrywebmaster @ #:

    “In any case, I’ve heard that the states, when passing the enabling legislation for a CC, can limit the CC to only consider the draft amendments. They can’t add or remove new ones.”

    Good luck with that. The original one was only to revise the Articles of Confederation, not scrap and replace. Any new one would likely do the same.

  24. 24
    Emperor Misha I growls and barks:

    Fa Cube Itches says:

    In the end, I suspect Secession or Balkanization is inevitable – we just don’t want to live with each other anymore, since there is so little common ground.

    I fear you may very well be right.

    But it didn’t have to be that way. Our differences among ourselves is nothing new. It wasn’t yesterday that, for instance, “come to Texas, it’s like a whole ‘nuther country” became a slogan. Nor is there anything inherently wrong in differences between communities, cities, counties, states etc. In fact, I would argue that it is what used to make us strong because we were free to experiment without bringing the whole frackin’ house down around our ears. Sometimes we’d get it right and everybody else would copy it, sometimes we’d get it wrong but that would self-correct when the people living in those communities either left for greener pastures or changed what was wrong.

    The Founders understood that, which is why they deliberately set up the Constitution to leave as little power as possible with the Federal Government. That way, most of everything was left to the States, and if one of the States fucked up, the rest of them wouldn’t be hurt by the fuckup. The system worked fine too, for the most part.

    Where the wheels came off the wagon was when FedGovCo arrogated unto itself ever more powers that they didn’t have under the Constitution, removing independence and self-rule from the individual States and forcing the ones that didn’t fuck up to pay for all of the other States’ fuckups.

    And self-correction was no longer an option. It used to be that if State X passed a retarded law, its citizens could then haul ass to one of the other States, thus forcing State X to either cease to exist or reconsider. There is nowhere to run if FedGovCo has all the power and every single State has to abide by one size fits all regulations coming from a malarial swamp that does not have to suffer the consequences of its own idiocies.

    As we all now, “one size fits all” really means “fits nobody at fucking all.” Because people aren’t “the same”, different regions aren’t “the same.” What might work exceedingly well in San Francisco is quite unlikely to work in a rural State. And there is nothing wrong with that. What’s wrong is ignoring reality and trying to reshape said reality by Imperial Edict.

    It is what totalitarian fascists always get wrong in their infinite hubris, and it is what brings every single nation that tries it down in the end, no matter how strong they are.

    The only thing you get from trying to legislate reality out of existence is that your subjects, faced with no other choice, will take reality and shove it right back in your face in ways quite unpleasant to contemplate.

    But it didn’t have to be that way. We, unlike all of the other nations/empires that went before us, HAD a Constitution designed to avoid just that, by delegating power as far away from an alien, centralized behemoth of a government as possible, thus leaving local governments with having to face the immediate consequences of their own rulings without the recourse of making everybody else pay for them at the point of a gun.

    We have that Constitution still, but it’s obvious that our self-appointed masters in DC have no intentions whatsoever of abiding by it.

    So, barring some miracle fervently to be hoped and prayed for, we’re going to have to force them or split into thousands of enclaves constantly at war with each other.

    If that comes to pass, and Heaven forbid that it does because none of the sides in such a conflict are going to like it, no matter what the outcome, then history will record the first example of a nation that self-destructed, not because of flaws in its foundation, but because it disregarded that foundation completely, and willfully so.

  25. 25

    When TSHTF,, I hope they’re as willing to surrender to us for peace’s sake as they are/were for all the other scumbags.

  26. 26
    angrywebmaster growls and barks:

    Fa Cube Itches @ #:

    Good luck with that. The original one was only to revise the Articles of Confederation, not scrap and replace. Any new one would likely do the same.

    Yup and even the new constitution way back when had to be voted on by the states, just as any new amendments would have to be now.

    We also have far better communications then we did back then too. If the ConCon tried to slip something through people would know.

    Something else I’ve heard, and again can’t say for sure, is that the ConCon doesn’t actually need to be people meeting. It could be just the legislatures each voting on the same amendment(s). I don’t think it says just how the ConCon is to be configured.

    Much research is needed before we start sacrificing Bosons. (Or is that Bothans?)

  27. 27
    BigDogg growls and barks:

    To hell with us seceding from them, let’s kick their asses out. I say we give the Left either: a) California, or b) lower New York, New Jersey, and the Delaware/Maryland isthmus, and tell them to pack their shit and create their own little socialist utopia in their new country. If they choose (b), we’ll relocate the Statue of Liberty to the west bank of the Potomac.

    In 10 years, we’ll reclaim their chosen area after it collapses and implodes. Any survivors of the area will be put on display in a zoo to remind everyone what brain-dead humans look and behave like.

  28. 28
    angrywebmaster growls and barks:

    I just saw something that looks interesting. Arizona Initiative would let voters overrule federal law

    I think the push back is starting to take off. I suspect that more and more states are going to assert their 10th amendment rights no matter what those clowns on the USSC say.