|
|
Post by moonpuppy on Apr 14, 2009 8:01:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Spider on Apr 15, 2009 5:21:09 GMT -5
[/url] Hmmm ...
One of the largest secessionist groups in the USA is located in Texas.
The League Of The South has chapters all over the USA.
[wikipedia] [/url] Now ...
Can anyone say
'CIVIL WAR'
__
'S'[/color] [/center] |
|
|
|
Post by moonpuppy on Apr 15, 2009 8:14:20 GMT -5
LOS is based here in Abbeville.
you know, they keep comparing Obama with Lincoln, if he sends in Federal Troops to Texas it will be history repeating itself.
Question is, would the U.S. Military arm it's weapons against fellow Americans today?
|
|
|
|
Post by Spider on Apr 15, 2009 12:43:43 GMT -5
 There won't be any need to send troops into any state that
should actually secede from the USA.
The Feds will simply stop all financial aide and then those states
will find themselves in deep financial doo-doo.
.. LOL ..
__
'S'[/b] Clic Below For[/color]  [/center] |
|
|
|
Post by Spider on Apr 15, 2009 13:08:54 GMT -5
 As you may know The Southern Poverty Law Center
is the LOS's most feared arch-enemy.
The SPLC has a HATE MAP that has identified most all hate groups in the USA.
Like I said earlier .. They are all over the place .. Primarily in the South.
The LOS is the
'Head of the Hate Serpent'.
__
'S' |
|
|
|
Post by Cobra on Apr 15, 2009 18:25:06 GMT -5
LOS is based here in Abbeville. you know, they keep comparing Obama with Lincoln, if he sends in Federal Troops to Texas it will be history repeating itself. Question is, would the U.S. Military arm it's weapons against fellow Americans today? Moonpuppy, you from Abbeville? If so, how close did the Tornado come too you? Now, Obama is wanting a Civilian national security force. Will this be the ones he sends in? |
|
|
|
Post by moonpuppy on Apr 15, 2009 19:39:51 GMT -5
I work in Abbeville, live in Greenwood. I got my butt whooped by someone from Calhoun Falls once... How big a fella r ya?  My Brother's house got hit badly, house across the street did also. We dodge this bullet luckily. No one was hurt either. We all live off Chinquapin road In Greenwood, on the west side. The good side... ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Cobra on Apr 15, 2009 19:57:59 GMT -5
Not that big...
Need any help where you work, I'm at Mohawk (The Rocky River Plant), it don't look good for us at the moment. My wife and I were down in your area yesterday, she was showing me where her grandmother used to live off of Woodlawn. Pretty area in there.
|
|
|
|
Post by moonpuppy on Apr 15, 2009 20:20:50 GMT -5
PM coming at ya.
|
|
|
|
Post by dahutist on Apr 18, 2009 9:09:22 GMT -5
If you look at it, we still have what could be called "states rights." The individual States can still make policy that affects them. They can still control blocs of power within the Congress, just as they always have. Secession would likely do more harm than good. (well except for Texas, which holds so much of the Nations key industry, including oil that they could likely pull it off).
The problem is the we have more federal level puppet masters now, than in the past.
Look at PBO's recent dressing down of Gov Sanford.
When Gov Mark wanted to put any federal stimulus money offered into resolving the states debt or raped unemployment program, PBO gave a reprimand and said spend it, or lose it (one assumes this meant spend it with my approval, as well.)
The Civlil War set the stage for this. It was the first time the federal government truly meddled - with impact - in
the affairs of the Republic's states. Once the precedent was set, the gloves were off.
|
|
|
|
Post by Spider on Apr 18, 2009 11:23:42 GMT -5
This post covers severals subject areas so I will limit my responses. (in RED)
__
'S'If you look at it, we still have what could be called "states rights." The individual States can still make policy that affects them.
.. Possible, but not Probable ..
They can still control blocs of power within the Congress, just as they always have.
.. Agreed ..
Secession would likely do more harm than good.
.. Agreed ..
(well except for Texas, which holds so much of the Nations key industry, including oil that they could likely pull it off).
.. This would serve as leverage and a primary source of income for Texas ..
.. Of course, oil could be considered a national security issue ..
The problem is the we have more federal level puppet masters now, than in the past.
.. Perhaps and perhaps not ..
Look at PBO's recent dressing down of Gov Sanford.
.. Tell me more about this "dressing down" ..
When Gov Mark wanted to put any federal stimulus money offered into resolving the states debt or raped unemployment program, PBO gave a reprimand and said spend it, or lose it (one assumes this meant spend it with my approval, as well.)
.. That statement is unclear to me ..
The Civil War set the stage for this. It was the first time the federal government truly meddled - with impact - in the affairs of the Republic's states.
.. Agreed - But WHY? ..
Once the precedent was set, the gloves were off.
.. And which 'round' is the USA in now over this 150 year time span? ..
.. This is 2009, not the mid 1800's ..
|
|
|
|
Post by moonpuppy on Apr 18, 2009 21:29:32 GMT -5
Sanford wants to use some of the money from the stimulus to pay down some of th debt the state has so when the mandated spending the State will be obligated to AFTER the one time stimulus is over we will be in a better cashflow position to do so.
Sanford asked the White House permission to do this, instead of an answer, the DNC released a commercial on SC TV saying that Sanford is letting schools rot because he will not take the stimulus. THEN he got the answer about a week later.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cobra on Apr 18, 2009 21:41:31 GMT -5
They have been throwing money at our schools for over 30 years now, and I don't think more money is going to fix it. When they do add more money to the school system, all of the administrators get raises, and new schools get built, and so on; But nothing is done to add to the quality of education. So why should he add more funding to an already failing education system?
|
|
|
|
Post by moonpuppy on Apr 19, 2009 8:30:47 GMT -5
Becuase the administrators asked for it? (sarcasm)
|
|
|
|
Post by dahutist on Apr 19, 2009 9:04:49 GMT -5
As reminder, this thread is about States Right under the Constitution:
About three weeks ago I caught the headline out of Columbia. "Obama chides Sanford.... tells him spend the stimulus or lose it."
This went on for several days and then I stopped following it, since in my mind the die was cast at the White House level.
The propoganda/advertising campaign by the feds which Moon mentions only clarifies their position. I did note the story was page 5 news before long...
But what remains clear is the model of a Republic of federated states is one that is followed by our leaders in Washington - when it suits them. This is a precedent that has been with us for a long time, as mentioned.
Precedent does not have to be current to be meaningful, either. Take the compulsory income taxation of the citizen by the federal government. That is hardly current, the precedent for it set back in , what 1916? Yet we live with it every day.
My point? Precedent sticks, especially so in Washington.
Once the federal masters have precedent, and compulsory taxation of the individual is a good example, it is "toe the line" policy from Washington thereafter. Whether it was 150 years ago, or today, it continues to be the same.
If we want to understand what the concept of a Republic really means, we need to do some research. Go look up "republic..." I used wikipedia, so keep it simple - and be surprised. I was.
State rights? Yeah, right.
|
|
|
|
Post by Spider on Apr 21, 2009 9:34:10 GMT -5
 Just to let you know ...
I'd like to pursue the topic of 'States Rights' ...
But at the moment I'm preoccupied with posting problems.
Please continue, if you will.
__
'S' |
|
|
|
Post by dahutist on Apr 21, 2009 21:09:38 GMT -5
Well I pretty much said what I hoped would be pertinent to the 10th Amendment discussion.
If that amendment warrants to the states united, or their people, those things that are not otherwise prohibited by the Constitution, where do we draw the line on federal involvement?
Here are some definitions of "republic"
"A state or nation in which the supreme power rests in all the citizens entitled to vote. This power is exercised by representatives elected, directly or indirectly, by them and responsible to them.
1 a (1): a government having a chief of state who is not a monarch and who in modern times is usually a president
(2): a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government b
(1): a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law (2)
Chew on that, for now, as there is more to accompany it. I cannot, however access it currently. More on this later...
|
|
|
|
Post by Spider on Apr 22, 2009 11:41:15 GMT -5
Just a brief reply ...
There is an increasing use of 'script currency' being utilized
in some communities (NOT States).
This is an example of a community exercising 'a states right'.
.. Is it not?
 Note: Community = Commune = Communist.
__
'S'
|
|
|
|
Post by moonpuppy on Apr 22, 2009 15:11:30 GMT -5
That brings in the question if the Federal Reserve is Constitutional
|
|
|
|
Post by Spider on Apr 22, 2009 19:02:26 GMT -5
That brings in the question if the Federal Reserve is Constitutional
Now we're getting into some deeep doodoo now!
Please continue MoonPuppy.
__
'S' |
|
Note: Community = Commune = Communist.