Patterico's Pontifications

2/22/2023

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene Calls For “National Divorce”

Filed under: General — Dana @ 10:03 am



[guest post by Dana]

On Monday, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene called for a “national divorce,” as in a red and blue state divide:

We need a national divorce. We need to separate by red states and blue states and shrink the federal government. Everyone I talk to says this. From the sick and disgusting woke culture issues shoved down our throats to the Democrat’s traitorous America Last policies, we are done.

Liz Cheney reminded Marge of her duty:

Let’s review some of the governing principles of America, @mtgreenee:

Our country is governed by the Constitution. You swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution. Secession is unconstitutional. No member of Congress should advocate secession, Marjorie.

Sen. Mitt Romney also denounced Marge’s call for a “national divorce”:

“You know, I think Abraham Lincoln dealt with that kind of insanity,” the Utah Republican told reporters during a brief press availability during his visit with lawmakers at the Utah Capitol in Salt Lake City.

“We’re not going to divide the country. It’s united we stand, divided we fall,” Romney said.

In a tweetstorm yesterday, Marge described in detail the national divorce she envisions. She broke it down into various issues like: education, energy, elections, law enforcement, bearing arms, etc. You can read it in its entirety here. I’ll just leave you with her closing remarks:

Imagine if America decided to just go ahead and have a national divorce.

Hollywood elites and celebrities and all the brainwashed leftists women who watch the nasty women on the View, men who identify as women, and Democrat voters who suffer from the lifelong debilitating disease Trump Derangement Syndrome they caught from CNN wouldn’t have to see much less tolerate deplorables anymore. They could live in their safe space blue states, own nothing, let their government decide and control everything, and most importantly protect their fragile minds from being shocked and insulted by those of us on the right who believe in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Then Americans could choose which way, left or right, provides them with the best quality of life, and we don’t have to argue with one another anymore. I am starting to feel like it’s the right thing to do for everyone.

–Dana

83 Responses to “Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene Calls For “National Divorce””

  1. Hello.

    Dana (1225fc)

  2. Cheney and Romney are wrong. Secession is not unconstitutional. Secession WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF CONGRESS is unconstitutional. There is a difference.

    States are admitted to the Union through an act of Congress, and therefore would require an act of Congress to undo that. The Confederacy did not have congressional consent to secede from the Union, which is why their actions were unconstitutional. That is completely different from a voluntary separation that is agreed to by all sides and enacted by Congress.

    Of course, that is not to say it is necessarily a good idea.

    Observer (2fa9d6)

  3. So, who pays for Social Security and Medicare? That by itself would keep Florida and Arizona in the Union. What happens in places like California and Virginia where there are pretty clear intrastate divisions?

    Heck, what happens to MTG if GA goes Blue? Are her neighbors going to pack up and “move” to Oklahoma like the Cherokee did?

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  4. Did Lizzie remind Sen Wyden of his constitutional duty?

    NJRob (1cd9d7)

  5. It woudl be funny watching the entire South forced to face the fact that they’ve been on welfare for decades and need to learn how to live within their means.

    But this is just Marge being Marge. This is a complicated fantasy with a simple message: she wants to rule (don’t confuse this with a desire to govern), and will get violent if she doesn’t get her way.

    john (1793ae)

  6. Is she alone in this, or is she echoing someone else – and also is someone echoing her (and if not, why is anyone paying any attention to this? She’s not an object of extreme curiosity, like George Santos, after all.)

    This is aimed at ignorant people. If you are ignorant, it can sound half reasonable, and difficult to rebut. Ignorant not only about the law, but about the population of the United States, and practicality.

    Sammy Finkelman (5ffd71)

  7. Remember the Trump Lesson: 100 IQ is an average.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  8. Ms. Greene and that Fulton County jury forewoman have something in common: The more they talk, the stupider they sound.

    Paul Montagu (8f0dc7)

  9. I think this is the funniest part:

    and most importantly protect their fragile minds from being shocked and insulted by those of us on the right who believe in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

    Don’t say say gay, Marjorie! And land sakes those drag queens!

    nk (bd7a2f)

  10. Don’t say say gay, Marjorie! And land sakes those drag queens!
    nk (bd7a2f) — 2/22/2023 @ 11:50 am

    yes, it’s funny, nk that you can’t discern the concept of sexualization and age appropriateness

    funny in a disturbing way

    JF (c8f8d9)

  11. We live in a strange time that in 2023 a member of Congress would call for a national divorce. If you read her detailed list (as linked in the post), she contrasts red and blue states with a black-and-white-hyper-partisan-blinkered view of the issues listed. She doesn’t address where the purple states would land in her new world order. Amusingly, she echoes Donald Trump from his speech last weekend: In red states, they would likely pursue one day elections with paper ballots

    I have to wonder how many members of Congress agree with her. I’m guessing the usual suspects…

    Dana (1225fc)

  12. Are her neighbors going to pack up and “move” to Oklahoma like the Cherokee did?

    Heh.

    Dana (1225fc)

  13. “It woudl be funny watching the entire South forced to face the fact that they’ve been on welfare for decades and need to learn how to live within their means.” Are you including Puerto no es Rico?

    PS: Not poking at you for the typo, but if you go to US Military page of their ASVAB test. If you go to their sample questions section, the word questions in misspelled: “Test your knowledge by selecting a subject and answering the sample qusetions below”

    Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) is a multiple-aptitude battery that measures developed abilities and helps predict future academic and occupational success in the military. It is administered annually to more than one million military applicants, high school, and post-secondary students.

    I’m embarrassed

    steveg (69926f)

  14. LA County has more people under the poverty line than Mississippi and Louisiana combined. NYC metro has more than Alabama and Kentucky combined.

    steveg (69926f)

  15. What we need is to split big states and have more federalism. The people in Fresno should not have to live the way the people in San Francisco tell them to.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  16. From Texas v. White (74 US 700)(1869)

    When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States.

    Considered therefore as transactions under the Constitution, the ordinance of secession, adopted by the convention and ratified by a majority of the citizens of Texas, and all the acts of her legislature intended to give effect to that ordinance, were absolutely null. They were utterly without operation in law. The obligations of the State, as a member of the Union, and of every citizen of the State, as a citizen of the United States, remained perfect and unimpaired. It certainly follows that the State did not cease to be a State, nor her citizens to be citizens of the Union. If this were otherwise, the State must have become foreign, and her citizens foreigners. The war must have ceased to be a war for the suppression of rebellion, and must have become a war for conquest and subjugation.

    Our conclusion therefore is that Texas continued to be a State, and a State of the Union, notwithstanding the transactions to which we have referred. And this conclusion, in our judgment, is not in conflict with any act or declaration of any department of the National government, but entirely in accordance with the whole series of such acts and declarations since the first outbreak of the rebellion.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  17. I think Sammy said it all in his Comment 7.

    nk (bd7a2f)

  18. Sen Wyden:

    Doctors and pharmacies should go about their jobs like nothing has changed.

    Doctors and pharmacies might, but will pharmaceutical companies ?He’s basing this on the idea of no stay being issued.

    It was left wingers who started this court tactic. They could pick the judge because although judges are assigned randomly, sometimes there’s only one possible judge.

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  19. Was incorporating the Bill of Rights against the states a good idea? True federalism died there. I don’t think it was (or rather I enjoy the liberties provided) but it sure does limit how different states can get.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  20. sometimes there’s only one possible judge.

    Or sometimes they are interchangeable.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  21. In red states, they would likely pursue one day elections with paper ballots…

    As it should be and worked for decades

    Horatio (631d70)

  22. LA County has more people under the poverty line than Mississippi and Louisiana combined.

    The fact that the population of Los Angeles County (9.8 million) exceeds the combined population of Mississippi and Louisiana (7.4 million) may have something to do with that.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  23. Was incorporating the Bill of Rights against the states a good idea?

    No.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  24. And not in the Constitution, neither. It was by judicial whim that lazy and timid Congresses allowed to stand.

    nk (bd7a2f)

  25. RIP Murdock, at 24: why not? Why *should* California be free to abridge people’s freedom of speech and religion? Why *should* Vermont be free to ignore people’s property rights? Why *should* Texas be free to stop you on the street and hold you for ten weeks without charges?

    aphrael (a3b324)

  26. Another day at secession fantasy camp.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  27. > The people in Fresno should not have to live the way the people in San Francisco tell them to.

    As soon as someone proposes a split that isn’t absolutely insane, sure.

    aphrael (a3b324)

  28. Az attorney general birnovitch when running for senate in 2022 told the maggots that their have been questions asked about the 2020 election in az in a partial release of the investigation. The part he left out was that the “questions” were investigated and found no evidence of fraud in the 2020 election! (DU) Also democrat wins house seat in virginia tuesday showing voters think rethugs still evil.

    asset (5a21d9)

  29. RIP Murdock, at 24: why not? Why *should* California be free to abridge people’s freedom of speech and religion? Why *should* Vermont be free to ignore people’s property rights? Why *should* Texas be free to stop you on the street and hold you for ten weeks without charges?

    Because those rights, and their scope, will now exist at the whim of five of nine political appointees, and can be varied, or revoked altogether, at any time?

    nk (bd7a2f)

  30. RIP Murdock, at 24: why not? Why *should* California be free to abridge people’s freedom of speech and religion? Why *should* Vermont be free to ignore people’s property rights? Why *should* Texas be free to stop you on the street and hold you for ten weeks without charges?

    aphrael (a3b324) — 2/22/2023 @ 1:22 pm

    It was an unserious response to an unserious question. Of course, the simple answer is that the Bill of Rights by their plain language say “Congress shall make no law” thereby allowing the states to “experiment.”

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  31. Or sometimes they are interchangeable.

    Lawyers don’t get judges they like very much that often. So the idea is to bring a lawsuit in a place where they can get a specific judge. Tjhis didn’t use to be so possible.

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  32. I can’t wait until Judge Ramasiva Brahmavishnu bans beef, nationwide, because the USDA has not sufficiently tested its safety.

    nk (e70658)

  33. And Durga have mercy on the Senator who objects.

    nk (e70658)

  34. “We’re not going to divide the country. It’s united we stand, divided we fall,” Romney said.

    ROFLMAOPIP

    Mon dieu. Été là, fait ça, Pierre Delecto: “Imbécile!”

    Romney’s 47% Comment Named Quote Of The Year

    Yale Law School released its seventh annual list of the year’s most notable quotations, and coming in at number one is Romney’s infamous 47 percent comment.

    The former Massachusetts’ governor’s campaign was rocked back in September when Mother Jones published a secretly recorded video of Romney at a May fundraiser, declaring that 47 percent of the population is made up of people who believe they are “victims,” and are “dependent on government.” Despite his efforts to apologize and insist that he does care about 100 percent of Americans, Romney never fully recovered from his politically disastrous remark. The rest, as they say, is history.

    Romney also took the Number 2 spot in the list, with his tone-deaf assertion that, as Massachusetts governor, he received “binders full of women” as potential candidates for jobs in his administration. The line became an instant internet sensation.

    https://www.msnbc.com/hardball/romneys-47-comment-named-quote-the-year-msna16754

    DCSCA (1fd358)

  35. If MTG has constituents who constantly bend her ear about regulation, secession and/or she empathizes or not, she has was elected to bring their interests to Washington. Typical Romney/Cheney self appointed “conscience(s) of the GOP” nonsense and I mean nonsense because they are wrong. Nice to know now that Cheney just “prosected” her case without a complete understanding of the role of Congress in secession. Good to know Romney seems to know even less. This process is described in the the very document Romney and Cheney cite as her being in violation of

    Cheney and Romney are hanging their pointy hats on the Articles of Confederation, in particular the parts that say: The Articles of this Confederation shall be inviolably observed by every State, and the Union shall be perpetual.”. People then ask the question: Where does the power lie to alter the compact? Not in the executive, not in the judicial, the power lies in the state that wants to secede and that power and flows through to their elected representatives who would then need to persuade the Congress to vote to allow their state to leave. Very much of a reach, but MTG isn’t violating her oath by talking about it.

    I considered emailing this to Cheney and Romney, but she’s kinda vindictive and I’m a coward. Doesn’t change they need a refresher course on how the process looks on Schoolhouse Rock
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgVKvqTItto

    steveg (3c131a)

  36. Now that I’ve trashed my two favorite pinatas, I have to admit I need help figuring out the way the voting would go.
    I am guessing the State wishing to secede would first have to have a majority of votes for YES to secede and then the representatives of that state would take it to congress. This is where it gets a little weird because am thinking it isn’t a simple majority vote and it isn’t a unanimous vote either. I think it would require majority yes vote from the representatives of each state, all 50 states. So rather than just counting ayes and nays for a majority and lets say the Wyoming reps both vote no, the secession would be scuttled?

    steveg (3c131a)

  37. I am guessing the State wishing to secede would first have to have a majority of votes for YES to secede and then the representatives of that state would take it to congress. This is where it gets a little weird because am thinking it isn’t a simple majority vote and it isn’t a unanimous vote either. I think it would require majority yes vote from the representatives of each state, all 50 states. So rather than just counting ayes and nays for a majority and lets say the Wyoming reps both vote no, the secession would be scuttled?

    Secession fantasy camp. And the Articles of Confederation having no governing force, as they were replaced by the Constitution. I can’t imagine Cheney or Romney citing the Articles. And any idea that a state could secede by majority vote (and that Congress would agree) is completely unsupported by facts or history.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  38. @36. The forgotten, first try, the Articles of Confederation, are often overlooked as a source point later revisited on the second try w/t Constitution and the ‘oh yeah’ after thoughts quilled in the BoR. The context of the times, the urgency of estabilishing a functioning government, etc., in the wake of the break w/t Crown; events occuring in Europe and so forth. They’re seldom mentioned but make for insightful reading for the mindset of the Founders in those times.

    DCSCA (0d1944)

  39. Putin has already told them how to go about it.

    nk (e70658)

  40. This is the Oath of Office members of Congress take when they get the job: Nothing in there about taking constituents’ interests to Washington:

    “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”

    There are two ways “secession” can take place. 1) The United States of America ceases to exist as a sovereign nation and all its constituent parts, big or small, state or no state, incorporated or unincorporated, are on their own; or 2) a constituent part chooses to break away while the United States of America is still a nation in which case the constituent part is guilty of sedition, rebellion, and insurrection. That’s it!

    Cheney and Romney are entirely correct. MTG can take anything she wants to Washington, but her oath is to the United States of America, one nation, indivisible, not to the people who sent her there. When she speaks of secession, she speaks treason.

    nk (e70658)

  41. As soon as someone proposes a split that isn’t absolutely insane, sure.

    Consider the possibility that NOT splitting is more insane. Doing nothing is not always better than doing something, although it usually doesn’t require a permit.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  42. And any idea that a state could secede by majority vote (and that Congress would agree) is completely unsupported by facts or history.

    If California voted to secede, they would get a least some votes of approval from some of the other states.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  43. Dismembering California has about as much chance as California seceding from the Union.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  44. Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/22/2023 @ 4:46 pm

    That is to say, none at all.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  45. There is nothing in the Constitution that forbids secession, although only in in Art IV, Section 3 is there language that suggests how a secession could be handled:

    New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.

    The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.

    And, failing that, Article V allows most anything except changing Senate representation..

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  46. Dismembering California has about as much chance as California seceding from the Union.

    I remember a German laughing at the idea that Germany would ever be reunited. Two months before it happened.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  47. As for a “national divorce”, the process in Article V seems apt.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  48. Apples and oranges. Enjoy your fantasies.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  49. OT: The ‘plane’ truth: Squinty McStumblebum stumbles again:

    https://news.yahoo.com/biden-stumbles-falls-while-boarding-172435400.html

    Guess what: no wind. No word of if he was chewing gum at the same time.

    DCSCA (0d1944)

  50. Look! MTG was voted into Congress by the descendants of multiple generations of girls who could not outrun their brothers. They cannot grasp the schizophrenia of “I Love America!”, “America First!”, and “national divorce”. They don’t ask: “When we’re divorced, who will be the Americans?”

    And Lauren Boebert looks better than she does in a tight jersey, and Kevin McCarthy’s bubble dance gets more applause than hers at the Freedom Caucus. So she needs to find another way to get attention. That’s all it is.

    nk (e70658)

  51. There is nothing in the Constitution that forbids secession,

    There is nothing in the Constitution that forbids tearing the tag off a mattress, either, but there is authority to pass a law against it, and there is authority to pass laws against sedition, rebellion, insurrection, and treason. Which Congress has passed.

    nk (e70658)

  52. nk @ 41,

    Sadly, the accuracy of what you’ve posted will not make a bit of difference to Marge’s supporters. Instead, it would only serve to reinforce their hyper-partisan views and that it was more oppression of the red states. She is counting on constituent gullibility and ignorance, leading them to believe her national divorce plan is a solid one. This assumes that Marge understands the totality of the oath she took but perhaps that is one benefit of the doubt too many.

    Dana (1225fc)

  53. Justice Scalia’s Thoughts on State Secession: Penned to One Man
    ………
    Well, we can do nothing but stand in awe at Dan Turkewitz, the brother of New York blogger and lawyer Eric Turkewitz. Dan, a screenwriter, shot off a message to all 9 justices on the law of state secession and actually got a message back, from Justice Antonin Scalia.
    ……..
    According to Eric, Justice Scalia was the only justice to respond. His brief letter read:

    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.
    ……….

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  54. Secession

    There’s more posturing about secession these days, and a reader asked me a question about this. So I thought I’d provide a few answers to some questions that seem to be being discussed:

    1. Is It a Good Idea for Some States to Secede from the U.S.? As I mentioned before, no. To begin with, let me stress that I think that modern talk of secession is both foolish and pretty obviously empty posturing, whether it’s some liberals talking that way during the Bush Administration or some conservatives talking that way during the Obama Administration. America has profited tremendously from American union, both in terms of wealth and in terms of liberty from threats both foreign and domestic. It has profited tremendously in terms of national greatness, for those who care about such things, as I sense many conservatives and some liberals do. And its unity has greatly helped the world, especially but not only during World War II and the Cold War.

    I doubt that even a fraction of those who on occasion talk in favor of secession are really willing to abandon the benefits of union. ……

    2. Do States Have a Legal Right to Secede on Demand? No, not because the Union victory in the Civil War somehow settled that question legally, but simply because our legal system has never recognized such a right, and is unlikely to recognize such a right. For an original meaning argument for this position, see Texas v. White (1869) (pp. 725-26); but the more important point is that the law, in the sense of the rules that our current legal system recognizes, does not recognize such a legal right.

    3. Is It Legally Possible for States to Secede? Of course, if the rest of the nation sufficiently agrees to this. It’s possible, given the originalist argument in Texas v. White, that Congress and the President can’t accomplish this through the normal federal lawmaking process (plus the consent of the seceding state), though I suspect that ultimately the constitutional question will be seen as a political decision for Congress and the President to make. But even if the Constitution is against this, it can be amended. If 2/3 of Congress, 3/4 of the states, and the seceding state agree to secession, secession will happen, and American legal institutions would view it as entirely legal (and, in my view, correctly so).
    …………

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  55. @54. Shocking poll finds many Americans now want to secede from the United States

    https://thehill.com/changing-america/enrichment/arts-culture/563221-shocking-poll-finds-many-americans-now-want-to/

    Lest you forget, he’s dead– and hardly a go-to representative for an antiquated, closed and arcane institution so laughably incompetent that it cannot keep track of some files and has yet to track down the leaker of same.

    DCSCA (0d1944)

  56. @47. I remember a German laughing at the idea that Germany would ever be reunited. Two months before it happened.

    Indeed.

    It occurred much faster- and went much smoother- than the Bush people ever expected… even under the jaundiced eyes of other European nations still scarred from the united Germany that gave them WW1…. and WW2:

    “In amazingly short order, and due in large part to the skillful diplomacy of the United States, the Treaty on German Unity was signed by representatives of East and West Germany on August 31, 1990, and approved by both legislatures the following month. Final approval was given by the four Allied powers on October 2. Forty-five years after the end of World War II and fortyone years after Germany’s division, the German Democratic Republic ceased to exist, and the country was reunited.

    After less than a year of negotiations, Bush writes, “we had accomplished the most profound change in European politics and security for many years, without confrontation, without a shot fired, and with all Europe still on the best and most peaceful of terms.” “For me,” says Scowcroft, “the Cold War ended when the Soviets accepted a united Germany in NATO.” – https://www.historyonthenet.com/german-reunification#:~:text=In%20amazingly%20short%20order%2C%20and%20due%20in%20large,by%20the%20four%20Allied%20powers%20on%20October%202.

    Consider, too, the rapid collapse of the USSR. Nobody expected it to dissolve so quickly- though at street level, those of us who’d been there in the early 1970s could see it was inevitable sometime in the future, only due to the scarcity of consumer goods. But many, including myself, certainly did not expect it to occur so fast and w/so little bloodshed in our lifetimes.

    DCSCA (0d1944)

  57. This, like George Santos, is all the product of an AI deepfake.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  58. It would seem possible that the same process used to admit a state could be used to let one go. Alternatively, if 2/3rds of the states call a Convention to eject a state, and 3/4ths ratify the terms, that too might work.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  59. “To dream, the impossible dream!”

    Rip Murdock (5e1527)

  60. DCSCA (0d1944) — 2/22/2023 @ 5:54 pm

    Then I guess we should stop quoting dead Presidents.

    Rip Murdock (5e1527)

  61. @22 Thats not the only thing they would do.

    asset (8dc332)

  62. It’s apparently catching on:

    A strange proposal is working its way through the Idaho state legislature that would have that state envelop more than a dozen of Oregon’s most conservative eastern counties—in effect, shifting the border between the states 200-plus miles to the west. While last Wednesday’s vote in the Idaho House approving this “Greater Idaho” idea is nonbinding, it does legitimize the movement that has long been promoting the plan.

    This shift of something like 60,000 square miles from Oregon to Idaho would be one of the most significant transfers of land from state to state in American history.

    Note that the Idaho House vote on this largely partisan-motivated plan for shifting territory—making red Idaho redder and blue Oregon bluer—comes at the same time that Marjorie Taylor Greene has called for a “national divorce” in which red states and blue states go their separate ways. Meanwhile, the favorability numbers among Republican voters for secession have risen in recent years. On the right, secession talk is popular and only getting more so.

    Via The Bulwark.

    Dana (1225fc)

  63. A state is a place. People who live in the state not dirt and rock decide on what happens in the state along with their fellow citizens in the other states. States right to do what? in 1860 it was right to own other human beings. Because a few gerrymandered legislative districts can tell majority of people who live in that state and either didn’t vote or voted against them that you are going to secede from the union because we in power say so. Even laura ingrham is aghast!

    asset (8dc332)

  64. @2024 republican campaign slogan Vote rethugliKKKan the party of insurrection, sedition and now we will secede from the union.

    asset (8dc332)

  65. If everyone she talks to says that red states should secede then she, as my students would say, needs to touch grass.

    Nic (896fdf)

  66. @61. Which ones lost files on the job? ‘Course we’re learning of the ones who steal them. 😉

    DCSCA (81e149)

  67. Even laura ingrham is aghast!

    Can think of more descriptive, earthy terms for Ms. Ingraham than aghast. 😉

    DCSCA (81e149)

  68. Dana
    Good afternoon. First of all apologies for being disagreeable when disagreeing earlier.

    The Eastern Oregon, North CA Counties have been talking/dreaming about joining Idaho for some time, or starting their own state of Jackson. There are some Nevada counties in the mix who are unhappy being ruled by/from Las Vegas. Last time I was in TX, west a bit of Lufkin, I was a silent part of a conversation where several Texans were talking passionately about leaving the US or more correctly feeling the US had left them. I’d characterize them as thinking of it like having to let go of a cheating spouse you still loved. I realized at the time that even if a majority of Texans all agreed on leaving, there was no way the rest of the states were going to vote for the economic losses that would bring. It would be like the cheating yet vengeful spouse who hates who you are and what you stand for but won’t sign off on the divorce because he/she/them wants perpetual, increasing barnacle-like attachment to the revenue stream rather take than a one time payoff.

    steveg (f2e96a)

  69. asset (8dc332) — 2/22/2023 @ 7:59 pm

    in 1860 it was right to own other human beings. `

    No, it was wrong. People said it was right, and that it was wrong to argue otherwise, and if people wouldn’t stop they would leave the Union.

    Really, the problem was that southern politicians could have no hope of getting national office and they would lose every vote that divided the country by section, even not about slavery.

    They couldn’t come out against slavery, and every defender of slavery was treated as disrespectable by politicians from the North and people in general who were not from the south.

    Soon, there would be more free states, and they’d be in a permanent minority.

    And they quickly got it so that just as it was not possible in the south (by whiter people of course but they were only people in the room) to dispute what was said about slavery, it was also not possible to dispute what was said about secession.

    Only the fire eaters did not get most of the new positions, but instead the old conventional politicians did.

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  70. For those interested in the long struggle to end slavery in the world, I recommend study of this time line.

    Some items from the United States:

    1783: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court rules slavery unconstitutional, a decision based on the 1780 Massachusetts constitution. All slaves are immediately freed.

    1787: The United States in Congress Assembled passes the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, outlawing any new slavery in the Northwest Territories.

    1806: In a message to Congress, Thomas Jefferson calls for criminalizing the international slave trade, asking Congress to “withdraw the citizens of the United States from all further participation in those violations of human rights … which the morality, the reputation, and the best of our country have long been eager to proscribe.”

    Peonage Act of 1867, mostly targeting use of Native American peons in New Mexico Territory. Slavery among native tribes in Alaska was abolished after the purchase from Russia in 1867.

    (Links omitted.)

    A few Americans, almost from the founding of the thirteen colonies, opposed slavery, which then existed in almost the entire world. Their numbers grew and they had successes in every northern state, before our Civil War.

    (In his brilliant Cooper Union speech, Lincoln showed that a majority of founders agreed that Congress could ban slavery in American territories.)

    Jim Miller (f29931)

  71. It is hard not to feel sorry for MJT’s ex-husband, Perry Greene, and their three children. And it is strange to see someone who has gone through a divorce, and should have seen the costs to all involved, advocate for a giant divorce.

    Jim Miller (f29931)

  72. > On the right, secession talk is popular and only getting more so.

    And yet the people advocating secession have the chutzpah to claim that they are going to make America great again and that people like me hate America.

    A lot of times when listening to Trumpists i feel like i’m listening to people who view _1984_ as an instruction manual.

    aphrael (e95b2c)

  73. 2024 bumber sticker: Like secession. insurrection, sedition and treason vote republican 2024! Desatan says he is boycotting NBC over black history. Andria mitchell was mean to him. Nbc should say we will ban desatan not books.

    asset (68cf32)

  74. Kevin – all the proposals i’ve seen have entirely unnatural boundaries. anything that tries to divide orange county from LA county (sorry, that creek is not a natural barrier) or santa clara county from san mateo county (neither is *that* creek) deserves to be thrown out without a further look.

    aphrael (e95b2c)

  75. A lot of times when listening to Trumpists i feel like i’m listening to people who view _1984_ as an instruction manual.

    Lewis Carroll’s The Adventures of Alice in Wonderland.

    nk (bb1548)

  76. And it is strange to see someone who has gone through a divorce, and should have seen the costs to all involved, advocate for a giant divorce.

    If we get a domestic relations restraining order to keep her 12 miles away from America …?

    nk (bb1548)

  77. MTG is nothing more than a nasty noise, and loud only because we choose to turn up the volume.

    Any real influence she has is because McCarthy is an emasculated pussy. As in Trump’s fixed and declawed house cat.

    In a very red district, MTG got 43,892 votes in the GOP primary, for 40.% of the vote.
    In the same primary runoff, she got 43,813 votes for 57.1% of the vote against her one opponent.
    In the general election, she got 229,827 votes for 74.7% of the vote (very red district).
    Meh!

    nk (bb1548)

  78. aphrael, LA county has 120 million people in it. As a separate state it is still one of the largest. Adding the rest of SoCal to it brings the number over 20 million and defeats most of the purpose of splitting the state; the new state would still be dominated by the intensely urban city of Los Angeles. Most of the rest of SoCal is quite different culturally. If you don’t split on county lines, you are then cast into 100 years of boundary hearings.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  79. aphrael,

    That aside, all of the proposals are Initiatives and I am fairly certain it is not constitutional to do so directly.

    As we’ve previous discussed, there are addition “details” such as state property, pensions, debt, water and such that need to be attended to and the single-subject rule on Initiatives would make that awkward at best.

    The only Initiative that would seem legal would be one that created a commission with certain guidelines and a fair (and geographically diverse) structure. The commission would address all these issues and present the Legislature with a package, including potential interstate compacts for the post-breakup states. After the Legislature weighed in, the result would go to the People and, if approved, to Congress.

    This is a process, not an event. It might take a decade, but the current state of California is terribly dysfunctional with large sections of highly disaffected citizens and a state government that continues to play favorites. It needs to split.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  80. (In his brilliant Cooper Union speech, Lincoln showed that a majority of founders agreed that Congress could ban slavery in American territories.)

    The thing that finally broke the Union was the Mexican Cession. When a bill to appropriate moneys for the final treaty negotiation with Mexico came to the floor, a amendment called the Wilmot Proviso was proposed at the last moment. It said:

    Provided, That, as an express and fundamental condition to the acquisition of any territory from the Republic of Mexico by the United States, by virtue of any treaty which may be negotiated between them, and to the use by the Executive of the moneys herein appropriated, neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall ever exist in any part of said territory, except for crime, whereof the party shall first be duly convicted.

    And all Hell broke loose. Northern and Southern Democrats split, as did Northern and Southern Whigs. The Proviso failed, but the Slavery faction saw the handwriting on the wall.

    The Compromise of 1850 slowed things down, but it failed, and Lincoln (who supported banning slavery in the new territories) was elected, pointing the way towards the South being outvoted in the not-too-distant future.

    Kevin M (1ea396)

  81. January 6 was only the crescendo. Roy Cohn’s slicked-up boy toy conceived the seditious conspiracy on November 20, 2016. That’s right, 2016 not 2020. He was never going to accept the results of any future elections.

    nk (bb1548)

  82. Always remember, as you read these statements in the media, that they are filtered by a media that has its own agenda. As a rule, statements by GOP whackjobs are amplified by media coverage and statements by Democrat whackjobs are diminished. Partly this is intentional, and partly this is due to reporters being more attuned to the Democrat whackjobs.

    Yes, MTG is nuts, but is the Squad sane, or quiet? Or just filtered out?

    Kevin M (1ea396)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2026 secs.