15 states request to secede from the Union.

[OsuMj]

I think its funny when people who don't live in texas sign it.

47.5K at 10:04

[ReconRat]

I think any American can sign any of them. Actually, I looked up the rules and it says almost nothing. Any human of the world can petition, age 13 and up. Maybe no limits on who can sign any petition. But it would at least make sense if it was American citizens petitioning and signing.

You must be 13 or older in order to create an account and participate in We the People.

edit: scarey thought... just exactly does the federal government do if over 50% of Texans sign the Texas petition?

Or any other state, for that matter...

edit: Houston's news article on the subject:

Texas secession petition grows on White House website

Edited November 13, 2012 by ReconRat

[gen3flygirl]

The problem with Texas is the big oil money. I don't see the U.S. giving that up to easily. I would gladly seek political asylum if they did become their own nation again. I miss Dallas like no other

[OsuMj]

I like texas too. Its warm there. Last i checked they get paid more and their cost of living is less (Houston at least). I like how they drive too - no hitting the breaks unless you're stopping.

[Cheech]

Plans for government, economy, continued relationship with remaining U.S., infrastructure......

No. They want to be bootstrappy, tri-corner hat wearing, Texas Forever yelling rednecks, then they can be all the way bootstrappy. No relationship with US infrastructure. They can pay a up-front fee for all the current infrastructure they have, then we start chopping inbound fiber cables and power grids. Inter-country communications are hashed out through international treaties, which they would then have to forge. Oh yeah, and the National Guard and active duty military's coming with us too, same with CBP, ICE, all Federal field offices such as FBI, EPA, FEMA, DHS, TSA. All air traffic would effectively cease to the seceded country until they can prove they have a effective method of security, so the only way to get to Texas via air would be through Mexico. How ironic. Then there's the currency upheaval, the new country would have to start denominating and printing it's own money, which since this is a brand new nation-state with effectively zero credit, should probably be backed by something at least for the short term (and it's what the RON PAULians want anyway), so better start stocking up on gold.

Of course, this all ignores the very real probability that even if the US agreed to part ways with Texas, there is absolutely no way that the US would part with strategic assets such as the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (2/4 sites are in Texas, with a combined 414 million barrels of oil), strategically important refineries, ports, airbases, stuff like that.

In short, it makes for an interesting thought experiment, but at the end of the day this is just another butthurt conservative having a temper tantrum about the election, and channeling his inner 4 year old in response. He is, quite simply, a dog chasing cars. What would he do if Obama trolled the hell out of him and agreed?

[ReconRat]

LOL, several more states now listed, but someone posted this:

Deport Everyone That Signed A Petition To Withdraw Their State From The United States Of America.

Geez, cheech, you angry?

Edited November 13, 2012 by ReconRat

[magley64]

What a bunch of whiny bitches...

"Our guy didn't win, boo hoo, were gonna take our toys and go home..."

[Disclaimer]

Rick Perry Won’t Join Petitioners Calling for Texas to Secede, Says Union is Fine As Is

http://gawker.com/5960133/rick-perry-wont-join-petitioners-calling-for-texas-to-secede-says-union-is-fine-as-is

A more worthwhile petition... (since minimally effective is >> 0%)

Nearly Half a Million Sign Petition Urging Macy’s to ‘Dump Donald Trump’

http://gawker.com/5960081/nearly-half-a-million-sign-petition-urging-macys-to-dump-donald-trump

[Cheech]

Hardly whining' date=' Magz. If they truley believe that this country's government is beyond saving, then let them leave. I just don't see any reason to force them to stay. You wanna' go? Then, go. It's one less state to support for the rest of us. This country could stand to be a bit smaller, in my opinion.[/quote']

And I'm fine with that. However, as this group loves to point out, elections have consequences, and those consequences are that the United States isn't just going to give up everything it has invested in that area, so one day you'll wake up and it'll be Texastan but all infrastructure and services will be there as they were the day before.

Seeing as these particular wingnut populous number, in my estimation, no more than a million or so people (and that's being WAY liberal), I think we should just give them their own state. A "reservation", if you will. They can live out the rest of their bootstrappy lives in peace, and we as a nation can move forward and get some shit done.

LOL, several more states now liisted, but someone posted this:

one That Signed A Petition To Withdraw Their State From The United States Of America.

Geez, cheech, you angry?

It was a combination of the temper tantrum shown by those petitions, massive hypocrisy, and the fact that I was up until 3:30AM. Still though, it does make for an interesting thought experiment, a modern-day civil war (because you know either side ain't going peacefully)

[Anden]

If my 5th grade Texas history still serves me right. Texas reserved the right to seced when they joined the union. So Texas doesn't need to petition.

Giving these fools thier way will end badly anyway. These fuckwits would eventually divide themselves down to the least common denominator.

[Cheech]

If my 5th grade Texas history still serves me right. Texas reserved the right to seced when they joined the union. So Texas doesn't need to petition.

Giving these fools thier way will end badly anyway. These fuckwits would eventually divide themselves down to the least common denominator.

Eventually? I'd say they're pretty much there. Texas v White is the final arbiter of the Texas secession argument.

[ReconRat]

Eventually? I'd say they're pretty much there. Texas v White is the final arbiter of the Texas secession argument.

Texas v White isn't based on anything more than the federal government saying "no you can't because we said so". Texas counters that by pointing out that the charter for Texas joining the Union says it will abide the Constitution, nothing else. Nothing in the Constitution says a state can't leave. Other states aren't so lucky in the wording they selected.

[OsuMj]

http://youtu.be/jvliy8rEJDQ

[magley64]

Hardly whining' date=' Magz. If they truley believe that this country's government is beyond saving, then let them leave. I just don't see any reason to force them to stay. You wanna' go? Then, go. It's one less state to support for the rest of us. This country could stand to be a bit smaller, in my opinion.[/quote']

I see your pov.

2 things:

1, They signed this petition AFTER voting in the election. (You no playa da game, you no maka da rules) Which is why I called it "whining". if their guy woulda won, they'd have done a victory dance, and the blue states would have been adults about it (well, they'd have bitched, but not like this).

2, Logistics: who gets power in texasopia? Do they adopt OUR constitution? or draft their own? How do we secure THOSE borders? Will there be a exodus period for people who want to emigate from and immigrate to texasopia? Will they have their own passports, military, obviously they would probably gain control of their own bases, but what of the federally owned equipment, and federally employed personnell?

Do texasopians lose their citizenship, or get dual citizenship?

Basically a whole bunch of SRSLY?

Edited November 13, 2012 by magley64

[Cheech]

Texas v White isn't based on anything more than the federal government saying "no you can't because we said so". Texas counters that by pointing out that the charter for Texas joining the Union says it will abide the Constitution, nothing else. Nothing in the Constitution says a state can't leave. Other states aren't so lucky in the wording they selected.

I've heard this argument before. Something along the lines of "if it's not expressly delineated in the Constitution, it automatically defers to the states?" The whole point of legal precedent is to fill in the gaps of things that aren't expressly delineated in the Constitution, that's why you can fit the Constitutional text on a few sheets of looseleaf paper where the law books would take an entire wall. Continuing this hypothetical, their whole approach of a peaceful transfer starts to fall apart the second that they start on what the US would consider a illegal act per Texas v White.

When you play the Game of Thrones, you either win, or you die.

[Cheech]

I see your pov.

2 things:

1, They signed this petition AFTER voting in the election. (You no playa da game, you no maka da rules) Which is why I called it "whining". if their guy woulda won, they'd have done a victory dance, and the blue states would have been adults about it (well, they'd have bitched, but not like this).

2, Logistics: who gets power in texasopia? Do they adopt OUR constitution? or draft their own? How do we secure THOSE borders? Will there be a exodus period for people who want to emigate from and immigrate to texasopia? Will they have their own passports, military, obviously they would probably gain control of their own bases, but what of the federally owned equipment, and federally employed personnell?

Do texasopians lose their citizenship, or get dual citizenship?

Basically a whole bunch of SRSLY?

These are easy, you just aren't thinking like a wingnut.

Power would be an interesting idea. Mayhaps RON PAUL would like to make another go? I honestly would have no idea, all I do know is it would get ugly very quickly.

I think they would largely adopt the current constitution, with revisions, of course. You can bet that gay marriage and abortion would be outlawed, and I would imagine the Flat-Taxers and Fair-Taxers would spar with the Tea-Partiers over taxation rates, also to be delineated in their constitution. I would imagine there would be a hearty helping of God and religion in there as well, so you can forget being a non-WASP. I'd expect the debate over how illegal abortion should be to be pretty fierce, but I think the rape/incest/health of mother exceptions would lose to the more radical elements. In short, I'd expect their constitution to be a small book by the time they're done.

We'd secure those borders just like any other, put up checkpoints and border crossings at the major road crossings and start CBP patrols along the shared border, in preparation for a fence to be built later. I'd expect a pretty severe exodus from Texas, as all the non-crazies flee. There would be a influx of people into Texas to replace them, but I suspect they would lose a significant portion of their labor pool and braintrust.

Passports: Yes. Dual citizenship? Maybe, depends on what their criteria for citizenship is, and how cool the US is with the separation. Military? Yes, they still have all state-owned paramilitaries like the Sheriff's Department, local SWAT teams/police forces. Expect the US to recall all National Guard troops, but there might be a few that go AWOL to stay in Texas. If you were a federal employee before the change, you probably ain't one now.

[ReconRat]

I'm still struggling with the concept that joining a Union of States is somehow "till death due us part".

I think if a group of people can join, then they can un-join.

I doubt there are any unusual border fences or visas between Russia and Ukraine. Passports are required. (Russians have to have internal passports to travel inside Russia.) There is a fair amount of extortion by Ukrainian border guards. And doubt there would be anything too unusual between USA and Texas. Just arguments about the cost and value of fuel and oil pumped North in pipelines. Same as over in Russia. Ukraine adopted the laws and rules of Russia, as long as they didn't contradict local Ukraine. They did choose to accept their portion of the national debt of the Soviet Union. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Legal_Succession_of_Ukraine

The real problem is that Texas paid in more than they received, so they might be due a refund. Not so with Mississippi, which would have to pay a large amount to settle up.

Btw, read today that the USA will be the largest oil producer in the world by 2017.

[magley64]

I'm still struggling with the concept that joining a Union of States is somehow "till death due us part".

I think if a group of people can join, then they can un-join.

I seem to recall this thing called "the civil war" regarding this exact topic...

also, the group of people that "joined" are all dead now.

[ReconRat]

I seem to recall this thing called "the civil war" regarding this exact topic...

also, the group of people that "joined" are all dead now.

There are any number of countries that split, divided, or otherwise altered without warfare. Of course, Scotland and Ireland aren't on that list, but they did it anyway.

The Civil War was a secession until the South decided to attack Federal forts in the South. Then it was a Civil War. Or was after the North decided to try and take them back. Even that was a blunder, since it did appear that those forts would eventually be turned over to the South, or an agreement reached so that they could stay.

[magley64]

There are any number of countries that split, divided, or otherwise altered without warfare. Of course, Scotland and Ireland aren't on that list, but they did it anyway.

The USA isn't on that list either... Neither of the last 2 attempts were peaceful.

The Civil War was a secession until the South decided to attack Federal forts in the South. Then it was a Civil War. Or was after the North decided to try and take them back. Even that was a blunder, since it did appear that those forts would eventually be turned over to the South, or an agreement reached so that they could stay.

If it was a secession, and then a war between the 2 new countries, why didn't the countries stay divided after the north won?

USA vs Britain... same story, opposite ending.. The seceding entity won that war, and therefore won their independence.

I don't think Texasopia has the military might to take on the rest of the country... jus sayin'

Edited November 14, 2012 by magley64

[ReconRat]

Missing the point. Tell them no, and it happens anyway. Win or lose. Choose wisely.

edit: It's that free will thing...

Edited November 14, 2012 by ReconRat

[jporter12]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxEmry5lRKk

[jporter12]

I just noticed that the (assumed) redneck that posted that used the wrong "one" in the title!

[magley64]

Welcome to America. We're a free country' date=' unless you try to leave. Then, we'll kill you.[/quote']

We'll share the land, but if you try to take a big chunk of our land and say "this is mine and you keep off" then we say, "no screw you, that's ours"

[Revelstoker]

Plans for government, economy, continued relationship with remaining U.S., infrastructure......

Texas could easily live without the rest of the U.S. Are Texans willing to work hard for this as a common goal? I have my doubts.

...I don't see Louisiana surviving on theit own.

Only states that could make it alone would be the Midwest. They can grow more than enough food to support the populace and water is plentiful. Screw the gold standard, we could put the world on the CORN and SOYBEAN standard.

The U.S.A could easily be broken up into about 7 regions where the majority of the people share roughly equivalent values and standards of living. More than complete breakup, I would much prefer a return to a system of government by the people for the people. In far too many instances (Patriot Act) the federal government has taken on a life of itself and almost acts as dictatorship or at the very least, an aristocracy of special interest service.

Greater power to the people through decentralized State control has merit. Taxation of states for mutual benefit (roads, military) could be implemented.

The Fed. government and corporate CEOS would be good to go back and restudy prior socialist movements and the labor unrest of the 1900s. If the secession serves no other purpose than to serves as a catalyst for the people to assume and exercise control of the federal agenda, then we will all benefit.

I see no CEO pay worth millions or billions with a refusal to pay for $50k worker salary. Microsoft would sell no software without engineers to write code. Ford would sell no cars without engineers to build them or workers to program the robots. If you want people to excel in math and sciences, then the pay needs to reflect the contribution. HP, CitiCorp, Walmart can easily run for years without a CEO but none can operate for long without key workers to generate proprietary products and file patents. Is the CEO of a biochemical worth $30M in pay or is the biochemist worth $30M? Outsource, sure, go ahead and transfer that knowledge and see how long your corporate history is when your competitive advantage is sold the the cheapest bidder or contract price is raised.

In short, if you want change - you have to create change. If succession is the path, then I would walk it.

Edited November 14, 2012 by Revelstoker