Published: Wednesday, Nov. 21 2012 12:00 a.m. MST
In addition, seniors would lose their social security and medicare.
And this can all be blamed on Obama.He has made the radical decision
to promote the same or similar policies and ideas that have been championed by
both R and D presidents for years.The nerve.
All the programs you allude to will likely suffer if not vanish anyway if we
continue on this path of "ridiculous" fiscal irresponsibility. Though I
don't personally believe in seceding, I surely understand the mentality
many are feeling. The present administration is not serious about cleaning up
the "mess" and those who do put serious ideas on the table are mocked,
scorned, and tossed aside as uncaring and bigoted. America is in decline...like
never before. People are simply trying to escape a disaster and seek a better
future for their families.
The succession idea is a symbolic protest of our morally bankrupt government who
steals money from those who EARN it and redistributes it to those who
don't! For those of you who believe the government has a moral right to
confiscate other people's property and re-distribute it, consider this: if
I steal YOUR money am I a crook? Should I go to jail? What if I steal your money
but I "redistribute" your money to people I think deserve it more than
you? What if many of your neighbors agree that they deserve to receive what you
have earned more than you do? Get it now?
One more point: If I steal your money year after year and I get angry with you
because you disagree with me about my "right" to steal your money, would
you keep trying to earn money? Would you eventually say, why should I keep
investing, working hard and creating wealth, it does no good? That about sums up
where we are in America today!
Broken Record Mountanman.Roads, police, fire, schools, defense etc
are provided by governments and are funded by taxes.People can and
often DO disagree with how the money is spent.But, it is undeniable that
both R AND D legislators have been doing it for decades.And the current
administration, Obama included, is running the country just like his
predecessors.Where was the backlash under Bush, or Reagan for that
matter?Taxes are lower under Obama than under Bush or Reagan. Why
are you not commending him? Or, at a minimum, recognize that he is better in
this regard than his predecessors.Partisan politics perhaps?
This irrational reaction is nothing more than people listening too much to
people on the radio. There will be no secession even Justice Scalia has made
that clear. These unhappy souls do have the right to seek happiness elsewhere. I
hear Canada has offered up Nunofit for settlement.
@Mountanman"The succession idea is a symbolic protest of our morally
bankrupt government"Secession is a pretty serious measure, and
one that should not be taken lightly, even symbolically. The one time secession
was seriously acted on it caused the bloodiest war in American History. Brother
against brother, a time in which I had hoped we had learned our lesson and dared
not repeat.When the colonies "seceded" from Britain, it was
a little different. First off, there was a huge geographic separation known as
the Atlantic Ocean, the colonies were suppliers (not takers) to Britain and
already had enjoyed relative autonomy until the French and Indian War.Biggest difference is when the decision was made, Thomas Jefferson laid out 39
specific charges against the crown, and then the signers pledged to each other
their lives, fortunes and honor, knowing if they lost they had committed
treason, and were willing to give their lives if necessary.Are you?
There is nothing innocent, cute, funny or "symbolic" in such
a request to secede. Unless you have that same conviction as those in 1776
it's nothing more than a disgusting fantasy that dishonors those who
created this nation.
@ Joe Blow. You missed my point, again! Entitlement spending is at an all time
high and going up by trillions every year through redistribution. Almost half of
Americans pay no federal income taxes at all and are getting some kind of free
goods that other people earned. We have plenty of other taxes (fuel taxes,
property taxes, and state taxes) to pay for roads, schools and firefighters.
Entitlement redistribution is not sustainable but it sure wins elections for the
Democrats, at least until we go bankrupt!
Another result of this asinine secession notion is that any leaders involved
would be guilty of Treason. Personally, I think anyone who promotes this
foolhardy notion should be tried for that crime.
I am not in favor of secession, but the arguments put forth by the letter writer
are ridiculous. Why on Earth would a separate country Utah close down everything
the federal government currently handles? The national parks would still be
open, just managed by a different nation. Likewise the highways would be open
and managed by us instead of a bunch of bureaucrats in Washington.Like typical liberal thinking, the author suggests that the local people in
Utah would do a far poorer job of managing our own local resources and money
than all the "smart" people in the federal government. I think just the
opposite is true (like typical conservative thinking). We would do a far better
job of making sure the system is run more effectively and efficiently.I think the people of Utah (and the people of the whole US) can be far more
productive and prosperous if the right systems are in place to encourage hard
work and innovation instead of discouraging it through excessive taxes and
regulation. Unfortunately, we are heading fast in the opposite direction under
No, Mountainman, it's you who are missing the point.How about
trying to learn WHY entitlement spending is increasing. Could it be because many
Americans -- who have worked hard and paid taxes all their lives -- are now
reaching retirement age and beginning to collect the Social Security they have
PAID FOR all those years? Could it be that these same Americans -- who have
worked hard and paid taxes all their lives -- are now receiving incomes that put
them below the income tax threshold?Could it be that many American
workers are now out of work because of companies that shipped their jobs
overseas?Could it be that many Americans -- such as those working at
WalMart -- are paid so little and kept on less than full time status that they
have no choice but accept food stamps and Medicaid?Could it be that
many Americans -- such as those working at Hostess Brands -- have had to take
pay cuts so the company executives could enjoy 300% pay increases?Instead of simply regurgitating the conservative radio blabs, why not do some
research and learn the REASONS why things are as they are?
I will leave this debate with a question for those of you who think the rest of
us owes you a living; Who will fund your entitlements? The number of those who
are paying for it are diminishing rapidly while those on the receiving end are
growing exponentially! The Democrat's serious dilemma is who is going to
pay your bills? Hunker down folks, its going to get rough!
No state should be forced to stay in the Union. What kind of Union would that
be? How can we call ourselves the "United" States when we have to force
states to remain. If the majority of people in a state want to seceed, let them
go. They are not trying to destroy the United States, they simply want to form
their own democratic nation. Our nation and Federal Govt are getting far too
From Washington's Farewell Address (in 3 parts):Part 1 . . . it is of infinite moment that you should properly estimate the immense
value of your national union to your collective and individual happiness; that
you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it;
accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the palladium of your
political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous
anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion that it can in
any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every
attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the
sacred ties which now link together the various parts. . . .
Citizens, by birth or choice, of a common country, that country has a right to
concentrate your affections. The name of American, which belongs to you in your
national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of patriotism more than any
appellation derived from local discriminations. . . . Here every
portion of our country finds the most commanding motives for carefully guarding
and preserving the union of the whole.
Part 2. . . With such powerful and obvious motives to union,
affecting all parts of our country, while experience shall not have demonstrated
its impracticability, there will always be reason to distrust the patriotism of
those who in any quarter may endeavor to weaken its bands.To the
efficacy and permanency of your Union, a government for the whole is
indispensable. No alliance, however strict, between the parts can be an adequate
substitute; they must inevitably experience the infractions and interruptions
which all alliances in all times have experienced. Sensible of this momentous
truth, you have improved upon your first essay, by the adoption of a
constitution of government better calculated than your former for an intimate
union, and for the efficacious management of your common concerns. .
. . The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish
government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established
government. All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all
combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real
design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and
action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental
principle, and of fatal tendency.
Part 3They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and
extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation
the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the
community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to
make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous
projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans
digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests.However
combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer
popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become
potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be
enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins
of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to
unjust dominion.Twin Lights here. I hope these quotes (authored by
Washington with help from Madison and Hamilton) help to frame the debate. One
thing I get out of this, is that there is nothing new here. The old debates are
the current debates. We need to stand together.
Mountanman, I have never once felt that anyone owed me a living.What
I do expect, however, is that all of my fellow citizens, including you, pay
their fair share for the national infrastructure we all use.I also
expect, in fact I demand, that the meager pension and retirement savings I
contribute to with every paycheck will be there for me when I retire.I have been faithfully contributing to my Social Security account for over 30
years, and I expect the portion of that that I have been promised to be there
for me when I retire. I will also expect that the portion of Social Security
that _you_ are entitled to will be there for you, too. The social contract of
American citizenship expects nothing less.I am not owed a living,
but we are all owed a level playing field, both in our economy and in our social
policies.The only thing I really feel "entitled" to is
fairness. Yes, I know that life isn't fair, but for the sake of my
children and grandchildren I'm working hard to make it so. You should be
doing the same.
Redistribution, Redistribution.We hear it over and over.We hear how the wealthy's wealth is being confiscated and handed out to
others less fortunate.But, the reality is that the wealthy are
getting more and more, uh, wealthy. They are continuing, at an accelerated
pace, to accumulate more and more of this countries wealth. The disparity in
this country is growing rapidly.How can that be? I thought we were
redistributing their wealth.I guess the money is just not collecting
at the top quick enough for some. Those who wish to
"redistribute" the wealth, are doing a pretty lousy job.Does
anyone think that the collection of wealth in the hands of so few is a good
thing for this country?
I wish they would succeed. We'll give them Mississippi or Alabama. They can
move, have their own utopia and let the realists run the United States. We can
add Puerto Rico as the 50th State.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments