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.
re: JoeBlow 8:44 a.m. Nov. 21You mean the income redistribution that
is the Free Market/Wall Street isn't all its cracked up to be?What are you some kind of Communist? ROFL!
Neil,I am not saying that secession is a good idea, but make sure
your arguments against it are cogent.Closing Hill, Dugway etc? You
mean the US maintains NO military bases outside our borders?end
tourism because the US no longer runs the parks? You mean the canyons and
mountains etc would just cease to exist and no one would therefore want to see
them?Close the airport? Delta would abandon the lucrative routes
and no one would ever come here again?The USDOT would come remove
the highways? really?Black Knight,no, the seniors have paid
for those benefits.Joe Blow,BO is running the country like
bush and reagan? Where do you come up with such garbage? Partisan politics,
perhaps? bush and reagan never dreamed of the deficits BO is amassing. they
never forced religious people to effectively provide abortions to their
employees. They never FORCED people to buy something. they NEVER used class
warfare to get re-elected. They NEVER LIED to the extent the current miscreant
in the WH has lied.old man,the entitlement programs were never
designed to support the number of people they support now. Dems continually add
more to maintain power.
Blue you said "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."What National Infrastructure are you talking about?90 percent of the Roads in Utah are State or local roads that are
maintained by these entities with Taxes they collect.90 percent of
Law enforcement falls under the same entities... They are paid by State, City or
County taxes...Everyone talks about the Police, Roads, and such but
fails to realize they are local not national.My whole issue the
current "redistrubtion" plan is that they penalize people for working
hard and getting ahead.. while they leave the rest alone.. You say
everyone should pay their fair share, Right? So why don't ALL AMERICAN pay
taxes? no just increase the wealthy taxes but make the non paying citizens pay
something as well, maybe not to the extent the wealthy does, but EVERYONE should
being putting something into the coffers.... according to you anyways.
Simple question...Had a white Republican been elected in 08 and did
all the things that Obama did, would these folks still be angry? I
truly hope that it's politics which they're upset about and not
something else... But unfortunately, I think we all know the answer to this
question...As we've seen Obama do EXACTLY what the GOP once
wanted, especially in Health Care reform, and look at how "outraged" the
right suddenly became! Want to know what Obamacare was considered in the 90s?
The GOP's Health Care reform. Interesting how things change
when an African American Democrat is elected into the White House...
The Declaration of Independance was NOT a protest petition.The Confederate
States of America was NOT a protest petition.Both constituted acts
of war and blood shed.It will be interesting to see how the Federal
Government retaliates if a 2012 sessionist group fires on the equivilate of a
modern Fort Sumter.I suspect HomeLand Security and Domestic
Terrorist forces will be the 1st line of America's Defense against such
Secession doesn't have to mean a complete separation from other states. Why
can't we go back to being united States of America instead of being The
United States of America? What binds West Virginia coal miners and coastal
liberals together other than the fact that coastal liberals and unelected EPA
bureacrats want to close down their coal mines? What benefit do the coal miners
derive from that relationship? Why do citizens of Utah tolerate the same coastal
liberals dictating to us what we can and can't do on land within our
borders? Nobody in Utah is telling people in Martha's Vineyard what they
can do with their land. Why do the people of Utah need an unelected bureaucrat
like Kathleen Sebelius dictating to us what our health care arrangements should
be? The state of Utah has been relatively responsible financially but I
assume Utah citizens will be expected to foot the bill when California's
financial position finally becomes untenable. Why is our union with CA
important? So we can all go broke quicker?
Red state pride,That would be the Articles of Confederation. The
Constitution replaced them when they were found to be wanting.The
Real Maverick,I think there are clear differences between what Pres.
Obama has done and what a Republican president would have done. But I fear you
are correct reference what I think of as the “afterburner” effects
of the current president’s race. There are real issues, but it adds
fire.Confused,What national infrastructure? Hoover Dam?
The interstates? Federal courts? Know anyone on Social Security or
Medicare?However, your point about everyone paying taxes is cogent.
Note that most do in the form of payroll rather than income taxes. Our failure
to account for those skews the debate. But yes, everyone but absolute poorest
need to have some skin in this game.Lost in DC,They
might not remove them but you might end up paying tolls to go in and out.Custer,The first Republican disagreed.Mountanman,No one owes anyone a living. And you are right, it is
going to get rough unless and until we begin to see that we really are better
off together rather than apart.
@red state pride -- You may not know this, but our forefathers tried the
approach you're suggesting under the Articles of Confederation. Under the
Articles, each state was sovereign and the states were only loosely tied
together. That form of government didn't work, so just a few years later,
in 1789, the Articles were replaced with the Constitution, setting up our
current system with a strong federal government. I think we should stick with
the wisdom of people who tried what you're suggesting and went with a
better plan after they saw the results.
red state pride - The Great Seal of the United States includes the Latin phrase
"E pluribus unum' - Out of many, one. It succinctly describes the
reason we have a nation. Not only are we made up of 50 states but we are made
up of over 300 million citizens. In this great land, each of us has the right
to think and act according to our own conscience but in the end we all need each
other to make this grand experiment work. The "coastal liberals" and
everyone in between has a part to play and each of us has the responsibility to
exercise our rights as citizens every day. We often disagree on what steps to
take to better the nation but without that debate and the compromise that should
follow, we will have nothing more than a dictatorship. Rather than focus on our
differences it might help to focus on the things we all share in common. That
is how we became a great country and it is the only way we will remain that way.
Geez! Can I please not be labelled as a Romney Supporter or a Racist? It's
is pure ignorance to think only Republicans and Racists, or even white people
sign these petitions. Does this letter writer know how to grow his
own food or build things? If you can't do that, It would be hard to live in
a seccesionists enviornment. Just because some peole are employed, doesn't
mean they are not depedndant on the government unfortunatley. After
the revolutionary war, it wasn't all flowers and sunshine for the economy.
They had big problems early on. But god was with them and if you have the spirit
and quick to remember your god, you will prosper. The lord even says if ye keep
my commandments ye shall prosper. But I would rather live free and
poor than rich and in slavery. America has very much become a psychological
slave state and a dependent state.
To "Ernest T. Bass" 50 - 2 + 1 =49. If 2 states go, and you only bring
in one more, Puerto Rico would be the 49th state.
@ twin lights and wonder: actually you are both wrong. We became The United
States of America after Abraham Lincoln laid down the law and used the force of
the Federal Government to prevent secession ( he did the right thing but
that's when States lost their autonomy- not when the current Constitution
was written). @ECR- are you convinced that a nation of 300 million can be
micromanaged by unelected bureaucrats in Washington DC without significant use
of forceful coercion? Tell us about some current countries in the world as large
as the US geographically and by population that are prosperous and peaceful.
China? A lot of people who disagree in China are "disappeared".
All that said, there are other ways to secede. Notice the increase in
homeschooling? I simply recommend getting your children out of government
operated schools and doing everything legally possible to avoid paying taxes to
the Federal Government and having a solid exit plan.
Question for Blue:How do you feel about someone who is considered
"wealthy", having paid into the Social Security system as much or more
than most, having that payout taken away from them or significantly reduced
because they're considered to be in a "wealthy" class?You see, because of your argument of "paying our fair share" and
expecting to receive what was promised, I would expect your answer to be that it
shouldn't be about how much they have, but how much they've paid in
for it to be "fair."Just wonderin'
Jane Fonda went to Hanoi, Vietnam. she never signed a legal Federal
document and sent it to the President of the United States, yet SHE was
labeled a traitotr to her country.Anyone who signed those petitions
stooped lower than old Hanoi Jane ever did.Jane Fonda is more
patriotic and less traitor than ANY of these blow-hard rebel cowards.BTW - Lucier and all his followers were cast out of Heaven for Rebellion - NOT
Didn't they petition at the White House's own website where citizens
are invited to petition? Didn't "the most transparent administration in
history" promise to respond to any petition with more than 25,000
signatures? Has the White House responded yet? Call the petitioners (and I
did not participate) kooks, call the birthers kooks, call the people who believe
Obama is a Muslim kooks but understand there is a reason they feel that way.
This President feels distinctly "un-American". Maybe because he was
raised in Indonesia. He doesn't have anything in common with blacks who
grew up in inner cities. And people who feel this way aren't racist. Herman
Cain was extremely popular with many conservatives as is Allen West. It has
nothing to do with skin color- just something about the way he talks when
he's off the prompter that makes many people uneasy. Vote for revenge?
Would Eisenhower have said that? Would Clinton have said that?
RedShirtUSS Enterprise, UTTo "Ernest T. Bass" 50 - 2 + 1
=49. If 2 states go, and you only bring in one more, Puerto Rico would be the
49th state.11:54 a.m. Nov. 21, 2012============== Guam (D), Puerto Rico (D), America Samoa (D), District of Columbia (D),
Norther Mariana Islands (D) and U.S. Virgin Islands (D) -- are all already
U.S. Territories, and all already have U.S. Congressional Representatives in the
House.I say bring it on -- they are all Democratic House members.And we'd be loosing a good chunk of the far-right-wing obstructionist
Republicans while gaining all Democrats.We could still have 53
states, even if 3 lunitic states actual DID seceed.BTW -- We'd also gain 12 new Democratic Senators.
Mountainman, Social Security is in trouble because it has been raided.And the first president to start raiding it was Reagan.
@ MountanMan"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!" I couldn't agree
more. However, I contend the Utah state government is morally bankrupt. Does
that mean I can secede from Utah? After all, I earned my money, yet the state
keeps stealing it from me and redistributes it to those who don't. $13 million to a contractor. Steady business to family and friends of
our elected leaders. No bid contracts. Yhe list goes on. And fyi you
spelled "mountain" wrong.
I'm not advocating secession, but there are several problems with this
letter, one of which is the fact that the writer does not know how to spell
"lose". The airport would not shut down. It would continue to operate
as its own airport. They would just have to coordinate with FAA. The national
parks would close, but be opened again as state parks. The military bases would
close, but Utahns would not have to pay any money towards a national defense.
The only military needed would be a small police force to guard against internal
strife, unless you think Arizona is going to invade or that China would fly over
the other states to invade.
To "LDS Liberal" I hate to be the one to tell you this, if just the
"red" states left, you would lose more than 3 states. You would lose
nearly all of your food and fuel producing states, along with some major
transportation hubs.But that is just a distraction from the fact
that "Ernest T. Bass" could not do some simple math. You are
distracting from the fact that he said to remove 2 states, and add one to remain
at 50 states.
To all those favoring succession, if you don't like the United States
please leave. No one is keeping you here.However the rest of us are
staying and will remain citizens of the United States.
It has become predictable that when someone complains that redistribution is
morally wrong, opposing voices broaden the argument to cover a wide spectrum of
things for which taxes are collected. When taxes go for services and
infrastructure, there is something we can distinctly point to that we receive in
return for the taxes we pay. Such services and infrastructure are available to
all.When taxes go to welfare programs, the funds are funneled to a
specific (and growing) group. Coercive taxation is required to fund government
welfare programs (no volunteering to help the poor here). Horror - I am
heartless for not supporting government welfare. I happily support private
organizations that care for our poor and needy. Critics - Before you
nitpick, please answer the specific question: What right do you have to take my
money and give it to someone else? Helping the poor and needy is
wonderful. But the fact that coercion is required to accomplish your end ought
to disturb you. The ends do not justify the means. The ends don't look so
good either. Too many people have been crippled by the dependency that
government welfare programs have created and perpetuate.Dependency
is not the American way.
The paying of taxes is the price citizens pay for financing the democracy they
live in and promoting the general welfare of all. Only freeloaders and bums
want to get something for nothing.
rokSan Diego, CAThe airport would not shut down. It would continue
to operate as its own airport. They would just have to coordinate with FAA.[Delta would pull SLC as it's hub. The FAA, TSA, and all airport
maintenane and operatons are FEDERAL employees -- I HIGHLY doubt the 2.7 million
Government Taxes = BAD living here in Utah could/would ever pony up and increase
their taxes enough to continue operations in SLC.]===========RedShirtUSS Enterprise, UTTo "LDS Liberal" I hate to
be the one to tell you this, if just the "red" states left, you would
lose more than 3 states. You would lose nearly all of your food and fuel
producing states, along with some major transportation hubs.[Fine,
bring it on. All Farming subsidedz would stop immediately as would all Oil
subsidies. Food and Oil would then be sold on the GLOBAL market at GLOBAL market
prices -- Mexico and Venezuela could EASILY beat Red States Food and Oil prices.
How could farmers compete when immigrant farm worker CAN go to Blue States and
be shot on sight in RED States?]
Love it or leave it.
I wrote this letter. I was just trying to point our that the federal government
could retaliate if Utah or any other state seceded from the Union. We are a
polaarized nation and I get it. I just think secsession is an over reaction and
mostly supported by Obama haters. I just wanted people to stop and think that
there could be drastic consequences to seceding. I can deal with criticism.
Thanks for all the comments, even the negative ones.
@Redshirt:That's why I said give them Mississippi OR Alabama. Not
both. Of course if we gave them both, they wouldn't be missed.You
should read what I wrote and fix your math.
I don't want to be too rude but let's define two different words and
how they are spelled.SUCCESSION is to follow something. SECESSION is the act of leaving the union.
Texas should secede fromm the union and everyone in the other states who wants
secession should move to Texas. Problem solved! Th United States doesn't
need these wackos and we certainly don't need Texas.
Mant comments concerning Social Security entitlement are made without
considering how the act was originally sold to the public. FDR backed the act
in the early 1930s to provide "something" for all workers when they
reached 65 years of age. Over the years, the Democrats in charge morphed the
act to include payments to children, medicare, construction of living facilities
and who knows what.. Had the act continued in its original form, there would be
a surplus of money.. Unberable for a politician. Oh, and by the way, there is
no trust fund for Social Security ever since the LBJ administration decided to
put the money in the general fund and issue IOUs so they could spend it along
with other tax collections. Social Security was never designed as a retirement
fund and anyone who depends on it for their retirement is foolish.