Showing posts with label alabama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label alabama. Show all posts

Saturday, August 22, 2015

Trump in Mobile, Alabama

photo 5470af0d-dbcd-43bc-aa34-2d4a5b4fc753.jpg

Previous Related Posts:
Trump Gives Helicopter Rides at Iowa State Fair
Trump's Hair and Other Viral Memes
First #GOP Primary Debate on Fox
Countdown to Trump Clown Car Debate
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Donald Trump flew into Mobile, Alabama, last night and spoke to an enthusiastice crowd of 30,000 people. There's no doubt they love him, but do they actually want him for President of the United States. Time will tell . . .

From CNN
Over an hour of often rambling remarks, the New York businessman reveled in the crowd size while he offered them his usual menu of patriotic pledges and carefree criticism of the media, his opponents and political correctness that he said his crowd similarly despised.
"We've gotten an amazing reception," Trump said as he began his remarks, turning his back to the podium at the Ladd-Peebles Stadium and pointing to the rafters behind him. "Has this been crazy? Man!"
The event had the trappings of a big Friday night high school match-up. Trump flew by the stadium in his private jet shortly before 6 p.m., doing a loop around the arena before landing. The fly-by was announced over the stadium's loudspeaker to cheers.

From Politicus USA
After Trump ran through his lines about suing Macy’s and Univision, two of the three cable networks had seen enough and cut away.
CNN cut away to a discussion of whether or not the term anchor baby is a slur. MSNBC flipped it back to Chris Hayes, who mocked Trump’s bragging.
It seems that at least some in the media are growing tired of the Trump circus. The truth about Donald Trump is that his speeches are rambling and boring. A Donald Trump speech is a lot like listening to your Fox News-watching relative spout off for hours because they think they are informed.









Byron York in Washington Examiner
Trump had predicted up to 40,000 people would fill Ladd-Peebles Stadium. That would have been huge, had it happened. As it was, filling about half the stadium was huge, too -- extremely impressive by any standard, except Trump's own.
How did Trump do? He gave what is now his trademark speech, which means it was a long stream of consciousness address incorporating all sorts of extraneous information about his business dealings but also connecting with audiences, both in the stadium and on television, with his outsider's message on immigration and trade. And all in Trump's distinctive style. Like this: "The 14th Amendment? You know what? I was right on it. You can do something with it, and you can do something fast." It's a style that probably works better in a smaller setting than a stadium. But Trump still made his points.



















































Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, February 12, 2015

Bigoted Fossil Judge Roy Moore Doubles Down on Gay Marriage

photo 14873610-mmmain.jpg

Cartoon: J.D. Crowe on AL.com

Previous Related Posts:
Gay Marriage Comes to Alabama
"Godless Perverts" - Religious Right Upset by Supreme Court DOMA Ruling
Stacey "Don't Say Gay" Campfield Voted Out in Tennessee

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Judge Roy Moore, the Chief Justice of Alabama, has taken a stand on Gay Marriage in his state that is in opposition to the Federal Supreme Court, which is leaning towards striking down all state bans on same sex marriage in our country.

Moore is such an ancient bigoted fossil that he (A) Keeps doubling down on his untenable position and (B) doesn't realize what a fool he is making of himself. However, it's quite a satisfying spectacle to watch unfold. :)

Even in Alabama, Moore is considered an extremist. In 2003, he was removed from the same Chief Justice post for putting up a copy of the Ten Commandments in his office.

From CNN

MONTGOMERY, Alabama (CNN) -- Alabama's judicial ethics panel removed Chief Justice Roy Moore from office Thursday for defying a federal judge's order to move a Ten Commandments monument from the state Supreme Court building.
The nine-member Court of the Judiciary issued its unanimous decision after a one-day trial Wednesday.
The panel, which includes judges, lawyers and non-lawyers, could have reprimanded Moore, continued his suspension or cleared him.
The ethics panel said Moore put himself above the law by "willfully and publicly" flouting the order to remove the 2.6-ton monument from the state judicial building's rotunda in August.
U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson ruled the granite carving was an unconstitutional endorsement of religion. Moore refused to obey the order but was overruled by his eight colleagues on the state Supreme Court. (Full story)
On November 3, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear Moore's appeal of Thompson's ruling. (Full story)
Moore "showed no signs of contrition for his actions," the Court of the Judiciary found.

Unfortunately, the Tea Party voters of Alabama returned him to his post:

From New York Times
He ran for governor twice, and failed, but in 2012, he shocked the political establishment with his re-election to the state’s high court, cashing in on name recognition and Alabama’s widespread Christian sentiment and skeptical stance toward federal government power.

“If you look at the professional class in Alabama, most of them would say they’d wish he’d just quit this foolishness and let Alabama move along with the rest of the country,” said Glen Browder, professor emeritus in American democracy at Jacksonville State University and a former Democratic congressman from Alabama. “But he’s popular in the church crowd.”

Chief Justice Moore’s office is decorated with a wooden plaque of the commandments, along with a portrait of George Washington and a photograph of Jefferson Davis, the president of the Confederacy. (Chief Justice Moore said that he has never been a segregationist, but that has no qualms about making arguments in favor of states’ rights when they are warranted.)



Yesterday he pointed out that he has Gay Friends. Yes, he really said that, with no apparent irony. So yeah, if he has homosexual friends, then there's no problem that he tried to halt gay marriage in Alabama, right?



Via Talking Points Memo
"I've had many friends who are homosexual," Moore said during an interview with John Heilemann and Mark Halperin of Bloomberg Politics. "I've treated people just like other people. This is not about how I treat people, or how I go to a wedding or a marriage or anything. It's about the constitution of Alabama and the Constitution of the United States."

"You wouldn't be reluctant, personally, to go to a same-sex wedding, then?" Halperin prodded.

"I would not go to a same-sex wedding," Moore responded. "No."







Amazing showdown on CNN with Chris Cuomo today:




CNN Transcript 2-12-2015, Chris Cuomo and Judge Roy Moore
CUOMO: . . . I understand what you're trying to do here, you're trying to defeat the federal law. The question is, why?

MOORE: No, I'm not trying to defeat the federal law. There is no federal law and that's the point. No judge in the United States or federal district court has the right to invent the definition of marriage, which is not even contained in the United States Constitution. And that's the problem. We have people going in trying to mandate to the state of Alabama that the sanctity of marriage amendment in our Constitution is wrong, and that's simply not right to do.

CUOMO: Well -- well, it certainly is right. That's how this works, right, is that the federal law says that a state law is discriminatory and they change it. And certainly the distinction you're trying to draw with the district court, you don't have an independent case in front of you, your honor, about your own marriage law. This is about gay marriage in general and the equality in general and that's why the district court's able to say it. But again, you're right, we shouldn't get into the thickets.

I would suggest something else looking at your letter that you wrote to the governor of Alabama. For you, marriage is about the divine institution. It's as true as your words and as the pin on your lapel. You want to say that God says marriage is a certain thing and you don't want to hear anything else about what a definition of marriage could be. Is that a fair suggestion?

MOORE: No, that's not a fair suggestion. I go by the law. Of course I believe marriage was defined by God, but so does the United States Supreme Court. In the case of Murphy versus Ramsey, they said that marriage and family are the basis from the holy union of one man and one woman in the state of matrimony. That was clearly the United States Supreme Court opinion. It's been the court of opinions in state courts across this country. And especially in Alabama, we've recognized it as a divine institution in our law. Naturally it existed hundreds and even thousands of years before the United States even came into existence.

CUOMO: Right, but we are a nation of laws and not just God's law. And what your state did in 2006 was what many did, which was, you tried to define marriage to exclude. And what happened in U.S. v. Windsor, the case that is on everybody's lips now because it changed it, is that those laws that define marriage as only between a man and a woman are unfair and fail the test of equal protection. You know that. You know that when they meet this spring many people believe the Supreme Court will affirm this and say that state laws and constitutional provisions like your own are unfair. The question is, why won't you accept that definition of marriage?

MOORE: First, when the Supreme Court meets, I believe state's rights is going to be a big part of this. And I don't believe they have the right to push upon the state a definition which this state does not recognize, indeed, which the United States Constitution does not recognize. In fact, in Loving versus Virginia in 1967, when they declared that interracial marriages could not be prohibited, correctly so, they referenced marriage as the right of free men and women to enter into pursuit of happiness. They quoted basically out of the Declaration of Independence which said that God gave us these rights. We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights and among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. They're unalienable because they can't be taken away and they can't be mandated on the state in this instance.

CUOMO: Of course they can, though, your honor. That's what happens. It used to be legal to have slaves. Your state had a lot of laws on the books, like other states, where times changed and those laws had to change. And this is another example of that.

MOORE: You know slavery -- slavery was wrong and in 1857, when the Supreme Court of the United States declared in Dred Scott that black people could be property, one justice dissented. He said that when a strict interpretation of the Constitution, according to the fixed rules which govern the interpretation of laws is abandoned, the theoretical opinions of individuals are allowed to control its meaning, we have no longer a Constitution. We're under a government of individual men who, for the time being, have the power to declare what the Constitution is according to their own views of what they think it ought to mean. Those words by Benjamin Curtis are exactly what's going on in the United States Supreme Court and the federal courts of this state -- of this nation today.

CUOMO: And just as they were --

MOORE: And the United States Supreme Court hadn't ruled on this issue.

CUOMO: And they will. But they have ruled on what the substance of it is. And you've had a federal court tell you to marry people and you're not. And I would suggest that, based on what we're hearing right now, your refusal goes to what you believe marriage is about and not just to the law.

MOORE: No.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

. . . MOORE: Nobody's arguing about racial discrimination in this case. This is not about racial discrimination.

CUOMO: It's about discrimination.

MOORE: It's about sexual -- it's about sexual preference.

CUOMO: It's about discrimination.

MOORE: Being -- overcoming an institution which has existed in our state, in our United States, for centuries. And I think it's wrong.

CUOMO: But it's about discrimination. In 2006, you created a constitutional amendment that, by design, discriminated against gay people. And now you are being told by the federal law that is wrong.

MOORE: Again -- again -- again, that is a constitutional amendment to the Alabama constitution, and it's clearly within the bounds of state law and federal law. Again, there is nothing in the constitution about marriage. How can judges go in and define a word? They're doing exactly what they did in 1857 in Dred Scott.-

CUOMO: They just did it in U.S. v. Windsor. They just looked at the Defense of Marriage Act and said you cannot define marriage as just between a man and woman.

MOORE: That was between Congress. It did not affect the state, according to the ruling in Windsor.

CUOMO: But you can't say that the Court hasn't spoken about it. It was the exact same issue. It just wasn't a state law and that's why we're having the next case in June --

MOORE: I can say the Court -- I can say the Court spoke about it, because they said this does not apply to the state. It applies to the federal law passed by Congress.

CUOMO: That's right, because of the specific issue before them. And now they're meeting again in June. And if June comes and they hold the same way, then what will you do?

MOORE: Then I will do what the Court should -- or what the Court should have done under Dred Scott. If it's an unlawful mandate, you don't have to recognize it. You can recuse from the case.

CUOMO: So you still --

MOORE: You can dissent. You can dissent to the United States Supreme Court, just like you can dissent to anything else.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

. . . CUOMO: State by state, the rulings all going the same way. State by state, they're all going the same way

MOORE: You can't say the law -- you can't say what the law is with the United States Courts of Appeals differ on this very issue.

CUOMO: And you can't say that even if the Supreme Court rules against your personal position, you won't follow it because it offends your faith. You can't do that as Chief Justice.

MOORE: I said I would not -- I would not oppose the law except with an opinion or a dissent. That's what I said.

CUOMO; No, I asked you would you follow it.

MOORE: I did not say I would not recognize the law.

CUOMO: I asked you if you would follow it and you went into a word salad about whether I would follow it.

MOORE: And I asked you if you would follow Plessy versus Ferguson.

CUOMO: I am not the Chief Justice.

MOORE: Well, you can't answer the question either.

CUOMO: You answer it first. Will you follow it if they decide in June that gay marriage is equal protection.

MOORE: I will recognize -- I will recognize the United States Supreme Court opinion is binding over the state courts. Me, personally, I will make that decision when it comes, sir.



Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Gay Marriage Comes to Alabama ~ Updated

photo AlabamaOutline.png

The Supreme Court allowed Gay Marriage to go forward in the state of Alabama this week, and the results were both exhilarating and at the same time a throwback to the equal-rights battles of the 60s. Some judges apparently forgot their learnin' and decided to forget that Federal Law trumps State Law.

Alabama Chief Justice, Roy Moore, tried to stop the whole process last week when he ordered Judges not to obey.

From Alabama.com
Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore late Sunday ordered all probate judges and employees in Alabama to follow existing state law and not issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples or recognize same-sex marriages.
. . . Moore wrote that if any probate judge defies the order, Governor Robert Bentley would have the responsibility of ensuring that state law is "faithfully executed."
He has also said that the judges are not bound by the orders issued in that case, Searcy v. Strange. Instead, he said, probate judges fall under the direct supervision and authority of the chief justice.

Well, let's just say he was wrong, and most Judges chose not to follow the order. Some stalled and hid in their offices or decided not to perform any marriages at all, like the Probate Judge of Mobile. Some just delayed a few hours, probably hoping the TV cameras would go away, or maybe to talk down some of the employees screaming that it was against their religion, etc.

But in most places on Monday morning, February 9, 2015, same-sex weddings began to occur all over the state of Alabama - a historic sight.

UPDATE: "Redneck Reporter" Jeremy Todd Addaway posted a hilarious spoof of the fear-mongering going on in Alabama (and other states) over Gay Marriage and how it effects everyone else.

“I read on the news today some information, that homosexuals will be getting married in Alabama today, so I wanted to give you a live report from Blount County,” he began.

. . . “This pile of brush is still here, and there are no homosexuals layin’ on top of it, doin’ homosexual things,” Addaway said.

“None in the shed either, but we need to check into this further,” he continued, delving ever deeper into his backyard.

“We’re back here by a pile of junk — and it’s still here — and there’s no homosexuals doin’ homosexual things here either, so it looks like we’re pretty safe here in Blount County, don’t think we’re gonna be subject to plagues of homosexuals fallin’ from the sky.”










And the Supreme Court gave a strong signal that Alabama is a bellwether state for the rest of the country, as well as Federal Law:






























Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, December 4, 2013

GOP Says Rosa Parks Ended Racism - Oh Wait

photo 3424525610_gop_elephant_dead_xlarge.jpg

The Republican National Committee (RNC) led by the intrepid Reince Priebus, got into a bit of trouble with the wording of a tweet last week on the 58th Anniversary of civil rights legend Rosa Parks' refusal to give up her seat to a white person on a bus in Montgomery, AL. They declared she had "ended racism" on that day, but many on Twitter begged to differ especially because of all the GOP Confederate Flag-waving lately. The tweet set off what NPR called a "snark avalanche."

They tried to take it back in another tweet, but it was too late! :)






~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
























































Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, February 28, 2013

Justice Scalia Says Voting Rights Act a Product of "Racial Entitlement"

Photobucket

JUSTICE SCALIA: Well, maybe it was making that judgment, Mr. Verrilli. But that’s — that’s a problem that I have. This Court doesn’t like to get involved in — in racial questions such as this one. It’s something that can be left — left to Congress.

 The problem here, however, is suggested by the comment I made earlier, that the initial enactment of this legislation in a — in a time when the need for it was so much more abundantly clear was — in the Senate, there — it was double-digits against it. And that was only a 5-year term.

 Then, it is reenacted 5 years later, again for a 5-year term. Double-digits against it in the Senate. Then it was reenacted for 7 years. Single digits against it. Then enacted for 25 years, 8 Senate votes against it. And this last enactment, not a single vote in the Senate against it. And the House is pretty much the same. Now, I don’t think that’s attributable to the fact that it is so much clearer now that we need this.  
I think it is attributable, very likely attributable, to a phenomenon that is called perpetuation of racial entitlement. It’s been written about. Whenever a society adopts racial entitlements, it is very difficult to get out of them through the normal political processes.

 I don’t think there is anything to be gained by any Senator to vote against continuation of this act. And I am fairly confident it will be reenacted in perpetuity unless — unless a court can say it does not comport with the Constitution. You have to show, when you are treating different States differently, that there’s a good reason for it.

 That’s the — that’s the concern that those of us who — who have some questions about this statute have. It’s — it’s a concern that this is not the kind of a question you can leave to Congress. There are certain districts in the House that are black districts by law just about now. And even the Virginia Senators, they have no interest in voting against this. The State government is not their government, and they are going to lose — they are going to lose votes if they do not reenact the Voting Rights Act.

 Even the name of it is wonderful: The Voting Rights Act. Who is going to vote against that in the future?

Photobucket


It was unreal, unbelievable, almost shocking, for a member of the court to use certain language/
. . . It is an affront to all of what the civil rights movement stood for, what people died for, what people bled for, and those of us who marched across that bridge 48 years ago, we didn’t march for some racial entitlement. We wanted to open up the political process, and let all of the people come in, and it didn’t matter whether they were black or white, Latino, Asian-American or Native American.
. . . (the right to vote is) precious, almost sacred. It is the most powerful nonviolent instrument that we have in a democratic society. And if the courts come to that point where they declare this section, section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, unconstitutional, it would be a dagger in the heart of the democratic process.
~ Congressman and Civil Rights Freedom Fighter, John Lewis

There were audible gasps in the Supreme Court’s lawyers’ lounge, where audio of the oral argument is pumped in for members of the Supreme Court bar, when Justice Antonin Scalia offered his assessment of a key provision of the Voting Rights Act. He called it a “perpetuation of racial entitlement.”
~ ThinkProgress

The arguments that we heard this morning gives us cause to pause and hope that we will not have to return to the streets to secure voting rights.
~ Reverend Al Sharpton at the Rosa Parks Statue Dedication today in Washington DC, via Addicting Info

The friggin' right to vote now is an "entitlement" like Medicare or Food Stamps.
Well no, it's not actually. Under the 15th Amendment to the Constitution, the right of citizens of the United States to Vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or pre-existing condition of servitude. Well, that amendment was ratified back in 1870 under the Administration of President Grant, one of my heroes, actually.
But we all know it was put into effect after a century of poll taxes, literacy tests, and other gimmicks to keep blacks from voting only because of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Yes, Justice Scalia, it has a wonderful name, as you put it.
And the reason is not the words or the spelling or the English language in which this Act is written or spoken about.
No sir, it's about its meaning.
That the United States Congress will ensure that people get to vote in places where they weren't before.
And that, sadly, does not refer only to the segregation of the past. It refers to people out there in state capitals today, sitting in bars and over poker tables, shouting out their latest gimmick to smother the electoral impact of blacks living in large cities from Harrisburg to Tallahassee.
They outbid each other with reptilic glee over their latest legislative squirm to convert electoral majorities into electoral minorities by denying blacks the right to vote.
~ Chris Matthews on Hardball







Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act doesn't represent the 'perpetuation of racial entitlement,' as Justice Scalia states. Rather, it is one of the most important tools we have for confronting the entitlement of those who believe some people's votes and voices should matter more than others ... I hope that Scalia's fellow justices will approach this issue more thoughtfully, and with a greater awareness of the reality in their country.
~ Minister Leslie Watson Malachi, director of People for the American Way Foundation's African American Ministers Leadership Council

We disagree with Justice Antonin Scalia, who today referred to the renewal of the Voting Rights Act as the 'perpetuation of a racial entitlement,' as if racial discrimination has ended. In the past two years alone, six of the nine states fully covered by Section 5 passed restrictions that would have made it harder for people of color to vote, and many of these were blocked thanks to Section 5. The Voting Rights Act is not an 'entitlement.' It is a critically needed protection for our most fundamental right.
~ Judith Browne-Dianis of The Advancement Project

Photobucket





















Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, February 19, 2013

Alabama Lawmaker McClurkin "A Baby is Largest Organ of the Body"

Photobucket

When a physician removes a child from a woman, that is the largest organ in a body. That's a big thing. That's a big surgery. You don't have any other organs in your body that are bigger than that.
~ Alabama State Rep. Mary Sue McClurkin

So, if babies are organs and organs are babies, does that mean an appendectomy is the same thing as an abortion? Are tonsils twins? My head hurts.
~ J.D. Crowe on Alabama.com

Mary Sue go to college, read a few books and stop trying to write law. Please. They may even have picture versions of Gray's Anatomy now.
. . . We want to help, MarySue. Really. Because you are sitting down in Montgomery writing law. You are sitting down in Montgomery meddling in the physician-patient relationship. You are meddling in things about which you have no knowledge whatsoever, and that means you are a danger to society.
~ Julie on Left in Alabama Blog

They ... need to hop on the Magic School Bus for a refresher in how the human body operates!
~ Katie Baker on Jezebel

This is what happens when education is considered to be elitist while stupidity and ignorance are glorified.
~ T. Steelman on Addicting Info

My largest organ is down the road in the local church.
. . . yep, for better or Wurlitzer
~ entlord on Daily Kos

If you find yourself birthing a lung or a kidney
You may want to seek medical attention.
*Dopeslap*
~ nightsweat on Daily Kos

My sister's baby organ became enlarged once. It got so big that one day it literally burst out of her. Then it went on living OUTSIDE HER BODY. That was years ago, and it's still crawling around her house. It's like something out of a David Lynch movie.
~ Mehvolutionist on Jezebel

McClurkin's assertion that the fetus is an organ contradicts the idea of fetal personhood, a favorite Republican rationale for banning abortion. Organs are not people. That makes McClurkin's comment possibly the most creative excuse for throttling abortion clinics in a while.
~ Maggie Severns on Mother Jones

A "child" is not a bodily "organ." Indeed, children have organs of their own. The largest human organ is actually the skin. According to National Geographic, adults carry about eight pounds of skin, which is slightly above the average weight of a newborn baby.
~ Amanda Terkel on Huffington Post

So now we can just call a woman who needs an abortion an "organ donor". Let the righties figure out how to argue against that. Ms. McCluck, you're a cluck.
~ Frickett on Huffington Post

From her remarks it is clear that McClurkin's brain is by far the tiniest organ ever found in any woman's body.
~ themightyabealrd on Huff Post

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

@SnarkAmendment (owner of this blog) had a little Twitter Tantrum today about this topic - I just can't stand the stupid sometimes:









Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, January 13, 2013

Obama Tells Wingnuts "No Secession"

Photobucket


Previous Posts:
Snark Amendment: To Secede or Merely Succeed, That is the Question
Snark Amendment: Secession Wars


Official White House Response to Secessionists
Thank you for using the White House's online petitions platform to participate in your government.

In a nation of 300 million people -- each with their own set of deeply-held beliefs -- democracy can be noisy and controversial. And that's a good thing. Free and open debate is what makes this country work, and many people around the world risk their lives every day for the liberties we often take for granted.

But as much as we value a healthy debate, we don't let that debate tear us apart.

. . . So let's be clear: No one disputes that our country faces big challenges, and the recent election followed a vigorous debate about how they should be addressed. As President Obama said the night he won re-election, "We may have battled fiercely, but it's only because we love this country deeply and we care so strongly about its future."


Party-Pooping White House
Well, this is certainly disappointing. All those people who signed all those petitions for secession on the White House website are going to be like soooo annoyed. I mean, what’s the point of petitioning for secession rights for South Carolina, North Carolina, Alabama, Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, Texas, and Louisiana if White House is just going to blow you off?
~ Scholars and Rogues

If at first you don't SECEDE, try, try again.
~ Sir Wizard on Freedom Outpost

Yes, I signed every dam secession petition I could find! Of course this was all symbolic, I don't think any of us seriously thought anything more would come of it than a few dismissive remarks from the Collaborationist media. But what we are facing here is more than a regional disagreement, this literally has the potential to embroil all 50 states and the territories & commonwealths besides. All I'm saying is, let's be very sure of what it is that some are suggesting. Let's not fool ourselves with pious talk of reformation or restoration, but keep carefully in mind the words of Patrick Henry, "If this be treason, make the most of it.”
~ Penny Robinson Fan Club on Freedom Outpost

That's all right people. When TEXAS decides it has had enough, all hell will break loose. Texas has more of a right to seceede than any other state in the U.S, Her economy is better than all of the U.S. economy put together, we have a better school system, we have our own oil to depend upon, we have cotton, soybeans, and every other form of food, PLUS our Santa Gertrudis cattle to feed our populace. We even have our own space program!!! Don't push Texas too far Washington.
~ Traveller62 on Freedom Outpost

Empty gesture and a mockery. What's the purpose of a petition, if the "president" rules by decree anyway???
~ bonaventure on Washington Times

So the guy in Mobile who was mad at the FEDERAL government because the LOCAL government shut down his topless car wash won't get his wish? Aww, dang. Hate it for the little goob.
~ nobottomfeeder on Alabama.com

Umm, sore losers mad because Obama got elected, then they ask his permission to secede! lol
~ mmkay on Alabama.com

Well, we are not prisoners to dictatorships, so we must have the right to leave the union once it no longer serves its intended purpose and treads on our liberties.
~ CodeToad on Free Republic

The jug-eared jacka$$ is all about tearing us apart.
~ WindsorKnot on Free Republic

Rights are granted by God not Government. Certainly not the Lying POS who sleeps in our house at 1600 Penn. Ave.
~ TexasFossil on Free Republic

There is a right to secede. It comes from the same source as our Right to keep and bear arm - God Himself - and a government that no longer rules with the consent of the governed and under the rule of a written Constitution cannot stop secession except by force. I hope and pray that our soldiers are too honorable and patriotic to obey any unlawful orders that they may receive in such a situation. I wish the thug in our White House would reread the Declaration of Independence; it articulates our right to secede quite well.
~ Pollster1 on Free Republic

~~~~~~~~~~~~



where can we find someone that will ignore the ayatollah barack and rise rough shod over him as he is doing to the entire United States of America. We need a leader who respects the Constitution Lives by the Amendments and represents WE THE PEoPLE
~ Barb P. on World Net Daily

The idiot sitting in the office of the President couldn't understand the constitution if it was spelled out in first grade language for him. Unless we can get rid of him, his czars and every illegal cabinet member he has nominated we are doomed!!
~ skeeter on World Net Daily

. . . The "right to separate" was resolved from 1861-65. There is no right to secede. Not only did the Civil War resolve this issue, in Texas v. White the Supreme Court ruled that states do not have the right to secede. You are welcome to move elsewhere though.
~ Teddy_Roosevelt on World Net Daily

Where did this weird idea of petitioning the president come from? It`s not up to the president to "allow" secession.
~ spacegasp on World Net Daily

Seal the Borders, Each State must Stand ..It's Time to Organize a Freeze Federal Tax Movement' at State Level'!.Until Congress!, Stops the Spending! ,and Investigate OBAMA, NOW!
Stand Together.
~ Capt Dax on World Net Daily

I CANNOT get passed the fact that MOST EVERYONE had Romney as the WINNER, some going as far as saying it would be a LANDSLIDE. FACT is that the MAJORITY of the INDEPENDENTS voted for Romney, and the establishment say that the BASE didn't vote. WHAT? There weren't a ton of people that were motivated to vote this incompetent idiot out of office? BOLOGNA! My question is HOW do they know the base didn't come out and vote?? Would it show the base didn't come out if the voting machines in 5 states changed every 3rd Romney vote to BHO? I know there are a lot of lazy people on the oboma dole, and are motivated to ruin the country before the will give up their stuff and go to work, but I STILL CAN'T BELIEVE THIS CHICAGO INCOMPETENT THUG WON THE ELECTION WITHOUT A LOT OF VOTER FRAUD GOING ON. They HAD TO WIN this election, OR THEIR AGENDA and LIBERALISM/COMMUNISM WOULD BE SET BACK 100 yrs because of what Romney would have done to turn this country around. I THINK WE HAVE BEEN SNOOKERED BY SOME CHICAGO COMMIES.
~ Eugene on World Net Daily

Photobucket


When you lose all of our military bases and other federal entities, to say nothing about the amount of federal money you get in excess of what you contribute, please explain how you will survive. Gun shops, walmarts, and Ted Nugent concerts are not enough to sustain you.
~ everymothersson on Huffington Post

My guess is that the people circulating the petitions probably had to hire someone to spell "secession".
~ fishnfool on Huff Post

We don’t need to sucede! WE NEED TO TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK!!!
WE, THE U.S. CITIZENS, ARE THE BOSS AND WE’VE BEEN LETTING OUR EMPLOYEES RUN THE SHOW!!!
We must now begin to disassemble this beast we’ve complacently allowed to grow before it consumes us all!!!
~ freedomnetworker on The Blaze

These states just need to stand up and do a proclamation to secede.. not ask for permission. The governors need to come together and convene.
~ freedomnetworker on The Blaze

Glenn Beck’s hero, Abraham Lincoln claimed the states have no right to secede and form their own government. So in order to get past this roadblock, we have to convince liberals AND people like glenn beck, bill o’reily, etc….That will be tough
~ soybomb315_II on The Blaze

I’d rather die defending the Constitution and my rights than live under the Soros/Obama communist utopia.
~ behindblueeyes on The Blaze

Perhaps Lincoln was wrong. He should have let them go. By now they would be begging to join the modern world.
~ jaggerama on Guardian UK

YAWN ,, A few thousand right WING NUTS dont speak for every one in their state of MILLIONS ,except the other wingnuts ,, what did these TEABAG CLOWNS think ? THEY were going to be taken seriously??HAHAHAHAHAHAHA,,, TEABAGGERS ,BIRTHERS, and SECESSIONISTS ,, THE BAD JOKES that keeps on giving us ALL a GOOD LAUGH
~ Fig Newt on Politico

South Carolina was 1st to vote to join the Confederacy, and 1st to vote to secede from the Union. Surprise, surprise. A hand full of spoiled kids sign a petition because they aren't getting their way, and it' news. Let Texas secede....and when the Mexican druglords are making Texas their bitch, don't run to Uncle Sam. The advent of social media and blogs has really put a spotlight on a number of unwell people amidst decent folks. The people who are signing petitions to secede would wet themselves if they awaken tomorrow with the strength, wisdom, and greatness of these United States backing their moves. Really. SC leaving these United States is not going to happen but the politicians in SC need stop fanning this kind of lunacy. And the hate speech on this blog is so 1960's. Hello, its 21st century. Hate is a poor commodity to trade in these days, and God really doesn't like ugly!
~ Hannibal on the Lexington, South Carolina Patch




Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, November 11, 2012

To Secede or Merely Succeed, That is the Question For Red States

Photobucket



The amount of liberals mispelling secede is unfathomable.
Secede: To withdraw formally from membership in an organization, association, or alliance.
Succeed: What you morons are never going to do.
Secession =/= Succession and Succeed =/= Secede
See the difference?
~ betterspecies on Tumblr


It’s either the political theater equivalent of a hissy fit or the start of more than a dozen new countries: Citizens in 15 states have filed petitions to secede from the United States after Tuesday’s election. These include Louisiana (which led the charge), the Republic of Texas, Kentucky, Colorado, New Jersey, Montana, North Dakota, Indiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Alabama, Florida, Georgia and Oregon. And somewhat hilariously, someone in North Dakota filed a petition requesting New York secede, which seems pretty rude, given they are sort of handling a major natural disaster right now. Although this is largely seen as symbolic, the filers in each state still have a month to gather 25,000 signatures to have their peaceful withdrawal from the U.S.A. considered by the president. Good luck with that
~ MSN.com

From Raw Story
Peter Morrison, treasurer of the Hardin County Republican Party, wrote in the newsletter he publishes that Obama’s reelection proved the nation is too big and encompasses too many divergent views to be controlled by the federal government. In a vitriolic screed labeling Democrats, “baby-murdering, tax-raising socialists,” Morrison laid out his reasoning for secession.

“Texas was once its own country, and many Texans already think in nationalist terms about their state,” he wrote.
"Why should Vermont and Texas live under the same government?,” he continued. “Let each go her own way in peace, sign a free trade agreement among the states and we can avoid this gut-wrenching spectacle every four years."
. . . “Like the remainder of Lee’s army after Gettysburg, it is our duty to keep fighting to the bitter end, in hopes that Providence might shine upon our cause before it is too late,” he wrote. ”We must contest every single inch of ground and delay the baby-murdering, tax-raising socialists at every opportunity. But in due time, the maggots will have eaten every morsel of flesh off of the rotting corpse of the Republic, and therein lies our opportunity.”

People around here are asking why Texas is so different from the rest of the country, why we see things so differently … but I don’t think a lot of people here are saying we ought to leave the Union.
~ Kent Batman, chairman of the Hardin County Republican Party to The Grio

We petition the obama administration to:
Peacefully grant the State of georgia to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.
just like in 1860 the south secede from the union. 2012 the state of georgia would like to withdraw from the USA
Created: Nov 10, 2012
~ Whitehouse Petition to let Georgia Secede, signed by 2,559 people as of today

















Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)