Ron Paul on Secession Talk by AnthonyT

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Ron Paul on Secession Talk

POSTED BY: ANTHONYT
UPDATED: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 18:21
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 671
PAGE 1 of 1

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 5:46 AM

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

Found this bit on CNN:

-=-=-=-

Kiran Chetry: How serious is this secession talk?

Ron Paul: I don’t think it’s very serious. I don’t think anybody called for secession, and I don’t think the governor called for it. But he brings up an important issue. The biggest surprise to me was the outrage expressed over an individual who thinks along these lines, because I heard people say, well, this is treasonous and this was un-American. But don’t they remember how we came in to our being? We used secession, we seceded from England. So it’s a very good principle. It’s a principle of a free society. It’s a shame we don’t have it anymore. I argue that if you had the principle of secession, our federal government wouldn’t be as intrusive into state affairs and to me that would be very good.

-=-=-=-

For my own part, I think the Federal government already demonstrated that it is no longer willing to let states secede. For good or for ill, Lincoln appears to have removed that option from the table.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 8:17 AM

OUT2THEBLACK

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,

For my own part, I think the Federal government already demonstrated that it is no longer willing to let states secede. For good or for ill, Lincoln appears to have removed that option from the table.

--Anthony

So it would appear...But , many appearances are also deceptive...

There is a significant body of case law , precedents , and Supreme Court rulings that uphold states' rights...

To take the Oath to " support the Constitution against all enemies , foreign and domestic " would stand one in the position of obligation to uphold states' rights...

Keep in mind that a 'state' , for the purpose of this discussion , is a 'legal fiction' , analagous to a 'corporation' , particularly now , since the passage of the Buck Act and other post-Civil War travesties enacted against the interests of states...

So , a state or corporation , being a legal fiction , actually has no innate rights , versus a real , live human being...

That's why the Founders took their 5,000-year leap and were really the first government to draw attention to the Fact that men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights...Among which are Life , Liberty , and the Pursuit of Happiness...

The more Folk come to recognize this , and sooner would be better , the more Free everyone may become...

A live dog is better than a 'dead' lion...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 9:10 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"So , a state or corporation , being a legal fiction , actually has no innate rights , versus a real , live human being..."

That ship sailed a long, looooooong time ago.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 9:22 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
So , a state or corporation , being a legal fiction , actually has no innate rights , versus a real , live human being...

Oh, you must mean inane rights. Because if human rights were really "innate" we wouldn't find them being violated!!! Same problem with "inalienable" rights.

Innnate: Possessed at birth; inborn; Possessed as an essential characteristic; inherent
Inalienable: Not able to be taken away or transferred to another

In reality, human rights or civil rights are what we choose to make them. They are as much an artificial construct as money, as artificial as the "rights" of states, corporations, or religions.

Don't get me wrong: I happen to like the concepts of equality, fairness, and freedom, the right to life, and democracy. But there is nothing inalienable, innate, inherent, natural, God-given, or permament about them because they can be - and often - are taken away at a moment's notice for all kinds of reasons.

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 9:30 AM

OUT2THEBLACK

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:

Innate: Possessed at birth; inborn; Possessed as an essential characteristic; inherent
Inalienable: Not able to be taken away or transferred to another

In reality, human rights or civil rights are what we choose to make them. They are as much an artificial construct money, and as artificial as the "rights" of states, corporations, or religions.

Don't get me wrong: I happen to like the concepts of equality, fairness, and freedom. But there is nothing inalienable, innate, inherent, natural, God-given, or permament about them because they can be and often are taken away at a moment's notice for all kinds of reasons.

Both innate and inalienable...If you try taking them from me , I'd just as soon end you...

Human rights and civil rights are not really the same thing , just as deficit and debt are not the same thing...

My rights are permanent , innate , and inalienable...Because of your moral relativism , your mileage varies , of course...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 9:33 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Even the earth isn't permanent, son.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 9:44 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Both innate and inalienable...If you try taking them from me , I'd just as soon end you...

Unless, of course, I end you first. I which case your right to life just went pphhhffffttt!

Quote:
Human rights and civil rights are not really the same thing

I used both terms just to make clear that neither is permament, inalienable, or what-have-you.

Quote:
My rights are permanent , innate , and inalienable...Because of your moral relativism , your mileage varies , of course...

MY morals aren't relative. They are what they are: What I think is just and right. I just don't hang them on god or nature to puff them up and make them more impressive.

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 12:07 PM

OUT2THEBLACK

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Even the earth isn't permanent, son.

An unprovable assertion , by any means...

Just an opinion of yours , supported by nothing...

Unfounded , like the majority of your comments...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 12:13 PM

BYTEMITE

I'm confused, SignyM, are you saying we should have those rights but often don't, that we shouldn't hold our breath for having those rights, or that those rights aren't important?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 12:14 PM

OUT2THEBLACK

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:

Unless, of course, I end you first. I which case your right to life just went pphhhffffttt!

MY morals aren't relative. They are what they are: What I think is just and right. I just don't hang them on god or nature to puff them up and make them more impressive.

To end me , you'd have to be both faster and luckier than you are 'smart'...I don't concern myself with non-starters like yourself !

No compass...No guidestar...No independence from the nanny state...You are lost !

You can't stand for something , that's why you're so willing to fall for anything...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 2:07 PM

FREMDFIRMA

*bonks Out2B on the head*

You're makin enemies out of potential allies here, dude.

Quit harpin on yer differences and find some common ground, it's a hell of a lot closer than either one of ya think it is.

All of ya have this thing where you look at folks who don't wholeheartedly agree with ya as opponents to be crushed instead of potential allies against certain things you BOTH oppose despite whatever differences otherwise you may have.

And it's really, seriously, idiotic, not to mention playing right into the hands of the powers that be who set us at each others throats to keep us offa theirs.

Just felt the need to say that, as we once again seem to have devolved to stupidity and insult instead of reason.

You can NOT shake hands with a balled fist.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 2:43 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
I'm confused, SignyM, are you saying we should have those rights but often don't, that we shouldn't hold our breath for having those rights, or that those rights aren't important?

I'm saying that "rights" are whatever we collectively choose them to be. There is NOTHING inevitable, unalienable, permanent, god-given, innate about what we think of as the "right to life", "the right to freedom", "the right to vote", the "right to property" or "the right to equality". In days past, the most common method of birth control was infanticide. Where was the right to life then? In many nations today, there is no equality between the sexes, or between young and old. Where is the right to equality? People who have 90% of the money today do NOT do 90% of the work. Where is the right to fairness? If "rights" were so automatic, so inalienable, they wouldn't be violated 90% of the time. They would come as naturally as swallowing. Nobody talks about "the right to swallow", do they?

Societies are like families: they allow for all kinds of forms and functions - or dysfunctions - as long as they are not immediately fatal in their enviroment. As long as people continue to reproduce and pass along the language and technology and paradigms of their forebears, that society- no matter how unfair or even horrific we deem it to be- will continue to survive.

I personally have a list of "rights" that I agree with, including equality, representation in government, freedom of speech and association and all that good stuff. I suport and defend those rights. However, that being said, I understand that MANY societies have an entirely different list of priorities. European societies try to achieve stability, employment, predictability in addition to ours. The Asian societies value conformity, and are willing to sacrifice the individuality and equality that we emphasize.

In other words: It's a CHOICE.

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 2:50 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
To end me , you'd have to be both faster and luckier than you are 'smart'...I don't concern myself with non-starters like yourself !

If I thought you were a real threat, I'd either shoot you in the back or report you to the authorities.

Quote:
No compass...No guidestar...No independence from the nanny state...You are lost !

I know exactly where I am and what I stand for. I also don't mistake my ideas for "god's". Maybe you do? That would explain why you get so upset when people disagree with you.

Quote:
You can't stand for something , that's why you're so willing to fall for anything...

You think that because I don't agree with you I don't stand for anything? You're clueless.

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 4:32 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Quote:

You can NOT shake hands with a balled fist.

But you CAN do the whole terrorist-fist-bump thing...

(Just funnin'...)

And yes, your point is taken. BSCM and I have found a *little* bit of common ground, as I have with some others who maybe tend to lean just a li'l more to the right than I do. And Rue, Signy and I have found LOTS of common ground, despite the feeling I get that they probably lean quite a bit to the LEFT of me on some things. Yet we find ourselves in agreement on certain things (torture bad, for instance)...

Now, if we could just figure out how to build on those things!

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 4:39 PM

KWICKO

Quote:
If "rights" were so automatic, so inalienable, they wouldn't be violated 90% of the time. They would come as naturally as swallowing. Nobody talks about "the right to swallow", do they?

Not to mention that if those "rights" are so universal, so intrinsic, so understood... we'd hardly have to enumerate them, would we?

At certain times in our history, such "inalienable rights" didn't apply to more than a select few. Black people didn't have the inalienable right to be free, or to even vote. Women had no right to vote. These rights that we NOW hold "inalienable" weren't, until we MADE them so, with words. And they can be taken away just as easily, with words, if enough of us make the choice to do so.

Just something to ponder...

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 4:44 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"My rights are permanent , innate , and inalienable..."

"An unprovable assertion , by any means...
Just an opinion of yours , supported by nothing...
Unfounded , like the majority of your comments..."

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 5:11 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Well, we can start by not playing along with something that's gonna be bloody obvious the minute I point it out to you.

The way this game is played, one requires a "threat" to stage the media campaign against, followed by a little reichstag fire, you see ?

Now, the complicit media and press is currently winding up the right end of the spectrum, and the alphabet goons are putting the squeeze on them in hopes of either creating another McVeigh-OKC incident, or providing a handy cover and someone to blame should they, as usual, have to do the job themselves - which frankly they DID do in OKC since the damage was done by internal explosives rather than McVeighs halfass truckload of ANFO, but alas for them most the internal devices didn't go off - so instead of completely levelling the building into it's own footprint (gee THAT sounds familiar) only part of it came down, and they had to blow most of their resources quashing suspicion and play it low key since it wasn't quite the total catastrophe they wanted.

And here we are again, with them whipping up the right end of the political spectrum, having the media spook them while the intel boys and law enforcement put the squeeze on, and agents provocateur giving all kinds of useful "suggestions" about what to do, complete with funding and equipment which kinda materialises out of nowhere, right ?
(gee, THAT sounds familiar too, Emad Salem redux!)

But *THIS* time around someone beat them to the punch, some folk made plans, you see, back in 2006 and got their people in early, educatin the damn fools on how to spot and dismantle this crap, exposing the plants and ringers, and generally causing chaos and disorder by suggesting means other than violence, as well as helping them shut down various Gov sponsored plots within their own ranks because while they talk a good game of martyrdom, NO ONE likes the idea of being lynched by an enraged populace - especially when they've got a tenative agreement with the OTHER end of the spectrum and certain sharp witted fellows in between with a plan that looks like it'll work.

That's right, Mueller you prick - I'm afraid you won't be collecting the insurance on that fusion center you conveniently set up as a cherry waiting to be picked, and your little band of redneck brothers is headed back to Florida in disgrace, and ain't that just too goddamn bad.

The four pole alliance is rising again, liberal intellectuals, nascar rednecks, anarchists, libertarians, greens...

And while not exactly in agreement with each other about almost any damn thing else, and currently in defensive posture while they scratch, claw, cuss, bang heads and try to figure out enough common ground to make a stand on, one thing they are sure of is that they're sick of being crapped on by folk nominally "in charge" who don't seem to comprehend the fact that we ain't their goddamn peons.

So I highly suggest you find yourselves some common ground all quick like, and when various factions of the powers that be try to use US, like the GOP attempting to wrangle the Tea Parties into a powergrab, we play a little judo and use THEM instead, which we more or less did, although not near as succesfully as we wished.

Like I Been Sayin - They're gonna hand us everything we need to finish them on a plate, we just need to bait them into doing so.

And in the meantime, we see to our own and smash flat any attempt to create a catastrophe to justify "emergency powers" via plants and ringers, by publicly exposing them in the most humiliating fashion possible.

We can DO this, it only requires that we try.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 5:49 PM

BYTEMITE

SignyM: Ah. Social contracts, like the Magna Carta and it's American response, the Constitution.

I don't want to give up those "rights" so long as my culture and events in history have agreed that I can have them.

I take as evidence promises that any society has made can no longer be fulfilled (or are subverted) as demonstrative of the decline of that society. The violation of the social contract suggests that society is no longer recognizable or valid.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 21, 2009 6:21 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

For my own part, I believe in inalienable humane rights, but freely acknowledge that humans aren't always humane. We have what rights we insist upon, fight for, and win.

Damn few, nowadays. Too few.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE