Category Archives: FedGov

Monday Moments

Posted on by

Phhhbt! to Algore and his Globull Worming fraud. There are two articles in the news today that oppose the global warming acolytes. First item is that this Spring has been the coldest on record since 1975—well before the start of the so-called warming, and, coincidentally, both periods were at the bottom of the 11-year sun spot cycle.

The second item appeared in reports from Russian researchers monitoring Arctic sea ice. Instead of growing thinner as claimed by global warming frauds, it isn’t.

“Journalists say the entire process is very simple: once solar activity declines, the temperature drops. But besides solar activity, the climate is influenced by other factors, including the lithosphere, the atmosphere, the ocean, the glaciers. The share of solar activity in climate change is only 20%. This means that sun’s activity could trigger certain changes whereas the actual climate changing process takes place on the Earth”.

Solar activity follows different cycles, including an 11-year cycle, a 90-year cycle and a 200-year cycle. Yuri Nagovitsyn comments.

“Evidently, solar activity is on the decrease. The 11-year cycle doesn’t bring about considerable climate change – only 1-2%. The impact of the 200-year cycle is greater – up to 50%. In this respect, we could be in for a cooling period that lasts 200-250 years. The period of low solar activity could start in 2030-2040 but it won’t be as pervasive as in the late 17th century”. — The Global Warming Policy Foundation.

It appears that the solar cycles have more to do with the earth’s temperature than any man-made activity.  The 11-year cycle is well known. It directly affects radio/TV transmissions. At its peak, broadcast TV stations have far greater range than usual. Amateur radio operators know these cycles well. The troughs, however, when sun spot activity is low, TV/radio transmissions have much less range—and the weather is often much cooler as well.

What is coming, is multiple cycles bottoming, the 11-year cycle, the 90-year cycle and the 200-year cycle, at the same time. When the convergence of those cycles happened last, about 400 years ago, the period was known as the Little Ice Age.

Hey, Algore! Real science will always beat pseudo-science. You can only fool libs all the time.

***

Another item in the news today is now many Americans now fear or mistrust their government. Fox News published a poll recently that surprised many. To some, the poll was a confirmation of viewpoints wide spread across the country but never reported by the media. While this is reported on the WND website, the data is from FOX.

Americans fear government more than terror

Astonishing poll results for 1st time since 9/11 hijackings

According to a pair of recent polls, for the first time since the 9/11 terrorist hijackings, Americans are more fearful their government will abuse constitutional liberties than fail to keep its citizens safe.

…

A Fox News survey polling a random national sample of 619 registered voters the day after the bombing found despite the tragic event, those interviewed responded very differently than following 9/11.

For the first time since a similar question was asked in May 2001, more Americans answered “no” to the question, “Would you be willing to give up some of your personal freedom in order to reduce the threat of terrorism?”

Of those surveyed on April 16, 2013, 45 percent answered no to the question, compared to 43 percent answering yes.

In May 2001, before 9/11, the balance was similar, with 40 percent answering no to 33 percent answering yes.

But following the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the numbers flipped dramatically, to 71 percent agreeing to sacrifice personal freedom to reduce the threat of terrorism.

Subsequent polls asking the same question in 2002, 2005 and 2006 found Americans consistently willing to give up freedom in exchange for security. Yet the numbers were declining from 71 percent following 9/11 to only 54 percent by May 2006.

Now, it would seem, the famous quote widely attributed to Benjamin Franklin – “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety” – is holding more sway with Americans than it has in over a dozen years.

A similar poll sampling 588 adults, conducted on April 17 and 18 for the Washington Post, also discovered the change in attitude.

“Which worries you more,” the Post asked, “that the government will not go far enough to investigate terrorism because of concerns about constitutional rights, or that it will go too far in compromising constitutional rights in order to investigate terrorism?”

The poll found 48 percent of respondents worry the government will go too far, compared to 41 percent who worry it won’t go far enough.

And similar to the Fox News poll, the Post found the worry to be a fresh development, as only 44 percent worried the government would go too far in January 2006 and only 27 percent worried the government would go too far in January 2010.

The Fox News poll was unique in that it further broke the responses down by political affiliation:

  • Bucking the trend, 51 percent of Democrats responded they would give up personal freedom to reduce the threat of terror, compared to 36 percent opposed.

  • Forty-seven percent of Republicans, on the other hand, opposed giving up freedoms, compared to only 43 percent in favor.

  • Yet independents were the most resistant, with only 29 percent willing to sacrifice freedom, while 58 percent stood opposed.

I’m not surprised all that much with the results of this poll. It mirrors sentiment I’ve observed over the last decade. The most tragic datum in the poll is this: 51 percent of Democrats responded they would give up personal freedom to reduce the threat of terror. We saw this in Boston where the populace gave up their 4th and 1st Amendment rights in the search for the remaining bomber. He was eventually found—outside of the search area by a resident who WASN’T quivering inside his home as ordered by the State.

The divide across the country continues to grow. The statists, those who depend on government for their security—economic, physical and political security, are content to give up their liberty. In past centuries, we called them subjects, peons and serfs.

Then, there are the rest of us who, for the most part, are the antithesis of those who would submit.

Facebook

Boston under Siege

Posted on by

The Boston Marathon was bombed. The ones who set the bombs are either dead or in custody.  That’s good. But the method used to find them?  That’s another issue.

From numerous reports, most of them still waiting for verification, Government, by this, I mean the state, local and the Federal government, suspended the Constitution in Boston. I don’t remember any declaration of martial law in Boston, but that is what, in effect, happened. The 1st and 4th Amendments were violated repeatedly. In some cases, even the media was treated like criminals (should I cheer?) being forced to the ground at gunpoint.

For those of you with access to Facebook, you can view nearly 150 photos taken by individuals in Boston and Watertown. They are horrifying.

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.471951542877595.1073741826.373523032720447&type=1

How would you like to look out your window and see this pointed at you?

Boston under Siege

Boston under Siege

This is what you can expect when the dems and liberals control government. When the search for Dorner was on in California, there was no lock-down until they had him located and then it was only for a few surrounding blocks. Boston was massive, massive over-reaction.

And, Bostonians submissively accepted this.

Facebook

It’s @)$*&(+_*& Monday!

Posted on by

For all too many, that’s the sentiment today. Moreso, because it’s also Tax Day where we pony up our gelt to the state and FedGov. Mrs. Crucis and I completed that onerous task last month.

As expected, the internet is filled today with articles about taxes—too many, too much, too little return for our money. If we fail to pay, we can expect a visit by federal leg-breakers. The FedGov’s tactics would make the local loan shark blanch.

An article in the American Thinker, expounds on the concept of taxes being the cost of civilization.

The Rising Price of Civilization

By Jon N. Hall

Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes famously opined: “Taxes are the price we pay for civilization.” Right, but that price is rapidly rising. Might we be paying for more “civilization” than we can afford?

I liked the article’s opening. The rest is just a rant about Missouri’s personal property tax. At one time, “paying the cost of civilization,” may have been accurate. No longer. Today, it seems to me, our taxes are paving our path towards tyranny and a dictatorship.

We see examples all over the country. New York, Colorado and Connecticut have repealed the 2nd Amendment within their states. They ignore McDonald, that declared the U.S. 2nd Amendment applies to the states. The New York law goes into effect today and that state’s Rifle and Pistol Association has filed a lawsuit against Cuomo’s power grab.

In our state of Missouri, our Governor, Jay Nixon, and a number of his department heads have violated state law and subverted the intent of those laws to send private data of the state’s citizens to the FedGov. In particular, Nixon, the Department of Revenue and the State Highway Patrol gave to the IRS a list of Missouri residents who hold CCW permits.

The reason? The IRS wanted to compare those lists with people who receive SSI payments for disability, possibly, mental disability. That would enable them to seize any weapons and ammunition, and possibly jail anyone who appears on both lists.

Nixon and his flunkies also sent Missouri citizen’s private information to a 3rd party to comply with the Read ID act. The problem with that is Missouri law specifically prohibits any state agency from complying with the Read ID act.

In addition to all the above, Colorado is back in the news today. Not only has the state violated the 2nd Amendment, they are now proposing to institutionalize vote fraud.

Voter fraud bill introduced in Colorado

Sunday, April 14, 2013 – Red Pill, Blue Pill by Al Maurer

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo., April 14, 2013 — Under the guise of modernizing the elections processes and increasing voter turnout, Democrats have submitted a bill that will leave the state wide open to fraud. House Bill 1303 was written completely in secret by House Democrats — no surprise in this increasingly radical one-party state government — without the input of the Secretary of State’s office or any of the 64 county clerk and recorder offices who oversee elections.

The bill is 126 pages long and completely re-writes election law in Colorado, creating a permanent system of fraudulent elections.

Just as with House Bill 10-0917 exactly three years ago, this bill introduces same-day voter registration and all mail-in ballot elections. But there is much more.

Sponsors of the bill claim that both methods increase voter participation. In fact, it is a recipe for fraud and creates problems where there are none now.

…

If this bill becomes law, prosecution will be even less likely. In one very telling portion of the bill, vote fraud is reduced from a crime to a misdemeanor. The word crime is boldly crossed out:

“IT IS A CRIME CLASS 1 MISDEMEANOR”

The intention is pretty clear from that change alone. But there is yet more.

The bill eliminates the category of “inactive voter,” requiring mail ballots to be sent to addresses that have not participated in the voting process in several years. These ballots can be fraudulently returned, causing serious issues of ballot verification.

The residency requirement is reduced from 30 days to 22. A subtle change in the voter’s affidavit is from “I am a resident of the state of Colorado” to “I have been a resident…”

So if you’ve ever lived in Colorado for twenty-two days, come on back and vote!

It seems that every day, the dems/libs make another move to institutionalize their power over us. At some point, we will rebell. I thought that day would be years off. Now, I’m not so sure.

Facebook

Elections have Conseqences

Posted on by

Elections, and actions, have consequences. Missouri is suffering under those consequences as more and more revelations are uncovered about the illegal release of confidential information to the FedGov—in particular, to the DHS and the IRS.

The first case of individual data being illegally collected was disclosed when the Department of Revenue, through their licensing bureau, refused to issue a CCW permit. The DoR has been collecting and scanning private documents and forwarding that information out of state in violation of Missouri law.

One CCW applicant refused to submit the requested documents. The Dor refused to issue the permit—although the DoR has no legal authority to refuse a permit once it has been approved by the county’s Sheriff! That applicant sued the DoR and a Judge issued the Injuction prohibiting the DoR from collecting any further data pending the resolution of the suit.

Jay Nixon initially denied the accusations. However, later, in testimony before the state legislature, the DoR confirmed they did collect private information as they have been accused. A Missouri Judge granted an injunction to block the DoR from collecting private data from Missouri’s citizens.

Today, new allegations broke about illegal actions by the Nixon administration. By Missouri law, personal information of the state’s CCW holders is confidential. That data is held by the DoR and can only be released for criminal investigations—individual information. The Missouri Highway Patrol admitted this week it had requested the complete CCW database from the DoR, twice, and had sent that information to the IRS. Again, in violation of Missouri law.

Highway patrol gave feds Missouri weapon permits data

JEFFERSON CITY – The Missouri State Highway Patrol has twice turned over the entire list of Missouri concealed weapon permit holders to federal authorities, most recently in January, Sen. Kurt Schaefer said Wednesday.

Questioning in the Senate Appropriations Committee revealed that on two occasions, in November 2011 and again in January, the patrol asked for and received the full list from the state Division of Motor Vehicle and Driver Licensing. Schaefer later met in his office with Col. Ron Replogle, superintendent of the patrol.

After the meeting, he said Replogle had given him sketchy details about turning over the list, enough to raise many more questions. Testimony from Department of Revenue officials revealed that the list of 185,000 names had been put online in one instance and given to the patrol on a disc in January.

Schaefer has been investigating a new driver licensing system. He and the committee grilled the revenue officials for several hours in the morning and again at midday before they admitted the list had been copied. The investigation was triggered by fears that concealed weapons data was being shared with federal authorities.

Under Missouri law, the names of concealed weapon permit holders are confidential. The only place in Missouri where the names of all concealed carry permit holders is stored is among driver license records. Permit holders have a special mark on their licenses indicating they have been granted the privilege of carrying a gun.

The list was given to the Social Security Administration Office of Inspector General, Schaefer said he was told.

“Apparently from what I understand, they wanted to match up anyone who had a mental diagnosis or disability with also having a concealed carry license,” Schaefer said. “What I am told is there is no written request for that information.”

Chris Koster, Missouri’s Attorney General, whose office is administratively under the Governor, has not, so far, investigated these violations of state law despite numerous request for him to do so.

What has all this to do with today’s post title? It’s the fact that Jax Nixon and Chris Koster was re-elected to office by a large margin last November. Does anyone truly believe if either, or both of them had lost that election, that the heads of the DoR, the DMV and the Highway Patrol would still be in office? If Ed Martin had beaten Koster last November, I guarantee that all three agency heads would be under investigation. If Nixon had lost his election, all three agency heads would be under suspension pending the results of that investigation.

But—neither lost and now we have a massive cover-up by Nixon’s department heads. Those are the consequences of that election. The voter’s action in that election has lead directly to this situation. Yes, elections have consequences.

Facebook

What’s really going on?

Posted on by

I am not a conspiracy theorist. I believe many, who exhibit those symptoms, have their tin-foil beanies on too tight. On occasion, however, when multiple sources cite multiple instances of similar events, you really have to wonder what’s going on.

What am I talking about? The militarization of the Department of Homeland Security.

Their are credible reports, reports that present irrefutable facts that the DHS, and other federal agencies, too, is militarizing. They are buying obscene amount of ammunition, 1.6 billion rounds, small-arms, and IED resistant, armored vehicles—MRAPs.

Beginning several years ago, the DHS began stockpiling ammunition, most, but not all, in .40S&W, a favored pistol caliber of law enforcement and federal agencies. They also bought large amounts of 5.56mm rifle cartridges, and 12ga 00 shotgun shells. 

Add to that the 2,700 armored MRAPs transferred from the Army to DHS, and a newly announced purchase of 360,000 more rounds of ammunition, and any rational person begins to get suspicious.

Add one more item to all of the above. DHS is freeing illegal aliens, criminal illegal aliens because of “sequester.” What a farce! Let’s estimate the cost of all that ammunition. Conservatively, let’s say each round costs $1.00. (Current prices for .40S&W hollow-point ammunition is in excess of $25 for a box of 20.) DHS could have spend that $1.6 billion on prosecuting the illegals DHS has in custody. Instead, Janet Reno turned them loose.

Think what could happen when all those criminals hit the streets—another manufactured crises? Some of those conspiracy theorists claim the FedGov is preparing for a coup. I can’t subscribe to that. Not quite, but it certainly is suspicious.

I’ll leave you with Michael Ramirez’s latest cartoon…

ramiriz_03252013

Facebook

The Tea Party Counterattacks

Posted on by

Since 2010, the ‘Pub establishment has been attacking the Tea Party. They accepted the Tea Party’s help to win back the House in 2010 but once that was accomplished, the establishment has tried their best to push the Tea Party to the back of the bus—whenever they didn’t throw them under the bus. Most recently has been the attacks by Karl Rove and others like him.

Now the Tea Party is beginning to fight back. It’s about time.

By Alexandra Jaffe – 02/18/13 04:35 PM ET

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) could see a primary challenge from local businessman Matt Bevin, who sources say is reaching out to Tea Party groups in the state to gauge support for a 2014 Senate run.

Sarah Duran, president of the Louisville Tea Party, told The Hill that Bevin had been in touch with her over the phone to discuss his run multiple times over the past few weeks, and that he met with the group two weeks ago to discuss his interest in the race.

“We met with him to just discuss our feelings about the Senator, our feelings about someone running against him, what the challenges would be, the risks involved,” she said.She added that other Tea Party groups had reached out to Bevin to encourage him to run, and that even “some people that have supported McConnell in the past” had been in touch with him about a potential bid.

Kentucky is the state than elected Rand Paul over the establishment’s pick.  Having the “Paul” name didn’t hurt either.

The Tea Party ran an opponent against John Boehner in the 2012 primary, David Lewis. The local and state ‘Pub establishment sided with Boehner as did the RNC. Lewis was outspent in the primary 6 to 1. The Ohio Tea Party hasn’t forgotten. I’ve heard reports they will run another candidate against Boehner in 2014.

***

Obama is in the news railing against Sequestration. The media conveniently is not reporting that it was his plan. He’s touring the country again with his usual dog ‘n pony show of firemen, cops and teachers whom he claims will be put out of work.

It’s a lie.

The reality is that with Sequestration, the FedGov will spend MORE this fiscal year than it did the last. The cuts are only 3% of the spending growth! The real issue is that the cuts are aimed at sacred cows.  For the ‘Pubs, this is the Defense Department.. The military issue is compounded by massive mismanagement by the Pentagon—lead by the exiting Leon Panetta.

Investor’s Business Daily ran this piece.

Sequestration Isn’t A Meat Ax—It Requires Cuts Of Just 3%

By Posted 02/15/2013 05:35 PM ET

“For too long, our budget process in Washington has been an exercise in deception,a series of accounting tricks to hide the expense of our spending and the shortfalls in our revenue and hope that the American people won’t notice,” Obama declared. “We do ourselves no favors by hiding the truth about what we spend.”

Obama’s clarity was a breath of fresh air. But four years later, that clarity has vanished.

Indeed, the president now denies we even have a problem with spending.

The shameful shift from honest concern about spending to denial is more than political opportunism — it reflects an unwillingness to confront the most serious economic challenge facing our nation.

The result is an ongoing series of budget crises, short-term “fixes” and emergency deadlines.

…

We’ll soon mark the latest of these deadlines as budget cuts under the process of “sequestration” take effect in March.

Under this process, originally slated for January but delayed by Congress in the deal to avert the “fiscal cliff,” federal spending would be cut by $1.2 trillion over the next nine years.

This strategy is, to say the least, unpopular among many D.C. politicians, who object to what they say is a blunt “meat ax” approach to budget cutting.

No Offsets

For example, the scheduled cuts target defense and discretionary programs and would have an immediate impact on certain industries.

…

And how much would they have to find to offset the sequester for this year? About $85 billion. Based on spending last year of $3.6 trillion, that means cutting roughly three cents out of every dollar the federal government spends.

Because the White House refuses to cut three cents out of every dollar the government spends, they are proposing another round of tax increases.

While the sequester is not perfect, it would be a step in the right direction toward fiscal responsibility, absent offsetting spending cuts.

With the White House’s stubborn insistence on another round of tax increases, it might be the best worst option.

The budget cuts under sequestration will be tough, an unfortunate consequence of Washington’s short-term approach to budgeting.

But the status quo is also quite painful.

What about our 7.8% unemployment rate? What about the 4.7 million who have been unemployed for more than six months?

What about our shrinking economy? What about declining consumer confidence? Has all of that been forgotten?

It’s clear that the big spending agenda of the last four years has not delivered on its promise.

The budget restraint that sequestration would bring would forestall long-term damage to the economy, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

To be sure, it will get ugly before it gets better. The DoD has already eliminated hot breakfast for troops in the combat zones of Afghanistan. They reduced our carrier battlegroups from eleven to eight and extended the length of fleet cruises and the length of service in combat while cutting the size of those same combat services. It’s the old story of doing more with less.

Spending cuts are needed and necessary. How those cuts are being implemented, however, is abominable—striking directly at our ability to defend this nation.

Facebook

A whiff of secession

Posted on by

The subject of secession has been popular since the election. I think there is a secession petition filed on the White House website from every state. Several states, like Texas, have reached that magic 25,000 signatures.

Does that mean Texas will secede? No. The petitions are meaningless gestures. There are others, however, who are serious about secession. Catalonia, for example…a segment of Spain.

Separatists winning in Catalonia, Spain: early results

BARCELONA, Spain | Sun Nov 25, 2012 6:43pm EST

(Reuters) – Four separatist parties in Spain’s Catalonia looked set to win a majority in regional elections on Sunday, partial results showed, but the main one was on course to lose some seats, possibly undermining its bid to call an independence referendum.

With half of votes counted, the ruling Convergence and Union alliance, or CiU, was winning 48 seats in the 135-seat local parliament, well down from its current 62 seats.

The separatist Republican Left, or ERC, was winning 20 seats, with two other smaller separatist parties taking a total of 16 seats, giving the four parties 60 percent between them.

Regional President Artur Mas, of CiU, had campaigned on a pledge to hold a referendum on independence, in response to a resurgent separatist movement among Catalans who are frustrated with Spain in a deep economic crisis.

Opinion polls had forecast that CiU would retain 62 or more seats in the local Parliament and that all four separatist parties would have more than two-thirds of the seats. Neither of those projections was met as the results began to come in.

Without the psychological backing of a two-thirds majority, analysts have said, it may be hard for Mas to defy the constitution and the central government in Madrid and try to hold a referendum.

Our experiment with secession failed 150 years ago. Other attempts around the world such as the Ukraine and Belarus has succeeded, albeit not without some blood being shed.

The talk in the US about secession has been just that—talk. The state of the nation, the economy, federal interference, the overall feeling of governmental tyranny, hasn’t yet reached the level where secession is being seriously discussed.

Yet.

There are some opinions that it could be done…by Texas, for instance. Texas has always had an independent streak. It, and California, were Republics before merging with the United States. The Republic of California was a joke. A side show, really, by a few Americans at the beginning of the War with Mexico in 1846. The Republic of Texas, however, existed for a number of years before succumbing to debt and internal divisions.

There are some today who think Texas could bring it off this time.

Secession, y’all: Why Texas can pull it off

Bob Smiley, Author, “Don’t Mess with Travis”

When Thomas Dunne published Don’t Mess with Travis in May — my comedic political novel about a freewheeling Texas governor who becomes fed up with a Constitution-stomping president and decides to secede — I knew I had landed on something relevant. I didn’t know it was this relevant.

As of writing, the Texas petition to peacefully “withdraw” from the United States via the White House’s open petition webpage is up to 62,481 signatures, on its way to tripling the required names needed to trigger a response from the Obama administration. No doubt Texas’s desire to break free is a source of amusement inside a White House that has mastered the art of belittling the opinions of its challengers, but there is one not-so-small problem here: Texas could pull it off.

Here’s why:

–Resources. Texas currently sits on one-quarter of the nation’s oil reserves and one-third of the nation’s natural gas reserves. Even more, fully 95% of the country receives its oil and gas courtesy of pipelines that originate within Texas. This is what one might call leverage.

–The Texas Economy. This is well documented but worth repeating. In the last decade, even with the Great Recession, Texas has expanded by one million jobs. One million. That’s more than every other state … combined. Because of its friendly business climate, Texas is home to more Fortune 500 companies than anywhere else. If Texas were its own country, it would have the thirteenth-highest GDP in the world, just behind Canada and Russia. Or think about it this way: For every dollar Texas taxpayers send to Washington, they currently get only about 80 cents back. Theoretically, they could transfer those funds to the state’s coffers and still give every Texan a 20 percent tax cut.

–Utilities. Texas is the only state with its own power grid. Developed over the course of the last 100 years, the Texas grid covers the majority of the state and is fully state controlled. Translation: Texans could rest assured that the federal government doesn’t have the power — literally — to turn off their lights.

–Defense. While no match for Uncle Sam’s firepower, Texas does have a significant defense presence, namely in the Texas State Guard (which answers only to the governor), the Texas National Guard, the Air Guard and the legendary Texas Rangers. Texas is also home to two of the nation’s largest military bases — Fort Hood and Fort Bliss — and being able to control those two installations is nothing to sniff at. But let’s not forget the firepower of the citizenry itself. There’s a reason burglars don’t waste their time in Texas.

–History. Texas has done this before. Twice, actually. First in 1836, when it seceded from Mexico and became an independent country. Second in 1861, when it joined the Confederacy. And while the South did lose the Civil War, it didn’t lose it in Texas. In fact, by the end of 1864, the North didn’t have one square foot of Texas soil under its control despite many attempts. Even a full month after Robert E. Lee surrendered at the Appomattox Court House Texas was still fighting. Texans love their state and they love a fight. That is a lethal combination.

Yes, Texas could make a go of it as an independent nation…if the U.S. would let it go peacefully. But let’s be realistic. That won’t happen. Obama and the libs need Texas. They need the taxes from Texas and they cannot allow the precedent of secession to be successful. Alone, Texas cannot withstand the power of the federal government.

Yes, there has been a number of pieces of fiction where secession succeeded. A more likely outcome would be something like that in Tom Kratman’s A State of Disobedience. The scenario at the beginning of Kratman’s book is eerily like that we find ourselves today.

If secession is to succeed, it must be by a coalition of states. Single states would not have sufficient power and defensive forces to win against the FedGov.

Like I said above, we’re not at that state yet and I pray we never find ourselves with that choice as our only option. The United States will not dissolve peacefully.

Why, then, are we discussing it? Because the credible threat of secession may force changes within the FedGov to resolve some of the differences between us, who revere the constitution and personal liberty and the statists who lust for power of government over people. Secession, then, is a tool—a last resort tool to be used to coerce the government to mend its ways and to restore some of our freedom.

It is a dangerous tactic. If secession is threatened, our options limited to two choices if we don’t get the concessions we demand: knuckle under to the FedGov or secede. Know then that with secession comes civil war because the FedGov needs us more than we need them.

When you hear talk of secession or participate in it, be aware of what you truly mean. There are consequences of such actions.

Facebook