November 13, 2012

The Left is having fun with the calls to secede coming from red states

Numerous petitions from red states have been sent to the White House website declaring a desire to secede from the Union now that Boss Obama has won re-election. The Left, of course (and correctly), is having fun with the idea. But, of course, a mere eight years ago many of these same voices ... wanted to secede after that evil incarnate, George W. Bush, was re-elected:

In 2004 Salon ran an article about how liberals were embracing secession movements as a reaction to Bush’s re-election:

In the days after the election, fantasies of blue-state secession ricocheted around the Internet. Liberals indulged themselves in maps showing Canada gathering the blue states into its social democratic embrace, leaving the red states to form their own “Jesusland“…

The present movement for secession has been gathering steam for a decade and a half. In preparation for Vermont’s bicentennial in 1991, public debates — moderated by then-Lt. Gov. Howard Dean — were held in seven towns before crowds that averaged 230 citizens. At the end of each, Dean asked all those in favor of Vermont’s seceding from the Union to stand and be counted. In town after town, solid majorities stood. The final count: 999 (62 percent) for secession and 608 opposed.

I thought that the Civil War pretty much settled the issue of whether states can legally secede from the Union. Honest Abe's view was that the states were legally bound to the Union:

“No State, upon its own mere motion, can lawfully get out of the Union, that resolves and ordinances to that effect are legally void, and that acts of violence, within any State or States, against the authority of the United States, are insurrectionary or revolutionary, according to circumstances.”

Basically, it'll take another civil war to allow a state (or states) to secede, but c'man everyone -- we ain't even close to that now.


Posted by Hube at November 13, 2012 05:52 PM | TrackBack

Comments  (We reserve the right to edit and/or delete any comments. If your comment is blocked or won't post, e-mail us and we'll post it for you.)

It's the old "dissent is patriotic..." mantra... but it's only considered patriotic if a Republican is in the White House. If someone like Obama is in office, it's "racist" and "dangerous."

Posted by: Carl at November 13, 2012 06:44 PM

I disagree on the notion that states may not secede. If they cannot, we may as well abolish state laws and just have federal laws. In fact, the 10th amendment, to my reading makes this plain. The powers are delegated to "the states OR the people". That seems to make them congruent. Combine that with multiple passages in the Federalist papers which allows the people to alter or abolish government as they see fit. How will Colorado and Washington get around the 14th amendment violation of the marijuana laws? Moreover, how will the feds enforce it if they resist?

Posted by: Duffy at November 14, 2012 03:24 PM

Duff: I concur with your POV. There is ample evidence for the basis of secession. But from the Civil War onward, it's been an increasingly difficult position.

Posted by: Hube at November 14, 2012 06:07 PM

Granted. However, if any state, esp. the large ones, voted to secede would the President use force to keep them in? I wonder.

Posted by: Duffy at November 15, 2012 08:15 AM