Secession petitions filed in 20 states

Post Reply New Topic

Yup.... Ironically, there's nothing nastier than a civil war.

Abusive Obama administration? Please!
And if it comes to a reduced American army vs. a multitude of rednecks, I'm going to put my money on the reduced American military.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

There's more to it than numbers, and I doubt any of the petition signers are very serious about secession. It's bore of a protest and I doubt a single one expects a single government official to give their blessing. I suspect the secession talk will blow over in time, but not their willingness to take up arms against the current administration.

If they take arms up against the Obama administration, then they've forced Obama's hand, as he's taken an oath to protect America from enemies both foreign and domestic. It should be remembered, the same kind of people had taken up arms after the election of our greatest President, Lincoln, and that ended very badly for the insurgents.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Comparing Obama to Lincoln is extremely disrespectful to President Lincoln.

Lincoln had just been inaugerated and the South rebelled, he hadn't even done anything yet.

A lot of people are extremely opposed to Obama due to his record, Fast & Furious is a perfect example as to why.

Then we have the situation in Benghazi, which could arguably be grounds for impeachment.

The south rebelled over what Lincoln 'might' do; the people that created those petitions are protesting what Obama's White House as well as the Federal Government has done. They haven't taken up arms, unless they do so, and until they fire the first shot (which I suspect they won't), this is quite frankly a 1st Amendment issue.

As Lincoln was pro-civil rights and anti-states rights, I'd say Obama has more in common with Lincoln than you might think. And opposition to Obama began long before Bengahzi or Fast & Furious. The people who hate him do so because of half truths and all out lies concerning Obamacare, socialism, regionalism (pro-south, mostly) the President's religion, and, yes, I'll say it, the color of his skin (and no, that's not directed at you). And I'll remind you, despite the Obama haters you site, the majority of Americans still reelected Obama.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Lots of people were extremely opposed to Lincoln during his first term too - and look how all that turned out in the end...

Obama is not pro-civil rights well let me re-phrase he's only for it when it is conveinent. If he was pro-civil rights there would be some individuals from the New-black panthers whom would be sitting in prison right now for voter-intimidation, and they got away with it twice now.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neGbKHyGuHU[/youtube]

So the idea that Obama is pro-civil rights is rather laughable.

Btw, the Bush DoJ actually got a conviction but in 2009 Obama's DoJ dismissed the charges.

@ Cornflake

You are giving a false equivalency, Lincoln would never have approved of something like what is seen in the video above.

Last edited by Inuyasha on 19 Nov 2012, 5:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Tell us how you believe the south had the right to secede in Lincoln's time. Don't forget, slavery is condoned in the Bible, and in the 1860s many southerners cited the Bible to defend their practice of slavery. It was a "1st amendment rights" issue, as well as a state's rights issue.

These are always code words whenever conservatives use them. Whenever they say "1st amendment rights" they really mean "my religious right to take away all of your rights", and when they say "state's rights", they mean "state's rights to take away any of the rights of their citizens they please". Yours has never been the ideology of civil liberties or freedom but of excuses for tyranny.

From the Orange County Register, Nov. 19, 2012:



It isn't a secret any more.

I wasn't - I was merely making an observation.
However, you are shifting those goalposts around to suit your argument - just like you normally do. You're speaking on behalf of Lincoln now and asserting how he'd respond to a video - that's some achievement, even for you.

The South resorted to use of violence, they didn't resort to trying to deal with things peacefully. I would say the didn't have the right to succeed simply because someone they didn't agree with got elected, despite him not being allowed on the ballot in many southern states.

The Supreme Court at the time was pro-slavery and it is extremely difficult to pass a Constitutional Amendment, which is pretty much what it would have taken to do away with slavery.



In case you didn't realize it, the Republican Party was the party that was against slavery. Despite the claims from the left, the Republicans didn't switch with the Democrats when it came to liberty. The very people whom are today's conservatives have largely the same values as those whom were against slavery (which was primarily opposed for religious reasons I might add).

One mistake people often make is that being against drugs, stating that society should have some ground rules, etc. is a form of tyranny, but it isn't.

I would actually argue that the legalization of drugs whould be something that tyrants would want. The fact is if you get the populace hooked on a drug, you can pretty much control the populace.

Entitlements are also a form of government control, if the populace is dependent on government for everything, they are terrified of standing up to government when government takes all their freedoms away. I don't view Social Security as an entitlement because people paid into it, however it has been demonstrated that Government should have no access to the "lock box," cause that's primarily why Social Security is a disaster.

Conservatives value personal responsibility and believe people should not be dependent on the government. I would actually argue that it would be substancially more difficult for a tyranny to form if people are self-reliant, or they get help from neighbors when they need it. People would be significantly less likely to stand for Government trying to run rampant.

Two jackasses - count 'em, two - with billy clubs they never used. Had they prevented anyone from voting in Philadelphia? Because black Americans had faced real voter intimidation in the past - which included physical abuse and even murder at the hands of numerous racist whites - some in police uniforms. Those two mental giants in Philadelphia did no such thing.
And as for the charge that Obama is not representative of civil rights, I'm sure gay Americans would dispute that fact with you.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Taking up arms because an election doesn't go your way? Good luck with that.

That's what makes it an "entitlement."





What are you rambling about?

Those are White Repugnican Karl Rove activists in Black Face.