Texas tries Secessionism 2.0: Seeks to null Fed. laws.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

All this is is a republican governor and a couple of republican state legislator being a bunch of twats. Absolutely nothing will come to pass of this. The republican party as a whole have been a giant tear soaked knot of twats since Obama came into office and this is just the latest batch of bullshit from the party.

You beat me to it. Perry is a grandstanding halfwit chucklefuck and he always has been, and Texas is about as likely to secede as I am to shit rubies. The secession argle-bargle is a good barometer of how unhinged the GOP has become, but it's not a serious threat.

The amateur lawyering was hilarious as always, though. "Sedition!" Is sedition even on the fucking books anymore? And bonus lulz for the bedwetting: "Nukular Texas! Civil war!"

Yeah, it is pretty retarded, though I couldn't stand to see people betraying such base ignorance (easily solved with a little googling) about where US nuclear weapons are manufactured.

[Terralthra]

The amateur lawyering was hilarious as always, though. "Sedition!" Is sedition even on the fucking books anymore? And bonus lulz for the bedwetting: "Nukular Texas! Civil war!"

Yes.

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government; or
Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or
Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.

[Darth Wong]

The amateur lawyering was hilarious as always, though. "Sedition!" Is sedition even on the fucking books anymore? And bonus lulz for the bedwetting: "Nukular Texas! Civil war!"

You live in a country where the Attorney General declared that the right to habeus corpus is not guaranteed in the Constitution, where lawyers in his department got off scot free on what should have been corruption charges by claiming that they did not realize their acts were illegal, where legions of torturers even now are going to escape prosecution because no one can determine that they've actually done something criminal, and where all of the most important legal decisions in the country seem to be made by a narrow 5-4 vote among a panel of political appointees.

I don't see how amateur lawyering can be any worse than official lawyering at this point.

[Chris OFarrell]

Didn't the US rule in 'Lincon V Confederacy' that it really was a BAD idea to try and break away from the Union?

[Beowulf]

The amateur lawyering was hilarious as always, though. "Sedition!" Is sedition even on the fucking books anymore? And bonus lulz for the bedwetting: "Nukular Texas! Civil war!"

Yes.

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government; or
Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or
Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.

*Yawn* Unless you actually do something against the Federal government, they can't do anything. Unpopular views are legal to express, including the view that the government should be overthrown. There's at least dozens of groups advocating the violent overthrow of the US gov, and you can't do anything about them without violating those people's 1st Amendment rights.

[Knife]

If the Dems are smart they'll stick it to the seperatists...er Texan GOPers when they ask to be declared a fed disaster area this hurricane season. Not saying Washington should not send aide (I'm just taking the gamble a hurricane might hit the gulf area again this year ) rather the political rhetoric against Perry and these asshats should be pounded in next fall/winter.

[Samuel]

The Pantex facility in Amarillo Texas happens to be the ONLY place in the USA at which the assembly and disassembly of nuclear weapons is currently conducted.

What? That can't be right. Don't other countries produce their own nuclear weapons or have they all entirely stopped?

[Darth Wong]

"From restrictions on gun and ammunition sales, to freedom-of-choice issues, to the Real ID Act, the federal government is passing laws that limit a state's ability to govern itself," Creighton has said. "Texas simply wants to send the message that we want to govern ourselves and decide for ourselves how our money is to be spent."

The last time they were allowed to govern themselves, they declared "That in this free government all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding States." And a lot of people down there still think they were right to do so, and that the Civil War was actually the "War of Northern Aggression". Texas is not a place that should be allowed to govern itself.

[Kodiak]

You live in a country where the Attorney General declared that the right to habeus corpus is not guaranteed in the Constitution, where lawyers in his department got off scot free on what should have been corruption charges by claiming that they did not realize their acts were illegal, where legions of torturers even now are going to escape prosecution because no one can determine that they've actually done something criminal, and where all of the most important legal decisions in the country seem to be made by a narrow 5-4 vote among a panel of political appointees who are accountable to none.

my own thoughts added

If a President is unpopular, he's gone in 4 years. The same goes for a congressman or a governor (typically), so why is it that the SCUS has life-long tenure? I understand that they need to be able to interpret the constitution as it applies to current situations, but who determines whether or not they're doing a good job?

[CJvR]

...but who determines whether or not they're doing a good job?

That is sort of a requirement to get the job in the first place. There are both pro and cons to having lifetime offices.

[Darth Wong]

...but who determines whether or not they're doing a good job?

That is sort of a requirement to get the job in the first place. There are both pro and cons to having lifetime offices.

Even if someone is competent and professional at the time he gets the job, that is no guarantee that he will remain so for the rest of his life. Lifetime appointment is an odd concept. That's not to say that they should be subject to a general vote; that would defeat the whole purpose of having a separate branch of government. But perhaps there could be some kind of legal society review of such individuals' judgements and comments, so that he can be removed if he appears to go off the deep end.

[Vaporous]

This isn't technically a secessionist act. They aren't getting ready to the leave the Union here, only saying that they claim sovereignty within it. It reminds me more of the nullification crisis than the civil war.

The solution is obvious. Have zombie Andrew Jackson threaten to burn Texas.

Or, more accurately;

Please give my compliments to my friends in your State and say to them, that if a single drop of blood shall be shed there in opposition to the laws of the United States, I will hang the first man I can lay my hand on engaged in such treasonable conduct, upon the first tree I can reach.

[Themightytom]

The secession of Texas is LESS laughable than the secession talk in Vermont was in 2007
http://www.vermontrepublic.org/
(Wow there is more than one person who thought taht would work??)

I saw a comemnt on another site that Texas doesn't have a secession clause to withdraw from the nation but they could seperate into four states?
http://www.thevictoriaadvocate.com/webl ... to-secede/

Anyway how many of the points of contention listed happened under the current administration as opposed to udner the adminsitrtaion of the guy living among them that they rabidly supported.

[Redleader34]

...but who determines whether or not they're doing a good job?

That is sort of a requirement to get the job in the first place. There are both pro and cons to having lifetime offices.

Even if someone is competent and professional at the time he gets the job, that is no guarantee that he will remain so for the rest of his life. Lifetime appointment is an odd concept. That's not to say that they should be subject to a general vote; that would defeat the whole purpose of having a separate branch of government. But perhaps there could be some kind of legal society review of such individuals' judgements and comments, so that he can be removed if he appears to go off the deep end.

I hate to say it, but the church has a better idea with its removal of bishops after they reach age 75 than lifetime appointments for SOCTUS

[Broomstick]

...but who determines whether or not they're doing a good job?

That is sort of a requirement to get the job in the first place. There are both pro and cons to having lifetime offices.

Even if someone is competent and professional at the time he gets the job, that is no guarantee that he will remain so for the rest of his life. Lifetime appointment is an odd concept. That's not to say that they should be subject to a general vote; that would defeat the whole purpose of having a separate branch of government. But perhaps there could be some kind of legal society review of such individuals' judgements and comments, so that he can be removed if he appears to go off the deep end.

I believe part of the reason there are NINE supreme court justices to prevent one whacko from upsetting the applecart. The odds of a majority of them going senile or insane simultaneously is, after all, pretty damn small.

[Darth Wong]

I believe part of the reason there are NINE supreme court justices to prevent one whacko from upsetting the applecart. The odds of a majority of them going senile or insane simultaneously is, after all, pretty damn small.

That does little to inspire confidence when many of their decisions come down to a 5-4 vote.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

The Pantex facility in Amarillo Texas happens to be the ONLY place in the USA at which the assembly and disassembly of nuclear weapons is currently conducted.

What? That can't be right. Don't other countries produce their own nuclear weapons or have they all entirely stopped?

ONLY place in the USA

Call me back when you've grown a brain.

[Broomstick]

I believe part of the reason there are NINE supreme court justices to prevent one whacko from upsetting the applecart. The odds of a majority of them going senile or insane simultaneously is, after all, pretty damn small.

That does little to inspire confidence when many of their decisions come down to a 5-4 vote.

Hey, man, I didn't invent the system, I just work for the Feds, and only part time at that.

[Ziggy Stardust]

I believe part of the reason there are NINE supreme court justices to prevent one whacko from upsetting the applecart. The odds of a majority of them going senile or insane simultaneously is, after all, pretty damn small.

That does little to inspire confidence when many of their decisions come down to a 5-4 vote.

This is an old article, but I believe the point it makes is still valid. To quote the lead:

"The nine justices of the United States Supreme Court do not always issue unanimous decisions, nor do their votes match the pattern that would be shown by nine totally independent thinkers."

[Samuel]

It uses the phrase independent thinker in a mathematical sense as in random voting. I don't think that it counts as an insult that they they have consistency.

ONLY place in the USA

Second time that has happened to me this week. Sorry.

I believe part of the reason there are NINE supreme court justices to prevent one whacko from upsetting the applecart. The odds of a majority of them going senile or insane simultaneously is, after all, pretty damn small.

Not really. The number of justices is purely political (I think it was set at its current number by Grant when they tried to stop him) and one wacko is important given the regular 5-4 decisions.

[Aeolus]

If the Dems are smart they'll stick it to the seperatists...er Texan GOPers when they ask to be declared a fed disaster area this hurricane season. Not saying Washington should not send aide (I'm just taking the gamble a hurricane might hit the gulf area again this year ) rather the political rhetoric against Perry and these asshats should be pounded in next fall/winter.

Back in the 70's and early 90's people were talking about secession and guess what it didn't happen. Basically instead of letting this whole thing blow over, like it does every decade or so when the people who want Texas to leave the union get vocal.
You want to give less extremist people in Texas a reason to actually go and leave the union?
Besides the article posted said Perry was pushing to expand the 10th amendment. It's highly unlikely that the courts would ever go for it but there is nothing illegal about trying to do that.

[Beowulf]

...but who determines whether or not they're doing a good job?

That is sort of a requirement to get the job in the first place. There are both pro and cons to having lifetime offices.

Even if someone is competent and professional at the time he gets the job, that is no guarantee that he will remain so for the rest of his life. Lifetime appointment is an odd concept. That's not to say that they should be subject to a general vote; that would defeat the whole purpose of having a separate branch of government. But perhaps there could be some kind of legal society review of such individuals' judgements and comments, so that he can be removed if he appears to go off the deep end.

They are appointed for life, but there is a way to remove a Justice who refuses to retire: impeachment. If a Justice goes obviously insane, it'd be pretty easy to convince Congress to impeach. No Justice has been removed by impeachment and conviction, but then, neither has any President.

[Aeolus]

...but who determines whether or not they're doing a good job?

That is sort of a requirement to get the job in the first place. There are both pro and cons to having lifetime offices.

Even if someone is competent and professional at the time he gets the job, that is no guarantee that he will remain so for the rest of his life. Lifetime appointment is an odd concept. That's not to say that they should be subject to a general vote; that would defeat the whole purpose of having a separate branch of government. But perhaps there could be some kind of legal society review of such individuals' judgements and comments, so that he can be removed if he appears to go off the deep end.

Well they can be impeached.

[Aeolus]

The secession of Texas is LESS laughable than the secession talk in Vermont was in 2007
http://www.vermontrepublic.org/
(Wow there is more than one person who thought taht would work??)

I saw a comemnt on another site that Texas doesn't have a secession clause to withdraw from the nation but they could seperate into four states?
http://www.thevictoriaadvocate.com/webl ... to-secede/

Anyway how many of the points of contention listed happened under the current administration as opposed to udner the adminsitrtaion of the guy living among them that they rabidly supported.

I thought it was 5 states. Anyway that would give Texas 6 to 8 more senators. Texas will never do it however. Texans like being 1 big state.

[Knife]

Back in the 70's and early 90's people were talking about secession and guess what it didn't happen. Basically instead of letting this whole thing blow over, like it does every decade or so when the people who want Texas to leave the union get vocal.

It crops up every couple decades when these guys don't get their way politically, they crawl back out into the light and start screeching. When they get their way, they crawl back into the shadows. No sense and not smacking the shit out of their stupid positions and temper tantrums when they happen.

You want to give less extremist people in Texas a reason to actually go and leave the union?

You can't read. I don't want the current Fed government to NOT give aide, rather make sure you remind the voters in Texas that despite the stupidity of Perry and the separatists in the State House, the Federal government does have an interest in the well being of Texas and especially in times of emergency, you need the help of the rest of YOUR people in the country.

I thought I made the idea of punitive action a non starter in my post, but just in case I fucked that up; you don't punish them but you sure as fuck remind them when they ask for help that you were there for them whether or not they were shit talking you earlier.

Besides the article posted said Perry was pushing to expand the 10th amendment. It's highly unlikely that the courts would ever go for it but there is nothing illegal about trying to do that.

Realistically, Perry is doing nothing but pandering to the hard right nutbars, rather than any brilliant political maneuvering and/or statesmanship for the State of Texas.