Secession Tantrums And Selective Memory

We conservatives are just throwing a hissy-fit like a bunch of toddlers – at least that’s that the left says:

This attempt to secede from the United States is blatantly foolish. During the Civil War, the secession of the Confederacy was an act of anti–American sentiment. They were so unwilling to cooperate that they attempted to dissolve and divide the country. They did not want to play by the rules so they tried to quit the game altogether. Although the secession petitions today do not carry the same weight of earnestness I still view them in the same light. Those who are signing these petitions are angry that Mitt Romney is not the elected president so they want to quit. The economy isn’t where they would like for it to be, so they’re done.

Rather than cooperate and work through various issues together as a nation, these petition signers are throwing tantrums common to toddlers. They would rather destroy a nation that has existed for 236 years over engaging in the democratic process put in place by our founding fathers.

Notice this:

They did not want to play by the rules so they tried to quit the game altogether.

Well, not quite – these ARE the rules of the game. Secession IS both constitutional and legal. While it may well be unworkable, it is a remedy for political division so deep as to dissolve the reasons for a union in the first place. Since the Constitution represents these rules, if we want to go over who ignores the “rules of the game”, let’s by all means address the abrogation of the Constitution by the liberal courts and our own central government.

Liberals always hold the Constitution in high regard until it gets in the way.

We have established that there is a long tradition of political separation and rebellion enshrined in our founding documents.

All of this goes right along with their “how dare you question my Precious” meme that “no president has faced the problems that Obama has faced and no president has had to cope with as much name calling as he has”.

Oh, yeah – never in history has any president had to endure what Obama has had to endure. Bush was never called a drunk, an illegitimate president, a functional illiterate, a deserter, a Nazi, a terrorist, evil, openly wished for his death – even writing books and plays about it, had Desmond Tutu call for him to be tried on international war crimes, called a dunce, called a liar on the House floor, called a liar and a murderer, a gang leader from South Central LA, a torturer and a racist…the media and punditry loved him, didn’t they?

Bullshit. Bush walked into the end of the dotcom crash, a court battle that delayed the transition of his government for months on end, a confirmation fight for his appointees from Democrats (who hated him and called him illegitimate) that delayed the formation of a functioning government even more,  8 months later he had 9/11 and within 3 years he had 2 wars on his hands – and yet, we still had less than 6% unemployment and strong GDP growth.

Obama faces a problem of Democrat origin. The federal government had a very large role in the financial crisis and the mortgage bubble.

Obama has also never had photos published of his daughters the way that the Bush girls were treated, either. They were even lampooned on Saturday Night Live. When there is a Democrat in the White House, we must respect their privacy – when it is a Republican, every frat/sorority party is front page news.

Liberals never threatened to leave the US if Bush was elected, either did they?

Well, actually – as Professor Jacobson at Legal Insurrection points out, they did:

Alternative Title:  “Election losers embrace secession to escape evil President’s second term.”

Tuesday, Nov 16, 2004 08:55 PM EST

If at first you don’t secede

Feeling they’ve lost any say in how the nation is run, liberals are turning to an unfamiliar philosophy: States’ rights.

Guess who was the secessionist leader (emphasis mine):

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.” They passed around the scathing rant from the Web site Fuck the South, which lacerated the chauvinism of the “heartland” and pointed out that the coasts, far from destroying marriage, actually have lower divorce rates than the interior.

These sentiments were so pronounced that they migrated into the mainstream. Speaking on “The McLaughlin Group” the weekend after George W. Bush’s victory, panelist Lawrence O’Donnell, a former Democratic Senate staffer, noted that blue states subsidize the red ones with their tax dollars, and said, “The big problem the country now has, which is going to produce a serious discussion of secession over the next 20 years, is that the segment of the country that pays for the federal government is now being governed by the people who don’t pay for the federal government.”

A shocked Tony Blankley asked him, “Are you calling for civil war?” To which O’Donnell replied, “You can secede without firing a shot.”  [WAJ note -- transcript here, still looking for video]

And not just Big Larry, Blue states buzz over secession (emphasis mine)

One popular map circulating on the Internet shows the 19 blue states won by Sen. John Kerry — Washington, Oregon, California, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, Maryland and the Northeastern states — conjoined with Canada to form the “United States of Canada.” The 31 red states carried by Mr. Bush are depicted as a separate nation dubbed “Jesusland.”

The idea isn’t just a joke; one top Democrat says, “The segment of the country that pays for the federal government is now being governed by the people who don’t pay for the federal government.”

“Some would say, ‘Oh, poor Alabama. It’s cut off from the wealth infusion that it gets from New York and California,’” said Lawrence O’Donnell, a veteran Democratic insider and now senior political analyst at MSNBC. “But the more this political condition goes on at the presidential level of the red and blue states, the more you’re testing the inclination of the blue states to say, ‘So what?’”

The emergence of a solidly Republican South prompted longtime Democratic activist Bob Beckel to advocate Southern independence the morning after Election Day.

“I think now that slavery is taken care of, I’m for letting the South form its own nation. Really, I think they ought to have their own confederacy,” Mr. Beckel said on the “Fox and Friends” program.

It all goes to confirm something as basic as natural law:

As I have said, “progressives” are bereft of a sense of irony and hypocrisy. The three requirements to be a modern “progressive” are more in evidence today than ever:

  1. Selective memory/political amnesia
  2. Cognitive dissonance
  3. Confirmation bias

And it goes to support The Utah Law of Diminishing Liberal Intelligence, which states:

If a liberal hasn’t said something illogical, self-contradictory, physically or financially impossible, historically inaccurate or just outright stupid, you just haven’t listened to them long enough,

Therefore;

Have patience and wait, they will eventually hang themselves if you give them enough rope. Just keep them talking. Evidence of intellect is inversely proportional to the length of the conversation.

About these ads

8 thoughts on “Secession Tantrums And Selective Memory

  1. WHO didn’t follow the rules. In Phily when the GOP poll watchers with a court order were still not allowed to sit at the table with their DFL counterparts who was not following the rules? Obama won by cheating, it was voter fraud. If my govt is corrupt I have a perfect right as an American citizen to pursue secession. My goal is to form a more perfect union, one without fraud , corruption and undue pressure from the invading forces.

    • @Trappedinca:

      There are still 300,000 votes to be counted in Ohio:

      The presidential election results in Ohio were close: According to still-unofficial figures from the Secretary of State, Barack Obama won the state with 2,690,841 votes to Mitt Romney’s 2,583,582 votes — a winning margin of 107,259 votes for the president. In percentage terms, that is 50.18 percent of the vote for Obama, and 48.18 percent for Romney.

      But those numbers will change. Remember when, before the election, many observers discussed the possibility the results could be decided by the large number of provisional ballots that might be cast in Ohio? Well, those provisional ballots were cast, and they have not yet been counted. Neither have a significant number of absentee ballots. Together, the number of uncounted ballots is larger than Obama’s margin of victory.

      Rules are for the little people.

    • Trappedinca,

      We need to understand that the Left actually believes in and follows Alinsky. In this case, we are dealing with rule #4:

      4. “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. (You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity).”

      In other words, the Left has no rules, but they will always try to hold us to THEIR version of our own beliefs. As Alinsky said, that is as impossible as it is to perfectly follow Christ’s Gospel. But this is an intentional “missing of the point.” What we on the Right are TRYING to do is to live by the rules. The Left doesn’t have this constraint because they believe and teach themselves that the ends truly justify the means because their ends is to “save humanity.” And, when you are trying to save all of humanity, then of what consequence is “a few broken eggs?”

  2. By the way, did anyone catch the attacks against us from The Corner, Red State and American Thinker yesterday? Anyone talking about secession was called assinine, sunshine patriot, and said to be nothing better than a birther needing a tin foil hat. Red State even “rolled up the welcome mat”. It’s lovely when conservatives attack each other.

    • Amy,

      It’s lovely when conservatives attack each other.

      This is because — when it comes right down to it — conservatives are the flip side of the same coin. That means they cannot “beat” the Left without beating themselves. To keep power, they need us — but they do not like or really want our opinions. They just want us to vote for and support them like the Left wants their welfare recipients to support and vote for them. Think about it: do you REALLY think the Left’s leadership wants or even cares about what the average Democrat thinks? They pay as much lip service to their people as most conservative radio hosts and blog sites pay to theirs.

      Ultimately, I believe there is less separating the rank-and-file than we have been led to believe. I think the first group to actually TOTALLY divorce themselves from BOTH Parties and organize around the principles and ideals of the Declaration would become a majority Party in short order.

      And if it didn’t, then you would have the final verdict on the experiment that is American self-rule: FAILED!

      BTW: 2 things. Thanks for the use of “us” in your comment :-) And did these other “conservative” site even bother to address our ideas, or did they “go lib” and just call us names? ;-)

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s