I Want a Divorce!

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]thefederalist wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]thefederalist wrote:
We’re keeping New York City, LA, San Fran, Chicago, Boston, Philly, Seattle, and joining Canada. Good luck with your third world southern states. [/quote]

Good luck propping up those social programs without anyone to pay for them.[/quote]

Ahhh… we are pretty much saying the same thing. There are many, many third world southern states that are on welfare in their trailer parks… and it’s paid for by those of us in the northeast that make all the money and pay all the taxes.

[/quote]

See my post above.

Not to mention, all of those welfare dwellers in the southern states will have 2 choices. Buck up, get a job and pay for their own shit, or move to one of your cities - further bankrupting them.[/quote]

Come on now I think you’re asking just a bit too much. After all there are generations that have been supported by our tax dollars. Do you really think that they can just go out and get a job? No way, it would take decades of rehab. Just mention the word work and most of them start shaking.

“Where’s ma check, I want ma check obama is giving us money”

No really we’ve reached the end unless November bears the results that I think it will.

Washington and Jefferson would truly roll over in their graves if they were aware of the nonsense that has become our federal government.
[/quote]

you will revolt in November if Dems retain control of Congress?[/quote]

Are you on some sort of medication that warps a part of your brain that is responsible for reasoning? No really, something is not clicking what could it be?

I’ve seen many election cycles junior, many. And when the people have had enough they vote out the scoundrels. If they want two more years of Obama with a democratic House and Senate, so be it. Then you double up the effort and try to defeat Obama at the polls in 2012.

Revolt? Honestly, what’s wrong with you? Is it too much MSNBC? Is that it? No I’m being serious tell me what’s wrong with you? what makes you post something so extraordinarily dumb? You must be better than that, please tell me you are, show me.

42

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]thefederalist wrote:
We’re keeping New York City, LA, San Fran, Chicago, Boston, Philly, Seattle, and joining Canada. Good luck with your third world southern states. [/quote]

Good luck propping up those social programs without anyone to pay for them.[/quote]

Ahhh… we are pretty much saying the same thing. There are many, many third world southern states that are on welfare in their trailer parks… and it’s paid for by those of us in the northeast that make all the money and pay all the taxes.

[/quote]

See my post above.

Not to mention, all of those welfare dwellers in the southern states will have 2 choices. Buck up, get a job and pay for their own shit, or move to one of your cities - further bankrupting them.[/quote]

haha. Fair enough.

Maybe we’ll build a big border wall… I like how that sounds…

43

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]thefederalist wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]thefederalist wrote:
We’re keeping New York City, LA, San Fran, Chicago, Boston, Philly, Seattle, and joining Canada. Good luck with your third world southern states. [/quote]

Good luck propping up those social programs without anyone to pay for them.[/quote]

Ahhh… we are pretty much saying the same thing. There are many, many third world southern states that are on welfare in their trailer parks… and it’s paid for by those of us in the northeast that make all the money and pay all the taxes.

[/quote]

See my post above.

Not to mention, all of those welfare dwellers in the southern states will have 2 choices. Buck up, get a job and pay for their own shit, or move to one of your cities - further bankrupting them.[/quote]

Come on now I think you’re asking just a bit too much. After all there are generations that have been supported by our tax dollars. Do you really think that they can just go out and get a job? No way, it would take decades of rehab. Just mention the word work and most of them start shaking.

“Where’s ma check, I want ma check obama is giving us money”

No really we’ve reached the end unless November bears the results that I think it will.

Washington and Jefferson would truly roll over in their graves if they were aware of the nonsense that has become our federal government.
[/quote]

you will revolt in November if Dems retain control of Congress?[/quote]

Are you on some sort of medication that warps a part of your brain that is responsible for reasoning? No really, something is not clicking what could it be?

I’ve seen many election cycles junior, many. And when the people have had enough they vote out the scoundrels. If they want two more years of Obama with a democratic House and Senate, so be it. Then you double up the effort and try to defeat Obama at the polls in 2012.

Revolt? Honestly, what’s wrong with you? Is it too much MSNBC? Is that it? No I’m being serious tell me what’s wrong with you? what makes you post something so extraordinarily dumb? You must be better than that, please tell me you are, show me.
[/quote]

According to the DSM IV, the federalist is clearly suffering from the mental disorder of statism. He displays all the tell tale signs.

Just wanted to clear that up for you.

44

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Flop Hat wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]blake2616 wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]blake2616 wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Unfortunately, Lincoln pretty much ensured a divorce will never happen.[/quote]

And it’s written into the Constitution that if part of the country attempts to leave the remaining part can pursue with force…[/quote]

Orly?!

Since the constitution is such a small document you can show me where it says this…?[/quote]

Section 10
No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation
[/quote]

If it is no longer a member of the Union it is not bound by the Constitution.

And anyway a piece of paper is not going to stop a pissed off and well armed mob.[/quote]

But the several hundred thousand soldiers who are sworn to protect and uphold that document might be able to convince that mob otherwise.
[/quote]

You mean the same men that cannot even hold Baghdad or Kabul without bribing half of the city?

You think they could hold Los Angeles?

Los Angeles and Houston?

Texas, Montana AND Wyoming?

Frankly, they could not.

[/quote]

Yes, those guys. The ones who regularly kill several hundred bad guys for every friendly killed while operating under strict rules of engagement. Remember the Taliban is backed by the ISI and has real military weaponry and the Iraqi militias were formed from the Iraqi army. So yes, I think the us military would quite handily secure Montana and Wyoming (all 200,000 people), and even Texas. You really missed your window of opportunity because pre 9-11 few soldiers had experience in unconventional warfare, but now you would pretty much be dealing with guys who are experts at killing guerrillas.

If you ever looked at the huge pile of bodies we made in the opening of Afghanistan with almost zero losses, you might change your mind.

45

[quote]Dustin wrote:

[quote]blake2616 wrote:

[quote]Flop Hat wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]blake2616 wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]blake2616 wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Unfortunately, Lincoln pretty much ensured a divorce will never happen.[/quote]

And it’s written into the Constitution that if part of the country attempts to leave the remaining part can pursue with force…[/quote]

Orly?!

Since the constitution is such a small document you can show me where it says this…?[/quote]

Section 10
No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation
[/quote]

If it is no longer a member of the Union it is not bound by the Constitution.

And anyway a piece of paper is not going to stop a pissed off and well armed mob.[/quote]

But the several hundred thousand soldiers who are sworn to protect and uphold that document might be able to convince that mob otherwise.
[/quote]

I’m going with this. And originally my quote was supported by the idea of Lincoln to keep the Union together. I’m not really factoring in whether or not it would be feasible. [/quote]

You would be surprised to know how many of the Soldiers you speak of share the same opinion as the well armed mob.[/quote]

Not enough to change the outcome. Some guys talk big, but when it comes down to fighting with your boys with all the cool toys or hanging with a bunch of fat loons with hunting rifles, the choice might be harder to make. History is replete with instances of the US Army smacking around separatist beyond just the civil war, but I’m sure this time would be different…

46

My friends and I were joking (JOKING) about what would happen if there really were a war between the states. Every state for itself.
The consensus was that

  1. Texas would kick everybody’s ass
  2. West Virginia would choose to be neutral, like Switzerland
  3. Ohio vs. Michigan? I’d bet on Michigan, but my friend from Cleveland insists that Ohioans are tough.
  4. Generally red states were thought to come out better than blue states. Disappointing to me – I’d like to believe that liberals can have grit too – but I’m not sure it’s untrue.