Confederacy... will it return?

[happybattles]

Along with many other theories which may occur within the next ten years is the fear that the Confederate States of America will be reborn.

Slavery won't return and the Confederacy isn't likely to declare war on the USA, but what would come of such a thing?

Recent articles have reported that many states, in particular Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Tennesse, Georgia, Arkansas and Florida have all passed legislature that reaffirms their Constitutional 10th Amendment Rights. Here is the 10th Amendment:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

This mainly was invoked to battle the President on his absurd declaration that the States must spend the stimulus money the way he has decided they will spend it. The fact is, the Constitution does not give the Federal government the right or power to dictate how the States will spend any money they receive.

So, while some will say that the States are just "talking smack", the fact remains that we are a union only because we choose, every second of every day, to stay a union. If any of the states in our union decide that they will not spend the money the way the Federal government demands, they will be in violation of a federal offense (though I can't say which one... but one will be invented for just such a thing). Federal troops will be sent into the State to secure it's capital. Once that happens, the war will begin. It probably won't be our elected officials, since these weakling just want to keep their jobs; it will be the people who have more to lose than their politicians. This will be a sad day for America.

What would happen if the dissenting states separated from the Union and formed a Confederacy? What would happen if Chuck Norris actually did run for President of the Confederate States of America?

If you'd be interested in talking in more detail with other interested persons on this topic, please email me at the above address. Also, please note: DO NOT THREATEN THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! IT'S A QUICK TRIP TO JAIL FOR EVEN TYPING IT! Remember, we're assuming a non-violent split where everyone agrees it's in the best interest of all. Here's some comments I've read so far:

"If Texas splits, Californa's new @#$%^ will be the illegal Texans!"

"No way Texas will keep NAFTA. This would be a chance to start over and run things the right way."



So, if you have a comment, even if it's a mean one to me, go ahead and send it to here. Remember - I asked for this, so say what you need to. I need honest opinions.

 

[Agnapostate]

It's not a conceivable possibility, most obviously because of the limited range of acceptable political options in this country.

 

[wvulax]

all we need is some s'mores schnappes. haha

 

[editec]

The confederate states wouldn't be a viable nation by themselves.

Cotton is no longer king.

Perhaps they might become a state funded by sending their soldiers off to die in other people's wars.

Lord knows that the South creates the sorts of guys who are used to having to go into the military because there's damned all little opportunity to make a living at home.

 

[jillian]

they weren't a viable nation by themselves THEN ... because they couldn't manufacture their own munitions.

but why do the loonies keep wanting to refight the war they lost?

i'm not sure Lincoln did us any favors.

 

[sitarro]

The confederate states wouldn't be a viable nation by themselves.

Cotton is no longer king.

Perhaps they might become a state funded by sending their soldiers off to die in other people's wars.

Lord knows that the South creates the sorts of guys who are used to having to go into the military because there's damned all little opportunity to make a living at home.

You're not very bright are ya eddy? How's Detroit doing? What are the fabulous Northern States doing that makes them so "viable".

Texas, by itself, refines a majority of the gasoline you clowns use. We also produce most of the natural gas being used in your power plants. Beef, I guess you're not interested in that stuff. Seafood? Yea, you've got lobsters in Maine but what about the rest of the northern states. Tourism, Florida is full of retired assholes from New Yawk, main reason nobody intelligent wants to vacation there. California's fucked like New York is heading, to many non Americans. Oh and cotton, you don't need cotton? Polyester is your choice? Louisiana produces most of the rice, sugar cane, soybean and the rest of the refined oil products. Kentucky has Wild Turkey and Tennessee has Jack Daniels. The South could do very well on it's own.


When it comes down to political ideology, the more successful in the northern states will join us in the south because they know that leftist can't survive on their own and will destroy any state they truly take over. You can have all of the illegals and the uppity blacks though.

 

[sitarro]

they weren't a viable nation by themselves THEN ... because they couldn't manufacture their own munitions.

but why do the loonies keep wanting to refight the war they lost?

i'm not sure Lincoln did us any favors.

Still living in the past Jilli, the South could survive a lot easier today than the north could and if there was a war, we would destroy you. This isn't the 1860s.

 

[jillian]

I'm not the one living in the past, sitty... that would be the nutters who want the south to rise agin...

 

[wvulax]

It doesn't come down to just supplies and resources though. I've heard theories stating that had general lee not been as aggressive the south would have won. Also there are 50 states now, and no one knows which side the midwest/western states would go. Colorado is one of those could go either way states. Also the federal government would have all the diplomatic agreements, the south would have to make their own friends.

WV, PA, NY have sufficient sources coal and natural gas. Food can be traded/bought even with a recession. gas would be a problem but we would make deals with canada.

this is a fun what if

 

[HUGGY]

Along with many other theories which may occur within the next ten years is the fear that the Confederate States of America will be reborn.

Slavery won't return and the Confederacy isn't likely to declare war on the USA, but what would come of such a thing?

Recent articles have reported that many states, in particular Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Tennesse, Georgia, Arkansas and Florida have all passed legislature that reaffirms their Constitutional 10th Amendment Rights. Here is the 10th Amendment:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

This mainly was invoked to battle the President on his absurd declaration that the States must spend the stimulus money the way he has decided they will spend it. The fact is, the Constitution does not give the Federal government the right or power to dictate how the States will spend any money they receive.

So, while some will say that the States are just "talking smack", the fact remains that we are a union only because we choose, every second of every day, to stay a union. If any of the states in our union decide that they will not spend the money the way the Federal government demands, they will be in violation of a federal offense (though I can't say which one... but one will be invented for just such a thing). Federal troops will be sent into the State to secure it's capital. Once that happens, the war will begin. It probably won't be our elected officials, since these weakling just want to keep their jobs; it will be the people who have more to lose than their politicians. This will be a sad day for America.

What would happen if the dissenting states separated from the Union and formed a Confederacy? What would happen if Chuck Norris actually did run for President of the Confederate States of America?

If you'd be interested in talking in more detail with other interested persons on this topic, please email me at the above address. Also, please note: DO NOT THREATEN THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! IT'S A QUICK TRIP TO JAIL FOR EVEN TYPING IT! Remember, we're assuming a non-violent split where everyone agrees it's in the best interest of all. Here's some comments I've read so far:

"If Texas splits, Californa's new @#$%^ will be the illegal Texans!"

"No way Texas will keep NAFTA. This would be a chance to start over and run things the right way."



So, if you have a comment, even if it's a mean one to me, go ahead and send it to here. Remember - I asked for this, so say what you need to. I need honest opinions.

You are an idiot and Chuckie has been watching too many Chuck Norris movies. Hey karate guy!...They are only movies!!!!

 

[Toro]

No.

Next question.

 

[strollingbones]

last time i checked...i am an american...i plan to remain one...no matter how disgusting yankees are....we have one thing in common..we are americans...

do not confuse state's wanting to exercise their rights with wanting to leave the "union" ...for crying out loud...we are one union...if we dont realize that now....we never will....

o and when your running your mouth about this and that...remember this....july 4th we will all have american flags out...i hope made in american that would be nice...an american flag came off my fathers coffin not a confederate flag..

 

[Navy1960]

Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1869) was a significant case argued before the United States Supreme Court in 1869. The case involved a claim by the reconstruction government of Texas that United States bonds owned by Texas since 1850 had been illegally sold by the Confederate state legislature during the American Civil War. The state filed suit directly with the United States Supreme Court, which, under the United States Constitution, retains original jurisdiction on cases in which a state is a party.

In accepting jurisdiction, the court ruled that Texas had remained a state ever since it first joined the Union, despite its joining the Confederate States of America and its being under military rule at the time of the decision in the case. In deciding the merits of the bond issue, the court further held that the Constitution did not permit states to secede from the United States, and that the ordinances of secession, and all the acts of the legislatures within seceding states intended to give effect to such ordinances, were "absolutely null".

The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation. By these, the Union was solemnly declared to "be perpetual." And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained "to form a more perfect Union." It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not? Samuel Chase
Texas v. White - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the only thing that keeps Texas from exercising it's right to break away from the United States. Even this, is a flawed opinion as it is based on the Artiles of Confederation and not the Constitution. If this case had been decided on the laws of the United States and not some crazy after thought Texas and any other State could exercise its right under the constitution to succeed.

 

[MaggieMae]

Along with many other theories which may occur within the next ten years is the fear that the Confederate States of America will be reborn.

Slavery won't return and the Confederacy isn't likely to declare war on the USA, but what would come of such a thing?

Recent articles have reported that many states, in particular Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Tennesse, Georgia, Arkansas and Florida have all passed legislature that reaffirms their Constitutional 10th Amendment Rights. Here is the 10th Amendment:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

This mainly was invoked to battle the President on his absurd declaration that the States must spend the stimulus money the way he has decided they will spend it. The fact is, the Constitution does not give the Federal government the right or power to dictate how the States will spend any money they receive.

So, while some will say that the States are just "talking smack", the fact remains that we are a union only because we choose, every second of every day, to stay a union. If any of the states in our union decide that they will not spend the money the way the Federal government demands, they will be in violation of a federal offense (though I can't say which one... but one will be invented for just such a thing). Federal troops will be sent into the State to secure it's capital. Once that happens, the war will begin. It probably won't be our elected officials, since these weakling just want to keep their jobs; it will be the people who have more to lose than their politicians. This will be a sad day for America.

What would happen if the dissenting states separated from the Union and formed a Confederacy? What would happen if Chuck Norris actually did run for President of the Confederate States of America?

If you'd be interested in talking in more detail with other interested persons on this topic, please email me at the above address. Also, please note: DO NOT THREATEN THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! IT'S A QUICK TRIP TO JAIL FOR EVEN TYPING IT! Remember, we're assuming a non-violent split where everyone agrees it's in the best interest of all. Here's some comments I've read so far:

"If Texas splits, Californa's new @#$%^ will be the illegal Texans!"

"No way Texas will keep NAFTA. This would be a chance to start over and run things the right way."



So, if you have a comment, even if it's a mean one to me, go ahead and send it to here. Remember - I asked for this, so say what you need to. I need honest opinions.

Frankly, I'm so sick of the idiotic politicking of raging against anyone and everyone who doesn't agree with one "side" or the other over the most silly, mundane things, I think the line does needs to be drawn again. Let the Civil War Redux begin and see who wins this time--the Southern Rebels who can only see black and white (no pun here) or the Northern Intellectuals who recognize that there's gray in between. (Regional characterizations are also generalized.)

 

[MaggieMae]

The confederate states wouldn't be a viable nation by themselves.

Cotton is no longer king.

Perhaps they might become a state funded by sending their soldiers off to die in other people's wars.

Lord knows that the South creates the sorts of guys who are used to having to go into the military because there's damned all little opportunity to make a living at home.

You're not very bright are ya eddy? How's Detroit doing? What are the fabulous Northern States doing that makes them so "viable".

Texas, by itself, refines a majority of the gasoline you clowns use. We also produce most of the natural gas being used in your power plants. Beef, I guess you're not interested in that stuff. Seafood? Yea, you've got lobsters in Maine but what about the rest of the northern states. Tourism, Florida is full of retired assholes from New Yawk, main reason nobody intelligent wants to vacation there. California's fucked like New York is heading, to many non Americans. Oh and cotton, you don't need cotton? Polyester is your choice? Louisiana produces most of the rice, sugar cane, soybean and the rest of the refined oil products. Kentucky has Wild Turkey and Tennessee has Jack Daniels. The South could do very well on it's own.


When it comes down to political ideology, the more successful in the northern states will join us in the south because they know that leftist can't survive on their own and will destroy any state they truly take over. You can have all of the illegals and the uppity blacks though.

Well golly gee, New England states produce real maple syrup too, but they can't survive on that industry alone.

Your post is a perfect example of the silly and mundane. I rest my case.

 

[MaggieMae]

Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1869) was a significant case argued before the United States Supreme Court in 1869. The case involved a claim by the reconstruction government of Texas that United States bonds owned by Texas since 1850 had been illegally sold by the Confederate state legislature during the American Civil War. The state filed suit directly with the United States Supreme Court, which, under the United States Constitution, retains original jurisdiction on cases in which a state is a party.

In accepting jurisdiction, the court ruled that Texas had remained a state ever since it first joined the Union, despite its joining the Confederate States of America and its being under military rule at the time of the decision in the case. In deciding the merits of the bond issue, the court further held that the Constitution did not permit states to secede from the United States, and that the ordinances of secession, and all the acts of the legislatures within seceding states intended to give effect to such ordinances, were "absolutely null".

The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation. By these, the Union was solemnly declared to "be perpetual." And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained "to form a more perfect Union." It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not? Samuel Chase
Texas v. White - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the only thing that keeps Texas from exercising it's right to break away from the United States. Even this, is a flawed opinion as it is based on the Artiles of Confederation and not the Constitution. If this case had been decided on the laws of the United States and not some crazy after thought Texas and any other State could exercise its right under the constitution to succeed.

Frankly, I couldn't care less if Texas secedes. I'd just like to see some of my family members living and working in the Houston area get out beforehand, though. My brother has lived in Texas most of his adult life (he's now 62), and when the subject of secession arises, he just rolls his eyes and shakes his head. He recently said to me: "Can you search the Internet and see if I'd need to update my passport to visit my son in New Orleans?"

 

[sitarro]

Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1869) was a significant case argued before the United States Supreme Court in 1869. The case involved a claim by the reconstruction government of Texas that United States bonds owned by Texas since 1850 had been illegally sold by the Confederate state legislature during the American Civil War. The state filed suit directly with the United States Supreme Court, which, under the United States Constitution, retains original jurisdiction on cases in which a state is a party.

In accepting jurisdiction, the court ruled that Texas had remained a state ever since it first joined the Union, despite its joining the Confederate States of America and its being under military rule at the time of the decision in the case. In deciding the merits of the bond issue, the court further held that the Constitution did not permit states to secede from the United States, and that the ordinances of secession, and all the acts of the legislatures within seceding states intended to give effect to such ordinances, were "absolutely null".

The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation. By these, the Union was solemnly declared to "be perpetual." And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained "to form a more perfect Union." It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not? Samuel Chase
Texas v. White - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the only thing that keeps Texas from exercising it's right to break away from the United States. Even this, is a flawed opinion as it is based on the Artiles of Confederation and not the Constitution. If this case had been decided on the laws of the United States and not some crazy after thought Texas and any other State could exercise its right under the constitution to succeed.

Frankly, I couldn't care less if Texas secedes. I'd just like to see some of my family members living and working in the Houston area get out beforehand, though. My brother has lived in Texas most of his adult life (he's now 62), and when the subject of secession arises, he just rolls his eyes and shakes his head. He recently said to me: "Can you search the Internet and see if I'd need to update my passport to visit my son in New Orleans?"

That is as ignorant as someone proposing that their state secede from the union.

 

[sitarro]

Along with many other theories which may occur within the next ten years is the fear that the Confederate States of America will be reborn.

Slavery won't return and the Confederacy isn't likely to declare war on the USA, but what would come of such a thing?

Recent articles have reported that many states, in particular Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Tennesse, Georgia, Arkansas and Florida have all passed legislature that reaffirms their Constitutional 10th Amendment Rights. Here is the 10th Amendment:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

This mainly was invoked to battle the President on his absurd declaration that the States must spend the stimulus money the way he has decided they will spend it. The fact is, the Constitution does not give the Federal government the right or power to dictate how the States will spend any money they receive.

So, while some will say that the States are just "talking smack", the fact remains that we are a union only because we choose, every second of every day, to stay a union. If any of the states in our union decide that they will not spend the money the way the Federal government demands, they will be in violation of a federal offense (though I can't say which one... but one will be invented for just such a thing). Federal troops will be sent into the State to secure it's capital. Once that happens, the war will begin. It probably won't be our elected officials, since these weakling just want to keep their jobs; it will be the people who have more to lose than their politicians. This will be a sad day for America.

What would happen if the dissenting states separated from the Union and formed a Confederacy? What would happen if Chuck Norris actually did run for President of the Confederate States of America?

If you'd be interested in talking in more detail with other interested persons on this topic, please email me at the above address. Also, please note: DO NOT THREATEN THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! IT'S A QUICK TRIP TO JAIL FOR EVEN TYPING IT! Remember, we're assuming a non-violent split where everyone agrees it's in the best interest of all. Here's some comments I've read so far:

"If Texas splits, Californa's new @#$%^ will be the illegal Texans!"

"No way Texas will keep NAFTA. This would be a chance to start over and run things the right way."



So, if you have a comment, even if it's a mean one to me, go ahead and send it to here. Remember - I asked for this, so say what you need to. I need honest opinions.

Frankly, I'm so sick of the idiotic politicking of raging against anyone and everyone who doesn't agree with one "side" or the other over the most silly, mundane things, I think the line does needs to be drawn again. Let the Civil War Redux begin and see who wins this time--the Southern Rebels who can only see black and white (no pun here) or the Northern Intellectuals who recognize that there's gray in between. (Regional characterizations are also generalized.)

Your condescending attitude towards the population of the southern states is incredibly ignorant and yet, all too typical. The idea that a person living in a Northern state is more intellectual than one in the southern states is such bullshit. I have lived across the United States, from Louisiana to Minnesota to California, Colorado and now Texas........ I have found very little difference among those populations. I lived in the deep, deep south....... Lafayette, Louisiana, about 20 miles from the Gulf of Mexico. In the 15 years I lived there, I saw nothing having to do with the KKK. I moved to Denver, Colorado and was treated to those clowns in their white robes demonstrating twice a year on the capital steps..... Hitler's birthday and MLK day. I spent some time in Chicago and witnessed a white cop standing over a black man lying face down in a pool of blood, he was eating a sub sandwich, he certainly didn't seem all that "intellectual".

There are idiots everywhere. There are exceptionally intelligent people everywhere also, it is people that live in the South that run and work for NASA, they have put men on the moon and helped build an international space station, not exactly red neck dumbasses. Houston has the most impressive medical centers anywhere. Discovering oil 130 miles offshore, drilling for it and refining it into gasoline isn't rocket science but it takes almost as much effort to bring it to the marketplace.

 

[editec]

The confederate states wouldn't be a viable nation by themselves.

Cotton is no longer king.

Perhaps they might become a state funded by sending their soldiers off to die in other people's wars.

Lord knows that the South creates the sorts of guys who are used to having to go into the military because there's damned all little opportunity to make a living at home.

You're not very bright are ya eddy?

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

How's Detroit doing?

Last I hear it was a shithole, why do you ask?

What are the fabulous Northern States doing that makes them so "viable".

Do you imagine I'm going to play your childish North v South game, lad?

The former Confedacy states wouldn't make a viable economy.

That statement isn't me crowing about how swell the North is, that's me observing that the Southern economy would suffer if it were on it own.

Point of fact, no region in this nation would do very well on its own.

Each area brings something to the overall economy that serves us all.





.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The states passing legislation affirming their sovereignty under the 10th amendment is no where near secession. In fact, it's the opposite. It's the states affirming their rights under the existing Constitution of the United States. The Confederacy is not coming back.