Ron Paul on secession. So right!

[Neurotika]

justice scalia disagrees with ron paul

The lawyer, Eric Turkewitz, says his brother Dan, a screenwriter, put just such a question to all of the Supreme Court justices in 2006 -- he was working on an idea about Maine leaving the U.S.and a big showdown at the Supreme Court -- and Scalia responded. His answer was no:

"I am afraid I cannot be of much help with your problem, principally because I cannot imagine that such a question could ever reach the Supreme Court. To begin with, the answer is clear. If there was any constitutional issue resolved by the Civil War, it is that there is no right to secede. (Hence, in the Pledge of Allegiance, "one Nation, indivisible.") Secondly, I find it difficult to envision who the parties to this lawsuit might be. Is the State suing the United States for a declaratory judgment? But the United States cannot be sued without its consent, and it has not consented to this sort of suit.

44 - Antonin Scalia: No right to secede

that was in 2010...

 

[Liberty]

justice scalia disagrees with ron paul

The lawyer, Eric Turkewitz, says his brother Dan, a screenwriter, put just such a question to all of the Supreme Court justices in 2006 -- he was working on an idea about Maine leaving the U.S.and a big showdown at the Supreme Court -- and Scalia responded. His answer was no:

"I am afraid I cannot be of much help with your problem, principally because I cannot imagine that such a question could ever reach the Supreme Court. To begin with, the answer is clear. If there was any constitutional issue resolved by the Civil War, it is that there is no right to secede. (Hence, in the Pledge of Allegiance, "one Nation, indivisible.") Secondly, I find it difficult to envision who the parties to this lawsuit might be. Is the State suing the United States for a declaratory judgment? But the United States cannot be sued without its consent, and it has not consented to this sort of suit.

44 - Antonin Scalia: No right to secede

that was in 2010...

So because a man wears a black cloak that makes him a god?

 

[Neurotika]

justice scalia disagrees with ron paul

The lawyer, Eric Turkewitz, says his brother Dan, a screenwriter, put just such a question to all of the Supreme Court justices in 2006 -- he was working on an idea about Maine leaving the U.S.and a big showdown at the Supreme Court -- and Scalia responded. His answer was no:

"I am afraid I cannot be of much help with your problem, principally because I cannot imagine that such a question could ever reach the Supreme Court. To begin with, the answer is clear. If there was any constitutional issue resolved by the Civil War, it is that there is no right to secede. (Hence, in the Pledge of Allegiance, "one Nation, indivisible.") Secondly, I find it difficult to envision who the parties to this lawsuit might be. Is the State suing the United States for a declaratory judgment? But the United States cannot be sued without its consent, and it has not consented to this sort of suit.

44 - Antonin Scalia: No right to secede

that was in 2010...

So because a man wears a black cloak that makes him a god?

no but he IS a supreme court ghoul which is where this would eventually wind up if it got that far..so ye..i think his input is relevant.
and as much as i like ron paul he will not be the one to decide...

 

[GuyPinestra]

IOW, the signing of the documents that declare our right to self-determination actually removes that right instead?

Is this 'The Law of Unintended Consequences', or simply another example of 'logic' defeating itself?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

IOW, the signing of the documents that declare our right to self-determination actually removes that right instead?

Is this 'The Law of Unintended Consequences', or simply another example of 'logic' defeating itself?

The state doesn't bother with logic. Only force.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Yes, and the Pharaohs said they were the living embodiment of gods. Since neither has anything to do with this topic I suggest we get back to the issue at hand.

So the Constitution has nothing to do with the Constitution.


Are you retarded?

The Preamble is merely a statement of intent, and has nothing to do with secession. It prohibits nothing to the states, and it confers no powers on the federal government.

It establishes a more perfect union. It says so right there in the Preamble. Have you ever read it? More perfect than what? The perpetual union already established.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

So the Constitution has nothing to do with the Constitution.


Are you retarded?

The Preamble is merely a statement of intent, and has nothing to do with secession. It prohibits nothing to the states, and it confers no powers on the federal government.

It establishes a more perfect union. It says so right there in the Preamble. Have you ever read it? More perfect than what? The perpetual union already established.

Well this got boring quickly.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

The Preamble is merely a statement of intent, and has nothing to do with secession. It prohibits nothing to the states, and it confers no powers on the federal government.

It establishes a more perfect union. It says so right there in the Preamble. Have you ever read it? More perfect than what? The perpetual union already established.

Well this got boring quickly.

Well? What do you want? Its what the words say.

 

[Hardcandy]

Ron Paul: Secession Is an American Principle - YouTube

Proving once again that Ron Paul knows nothing

Oh, really?
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGDisyWkIBM]Ron Paul - Predictions in Due Time (Original) - YouTube[/ame]

How dare you impose reality on these liberals by insulting them with the truth!

 

[Hardcandy]

Ron Paul's Neo-Confederate "South Was Right" Civil War Speech With Confederate Flag - YouTube

The south will rise again!

Did you by any chance actually listen to what Ron Paul was saying or were you mesmerized by the backdrop?

It does appear that you were so overwhelmed by the visuals that the message went completely unnoticed!

liberals are very well trained

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

It establishes a more perfect union. It says so right there in the Preamble. Have you ever read it? More perfect than what? The perpetual union already established.

Well this got boring quickly.

Well? What do you want? Its what the words say.

I don't deny it. That is what the Preamble says. Very good.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Well this got boring quickly.

Well? What do you want? Its what the words say.

I don't deny it. That is what the Preamble says. Very good.

Then I'm going to go with what it says, and I guess you'll just pretend it isn't there.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Well? What do you want? Its what the words say.

I don't deny it. That is what the Preamble says. Very good.

Then I'm going to go with what it says, and I guess you'll just pretend it isn't there.

Yep.

 

[GHook93]

Ron Paul: Secession Is an American Principle - YouTube

He is a douche bag! He mentions States had a right to secede from the state, but he is wrong! No where in the constitution (his FAVORITE PHRASE) does it say that states have a right to sucede from the union. NOWHERE!!! It says how they can join, but not that they have a right to sucede. The Civil War ANSWERED the question on the right to sucede (interesting he is the same douche bag that doesn't approve of that war)!

Nice example of Russia. What a douche bag comment! We applauded that SUCESSION MOVEMENT from Russia, because WE WERE IN THE COLD WAR AND RUSSIA WAS (AND STILL IS) OUR ENEMY! Sucession made them WEAKER! As it would make us WEAKER!!! Of course we would applaud our enemy, the EVIL RED EMPIRE, getting weaker!

And we didn't sucede from the British! We were a colony and never part of the Britian (we had no say in the government, laws forced on us and taxation without representation). We formed a nation, not suceded from a nation we were a part of! He says sucession is in our blood? What an illogical red herring, Ron Ron just looks even more and more clueless!

Go off into the sunset nutjob!

 

[GuyPinestra]

Ron Paul: Secession Is an American Principle - YouTube

He is a douche bag! He mentions states thought they had a right to secede from the state, but he is wrong! No where in the constitution (his FAVORITE PHRASE) does it say that states have a right to sucede from the union. It says how they can join, but not that they have a right to sucede. The Civil War ANSWERED that question on the right to sucede (interesting he is the same douche bag that doesn't approve of that war)!

Nice example of Russia. What a douche bag comment! We applauded stated SUCESSION from Russia, because WE WERE IN THE COLD WAR AND RUSSIA WAS (AND STILL IS) OUR ENEMY! Sucession made them WEAKER! As it would make us WEAKER!!! Of course we would applaud our enemy, the EVIL RED EMPIRE, getting weaker!

And we didn't sucede from the British! We were a colony and never part of the Britian (no say in the government, laws forced on us and taxation without representation). We formed a nation, not suceded from a nation we were a part of! He says sucession is in our blood? What an illogical red herring, Ron Ron just looks even more and more clueless!

Go off into the sunset nutjob!

Again, please explain to me how signing the documents that GUARANTEE our right to self-determination abrogates that right?

 

[nodoginnafight]

And some people scratch their head and wonder why he's considered a wacko

 

[Liberty]

Ron Paul: Secession Is an American Principle - YouTube

He is a douche bag! He mentions states thought they had a right to secede from the state, but he is wrong! No where in the constitution (his FAVORITE PHRASE) does it say that states have a right to sucede from the union. It says how they can join, but not that they have a right to sucede. The Civil War ANSWERED that question on the right to sucede (interesting he is the same douche bag that doesn't approve of that war)!

Nice example of Russia. What a douche bag comment! We applauded stated SUCESSION from Russia, because WE WERE IN THE COLD WAR AND RUSSIA WAS (AND STILL IS) OUR ENEMY! Sucession made them WEAKER! As it would make us WEAKER!!! Of course we would applaud our enemy, the EVIL RED EMPIRE, getting weaker!

And we didn't sucede from the British! We were a colony and never part of the Britian (no say in the government, laws forced on us and taxation without representation). We formed a nation, not suceded from a nation we were a part of! He says sucession is in our blood? What an illogical red herring, Ron Ron just looks even more and more clueless!

Go off into the sunset nutjob!

...nor does the constitution prohibit it. Get a clue...10th amendment. read it.

 

[GHook93]

And some people scratch their head and wonder why he's considered a wacko

LOL so true!

 

[Hardcandy]

Look at it this way leftist.

You will win from here on out and we will have our nation of freedom. Looks like we both win!

Not quite Mat, secession by the right would greatly accelerate the failure of the lefts new found socialist utopian dream.

If several US states seceded in protest over ideology, all the producers would migrate to the capitalist states leaving the socialist states with no one to pay their bills.

The socialist states would be stuck with all the non-producers waiting for the government to take care of them with no one to tax for the necessary resources to do so.

Not to mention the fact that most of the criminals as well as the bums, losers and lowlifes would migrate to the liberal states where they would be coddled and tolerated.

 

[shock]

I once lived in Ron Paul's district. An interesting and unrelated side note of history that no one has explained is the call made to Paul's predecessor warning of the bombing of Fish Murray building in Oklahoma City.

Paul is a good man and he is an independent thinker.

I have long valued Paul and i honor him
for despite his sometimes self-serving flights of political fancy
he always has been a voice worth listening to.

But his preaching secession
rather
than national renewal
by means of a new party
is downright silly and thus
leads me to believe
that Paul, wounded and worried by defeat,
is searching for a new and more rewarding destiny and
that age has worsened his already fusty political thinking.

SHOCKLEY