Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For a Public Official to advocate secession is Treason
maybe it's me,but i can guarantee there is a lot more politicians are doing that can be considered treason than one of them bringing up the word secession....
The question is, does your federal government really speak for the people? Can a government thousands of miles away from its constituent base of more than 300 million people really represent the country? When you voted for Obama in 2008 did you really support all his ideas? Almost all of his ideas? Most of his ideas? Or were you just looking for change because of a sinking economy and anger at the war?
The truth is, federal policies are almost never a unanimous proposition. Just as Unions are the main focus for Michigan democrats, and immigration is the main focus for California democrats. They both are forced to compromise and come as one big democratic party to get elected.
The states need more power but slowly the federal government has been claiming all power for itself. The happiest countries in the world are almost always very small in population. How can one federal entity really pass laws to govern such a diverse landscape and diverse people.
People may claim that all states have representation, but does it really feel that way? In this country the majority can force whatever they want through, disregarding the minority. Why is it OK to force 149 million people to follow a policy that only 151 million people supported(or realistically less through compromises).
If the states had more power, then California could have opted to not send its men on a pre-emptive war into Iraq. If Texas had more power, it could stem the tide of illegal immigrants coming into the state by protecting the border, and expelling illegals already there. And we won't even talk about the everchanging demographics of this country through legal immigration. About 1/3rd of this country is either an immigrant(mostly Asian, African, or Hispanic), their children, or illegal immigrants.
I don't support an armed revolution, but some things need to change, and if it comes to standing up for whats right, I hope we have the desire and courage to do the right thing.
From huge corperations to that deli on the corner, greed does indeed drive the economy. People look for the best jobs with the highest pay so they might purchase things of better quality or merely keep up with the Jones'. Other people cater to the first set and having the same motivations as well, seek to sell the most and make the most money possible
Unchecked and un-regulated greed are certainly "bad things", but like everything else in life, moderated greed is a good thing.
It isn't the Ultimate Evil you make it out to be.
your "good greed" should be phrased as typical wants (not needs) and a personal drive towards a certain level of existance. this is a system of supply and demand also. I'm merely suggesting that the developer that buys that hunk of swampland at $50/acre and turns around and sells it for $20M per acre is the "unchecked" greed - how many millions does one really need??? case in point would be Oprah with the $1M per week allowance - absolutely nuts!
The question is, does your federal government really speak for the people? Can a government thousands of miles away from its constituent base of more than 300 million people really represent the country? When you voted for Obama in 2008 did you really support all his ideas? Almost all of his ideas? Most of his ideas? Or were you just looking for change because of a sinking economy and anger at the war?
The truth is, federal policies are almost never a unanimous proposition. Just as Unions are the main focus for Michigan democrats, and immigration is the main focus for California democrats. They both are forced to compromise and come as one big democratic party to get elected.
The states need more power but slowly the federal government has been claiming all power for itself. The happiest countries in the world are almost always very small in population. How can one federal entity really pass laws to govern such a diverse landscape and diverse people.
People may claim that all states have representation, but does it really feel that way? In this country the majority can force whatever they want through, disregarding the minority. Why is it OK to force 149 million people to follow a policy that only 151 million people supported(or realistically less through compromises).
If the states had more power, then California could have opted to not send its men on a pre-emptive war into Iraq. If Texas had more power, it could stem the tide of illegal immigrants coming into the state by protecting the border, and expelling illegals already there. And we won't even talk about the everchanging demographics of this country through legal immigration. About 1/3rd of this country is either an immigrant(mostly Asian, African, or Hispanic), their children, or illegal immigrants.
I don't support an armed revolution, but some things need to change, and if it comes to standing up for whats right, I hope we have the desire and courage to do the right thing.
The Federal Government isn't some huge gesalt beast eating up state's rights for dinner, and then little children for a snack.
The Federal Government IS the States.
No "State soverignty" or "rights" has been lost in the least.
Granted Senators were indeed assigned by a State's Legislature prior to the 14th Amendment, but a Senator still answers to that State.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.