No, but if you are rural and you like NASCAR, there is a good chance you are a redneck dumbass. That is a joke ala Jeff Foxworthy-style. No offense intended.
When Foxworthy does it it's meant to be self-deprecating. And I usually don't hear him say dumbass afterwords or any similar such invective.
While seceding is not realistic now, I think there is a possibility that it can happen in near future. This can happen if the Fed keeps printing money such that hyperinflation is all over the land. Then CA or TX might consider seceding to print their own money to counter the problem. Come to think of it, if the Chinese and/or Japanese selling our T-bonds like crazy, we should consider that an act of war and fight them to the death. Because basically our country will collapse when the full effect of that is felt.
Backed by what though? The full faith and credit of the Republic of Texas or the Republic of California? I don't think either country could just separate their economy from the US. Even if legal secession was possible those states are still part of the the US economy and have also shared in the US national debt. Unless their new currency was pegged to a gold standard or another currency standard their would probably be far less faith in them than the US dollar even with a very inflated dollar. That's a tough argument to make when we encouraged them to buy T-Bonds.
With all due respect, there's no way in hell that's ever going to happen. We could have at the outbreak of the Civil War, when Governor Sam Houston said that if we (Texans) insisted on leaving the Union, then the intelligent thing to do was become the Republic of Texas again and stay out of the looming conflict between North and South. That ship has sailed. We could divide Texas into 2 or more states... up to 5. It's in the treaty signed between the Republic and the United States. That could actually be done. Does it make sense? Maybe, maybe no.
from Josh: I thought earlier that Tom DeLay had conceded that in fact Texas isn't allowed to secede from the federal union. And he does say that at one point in his talk with Chris Matthews that Texas can't secede. But then he has a reading of the 1845 annexation of Texas in which he claims that Texas can essentially force Congress to kick them out of the Union, thus amounting to a sort grand secessionist bank-shot. Here's the quote ... A few seconds later DeLay seemed to say Texas couldn't secede but then went back to the Treaty double-bank shot idea. I guess you could say he's conflicted. http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/04/delay_offers_new_theory_of_texas_secession.php
isn't the argument that once texas attempted joined the confederacy, it was in material breach of the original treaty and thus the entire treaty was null and void?
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/I4tWZNxnABk&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/I4tWZNxnABk&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
If US in chaos and CA/TX think the Fed doesn't have the will to fight them, they can secede. If they do, most likely they will be supported by foreign countries that want to see US in decline, e.g. Russia, China. Of course, if US is still stable, there is no chance for them to secede.
Why do you, with all due respect, keep posting this dribble? Texas cannot secede. California cannot secede. It is all utter bull ****.
<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/jvliy8rEJDQ&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/jvliy8rEJDQ&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>
the libs are in charge right now, the repub's are spinning out of control. libs=rockets > repubs=blazers.
Russia might not care but they aren't in much of a position to do anything economically to help out independent CA or TX. While the PRC might get some schaundenfraude seeing the US break up a collapse like that would be disastrous to the PRC economy too and I doubt they would support a CA or TX secession movement as that might encourage Tibetan and Uighar movements and also harden Taiwan's position.
To follow up on some of my previous points and respond to Rep. Paul. Secession isn't a Constitutional principle as the US Constitution is now. I don't think legally under the framework of the US Constitution a state could secede from the Union. Secession though is a general principle of a human self determination but if it was to ever happen again in the US there would have to be the understanding that the Constitution is broken. While I think the Constitution should be upheld presuming some extreme hypothetical where the citizens of a state felt that the Federal government was truly repressive and democratically decided that they should leave the Union then I think that self determination is more important than the Constitution; especially when the alternative is war to keep them as part of the Union. I would also suspect that if the Fed was seen as that oppressive then the Constitutional protections of civil liberties would have already been broken or at least watered down to the point of being meaningless. I agree with Paul that secession is an American principle and is what behind the Declaration of Independence. The Constitution though has superceded the Declaration of Independence.
