RUSSIAN ANALYST PREDICTS DECLINE AND BREAKUP OF USA

I think different regions of this country are a little to interdependent to break up. Hypothetically, I don't think anybody wants to risk a bloody continental conflict over natural resources, money or arms. Also, he seems to partially split it on the basis of minority population; which frankly probably greastly overestimates our influence.

 

They are still bitter...

 

My name Bubba-borat, from Texasistan!

 

I don't think he overestimates their influence as much as their ethnic solidarity. Russia has a history with strong ethnic-nationalist sentiment in some minority groups with a strong geographic attachment, which causes are the headache in the Caucasuses. I think he assumes the Chinese-American, Hispanic-American, Native American, and White-American populations (funny he doesn't mention blacks) have a similar desire for a national identity apart from one another. If he was right, some minority groups have enough numbers to force a political remedy of some sort; but I doubt the interest is there.

 

We tried and it was called the civil war. It ain't going to happen. No one besides Palin's husband and the republic of texas nut jobs want to secede from the union.

 

You forgot about Vermont.

 

If Russia takes Alaska just think, Sarah Palin could be the president of Russia.


All I know is if the US splits up I'm going to declare myself the dictator of Dakotastan.

 

oh man, thinking about these clowns the other day for some reason. they actually kepting flooding the court with lawsuits saying that texas joining the union was illegal.

 

Unfortunately, California is more Hispanic and White than Chinese, but he has it separating from other pre-dominantly Hispanic states. Go figure.

If a a split were to occur, it's more likely to happen not along racial lines. It would happen with the secessionist Alaska Independence party and their undercover politicians like Palin.

 

Oh, crap, I guess I need to renew my passport if I ever expect to make it out to Newyorkistan or Caliwashegonada.

 

Interesting read. Definitely have my vote for the new Texas. dallas, Oklahoma.....hilarious!

I think trying times may be ahead, but it would have to get really bad for another split. Not very likely.

Though, if Texas were to become its own nation, would H-Town fare better than other big cities?

 

cool if you guys like this then you're going to love what happens under FEMA executive orders:

http://users.rcn.com/zap.dnai/regions.html

The 10 Federal Regions

REGION I: Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont. Regional Capitol: Boston

REGION II: New York, New Jersey, Puerto Rico, Virgin Island. Regional Capitol: New York City

REGION III: Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia, District of Columbia. Regional Capitol: Philadelphia

REGION IV: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee. Regional Capitol: Atlanta

REGION V: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin. Regional Capitol: Chicago

REGION VI: Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas. Regional Capitol: Dallas-Fort Worth

REGION VII: Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska. Regional Capitol: Kansas City

REGION VIII: Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming. Regional Capitol: Denver

REGION IX: Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada. Regional Capitol: San Fransisco

REGION X: Alaska, Oregon, Washington, Idaho. Regional Capitol: Seattle

 

Chinese population in California about 1.1 million. The total estimated population of all races in California was 36.5 million people in 2006.

If California secedes from the USA, it's not the chinese. If anything it's the white people or the hispanics. Hispanics made up 36% of the population. They would join New Mexico, Arizona, and Texas, if the Russians believes hispanics will form their own country.


http://www.ameredia.com/resources/demographics/chinese.html

 

China would buy California from the US with our own treasury securities.

All hail our ChiCom overlords.

 

Under the bus you go, President Bush...

Bush Hands Over Reins of U.S. Economy to EU

Wednesday, November 19, 2008 2:28 PM

By: Dick Morris & Eileen McGann Article Font Size




The results of the G-20 economic summit amount to nothing less than the seamless integration of the United States into the European economy.


In one month of legislation and one diplomatic meeting, the United States has unilaterally abdicated all the gains for the concept of free markets won by the Reagan administration and surrendered, in total, to the Western European model of socialism, stagnation, and excessive government regulation.


Sovereignty is out the window. Without a vote, we are suddenly members of the European Union. Given the dismal record of those nations at creating jobs and sustaining growth, merging with the Europeans is like a partnership with death.


At the G-20 meeting, Bush agreed to subject the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and our other regulatory agencies to the supervision of a global entity that would critique its regulatory standards and demand changes if it felt they were necessary. Bush agreed to create a College of Supervisors.


According to The Washington Post, it would "examine the books of major financial institutions that operate across national borders so regulators could begin to have a more complete picture of banks' operations."


Their scrutiny would extend to hedge funds and to various "exotic" financial instruments. The International Monetary Fund (IMF), a European-dominated operation, would conduct "regular vigorous reviews" of American financial institutions and practices.


The European-dominated College of Supervisors would also weigh in on issues like executive compensation and investment practices.


There is nothing wrong with the substance of this regulation.


Experience is showing it is needed. But it is very wrong to delegate these powers to unelected, international institutions with no political accountability.


We have a Securities and Exchange Commission appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, both of whom are elected by the American people. It is with the SEC, the Treasury, and the Federal Reserve that financial accountability must take place.


The European Union achieved this massive subrogation of American sovereignty the way it usually does, by negotiation, gradual bureaucratic encroachment, and without asking the voters if they approve.


What's more, Bush appears to have gone down without a fight, saving his debating time for arguing against the protectionism that France's Nicolas Sarkozy was pushing.


By giving Bush a seeming victory on a moratorium against protectionism for one year, Sarkozy was able to slip over his massive scheme for taking over the supervision of the U.S. economy.


All kinds of political agendas are advancing under the cover of responding to the global financial crisis.


Where Franklin Roosevelt saved capitalism by regulating it, Bush, to say nothing of Obama, has given the government control over our major financial and insurance institutions. And it isn't even our government!


The power has now been transferred to the international community, led by the socialists in the European Union.


Will Obama govern from the left? He doesn't have to.


George W. Bush has done all the heavy lifting for him. It was under Bush that the government basically took over as the chief stockholder of our financial institutions and under Bush that we ceded our financial controls to the European Union.


In doing so, he has done nothing to preserve what differentiates the vibrant American economy from those dying economies in Europe.


Why have 80 percent of the jobs that have been created since 1980 in the industrialized world been created in the United States? How has America managed to retain its leading 24 percent share of global manufacturing even in the face of the Chinese surge?


How has the U.S. GDP risen so high that it essentially equals that of the European Union, whose population is 50 percent greater?


It has done so by an absence of stifling regulation, a liberation of capital to flow to innovative businesses, low taxes, and by a low level of unionization that has given business the flexibility to grow and prosper.


Europe, stagnated by taxation and regulation, has grown by a pittance while we have roared ahead. But now Bush — not Obama — Bush has given that all up and caved in to European socialists.


The Bush legacy? European socialism. Who needs enemies with friends like Bush?







© 2008 Dick Morris & Eileen McGann

 

All hail our Europansy overlords.