The New Confederate States of America?

txflag_earthSouth Carolina left the Union of the The United States of America in December of 1860 sounding off the spring 1861 flood of Southern states that left the Union ultimately making headway for the Confederate States of America that lasted all of four years.  Although many of the Confederate leaders were charged with treason and acts of sedition under the 1798 Alien and Sedition Acts, they were pardoned by the spineless President Andrew Johnson.

The last time we heard so much about states’ rights was the ante-bellum period.  So, for Texas Governor Rick Perry to say that he’s not ruling out the idea of secession.

WHAT THE F&%$?!?!?!


Here’s the story below from CNN:

Texas Gov. Rick Perry isn’t ruling out the possibility his state may one day secede from the nation.

Speaking to an energetic and angry tea party crowd in Austin Wednesday evening, the Lone Star State governor suggested secession may happen in the future should the federal government not change its fiscal polices.

“There’s a lot of different scenarios,” Perry said. “We’ve got a great union. There’s absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, you know, who knows what might come out of that. But Texas is a very unique place, and we’re a pretty independent lot to boot.” (Video below: Tea party fires up debate)

Perry, who is beginning to gear up for what could be a challenging re-election race, rejected more than $500 million in federal stimulus funds earlier this year and has been highly critical of President Obama’s stimulus package.  (Related: Joe “The Plumber” speaks at Michigan tea party)

His comments come a week after endorsing a resolution in the Texas state House reasserting state sovereignty over federal mandates.

Specifically it states that “all compulsory federal legislation that directs states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties or sanctions or that requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding be prohibited or repealed.”

Texas, America’s second biggest state in area and population, was its own nation for 10 years before joining the United States in 1845.

Should Texas one day secede, one man may already be vying to be its president. Actor Chuck Norris said last month he may be interested in the post.

“I may run for president of Texas,” Norris wrote in a column posted at WorldNetDaily. “That need may be a reality sooner than we think. If not me, someone someday may again be running for president of the Lone Star state, if the state of the union continues to turn into the enemy of the state.”

This is a hot mess.

I know this is nothing more than political pandering on behalf of a governor who wanted to make national news, but DAYUM!  this is a bit out of hand in my opinion.  Just think about it:  East Texas ain’t having it!  A good chunk of black folks live east of Interstate 45 and aren’t looking for any secession.  Whatever the case, I know that the majority of Texans wouldn’t be interested in leaving, but still, for a governor to get on a microphone and put such sentiments into the atmosphere is not good.

Yet again, Glenn Beck’s dumbass did his show yesterday out in San Antonio in front of the Alamo to make a big deal about it.  Again, as my earlier post said, such wanton journalism fuels the fans of redneck, hick fools who own guns and frankly, I wonder if we don’t see random hate crimes go up in Texas.  Such rhetoric gives unction to individuals to think that this country is going to pot and that if they don’t arm themselves and do something about it, then nothing’s going to get done.

I mean was this not the angle of the KKK?

I’m not calling all white folk members of the Ku Klux Klan in Texas, but doesn’t such speech and rhetoric give credence to those that decide to take the law into their own hands?  Because all of this is up for individual interpretation, could not some backwards-ass individuals see that the law needed to be taken into their own hands because the law that was on the books was in fact an unjust law, therefore not making it a law in the first place?


This country hasn’t seen war on it’s own land since 1865 and the end of the Civil War.  I wonder did any of citizens at the time see it coming?  It’s easy for us in 2009 to not imagine U.S. Army tanks rolling down our own streets as a result of a civil war, but for many other countries, even in our own hemisphere, civil war is a daily occurrence.  I’m hoping that Rick Perry’s statement was just empty rhetoric.

And in the meantime, can someone just teabag Glenn Beck to make him shut up!


Do you feel that the governor’s speech went too far or was it necessary to make his point clear?  Should such speech be categorised as treasonous or seditious in nature?  

9 thoughts on “The New Confederate States of America?

  1. “Do you feel that the governor’s speech went too far or was it necessary to make his point clear? Should such speech be categorized as treasonous or seditious in nature? “

    I’m more likely to wonder if Obama’s and the current Liberal regimes actions, which provoked such a response from people, should be categorized as treasonous or seditious in nature.

    How many states, responding the federal government’s action have drafted State Sovereignty legislation?

    How many people – the ones you casually disparage with your “teabag” reference – gathered in cities across America to protest the government’s actions?

    Everyone admits that there’s no current Republican or Conservative leader, so this is a true grass-roots efforts. You don’t get that sort of thing unless there really is a problem.

    1. @jonolan

      You didn’t answer the question.

      I think I’d be more apt to give this Tea Party Movement more credence had this been a year or so into Obama’s administration. Fact of the matter is that Obama’s presidency was secured by the same type of grass-roots organizing.

  2. OK, no. I don’t think that such speech be categorized as treasonous or seditious in nature.

    He does not preach the overthrow of the US government, only possibly removing Texas from its supposedly – like all the States – voluntary participation in the Union.

    I’d like to think that the government will get its mind right before secession happens, but I don’t really hold out much of for that.

    — Texas
    — Hawaii

    All three have made various noises towards secession since January 1, 2009.

    I’d say that there’s a problem, and it’s not the GOP or the Right…

    1. @jonolan

      So speaking with 20/20 view on history, what’s your perspective on the southern states seceeding from the Union forming the Confederacy?

  3. You said it all right here: “I know this is nothing more than political pandering on behalf of a governor who wanted to make national news.”

    Perry wants to be able to claim he was against all this spending from the start, especially since he has plans to run for re-election in 2010. This is just a ploy to differientiate himself from Kay Bailey Hutchison, who could be viewed as contributing to this “big spending.”

  4. I feel that they were well within their rights to do so and that the federal government overstepped its bounds both in the underlying laws that caused the secession and in their response to it.

    Please don’t read that as an endorsement of slavery, which I find to be both stupid and wrong. Just think of me as a staunch anti-federalist.

    1. @jonolan

      While I won’t make the jump that it is an endorsement of slavery, by saying that you felt it was within the states’ rights to secede from the Union, fact of the matter is that their main reason for secession was because of slavery. They felt that the government was attacking their way of life which was the agricultural economy of a slavocracy. Hearing THAT endorsement scares me and shoul scare many other Americans.

  5. True, slavery was the touchstone issue, but you said it yourself, “They felt that the government was attacking their way of life…”

    The federal government – for admittedly morally sound reasons – overstepped the authority that it had been granted under the constitution and the states responded.

    It’s not that much different today, though the moral rightness of the government’s motives are far, far less clear since there’s no issue like slavery involved in the current situation.

    1. @jonolan

      We’ll agree to disagree. I’m not convinced the federal government overstepped it’s boundaries back then, and most certainly not today. I mean, I’m more concerned about the Patriot Act and other bullcrap civil liberties that have been encroached upon as a result of the previous eight years. Taxation is not at the top of my list when it comes to governmental concerns. Moreover, I think this is nothing but smoke and mirrors on behalf of self-professed conservatives and Republicans. This just seems to be a knee-jerk reaction to losing the election in November 2008.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s