Secession Thread

[Lenno]

Put your Secession/CW articles here!

South Carolina Introduces Secession Bill Over Gun Rights

‘…People even talk about totally repealing Second Amendment, which separates us from entire rest of world,’ says SC lawmaker

The Washington Times - April 8, 2018

COLUMBIA, S.C. — South Carolina debated seceding from the Union more than 150 years ago, one of the opening salvos of the Civil War. Now, the topic has come up again, amid a national debate over firearms and gun rights.
A trio of state House Republicans on Thursday quietly introduced a bill that would allow lawmakers to debate seceding from the U.S. “if the federal government confiscates legally purchased firearms in this State.”
Rep. Mike Pitts, the measure’s chief sponsor, acknowledged Friday in an interview with The Associated Press that the bill has no chance of passage this year but pledged to continue to raise the issue based on what he described as a defense of the Bill of Rights.
“Without a Bill of Rights, our nation is not what it is,” Pitts said.
Read more

[Lenno]

Twitter CEO Shares And Raves About Article Calling For Dem Victory In Second ‘Civil War’

“The way forward is on the path California blazed about 15 years ago.”

[Lenno]

Read more: https://www.ammoland.com/2018/04/pro...#ixzz5C7G6haIu
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

Progressive Illinois Rep. Declares Constitution Means Nothing

Ammoland Inc. Posted on April 6, 2018April 8, 2018 by Dean Weingarten
Progressive Illinois Rep. Declares Constitution Means NothingArizona -(Ammoland.com)- An Illinois technocrat has demonstrated the Progressive attitude about the Constitution and the Second Amendment. Representative Bill Foster has a PhD in Physics from Harvard. He was raised and earned his Bachelor degree in ultra-liberal Madison, Wisconsin. In his view, the Constitution is a document that can be re-interpreted to mean different things every few years. That is true in a sense. Amendments to the Constitution can be put forward and passed any time. It is clear a constitutional amendment is not what Representative Foster is talking about. From chicagotribune.com:

Flanked by two area high school students, a pediatrician and the mother of a gun violence victim, U.S. Rep. Bill Foster told a community forum audience Monday the Second Amendment should be up for reinterpretation as new generations come into power.
“It always has been up for reinterpretation,” Foster, D-Naperville, said during an event focused on gun violence. “The technology changes, and the weapons thought to be too dangerous to be in private hands change. A civil war cannon is frankly much less dangerous than weapons we are allowed to carry on the streets in many of the states and cities in our country today. This is something where technology changes and public attitude changes and both are important in each of the generations.”

What does “reinterpretation” mean? It means you take the same words in the Constitution, and apply a different meaning to them. If you can do that, the Constitution only means what you want it to mean, when you want it to mean it. If Representative Foster means that legislators, such as himself, should change the meaning of the Constitution when they wish it, then Constitutional limits on government power mean nothing. Much of the purpose of the Constitution was to limit government power, to provide stability, to prevent rapid, radical change in the laws.
The Representative mentions technology changes and public attitudes. But technology changes apply to the First Amendment, the Fourth Amendment, the Fifth Amendment, and most of the Bill of rights. Should we give the legislature the power to change most of the Bill of Rights at will?



The Constitution is designed as a structure of government to moderate and delay change so as to prevent hurried legislation in response to emotional public reactions.
In short, Representative Foster is talking about scrapping the Constitution and ruling by legislative fiat. That has always been the Progressive way. From heritage.org, a quote from Charles Merriam, an early, leading Progressive political scientist:

The individualistic ideas of the “natural right” school of political theory, endorsed in the Revolution, are discredited and repudiated…. The origin of the state is regarded, not as the result of a deliberate agreement among men, but as the result of historical development, instinctive rather than conscious; and rights are considered to have their source not in nature, but in law.

Progressives believe that experts should rule society, that the “average man” is incapable of knowing their own best interest. Progressives believe there is no absolute right and wrong. Right and wrong are defined by Progressives and their experts at any particular time.
Progressives see the Constitution and the Bill of Rights as obstacles to be overcome, not pillars of American society that must be defended.
Progressives generally view the State as god, or at least the manifestation of God on earth. Right is anything that advances Progressivism. Wrong is anything that hinders the Progressive agenda.
President Wilson, one of the political foundational Progressives, is attributed as believing that “limits on government power should be abolished”
Representative Foster is an iconic technocrat. After working as a government scientist for his career, he was able to win a seat in the House of Representatives. He does not believe in natural law. He does not take his oath of office seriously. No Progressive does. To Progressives, oaths, natural law, the Constitution, are all outdated concepts to be placed in the dustbin of history in order to achieve power. Setting aside the Constitutional questions, Foster ignores facts, and lies to advance his agenda.
Foster is a scientist. He understands how to lie with statistics. His prowess at doing so is shown below:

“I doubt that's the most effective way to control gun violence,” Foster said. “The most accurate predictor of the rate of gun homicides, if you look at the statistics, is actually the number of guns per person in the state or in the community.”

That is an irrelevant conclusion. “Gun violence” is a propaganda term. It is not germane to the argument about the effectiveness of legislation. It does not matter to a victim if they die from a gunshot, or because they did not have a gun to defend themselves. If they die from a club, or a knife, or a bombing, they are still dead. If a country institutes restrictive gun legislation, and the homicide rate increases, the legislation is a failure for its stated purpose. It is irrelevant if the number deaths inflicted with guns goes down. It is the total, unjustified homicide rate that matters. John Lott says that every country that instituted gun bans saw increases in the homicide rate. From crimeresearch.org:

One thing gun control advocates such as Vox would never mention is that every single time that guns are banned — either all guns or all handguns — homicide/murder rates rise. This is a remarkable fact.

It would be unsurprising that if there are more guns, there are more gun homicides. If there are more cars, there are more car accidents. If there are more hospitals, more people die in hospitals.
What is surprising is that as the number of guns has increased in the United States over the last 30 years, the rate of gun homicides and gun accidents has decreased dramatically. Foster may not know this. Progressives are notoriously good at ignoring facts. As a scientist, he should know it. As a Progressive, it is “crimethink” as described in the novel, 1984. That fact contradicts his assertions, even about “gun homicides”.
That fact contradicts his assertion, even about only “gun homicides”.Anyone can find “experts” to show statistics that agree with their position. That is the foundational weakness of Progressivism. Choose your expert, and you get the policies you want.
Representative Foster does not think you are smart enough to rule yourself. He does not think you will recognize his use of statistics to lie, or he would use other methods.
Improved technological communications allow everyone to contrast competing expert opinions and construct their own. That technology is changing all the Progressive assumptions about their ability to “construct consent” and rule as technological elites.

[Samuel Adams]

Secession has become an expletive, only instead of being used when a fellow hits a thumb inadvertently, when building.....it's an expletive for states who are throwing a tantrum in response to the federal hammer.

Either way, all that is accomplished is the letting off of a little steam.

I look forward to the day I might be proven wrong.

[Lenno]

ZBlog: “You may not think you are at war with them, but they are at war with you.”Posted on April 9, 2018 | Leave a comment

The longer you stay stupid about it, the better.
Remember the old Mattis quote?

[Lenno]

[Lenno]

Cynthia Nixon promises to make New York 'a real sanctuary state' for undocumented migrants in swipe at Democratic rival Andrew Cuomo

• Former Sex and the City actress blasted her Democratic rival for holding up laws
• Several cities and counties in New York State have already taken up legislation
• Nixon accused Cuomo on stopping it from being adopted on a statewide level

By Rory Tingle For Dailymail.com
Published: 09:57 EDT, 7 April 2018 | Updated: 11:35 EDT, 7 April 2018

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz5CB5Fy6iH
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Open borders on both coasts as well as the southern and northern border...WHEEEE!

[Oscar Wilde]

Cynthia Nixon promises to make New York 'a real sanctuary state'

Just how does a "sanctuary" occur, develop, evolve ... happen?

Perhaps "wee" should create a sanctuary for ourselves ... where'd be a good place?

I know somebody established, in print anyway, a "redoubt" somewhere in the northwest but can one find sanctuary there?

We need sanctuary ... and we're the ones who gonna have to create it!

O.W.

[Lenno]

Cynthia Nixon is Associated With An Anti-Semitic Party, She Should Be Called Out For It

September 12, 2018
Daniel Greenfield





A flyer accusing socialist extremist Cynthia Nixon of an anti-Semitism has led to a furor and attacks on Governor Cuomo.
While Cuomo is an ethically challenged figure, there's nothing wrong with the flyer which rightly calls out Nixon's associations with the anti-Semitic and anti-Israel left. Notably, Nixon sought the backing of the DSA.
And the Democratic Socialists of America are backing actual anti-Semitic candidates.

“Like most American Jews, I was raised with the delusion that Israel was a safe haven for me,” Julia Salazar wrote on Mondoweiss, an anti-Semitic hate site, while denouncing the Jewish State.
Salazar’s rant had appeared on a racist site whose creator had complained that his publication had been banned from DailyKos because of “my repeated insistence on talking about the large Jewish presence in the American establishment and the importance of Jewish money in the political process” and one of whose editors had declared, "I do not consider myself an anti-Semite, but I can understand why some are."
In reality, Salazar had been baptized as a Catholic, her uncle was a Jesuit priest, and her brother made it clear that no one in the family was Jewish. The Jewish part of her past was as fake as the rest.

Cynthia Nixon endorsed Salazar and continues to back her. But it gets worse.

DSA-LA continues to back Maria Estrada for California State Assembly District 63 despite her praise for Farrakhan, accusations that Jews were exploiting the Holocaust, and attacking a Jewish Democrat for not keeping “your party, your religion and your people in check.”
"Anyone who believes they are one of ‘God’s chosen people’ automatically feels superior and justified in all they do," Estrada ranted.
Estrada’s racism was criticized by the Simon Wiesenthal Center, reported on in numerous Jewish publications, and yet the DSA and Bernie Sanders’ Our Revolution, refused to withdraw their support. When contacted about her hateful views, both the local and national DSA, as well as the local and national Our Revolution organizations, failed to condemn Estrada.
Estrada’s accusation that the Jews exploit the Holocaust was echoed by her fellow racist in New York. "These people exploit Holocaust for their hot takes," Salazar had tweeted.

Nixon has yet to withdraw her support for Salazar or condemn the DSA's backing for Estrada. Or the DSA's flirtation with overt racists.

Also at the DSA convention was a representative from Melenchon's France Insoumise. Melenchon’s blatant anti-Semitism, was so bad that it was even condemned by members of the DSA’s Jewish Caucus.
But instead of insisting that the DSA end its ties to an anti-Semitic movement, Lane Silberstein, a DSA and If Not Now member, weakly argued that, "Jewish socialists have had to contend with one of history’s most egregious eras of antisemitism— from which the left was not immune in promoting — and yet they continued to proudly identify as socialists… we will carry on that tradition and not shy away from working with the left.” The technical term for that is collaboration with anti-Semites.

Cynthia Nixon is associated with an anti-Semitic movement. She should be called out for it.