1,311 responses to “Ron Paul: Secession Is an American Principle”

  1. Ron Denenea

    How so?

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. Markunator

    Really? Because it seems like Texas is doing worse than most other states in more than one way. And I don't live in any state, by the way. I'm Swedish. I'm just interested in American politics.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. ingeniosodonquijote

    First of all, I don't live in Texas and never have. I'm commenting on the situation as an uninvolved party.

    Second, what state do you live in? Because if you don't live in Texas, there is literally a 97% chance that your state's economy is doing worse than Texas. In other words, America would be unequivocally worse off without Texas. The numbers don't lie.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. Markunator

    And then there's the kind of people who just don't agree with him.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. Markunator

    After what the Texan government said earlier this year (the stuff about essentially being "against free thinking"), the rest America would probably be better off without you.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  6. Markunator

    LOL, there is no "creator"!

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. Markunator

    Secession is not American if you're seceding FROM AMERICA, Dr. Paul.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  8. KayBeeEee1983

    That's exactly what secession is.
    "An inference from the doctrine that a single state has a right to secede at will from the rest, is that the rest would have a right to secede from it; in other words, to turn it, against its will, out of its union with them."
    -- James Madison

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  9. michaelrockzx420

    that is not what secession is!

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  10. skaterhkk

    We are becoming an authoritarian police state controlled by the centralized megabanks, that's why there is talk of secession.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  11. skaterhkk

    Jeez man,Obama is a part of the global/corporate takeover and the push for world government. He hasdeclared to congress that he gets his orders from the UN, and that congress has no authority over wars or the purse. And how has he changed the way everyone pictures things?? His stance on many important issues is the same as Mitt Romney. He has no intention of reigning in the fed res, approves drone use and sanctions on iran, the NDAA which allows indef detintion of americans withou trial.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  12. KayBeeEee1983

    Can't use what to explain what is happening on Capitol Hill? Social media, or secession?

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  13. KrazyKatPosse

    I certainly insult, but I back up my anger with facts.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  14. KrazyKatPosse

    I certainly insult, but I back up my anger with facts.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  15. RightwingRob

    I do believe that talk of secession is immature. If the people can't effect change in government then they aren't trying hard enough. Look at Obama. He changed the way everyone perceives things by using social media. Why can't people use it to explain what is happening on Capitol Hill? What do you think?

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  16. RightwingRob

    I apologize. You jumped in an I was confused about whom I was talking to. Your statement is still very generalized. I don't know what that has to do with secession but more power to you.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  17. RightwingRob

    I don't believe so. He merely stated that the US gov't no more owns the States any more than the UK owned the US or the colonies owned the land that the American Natives lived on. We do not need a right to exist as a state. Each state has it's own charter that is not owing to the government to which the States created in the first place. The treaty by the UK stated that it would honor our right to exist. The rest just stated that they still declared Canada as their territory and maritime rights.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  18. KayBeeEee1983

    Occhi said that under lleko1's premise the US is still owned by the UK. That's a bad analogy because the UK legally transferred territorial rights to the US.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  19. KayBeeEee1983

    I didn't say the land belongs to the government. The government can force you to sell your land to them.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  20. RightwingRob

    Hahaha! Occhi never said it did. She was drawing an analogy to your statement about the gov't owning the states and anyone seceding would be stealing. But say I go along with your statement to him and so the UK doesn't own the US. Your proof is just an acknowledgement by the UK as to our right to exist as a sovereign nation. It doesn't say anything about ownership so why state it?

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  21. RightwingRob

    I love the way you twist the idea of eminent domain. The 5th Amendment was written to PROTECT the rights of individual citizens not to declare ownership of private property at will. Clearly your Liberal leanings allow you to misinterpret the Constitution as you see fit. You have also indicated in your statement that private property does NOT belong to the gov't since they are required to purchase it from you at fair market price and show a just need to do so. You have contradicted yourself.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  22. KayBeeEee1983

    Yes, it's impossible for the federal government to kick states out of the Union.
    States aren't bound to the Union. If every state consents to secession, then states can leave.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  23. eschompthis

    You're splitting hairs. Are you saying its impossible? What you're referring to is not having constitutional powers outside its jurisdiction. So if the people want out, as a state representative, it is their duty to represent the will of their people and leave. This notion that they are bind to the union unless they pick up arms, even if feds wanted the secession makes no sense.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  24. KayBeeEee1983

    Q: if they have the power to create and allow 37 more than the first 13 states, explain to me how they couldn't?
    A: the federal government only has the powers that the Constitution gives it. Art 4, Sec 3 states: "New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union". Therefore, Congress has the power to admit new states into the Union. The Constitution doesn't give Congress the power to expel states from the Union. Therefore, Congress doesn't have the power to expel states from the Union.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  25. KayBeeEee1983

    Of course the federal government was meant to have power over us. It wasn't meant to have ABSOLUTE power over us
    Secession is a tool for strong states to bully weaker states into doing what they want them to do. Unilateral secession is totally illegitimate
    "An inference from the doctrine that a single state has a right to secede at will from the rest, is that the rest would have a right to secede from it; in other words, to turn it, against its will, out of its union with them."
    -- James Madison

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  26. eschompthis

    You're are not answering the question. How dose congress have the constitutional powers to allow states into the union, but dose not have the right to end them?

    "To shew the absurdity — Congress have the right to admit new states. When territories they are subject to the laws of the Union. The day after admission, they have the right to secede and dissolve it."
    Andrew Jackson to Martin Van Buren, 25 December 1832
    Bassett, Life of Jackson, II: 579-580

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  27. KayBeeEee1983

    The federal government can take your land any time it wants as long as it pays you for the land.
    5th Amendment of the US Constitution:
    "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  28. KayBeeEee1983

    The UK doesn't own the US.
    Treaty of Paris, Article 1:
    "His Brittanic Majesty acknowledges the said United States.....to be free sovereign and Independent States; that he treats with them as such, and for himself his Heirs & Successors, relinquishes all claims to the Government, Propriety, and Territorial Rights of the same and every Part thereof"

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  29. KayBeeEee1983

    Because the federal government only has the powers that the Constitution gives it. The Constitution doesn't give Congress, or any branch of the federal government, the power to kick states out of the Union.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  30. eschompthis

    Of course they have the right to end union, if they have the power to create and allow 37 more than the first 13 states, explain to me how they couldn't?

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  31. deathrattle420

    .I know what Bush did, but what does that have to do with Ron Paul? Paul wouldn't drag us into those wars. Also, Allowing Lehman to fail didn't cause the recession, on the contrary it boosted confidence in the market over the following weeks. All of those banks dug themselves into a hole and didn't decide to act until it was too late. The housing bubble they created is what caused the recession. You seem to have the idea that I support Neo-Conservatives (Bush etc.). I cannot stand them.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  32. deathrattle420

    .I know what Bush did, but what does that have to do with Ron Paul? Paul wouldn't drag us into those wars. Also, Allowing Lehman to fail didn't cause the recession, on the contrary it boosted confidence in the market over the following weeks. All of those banks dug themselves into a hole and didn't decide to act until it was too late. The housing bubble they created is what caused the recession. You seem to have the idea that I support Neo-Conservatives (Bush etc.). I cannot stand them.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  33. OcchiAzzurriDue

    Seriously? 'I was talking about a modern situation and legal ownership of the land.' You think the US gov't owns each state???? Well, you could always skip google and quote the Constitution where it states that by joining the Union all states relinquish property rights. Or maybe they had to Purchase it from the gov't. LOL

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  34. RightwingRob

    When you buy the land that your house is on you pay taxes to the state. Capital Hill has nothing to do with it. I then OWN it. The government will only own the states when it overrides parts of the Constitution much like Obama does with Executive Orders.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  35. RightwingRob

    Again I tell you that you are wrong. We are not a government divided into states. We are a Union of states that form a government. The government was never meant to have power over us. The threat of secession is a tool to minimize the governments power. It is your belief that in the government resides all power but you are wrong. Our Constitution is what gives us existence and limits government power. It is a shame that you think we owe anything to the gov't as our reason for being states.

    Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

1 31 32 33 34 35 38

Leave a Reply