Ace makes the case for a velvet divorce of the United States along left-right lines. The progs can create their statist utopia, where in return for complete loyalty to the party, the party will promise you welfare, social justice, and equality. They can use the power of the State to punish every heteronormative microaggression trigger. The right can create a Constitutional Republic with freedom, debate, and opportunity. Here’s a sample, read the whole thing.
It is time to put acrimony about the past aside and being talking happily — about a future that doesn't intimately involve the other.
— TheClassyLife (@AceofSpadesHQ) April 26, 2015
Of course, we would have to overcome the insatiable craving of the Left to have power over others, first.
The problem is that the State borders don’t reflect the ideological frontiers. Should a state’s radical Urban-Left condemn it’s Constitutionalist rural residents to perpetual social servitude to the Will of the Masses simply based solely on demographic imbalances and geography? To avoid bloodshed, you need to burrow-down much more fractally; which you create an unstable Balkanization. Just look at the intersperced cantons of Flems and Walloons that created a Belgium that well-near ungovernable — yet exquisitely polite about it.
I’ve seen schemes that break up the states by equal population. It would have the wonderful effect of cordoning off the Democrat metropolises and their attendant suburbs into their own states.
Essentially, only a few full regions went Democrat in the last election- The West Coast, the Southern Border, the Miami Metro Area, and New England. Maybe create two countries for liberals, one on each coast and say, “Get there by such and such date or face the consequences?” Kind of like what India did with Pakistan and Bangladesh.
Please make NYC a separate state
Speaking of NYC, you of course heard the idea of allowing non-citizens to vote there? I hope that governors everywhere sue, because it WOULD have national ramifications.
Since NYC accounts for over 40% of the population of the state, how hard would it be for them to force the entire state to allow non-citizens to vote, and from there, affect national elections?
And, yes, this includes voting for President. See, the Constitution does not say word one about a popular vote for President. It leaves it up to the state legislatures. And if the state of New York allows non-citizens to vote… That little difference could swing the entire election, especially when a number of states have already surrendered their state sovereigncy by stipulating that their electoral votes go to the candidate that wins the plurality of the popular vote nationally.
State should oppose it now, on Constitutional grounds.
NYC elected a communist for a mayor, 17 percent, that he called a landslide.
Now look at NYC.
Maybe we can apply the Biden solution for Iraq to create three separate nations. Divide the U.S. into three regions, one for the left, one for centrists, and the third for the right. If there is any truth in the saying that birds of a feather flock together, it shouldn’t be too difficult to get people to move.
It sounds like such a simple solution. “When in the Course of human events,” The Declaration of Independence continues, it becomes necessary for one people to disolve the political bands . . .to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitles them.” The left is a fractious minority and we have become victims of their tyranny. It’s time for us to nominate a leader who will say enough is enough. Hillary might be yesterday, but like Marco, I don’t want yesterday. I want the day before yesterday. It is time to take back the country; annul Obama’s Executive Orders, secure our southern and northern borders, throw PC in the garbage along with Bill Mahr, Sean Penn, et. al. vote out or impeach appointed activists judges,and for parents to take back their authority from their local schools, and rid them of leftist indoctrination. The Supreme Court needs to reaffirm the ions will have to do so at their own expense.1896 decision that the United States is a Christian nation. Minority religions which have special requirements for its adherents will need to apply for permission to install (foot baths) in public institutions. The Washington National Cathedral of St. Peter and St. Paul, sustained damage from the earthquake a few years back. Repairs are being made by donations, particularly from Friends of the Cathedral. If they had demanded funds from the government, the left and its legal voice ACLU would have had a hissy fit; separation fo church and state.
These liberal utopias will have to buy their food and their energy from us dome fly over country red stater, so that’s just fine with me.
We have 50 states with 50 constitutions so there is no need to bust up the country. Instead we need to defang the bloated, over reaching, over spending, over taxing, power hungry federal government and return power to the states.
“…Instead we need to defang the bloated, over reaching, over spending, over taxing, power hungry
federalstate governments and return power to thestatesPeople.”My I humbly suggest that you aim even lower. Most states are as corrupt, officious, power-mad and bureaucratic as our Federal government. Some are even worse in their pettiness and narrow-mindedness…
We’re not ceding the republic to a minority of sociopathic 2-3%ers, whether they identify as progressives or libertarians. No secession, no martial law…..98% of those that adhere to the COTUS and the Bill of Rights would ignore any such imposition by a 2-3%er national socialist/communist.
I respectfully suggest that your COTUS 98%-figure is way to-high.
Romney was right in his assessment that 49% would vote for whoever promised them the most free stuff.
CA has more bogus electoral votes due to illegals being counted during the census. Refugees are being dumped in red areas because the left knows low IQ savages will always vote for more free stuff.
@Steve, makes you wonder just how powerful the southern states were before the civil war, when slaves, who could not vote, counted as 3/5th of a person for representation.
They claim it devalued slaves as people. They look at it wrong. The fact that they could not vote was what devalued them. The fact that their state could still count them to get representation, however…
I’ve always been intrigued by that “3/5ths” and how it demonstrates in real-terms the Founders ambivalence. They were not free-men, but they still counted them. And the free blacks of the Southern (and Northern States) counted the same as the mostly British/German ex-Colonials.
As I remember, all of the thirteen Colonies forbid non-Black enslavement by the Revolution, but did some still have legal Indenturement? In many Colonies earlier, indentured persons were also considered “not-free” legally, but were not termed “chattel” and still retain some Rights….as did slaves at that time. It was in the decades leading-up to the Civil War and the brutality of producing King Cotton that (Black) slave=chattel gets it’s stranglehold.
Also remember that most of the British/German male population of the North and the South didn’t have the vote either. They had Representation, but without the consent of the Represented.
Don’t want to intrude here on a deep convo about slavery that ended over 150 years ago, but please do discuss woman suffrage, long after slavey ended. Do you see women rioting and looting for “civil rights”. Black men treated women like property long after slavery.