Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Politics

Secession Petitions Flood White House Website 1163

Posted by samzenpus
from the we're-leaving dept.
First time accepted submitter RNLockwood writes "Political.com reports that several petitions to secede from the Union have been created at the White House site, We The People, for many states; all since Obama's re-election. Texas and Louisiana lead the list with Texas needing only 7,000 more signatures to qualify for a White House response, probably less now as more Americans have become aware of the petitions. It would be interesting to see a comparison done of these petitions and the Post Election Racist Tweets Map."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Secession Petitions Flood White House Website

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:05PM (#41960609)

    ..you'd find these states well ranked.

    Secession is an economically unviable option. If you want copious analyses ask the Quebec'ers.

    We in the US seem to have a hard time admitting when we are wrong. Mitt was a dreadful choice for a conservative presidential candidate. Obama's winning the election was not a sign that the poor Texans are oppressed. They simply picked a moderate who had to pivot to the right of Rick Perry to win the primaries, and then back to the center to have a chance in the final election. I don't think anyone could have done that job any better than Mitt did, but even with 3 to 1 outspending of their opponents it wasn't enough. I sent my $100 to Buddy Roemer to try to get an honest man into the race, and honesty lost.

    So, please quit your whining and next time pick an actuall conservative. Pick someone with a tax plan that adds up, low spending, little war-lust, and who understands what a disaster the "personhood" amendment would be, and then you'll have a race.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:08PM (#41960639)

    Response:

    No.

  • by Bodhammer (559311) on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:10PM (#41960663)
    You mean Gary Johnson?
  • Now's our chance! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ChinggisK (1133009) on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:11PM (#41960673)
    Quick! Someone make a "Let Texas and Louisiana Secede" petition!
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:12PM (#41960693)

    What conservatives need is to make a decision: fiscally conservative or socially conservative. Pick one, then stop trying to "purify" the party to get rid of the 70% of Americans who aren't both then whining that they're losing because of welfare leeches.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:12PM (#41960705)

    Blow it out your ass. We survived Bush, you can survive Obama. Grow the fuck up.

  • by rsborg (111459) on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:14PM (#41960733) Homepage

    Can't we at least let them try it this time?

    Note: This is some random guy in a state requesting it for his entire state. I'd say the answer should be: ask your duly elected representatives, not me, the President.

  • Let them go. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bmo (77928) on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:15PM (#41960749)

    Being a resident of New England, I'm tired of paying for their highways and such while they accuse us here as being Un-American.

    For fucks sake. Leave already.

    What I found especially amusing was the tea-tard messages claiming people would high-tail it to Canada if Obama got re-elected. Yeah, the country next door with single-payer health insurance, decent social security, more gun regulation, etc.

    Go. Go to Canada.

    --
    BMO

  • by sexybomber (740588) <boccilino&gmail,com> on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:15PM (#41960753)

    29,025 and presumably climbing. I say, great. Good riddance.

  • by h4rr4r (612664) on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:15PM (#41960759)

    If you pay attention to what they have been doing recently they made that choice. They are firmly going with social conservatism and spending like a sailor on shore leave. Sadly they want to do that last part and cut taxes at the same time.

  • by mbkennel (97636) on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:18PM (#41960797)

    "Pick someone with a tax plan that adds up, low spending, little war-lust, and who understands what a disaster the "personhood" amendment would be, and then you'll have a race."

    Sorry, but Bill Clinton is not eligible to run.

  • by Bodhammer (559311) on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:20PM (#41960827)
    So succession = racism? Does the OP work for MSNBC and Chris "Tingles" Matthews?

    A fundamental disagreement with the government policies does not automatically equal racism but of course you are free to perpetuate that myth...
  • by X0563511 (793323) on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:20PM (#41960835) Homepage Journal

    I'd much prefer "Then quit bitching and pack up your shit. Mexico isn't very far away"

  • Fuck The South (Score:0, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:20PM (#41960841)

    Still as true as in 2004:
    http://www.fuckthesouth.com/

  • Race card (Score:3, Insightful)

    by onyxruby (118189) <{onyxruby} {at} {comcast.net}> on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:21PM (#41960847)

    Derp is derp, and insinuating that people who don't like Obama must be racist is a mindless of a cliche of derp as derp gets. Divisive language like that used by the story submitter is a perfect example of how /not/ to bring the country back together after a nasty presidential election.

  • by SimonTheSoundMan (1012395) on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:21PM (#41960851) Homepage

    Mitt was a dreadful choice for a conservative presidential candidate.

    Romney was a far right conservative presidential candidate, Obama is not "moderate" at all as he is a right wing conservative.

    What is bad is America had no left wing candidate at all.

    We're going how the rest of the world define political spectrum, not America.

  • by mbkennel (97636) on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:24PM (#41960883)

    | Iran has strong religious values, and gas at 50 cents a gallon and the most polluted capital city anywhere.

    That is what they wish for.

  • by HiThere (15173) <charleshixsn@ear ... t ['hli' in gap]> on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:26PM (#41960905)

    That *should* be the response, however, judging by past actions, if it gets close to the point where a response is promissed, the petition will quietly disappear.

    That's what's happened in other instances where he didn't want to respond.

  • by ChinggisK (1133009) on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:29PM (#41960961)
    Either that or the person chosen to write the response was ridiculous, i.e. director of the TSA responding to the "Abolish the TSA" petition...
  • by multicoregeneral (2618207) on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:34PM (#41961031) Homepage
    These "we the people" petitions are a joke. At best they'll get a response that says the whitehouse cannot respond for whatever reason they figure is vague enough not to be offensive to anyone at the time.
  • by Art Popp (29075) * on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:39PM (#41961083)

    Fair enough. It was an incomplete pivot. In the debates he went right-of-Perry on immigration but wasn't more radical than most of the stage.

    But, again, what can you do. You don't want to appear to be an Etch-a-Sketch, but you have to in a split-brained party if you want all their votes. Pleasing the corporations ruins the budgets valued by decent conservatives, pleasing the decent conservatives, irks the religeous zealots. The guy was asked to swim in air. I've no pity for the amount of deceit he employed in this process, but it looked like a pretty impossible job.

  • by MozeeToby (1163751) on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:40PM (#41961095)

    This election wasn't just about Obama vs Romney, I would argue that wasn't even the most important race taking place, especially given that anyone objective enough to look at actual polling data knew the conclusion before the first ballot was caste on the 6th. If I were a republican, I'd be more worried about the number of senate races they lost. I'd be more worried about the fact that they lost the popular vote if you add up all the house races (only maintaining a 40 seat lead in the house thanks to a metric shit-ton of gerrymandering in 2010). I'd be more worried that 60% of voters think that taxes should go up for the richest people and only 35% thought that taxes shouldn't go up for anyone. And that 65% of voters think there should be a path to legal residency for illegal immigrants.

    And if I were a social conservative, I'd be terrified that 60% of voters in this election think that abortion should be legal for all circumstances. And that more people think same sex marriage should be recognized than not (49% to 46%). Not to mention that Wisconsin (of all places) just elected the first openly gay senator.

    Things are changing the US. It wasn't just that Romney was unlikable, it wasn't just that he had to pander to the base to get elected. Over the past 8 years conservative, republican positions have become more and more untenable to the majority of voters.

  • by argStyopa (232550) on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:44PM (#41961155) Journal

    I think the idea of secession is an absurdity, and to suggest it immediately marks one whose political input is meaningless.

    Nevertheless, the summary's implication secessionist talk as racist is equally weaksauce.

    To suggest that only racists would react to an overweening Federal government that cheerfully violates any inconvenient statute without hesitation, one which has run roughshod over the clearly-stated limits to Federal power set forth in the US Constitution, and whose constituent elements have both ignored their actual duties (budget? Who bothers with a budget?) and colluded to deliberately circumvent the system of checks and balances set out by the founding fathers (War Powers Act? Who needs such a thing?) is suggesting really that white people are somehow the only one capable of recognizing the disastrous course our country has been on for at least 60 years, and that's fairly patronizing if not outright racist itself.

  • by medv4380 (1604309) on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:44PM (#41961163)
    When Clinton was Elected there was crying about Secession from Conservatives, like all of Texas. When Bush was elected there was crying about Secession from Liberals , like all of California. Just Get Over It, you Lost. Try again next time. Your Princess is In Another Castle.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:48PM (#41961209)

    Lincoln should have been impeached. Not for trying to save the Union, but for suspending habeas corpus and throwing his opposition into jail.

  • by Niris (1443675) on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:49PM (#41961239)
    He was my actual vote >.> He seemed the most reasonable out of all of the candidates. It's a shame the media and government don't care about options.
  • by Mr. McGibby (41471) on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:51PM (#41961263) Homepage Journal

    Third party candidates are a fantasy. Either fix the system so they have any chance of winning, or just stop spewing this nonsense.

  • Re:Let them go. (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:58PM (#41961347)

    Being a middle class worker, I'm tired of half my extra contract work money going to the federal government and being called a bigot for saying anything about it. You even using terms like "tea-tard".

    You hear the bipartsianship from the GOP? It just went away with comments like yours. No one will ever work with the DNC because their attitude is just like yours.

  • by metrometro (1092237) on Monday November 12, 2012 @07:01PM (#41961379)

    Seriously. I voted for the guy who said he's end the wars and raise taxes, because there's a deficit, yo. The guy who implemented the Heritage Foundation's plan for healthcare, which was based on the idea of individual responsibility paired with a fair and transparent dealing from the insurers. The guy who overthrew the Libyan government under force of arms with four American fatalities, and didn't do the same in Syria because he thought it was too risky. Oh, and he's on the right side on the inclusion of gays, women(!?), immigrants and host of other basic-human-freedom issues that used to be considered part of the conservative promise.

    We need a conservative party in this country, and I'm not sure the GOP is going to be it. I think the best thing you could do as a conservative in this country is start electing Greens and then plan to be a Democrat for the next 50 years.

  • by mark-t (151149) <markt@@@lynx...bc...ca> on Monday November 12, 2012 @07:30PM (#41961617) Journal
    The only reason that they don't have any chance of winning is because everybody thinks that they don't have any chance of winning, and so a vote for one of them is a wasted vote that could better go to a candidate that has a chance of winning that is the lesser of the two evils.
  • by darkmeridian (119044) <william@chuang.gmail@com> on Monday November 12, 2012 @07:52PM (#41961777) Homepage

    Let Texas secede, withdraw all the national defense instruments we have in the region, and let them hold off the violent Mexican gangs. They will soon remember the Alamo, and not in a good way.

  • by multimediavt (965608) on Monday November 12, 2012 @07:58PM (#41961825)
    I've said this every time the subject comes up. You wanna secede, go ahead. You lose currency, military, and everything else that comes with being part of the United States. Oh, you thought you'd get to use the dollar? Uh, no, that's a United States Federal Reserve Note. Fuck off! And, no way would I give them Texas. You want some states you get Mississippi and Alabama because your policies already fucked those states up so bad we don't want them anyway. We'll just build a nice four meter high fence around them for you and install the appropriate border crossings after we cut off any and all infrastructure running in and out of those states. Idiots think they can have their cake and eat it to. Ha! My ass!!!
  • by capedgirardeau (531367) on Monday November 12, 2012 @08:06PM (#41961893)

    The reason it smacks of racism is because we had 8 years of exactly what you are describing under a white President and everyone who is now complaining about it was perfectly happy with it when it was a white guy doing it.

    Funny how all those things are now a problem when they were not a problem at all, in fact you were unAmerican if you said they were a problem, during the Bush II administration.

  • by runeghost (2509522) on Monday November 12, 2012 @09:16PM (#41962537)

    I wish people would quit using the word "insolvent" in relation to the federal debt. The United States government can print as many dollars as it wants or needs. While there are significant downsides to the U.S. printing it's way out of debt, it can be done. Thus, the U.S. is by definition not insolvent. If the United States defaults on its debt, it's because the government (or the people running the government) choose to do so.

  • Re:Good Idea (Score:5, Insightful)

    by stretch0611 (603238) on Monday November 12, 2012 @10:05PM (#41962945) Journal

    Anyone with half a brain I know of didn't vote.
    I didn't vote, and none of my friends voted.

    Well if you had more than half a brain, you would have voted. It is your only power to prevent the things you do not like in politics.

    This two party system is only going to bring more welfare, poverty and despair and finally a dictatorship to control it all just like North Korea.

    While I do not see the dictatorship aspect, a two party system is one of our biggest problems... However, you did nothing to stop it, even an AC that replied to you earlier realizes that if a 3rd party gets 5% of the vote, they qualify for federal election funding in the next race. That is the first step to get rid of the two party system.

    Nobody is doing nothing about the banks robbing everything, billions go missing and nobody goes to jail.
    It is out of control, and it is all going to end very badly.

    Yet, in spite of this, you still sit home and do not vote. You do absolutely nothing to help yourself and everyone else. You let the corrupt incumbents stay in office instead of attempting to vote them out. All it takes is for our elected officials to actually fear for their job to get them to listen to the people; right now they only listen to the people who finance their campaigns... If they get voted out, or narrowly squeeze by, they will be more likely to listen to the people the next time.

    One thing that the Obama campaign proved this year, is that it is people turning out to vote that will get you elected, not getting more campaign contributions. (Of course, trying to get them to realize that themselves will be difficult at best base on the number of "give me more money" emails they sent out this year.)

    In short, by staying home, you are part of the problem. A smart person realizes that the right to vote is valuable and will exercise that right whenever he/she can.

  • by TheCarp (96830) <sjc&carpanet,net> on Monday November 12, 2012 @10:34PM (#41963253) Homepage

    Why do you assume that every action is done of a genuine belief that its going to work? There is often value to a stunt, even if just to make a point. If anything, I think they are the smart ones in this system.

    Its like I tell to some Obama supporters who can't stand Obama. They feel like voting for a 3rd party was wasting a vote, as if the consequences of an election end with who gets into office. Imagine the message sent to both parties if Stein, or Johnson handed Obama a loss.

    Elections are not about who wins or loses, those are secondary issues. Elections are about what issues politicians feel safe standing on, and what issues they feel they need to fall into line on. These petitions serve a similar purpose...its not about breaking off, its about getting people talking about it, and about making them answer it.

    Its definitely a silly tactic, but, I think there is plenty of room for that.

  • Re:Good Idea (Score:5, Insightful)

    by codepigeon (1202896) on Monday November 12, 2012 @10:42PM (#41963313)
    "Anyone with half a brain I know of didn't vote. I didn't vote"

    Then shut the fuck up.
  • Not gonna moderate (Score:4, Insightful)

    by BenEnglishAtHome (449670) on Tuesday November 13, 2012 @02:27AM (#41964665)

    ...even though I've got points because this comment is just too out-of-touch to let go without a response.

    The Texas secession will go nowhere, of course. However, you've missed a couple of things.

    First, the kinds of Texans who actually want to secede wouldn't bother with a wall on the border. They'd set up a 1000-yard-wide no-man's land, pepper it with automated machine gun towers and kill anything that moved. That would be a start on the whole "hold off the violent Mexican gangs" thing.

    Second, even more Texans than the sort mentioned in the previous paragraph legally carry concealed weapons and wouldn't hesitate to return fire. The brazen, large-scale Mexican gangs activities seen inside Mexico just wouldn't fly in Texas. There are too many ranchers with too many 7.62s and .50s, and too many LEOs and judges who would simply give them a pat on the back and some reward money for every cartel member they downed.

    Finally, the U.S. would never let Texas secede specifically *because* of national defense issues. Remember, the PANTEX plant is in Texas. Texans are the people who make nukes for the USA. A successfully seceeded Texas would instantly become a nuclear-bomb equipped nation. Now, delivery systems would be a problem but I'm sure they could figure out a way.

    God, these secession petitions are stupid but if you want to insult Texas, work a little harder, OK?

  • by squiggleslash (241428) on Tuesday November 13, 2012 @07:55AM (#41965887) Homepage Journal

    Staggeringly enough, we don't consider non-sentient land to be the basis of a democracy. Instead we count votes from people.

    If you're saying the election is rigged because it counts people in each state, rather than square feet of land, then well, I guess you're right, but you probably need a refresher course in civics.

  • by yog (19073) * on Tuesday November 13, 2012 @10:57AM (#41967359) Homepage Journal

    A couple of observations:

    Southerners are over-represented in the military (in fact, "red" counties all over the nation would tend to be over-represented), and there are a lot of military bases and installations around the South and Southwest. If the money-in versus money-out formula takes into account military spending, then this should be factored out. Military service is giving, not taking. Bases create jobs, but they are a component of national defense, not some sort of charity.

    Memo to the winners: be gracious in victory even if those who lose are not gracious in defeat. You're not 5-year-olds, are you?

    It ought to be acceptable to register dissatisfaction with the election results in this free country of ours. When Bush was designated the victor in 2000, many Democrats spent the next four years saying "the President Select" and "Bush stole the election" and all sorts of nasty things. Yet, when the NYT and Tribute did a recount in Florida in two different ways, they still found for Bush no matter how charitable they were to the ambiguous ballots. Bush won, yet a good chunk of the electorate refused to accept it. Of course, then 9/11 happened and the country had to pull together and put this behind us, at least for a short while.

    This is not a football game. It's a referendum on the future of our country. If 48% of the people were so dissatisfied with the incumbent's performance that they registered a protest vote against him, then the winning party should take heed and be prepared to compromise. It's not about winning one lousy election; it's about leading a huge country and making decisions that will affect the entire world. It can't be all-or-nothing, folks. That goes for both sides.

    Secession is scary. It may be laughable to some of you--listen to those dumbass hicks clinging to their guns and religion and yada yada yada. But the more you talk that way, the worse the situation will get, until one day we may actually be faced with millions of people who no longer accept or respect the authority of the elected national government. We don't want it to get to that point. The way to avoid this is to work with the opposition and hammer out compromises. The Democrats failed to compromise from 2008-2010, feeling they didn't need to, and in 2010 they reaped the results.

    The important thing isn't that Romney lost, but that he came that close to winning. He took 24 states, in some cases by a 2-to-1 margin. Admittedly, he was perceived as a relatively weak and flawed candidate, personally disliked by large swaths of the electorate (fairly or unfairly). Just imagine if he hadn't uttered the 47% remark; that one gaffe might have cost him 100,000 votes in a state like Ohio where Obama won literally by 104,000. The point is, Obama does not have a strong mandate and would do well to incorporate some of the moderate and conservative fiscal ideas into his policies going forward.

  • by s4m7 (519684) on Tuesday November 13, 2012 @11:48AM (#41968073) Homepage

    Imagine the message sent to both parties if Stein, or Johnson handed Obama a loss.

    You mean like when Nader handed Gore a loss in 2000?

    The lesson the Republicans learned was "we have a mandate" and proceeded to pursue a decade of self-destructive jingoistic policy they still haven't recovered from. The lesson the Democrats learned was "don't get Nadered again."

  • by Yunzil (181064) on Tuesday November 13, 2012 @01:49PM (#41970087) Homepage

    It ought to be acceptable to register dissatisfaction with the election results in this free country of ours.

    There's a difference between registering your dissatisfaction and being a whiny childish douchebag. These secessionists fall into the latter category.

    The way to avoid this is to work with the opposition and hammer out compromises. The Democrats failed to compromise from 2008-2010, feeling they didn't need to, and in 2010 they reaped the results.

    It's laughable that you think it's the Democrats that need to compromise.

    The point is, Obama does not have a strong mandate and would do well to incorporate some of the moderate and conservative fiscal ideas into his policies going forward.

    I guarantee you that if Romney had won by the same electoral margin, we'd be hearing nothing but "mandate" being screamed from the right.

(1) Never draw what you can copy. (2) Never copy what you can trace. (3) Never trace what you can cut out and paste down.

Working...