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This discussion has been archived.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 @05:05PM (#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 h4rr4r (612664) on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:10PM (#41960657)

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

      • by rsborg (111459) on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:14PM (#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.

      • by Grayhand (2610049) on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:53PM (#41961291)

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

        I agree, let's call their bluff and say okay you're out of the union. They're mostly the poorest states that use the most welfare and medicaid and medicare per capita. They also push the hardest for declaring war. If we let them go we might actually balance the budget finally. Give all the right wing conservatives a year to relocate to the red state of their choice then close the borders. About the time they realize how bad off they are it'll be too late and the rest of us can finally move forward without the half of Congress that always stonewalls efforts to fix the mess. It's a win win because they get to live in a world of fear and hate and teach their kids about Jesus riding dinosaurs while the rest of us get the economy back on track and fix the pollution problem and finally get energy independent.

        • Care to back that up? [taxfoundation.org] I only mention this because most people seem to be unaware of which states are net receivers and which states are net payers of Federal tax revenues. California and Texas, for example, are net payers, thus it could be argued that if they seceded they would see an increase of capital.
          • by mdenham (747985) on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:32PM (#41961629)

            Hence my petition [whitehouse.gov]. Get rid of (some of) the net receivers, gain some much-needed capital to help pay down the national debt in exchange, and as a side effect we have a smaller government to boot.

            (For what it's worth, I don't expect to get more than a couple hundred signatures, tops.)

          • 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.

            • Not gonna moderate (Score:4, Insightful)

              by BenEnglishAtHome (449670) on Tuesday November 13, 2012 @01:27AM (#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 artor3 (1344997) on Monday November 12, 2012 @09:07PM (#41962973)

            You just backed it up for him. According to the site that you yourself linked there is only one "red" state that pays more in taxes than it gets in federal spending: Texas.

            Here's a quick summary, from your own link, of which states support the nation, sorted by the amount they give in excess of the amount they receive:

            California: $47B
            New Jersey: $32B
            New York: $24B
            Illinois: $19B
            Connecticut: $10B
            Texas: $10B
            Minnesota: $9B
            Massachusetts: $8B
            Nevada: $6B
            Colorado: $5B
            Michigan: $3B
            Washington: $3B
            Wisconsin $3B
            New Hampshire: $2B
            Delaware: $1.5B
            Oregon: $1B
            Florida: $0.5B

            That list includes big states, small states, densely populated states, sparse states, coastal states, landlocked states, and so on. The only common thread is that they're all liberal, except Texas. And if we're being honest, Texas only makes the list because of the big liberal cities like Houston that drive their economy.

            The fact is that the red states that bitch the most about taxes are also the ones who benefit the most from them. Not unlike their fervently anti-gay congressmen who get caught soliciting sex in the men's room.

        • by reboot246 (623534) on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:31PM (#41961619) Homepage
          Along with Texas and Louisiana, the other petitioners interested in secession are in Kentucky, Oregon, Montana, North Dakota, Mississippi, North Carolina, Florida, Georgia, New York, New Jersey, Colorado, Arkansas, South Carolina, and Missouri.

          Yep, all those are the poorest states and redder than a ripe tomato.
        • by multimediavt (965608) on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:58PM (#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 Bodhammer (559311) on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:10PM (#41960663)
      You mean Gary Johnson?
    • by Hatta (162192) on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:14PM (#41960739) Journal

      They did pick an actual conservative. Obama. The guy is to the right on Nixon and Reagan on many issues.

      • by lysdexia (897) on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:34PM (#41961027) Homepage
        Hell yes. I grew up with older relatives who equated Richard Nixon with Atilla the Hun. The stuff that got him impeached would barely be reported on mainstream news these days. And we almost had Romney/Obama care back in the 70's. Do a google search for Nixon Permenente and lose your mind.
      • by metrometro (1092237) on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:01PM (#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 mbkennel (97636) on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:18PM (#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 Arancaytar (966377) <arancaytar.ilyaran@gmail.com> on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:21PM (#41960845) Homepage

      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

      I'm aware I don't watch the same news as most Republicans, but I got the reverse impression. Before he won the primaries he actually did look more moderate than Rick Santorum and Rick Perry. After winning the primaries he picked Ryan, got recorded with the "47%" remark, spoke out more strongly against gay marriage and Planned Parenthood.

      Was honestly wondering why he seemed to feel the need to appease the far right instead of the center after already winning the primaries. My only guess was that he feared the far right might get too disgusted with the election to vote if he came off as moderate.

      • by h4rr4r (612664) on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:29PM (#41960953)

        I don't understand it either. The Republicans have the hick and religious nutter vote locked up, why court them at all?

        Playing towards the middle could win an election, but instead they take good middle of the road candidates like McCain and Romney and saddle them with a fringe nutcase VP. Then somehow convince them that it is in their own best interest to act like a far right winger instead of just acting like themselves. Not only does it turn these candidates into liars/flip-floppers but it dirves away votes.

        • by SuricouRaven (1897204) on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:05PM (#41961409)
          Because the rick-and-nutter vote may be tied up at the election, but they seriously matter in the primaries. A republican candidate needs to have some degree of hick-and-nutter appeal, or they'll never get to be the candidate. The party leadership also knows that the social conservatives are very powerful for local organisation and get-out-the-vote efforts, so it's not enough to just have them voting to keep the democrats out. The trick for the republicans is to find a way to whip the social conservatives up into a frenzy of support without also alienating the moderates.
        • by dcollins (135727) on Monday November 12, 2012 @07:45PM (#41962239) Homepage

          "The Republicans have the hick and religious nutter vote locked up, why court them at all?"

          Actually, no. Among the bitch-slaps the GOP took this cycle was the fact that, against all expectations, 6 million fewer white people voted than in 2008 (and of course, their population is actually larger) -- http://news.yahoo.com/karl-rove-why-romney-lost-obama-suppressing-vote-215625694.html [yahoo.com]

          Meanwhile, increasing voter participation occurred for Blacks and Hispanics. Young people (18-29) cast more votes than old people (65+) for possibly the first time ever -- and they vastly prefer Dems positions on social issues (immigration, health care, women's rights, gay marriage, etc.), breaking 60% for Obama even when most pundits thought they were disenchanted. This demographic trend is only expected to increase -- http://news.yahoo.com/gop-faces-steep-climb-young-voters-080006202--politics.html [yahoo.com]

          Arguably, the GOP is between a rock and a hard place; their primary seemingly cannot nominate a person acceptable to the electorate at large. This might even be seen to be the case for the last 20 years if the vote in 2000 had been counted accurately.

      • by Art Popp (29075) * on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:39PM (#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 SimonTheSoundMan (1012395) on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:21PM (#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 MozeeToby (1163751) on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:40PM (#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 Anonymous Coward on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:45PM (#41961175)

      Secession would probably be a bad choice for Texas or any other state.

      Actually, I often wonder whether the US should not look into expansion as a way to boost economic growth in the next 2 or 3 decades. Europe is a mess right now but countries like Germany reaped tremendous economic benefits from the establishment of the European Union. Even though the US is in bad shape right now, there is probably still a lot of countries in latin america that would love the opportunity to join the US. The problem is that in the past the US has only offered trade agreements like NAFTA.

      I understand that the idea of expanding the US into Spanish speaking Latin America may seem like just more trouble. Think about it twice though. Just to the south of us we have Mexico. Probably most Mexicans (particularly in the North) would love to join the US. Mexico has a lot of oil and farmland. Their country is a mess...they would benefit from us coming in and putting the place in order and our economy would benefit of all the opportunities that expansion of our country would provide. Panama is another one further south that should probably be anexed to the US. Their economy has actually been thriving recently. Let's expand the USA rather than breaking it apart.

    • by stillpixel (1575443) on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:02PM (#41961383) Homepage Journal
      Dear Red States:

      We're ticked off at the way you've treated California and we've decided we're leaving.

      We intend to form our own country and we're taking the other Blue States with us.

      In case you aren't aware that includes Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois and all the Northeast.

      We believe this split will be beneficial to the nation and especially to the people of the new country of New California.

      To sum up briefly:

      You get Texas, Oklahoma and all the slave states.

      We get stem cell research and the best beaches.

      We get Elliot Spitzer. You get Ken Lay.

      We get the Statue of Liberty. You get OpryLand.

      We get Intel and Microsoft. You get WorldCom.

      We get Harvard. You get Ole' Miss.

      We get 85 percent of America's venture capital and entrepreneurs. You get Alabama.

      We get two-thirds of the tax revenue. You get to make the red states pay their fair share.

      Since our aggregate divorce rate is 22 percent lower than the Christian Coalition's we get a bunch of happy families. You get a bunch of single moms.

      Please be aware that Nuevo California will be pro choice and anti war and we're going to want all our citizens back from Iraq at once. If you need people to fight ask your evangelicals. They have kids they're apparently willing to send to their deaths for no purpose and they don't care if you don't show pictures of their children's caskets coming home.

      We wish you success in Iraq and hope that the WMDs turn up but we're not willing to spend our resources in Bush's Quagmire.

      With the Blue States in hand we will have firm control of 80% of the country's fresh water, more than 90% of the pineapple and lettuce, 92% of the nation's fresh fruit, 95% of America's quality wines (you can serve French wines at state dinners) 90% of all cheese, 90 percent of the high tech industry, most of the US low sulfur coal, all living redwoods, sequoias and condors, all the Ivy and Seven

      Sister schools plus Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Cal Tech and MIT.

      With the Red States you will have to cope with 88% of all obese Americans and their projected health care costs, 92% of all US mosquitoes, nearly 100% of the tornadoes, 90% of the hurricanes, 99% of all Southern Baptists, virtually 100% of all televangelists, Rush

      Limbaugh, Bob Jones University, Clemson and the University of Georgia.

      We get Hollywood and Yosemite, thank you.

      38% of those in the Red states believe Jonah was actually swallowed by a whale, 62% believe life is sacred unless we're discussing the death penalty or gun laws, 44% say that evolution is only a theory, 53% that Saddam was involved in 9/11 and 61% of you crazy bastards believe you are people with higher morals then we lefties.

      We're taking the good pot too. You can have that dirt weed they grow in Mexico.



      from: http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/jokes/bljokedearredstates.htm [about.com]
      • by Areyoukiddingme (1289470) on Monday November 12, 2012 @07:06PM (#41961909)

        Wait wait. I'm from Missouri. We entered the union as a slave state, but we never seceded (except the parts that tried to) and we fought on both sides of the Civil War. Our senators are one each, D and R, and we used to vote for Democratic presidents until just recently. So are we a slave state or a free state? I don't wanna get stuck with the crazies. I LIKE lettuce.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:08PM (#41960639)

    Response:

    No.

  • by Arancaytar (966377) <arancaytar.ilyaran@gmail.com> on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:09PM (#41960651) Homepage

    I'm conflicted whether Obama's response should be:

    Yeah yeah, don't let the door hit you.

    or

    Why don't you try and see how that works out for you.

  • by RelaxedTension (914174) on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:10PM (#41960667)
    No
  • Now's our chance! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ChinggisK (1133009) on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:11PM (#41960673)
    Quick! Someone make a "Let Texas and Louisiana Secede" petition!
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:12PM (#41960705)

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

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

    by bmo (77928) on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:15PM (#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 @05:15PM (#41960753)

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

  • by inhuman_4 (1294516) on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:17PM (#41960783)

    I'm not American, but it seems to me that there is a growing geographical dichotomy between the left leaning states and the right leaning states. Some of the old confederate states esp. Texas seem to be moving more and more to the right as the coastal states seem to be moving more to the left.

    The left states seem to be moving closer to the Europe and the rest of the world in terms of politics. That is being less religious, pro-choice, pro-gay, anti-war, pro-environment, etc. While the right leaning states seem to be rallying around the Church.

    While I realize it is not a possibility anytime soon, but in 100 years could we see the return of the Confederate States of America?

  • Wrong Branch (Score:4, Interesting)

    by danheskett (178529) <danheskettNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:19PM (#41960811)

    They are asking the wrong branch. The Executive can't change the union. That's a matter for Congress.

    Or they can try to re-fight the Civil War. Something tells me the modern rebels would not appreciate a Predator drone armed with a small missile up in their business.

  • by Bodhammer (559311) on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:20PM (#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...
  • Race card (Score:3, Insightful)

    by onyxruby (118189) <onyxruby&comcast,net> on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:21PM (#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.

  • A trade? (Score:5, Funny)

    by SmaryJerry (2759091) on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:26PM (#41960907)
    Remove Texas and bring in Puerta Rico so we don't have to change the flags.
  • by oic0 (1864384) on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:28PM (#41960939)
    Texas could maybe pull it off, Louisiana no... The only industry we have here is the Prison industry and the gov here is corrupt top to bottom. Those that aren't in prison are on food stamps. Its an all around crappy state... Every day I wake up I ask my self WTF am I doing here? "Louisiana's incarceration rate is nearly five times Iran's, 13 times China's and 20 times Germany's.... A majority of Louisiana inmates are housed in for-profit facilities, which must be supplied with a constant influx of human beings"
  • by hessian (467078) on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:28PM (#41960951) Homepage Journal

    Whichever side you agree with, you think the other 50% of the country are wrong.

    They're not going to change their views.

    We have no way to go forward. Bipartisanship is a joke; liberals like methodology, conservatives like results. There is no compatibility.

    Further, the liberal side is mostly women, minorities, homosexuals/transgenders and college students. The conservative side is mostly white men.

    It's time to either beat down one side, or divide up the country so we all get what we want.

    1861's (and 1776's) solution was states' rights.

    Wonder what we'll pick, and how bad the ensuing war will be.

  • by argStyopa (232550) on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:44PM (#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 @05:44PM (#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 mseeger (40923) on Monday November 12, 2012 @05:45PM (#41961171)

    Reasonably capable general is on the market :-)

  • by NinjaTekNeeks (817385) on Monday November 12, 2012 @06:09PM (#41961447)
    (Source : Comments section of - http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/267413-texas-secession-petition-gains-enough-signatures-for-white-house-response [thehill.com]) Don't know the origin of this, but I liked it. "Dear Red States We're ticked off at your Neanderthal attitudes and politics and we've decided we're leaving. We in California intend to form our own country and we're taking the other Blue States with us. In case you aren't aware that includes New York, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois and the rest of the Northeast. We believe this split will be beneficial to the nation and especially to the people of the new country of The Enlightened States of America (E.S.A). To sum up briefly: You get Texas , Oklahoma and all the slave states.We get stem cell research and the best beaches.We get Andrew Cuomo and Elizabeth Warren. You get Bobby Jindal and Todd Akin.We get the Statue of Liberty. You get OpryLand.We get Intel and Microsoft. You get WorldCom.We get Harvard. You get those ignorant fools at Ole' Miss.We get 85 percent of America 's venture capital and entrepreneurs. You get Alabama .We get two-thirds of the tax revenue. You get to make the red states pay their fair share. Since our aggregate divorce rate is 22 percent lower than the Christian Coalition's, we get a bunch of happy families. You get a bunchof single moms.With the Blue States in hand we will have firm control of 80% of the country's fresh water, more than 90% of the pineapple and lettuce, 92%of the nation's fresh fruit, 95% of America's quality wines (you can serve French wines at state dinners) 90% of all cheese, 90 percent of the high tech industry, most of the US low sulfur coal, all livingredwoods, sequoias and condors, all the Ivy and Seven Sister schools plus Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Cal Tech and MIT.With the Red States you will have to cope with 88% of all obese Americans and their projected health care costs, 92% of all US mosquitoes, nearly 100% of the tornadoes, 90% of the hurricanes, 99%of all Southern Baptists, virtually 100% of all televangelists, RushLimbaugh, Bob Jones University, Clemson and the University of Georgia.We get Hollywood and Yosemite, thank you.38% of those in the Red states believe Jonah was actually swallowed by a whale, 62% believe life is sacred unless we're discussing the deathpenalty or gun laws, 44% say that evolution is only a theory, 53% that Saddam was involved in 9/11 and 61% of you crazy bastards believe you are people with higher morals then we lefties.We're taking the good weed too. You can have that crap they grow in Mexico.Sincerely,A Citizen of the Enlighten

Blessed be those who initiate lively discussions with the hopelessly mute, for they shall be known as Dentists.

Working...