Is Medina finished?

[Deldem]

I hope both Medina and Perry lose.  Secessionists deserve no place in our government.

Ah, I presume you would have been a British loyalist back in 1776.

Those damn secessionists like Jefferson and Washington deserved to lose.

My God, you are a moron.

I know I've won for sure when my opponents resort to childish name-calling.

Sweetie, the revolution happened because of lack of representation, not because of taxes. The current collective teabagger hissyfit has nothing on them.

Ah, resorting to condescension and non sequuntur now.

Checkmate.

I don't think you can claim victory when you have dramatically misrepresented the American Revolution for your own purposes.

First off, the American Revolution was indeed fought primarily over "No taxation without representation," (basically, if we're taxed we should have some say in our decision making process) though there were certainly other causes. This was not secession, I would argue, since colonies were not legally deemed equal to the people living in the British Isles, and therefore the government was illegitimate within the colonies, since they had no say whatsoever in many of the decisions of how to run the colonies.

Now, let's look at the Civil War, when true secession actually took place. This was fought so that Southerners could whip and own other human beings, and so the wealthy plantation owners could make more money. They also argued for the ability to nullify federal laws, despite the Constitution clearly giving Congress the right to make laws for our entire nation.

Now, for the Tea Party movement. The goal of this movement driven by upper middle class and the wealthy is to lower their taxes, since they think the government sucks. They occasionally advocate secession to meet this end. Basically, they spout off this oddly Randian ideology that is very similar to laissez-faire capitalism, and don't really care about the less well off. They merely care about their bottom line, and will go to great lengths to reduce what is probably one of the lowest tax rates for the wealthy since the dawn of the 20th Century.

Tell me, which of the first two things is the Tea Party movement actually like?

The correct answer would be the Civil War, which came about largely because the wealthy members of Southern society thought that paying people would hurt their bottom line. The Civil War, in which we also determined that nullification and secession were not legal under our Constitution. It's funny, considering that the Tea Party professes to want to go back to the Constitution, when they clearly do not accept the legal interpretation of it by the highest court in the land, which was clearly established by the said Constitution.

So, Libertas, if you are going to tell me that the Tea Party movement is anything like the American Revolution, please tell me how you are within American borders, yet do not have any sort of representation to the United States government. Please, enlighten me, I'm curious how you managed to go to this magical land of Narnia inside America where you are devoid of someone who could possibly hear your complaints and act on them, and that this isn't instead a case of someone who is whining about how the government isn't doing exactly what he wants it to do.

[Deldem]

First off, the American Revolution was indeed fought primarily over "No taxation without representation," (basically, if we're taxed we should have some say in our decision making process) though there were certainly other causes.

Which means that, in truth, no one wanted to pay taxes - this was common in the South especially, up until the Civil War.  The "representation" part was an "out" of sorts.

Still, my main point was that there was some sort of justification for the American Revolution. There were legitimate concerns beyond taxation being dealt with. To sum it up, the Tea Party is nothing like the American Revolution; if anything, it's closer to the Civil War.

[Deldem]

I hope both Medina and Perry lose.  Secessionists deserve no place in our government.

Ah, I presume you would have been a British loyalist back in 1776.

Those damn secessionists like Jefferson and Washington deserved to lose.

My God, you are a moron.

I know I've won for sure when my opponents resort to childish name-calling.

Sweetie, the revolution happened because of lack of representation, not because of taxes. The current collective teabagger hissyfit has nothing on them.

Ah, resorting to condescension and non sequuntur now.

Checkmate.

I don't think you can claim victory when you have dramatically misrepresented the American Revolution for your own purposes.

First off, the American Revolution was indeed fought primarily over "No taxation without representation," (basically, if we're taxed we should have some say in our decision making process) though there were certainly other causes. This was not secession, I would argue, since colonies were not legally deemed equal to the people living in the British Isles, and therefore the government was illegitimate within the colonies, since they had no say whatsoever in many of the decisions of how to run the colonies.

Now, let's look at the Civil War, when true secession actually took place. This was fought so that Southerners could whip and own other human beings, and so the wealthy plantation owners could make more money. They also argued for the ability to nullify federal laws, despite the Constitution clearly giving Congress the right to make laws for our entire nation.

Now, for the Tea Party movement. The goal of this movement driven by upper middle class and the wealthy is to lower their taxes, since they think the government sucks. They occasionally advocate secession to meet this end. Basically, they spout off this oddly Randian ideology that is very similar to laissez-faire capitalism, and don't really care about the less well off. They merely care about their bottom line, and will go to great lengths to reduce what is probably one of the lowest tax rates for the wealthy since the dawn of the 20th Century.

Tell me, which of the first two things is the Tea Party movement actually like?

The correct answer would be the Civil War, which came about largely because the wealthy members of Southern society thought that paying people would hurt their bottom line. The Civil War, in which we also determined that nullification and secession were not legal under our Constitution. It's funny, considering that the Tea Party professes to want to go back to the Constitution, when they clearly do not accept the legal interpretation of it by the highest court in the land, which was clearly established by the said Constitution.

So, Libertas, if you are going to tell me that the Tea Party movement is anything like the American Revolution, please tell me how you are within American borders, yet do not have any sort of representation to the United States government. Please, enlighten me, I'm curious how you managed to go to this magical land of Narnia inside America where you are devoid of someone who could possibly hear your complaints and act on them, and that this isn't instead a case of someone who is whining about how the government isn't doing exactly what he wants it to do.

<BIG standing ovation>

Libertas, do you support succession from the USA?

"Succession"? What will 'succeed' from the USA?

I like how you ignored the question by jumping on a grammatical error. And how you haven't responded to any of my comments.

I'll fix Badger's statement, just for you, since you seem to have a comical inability to answer questions that are not perfectly worded to your satisfaction:

Libertas, do you support secession from the USA?

[Deldem]

Why, of course I do. I think there was some talk of secession in Vermont a few years back.

Alright then, I'm glad you at least answered.

Now how in the hell do you think that is even remotely achievable? I don't think it was exactly a smashing success last time around...

Also, I'm curious as to what specifically calls for secession in this case.

[Deldem]

Why, of course I do. I think there was some talk of secession in Vermont a few years back.

Alright then, I'm glad you at least answered.

Now how in the hell do you think that is even remotely achievable? I don't think it was exactly a smashing success last time around...

Also, I'm curious as to what specifically calls for secession in this case.

Of course its not achievable now, with fedgov and its military still maintaining an iron fist.

But collapse is inevitable for the federal government.

Now what evidence do you have to suggest that it's going to collapse anytime soon? When I look about, most everybody I come in contact with still supports the current American government, though they may not agree with its direction. How will this event come to be?

[Deldem]

Why, of course I do. I think there was some talk of secession in Vermont a few years back.

Alright then, I'm glad you at least answered.

Now how in the hell do you think that is even remotely achievable? I don't think it was exactly a smashing success last time around...

Also, I'm curious as to what specifically calls for secession in this case.

Of course its not achievable now, with fedgov and its military still maintaining an iron fist.

But collapse is inevitable for the federal government.

Now what evidence do you have to suggest that it's going to collapse anytime soon? When I look about, most everybody I come in contact with still supports the current American government, though they may not agree with its direction. How will this event come to be?

Open your eyes, man. The current state is entirely unsustainable.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123051100709638419.html

http://www.therightscoop.com/gerald-celente-us-economic-collapse-by-2012/

So a crazed Russian professor talking to a propaganda paper and a guy talking on an Internet video are supposed to be convincing arguments? Hell, I'd place more stock in palm readers.

[Deldem]

Why, of course I do. I think there was some talk of secession in Vermont a few years back.

A true American patriot.

     Hmm? Could you enlighten me as to where Libertas has ever claimed to be inclined towards patriotism?

Well, it's kind of funny, when you consider he invoked the American Revolution, which generally implies your opponent is lacking in patriotism. Of course, he was shamelessly twisting history for his own purposes, and totally perverting the whole scenario of 1776, and expecting average people to use his quite misleading conjectures and interpretations.