Slashdot Mirror


Secession Petitions Flood White House Website

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."

1,163 comments

  1. If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ..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.

    1. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by h4rr4r · · Score: 5, Funny

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

    2. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Secession is an economically unviable option

      You may be very wrong given prevailing national energy and environmental policy.

    3. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Bodhammer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You mean Gary Johnson?

      --
      "I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
    4. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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.

    5. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by SerpentMage · · Score: 1

      No it is a bad policy as the problems it entails outweigh the benefits. What if the US said, "sure you go on your own." BTW remember those businesses that wanted to ship products to us? Oh yeah not gonna happen without tariffs, delays at the border, and so on.

      --

      "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
      "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
    6. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by rsborg · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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.

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    7. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Hatta · · Score: 5, Informative

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

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    8. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by h4rr4r · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

    9. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Bradmont · · Score: 0

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

      Actually, don't. As an anglo Canadian who moved to Quebec, those who hold on to separatism are probably about as logical about it as these Romney supporters...

    10. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by mbkennel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "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.

    11. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by h4rr4r · · Score: 5, Informative

      It would save us a shitload of tax money and we would no longer have to worry about the American taliban getting their voice in our laws.

      http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2012/09/who-receives-the-disproportionate-share-of-government-spending.html

    12. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, no. Not in the least bit wrong. You may have been sold the idea that energy companies are "suffering under an enormous burden of environmental regulations" but it's wildly disproportionate to the actual costs. Getting your oil, or power 20% cheaper might be nice, but creating your own borders, setting up your own military, printing your own money... trading with people with whom you don't share an ocean... these are expensive undertakings.

      The small impacts of an environmental free-for-all, and cheap gas are trivial compared to the scope of this undertaking. Iran has strong religious values, and gas at 50 cents a gallon and the most polluted capital city anywhere.

      http://www.economist.com/node/17804554

      Be very careful what you wish for.

    13. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Hey, he was my "protest" vote!

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    14. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Arancaytar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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.

    15. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by SimonTheSoundMan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

    16. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by dmbasso · · Score: 1

      I'm curious what that would mean for the military... how would they deal with the bases, people, information, etc... Any idea?

      --
      `echo $[0x853204FA81]|tr 0-9 ionbsdeaml`@gmail.com
    17. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by mbkennel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      | 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.

    18. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by h4rr4r · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Jill Stein was just a figment of my imagination?

      I really do remember marking that box on the ballot.

    19. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Also we could stand to shed a state so we won't have to buy new flags when Puerto Rico becomes a state.

    20. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the USA still have a base in Cuba, it won't be difficult to reach an agreement with Texas.

    21. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by h4rr4r · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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.

    22. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by amiga3D · · Score: 2

      Think of the foreign aid!

    23. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Algae_94 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I have an idea. They would not let the state secede. That is the precedent set by previous administrations.

    24. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by jedidiah · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yes quite. This is the perfect example of a "states rights" issue. If you want to succeed then you need to have a local succession convention in your own state. Dragging the "enemy" in Washington into it really seems beyond absurd.

      It's like genuine fire eaters petitioning Lincoln.

      These people are too stupid to even know what they're asking for.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    25. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by lysdexia · · Score: 5, Informative

      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.

    26. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by blind+biker · · Score: 2

      I sent my $100 to Buddy Roemer

      You sent your 100 bucks to a banker? Splendid plan, whatever could be wrong with that.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    27. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Art+Popp · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

    28. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by MozeeToby · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

    29. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Socially conservative while fiscally reckless wasn't just a recent decision, they've been at that for the last decade at least

    30. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by blind+biker · · Score: 5, Informative

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

      That's not true at all - the Green Party fielded a genuinely left-leaning candidate - Jill Stein
      I quite like her.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    31. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      >Jill Stein was just a figment of my imagination?

      If you think she was actually a viable candidate in any sense, yes, it was just a figment of your imagination.

    32. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only if you consider Marx a moderate.

    33. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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.

    34. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by AaronLS · · Score: 0

      You are saying they wish for the most polluted capital city? I love when people try to be snarky, don't even get a complete thought out, and instead produce a nonsensical blurb.

    35. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by cyfer2000 · · Score: 1

      Those are federal land.

      --
      There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
    36. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Synerg1y · · Score: 0

      Sure would save a lot there, however 10k votes out of millions of people isn't even 1%, another out-dated law in our system... If those 10k aren't happy with what they got, South of the border is within driving distance for them, they can go enjoy Mexican tap water.

    37. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Niris · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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.

    38. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Depends how it's done. A friendly secession - possible if president and a majority of both houses have no serious objections, rather unlikely - could easily include a common-market treaty, something like the EEC. Combined with an open borders policy and mutual document recognition in the same treaty, there wouldn't be much economic impact.

    39. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Mr.+McGibby · · Score: 4, Insightful

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

      --
      Mad Software: Rantings on Developing So
    40. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Raenex · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's "secede", not "succeed".

    41. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by hey! · · Score: 1

      Well the Soviets did it, which shows it *can* be done, albeit perhaps messily.

      But even under the best assumptions, it would not be a happy situation for Texans. They'd be dominated militarily and economically by the United States, bottled up in the northwest corner of the Gulf of Mexico with unfriendly states on either side and a burgeoning Hispanic population internally to keep under control.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    42. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Grayhand · · Score: 5, Interesting

      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.

    43. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by MonkeyBoy · · Score: 1

      Well, if you were in one of the states where she wasn't on the ballot, it would have to be a figment.

      --

      Moof!

    44. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by kd6ttl · · Score: 2

      If they are taking actions that result in the most polluted capital city, then yes, in some sense they wish for the most polluted capital city. It may be a side effect of the government they support, not a main effect, but it's still an effect.

    45. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Once. Not much of a history.

      If it came down to it, so you think any president would want to send the army to fight against people who were US citizens until only a few months ago? Only if there is no other way would they consider it. First they'd try to call in every favor they had to block it, and then they'd spend years on some form of treaty that allowed the state nominal independence without leaving the union entirely.

    46. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      The choice is between clean air and poverty or smog and riches. They chose the latter. So did China.

    47. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by metrometro · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

    48. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by stillpixel · · Score: 5, Funny

      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

    49. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by SuricouRaven · · Score: 5, Interesting

      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.

    50. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by kwiqsilver · · Score: 5, Funny

      It works with both, actually: they can't secede if they fail in their attempt.

    51. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by houghi · · Score: 4, Informative

      I assume you are referring to there not being a left wing candidate.

      You thinking that she is left wing just shows how long the US has not have a left wing candidate. To the rest of the world she is center at most.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    52. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      These people are too stupid to even know what they're asking for.

      That might be true, but many of them probably do know the difference between "succeed" and "secede".

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    53. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, Bill Clinton had lots of war-lust. Do you remember his era? That was when people talked about Wag the Dog, and distracting from sex scandals by going to war. Clinton was the most warlike president of all since Johnson. At least until Bush Jr went crazy.

    54. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by scumdamn · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately for them they won't be donig either.

    55. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

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

      What's really bad is how even the electorate seems to completely disregard third-party candidates. There are plenty of actual left-wing candidates there if you care to take a look. It's not for a lack of candidates so much as a lack of coverage and awareness that those candidates are even running.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    56. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      But...but...but...all the job creators will be living in red states. How will the rest of us ever find work?

    57. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by scumdamn · · Score: 2

      It's not the media's fault. It's the "first past the post" voting system that's in place all the way from the bottom to the top. That's why there are two dominant parties. Until that's changed votes for a third party cannabalize votes that would go to one of the major party candidates and hurt their chances to be elected (see Gore, Al).

    58. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Sure he is. We just need a constitutional amendment first.

    59. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not to mention that Wisconsin (of all places) just elected the first openly gay senator.

      Uhhh...Wisconsin isn't really one of the hardcore conservative states. I'm not sure they qualify for an "of all places".

    60. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what the fuck would you know about Marx?

    61. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The RNC needs to find some way to prevent the opposing party from choosing their candidate!

    62. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      blah blah blah blah blah blah Please be aware that Nuevo California will be pro choice and anti war [...]

      What's that y'say, sonny? You say you'll be easy to take over in glorious American(tm) military conquer? Hooooo-wee! Then we wouldn't even need to fly out to Iraq to shoot us some America-hatin' human bein' bastards!

    63. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by MyFirstNameIsPaul · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Care to back that up? 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.

      --

      I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.

    64. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the reason might have been, that being Mormon, straying too far from the right might have risked alienating that entire segment leading to them either not voting or running a third party candidate. It's not an enviable position when your party's base is threatening to abandon you if you get too moderate.

    65. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by AwesomeMcgee · · Score: 1

      Apparently you don't know how their government gets its "support", hint: it's not from the citizenry.

    66. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by mark-t · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

    67. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by reboot246 · · Score: 3, Informative

      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.

    68. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by mdenham · · Score: 4, Funny

      Hence my petition. 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.)

    69. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by AK+Marc · · Score: 3, Funny

      So they can secede without succeeding?

    70. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well, he didn't have a (pick a cliche and insert here) to win, thus my labeling of the vote as a "protest". He was better than the two viable candidates.

      I disagree with him on some substantial parts of his platform: ending the Fed (though he's not a huge proponent of that), ending farm subsidies (does he mean all? what about food security?), and I think he shares the same flaw that many Libertarians do when considering corporations: for some reason, they do not see corporations as an example of massive government regulation of the private market, when they clearly are. I also think that the federal government does belong in the EPA business, since many pollution issues cross state boundaries.

      That said, I largely agree with him on almost every other issue and he was by far the closest fit for me.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    71. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by mrchaotica · · Score: 2

      It's because they think they need a nutjob in order to get the Republican "base" out to vote, when what they really need is a moderate to win over the undecided voters (who are the real deciding factor).

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    72. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by dkleinsc · · Score: 5, Informative

      Clinton was the most warlike president of all since Johnson. At least until Bush Jr went crazy.

      Definitely not:

      Richard Nixon: Elected on a secret plan to end the Vietnam War in 1968, he expanded it into Laos and Cambodia, two countries who's only crime was being next to Vietnam.

      Gerald Ford: Actually made peace in Vietnam. He's not a contender for the "most warlike".

      Jimmy Carter: A few minor things, such as trying to rescue the hostages. Also not a contender.

      Ronald Reagan: Invaded Grenada, Honduras, ordered various operations against Libya, was on the outskirts of the Iran-Iraq War (supplying weapons to both sides and using US ships to protect Kuwaiti oil tankers).

      George H.W. Bush: First Gulf War. Several smaller operations in Panama, Hondurus, and Liberia.

      Bill Clinton: Enforcing the no-fly zone in Iraq, air operations in former Yugoslavia, missile strikes on Al Qaida.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    73. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by mrchaotica · · Score: 2, Informative

      A republican candidate needs to have some degree of hick-and-nutter appeal, or they'll never get to be the candidate.

      So, you missed the part where the (relatively) moderate candidate won the primary and then picked a hick-and-nutter running mate?

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    74. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by AwesomeMcgee · · Score: 1

      Not much economic impact? You seem to forget you're talking about the states that use the majority of our welfare/medicaid dollars and give the least to our tax base disappearing from our economic picture. I call that us going rapidly into the black on flow, which considering how red we are even on inflow/outflow right now would be s significant economic impact.

    75. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by AwesomeMcgee · · Score: 1

      Please don't leave us out here in colorado all alone? Us an new mexico are surrounded by jerks :(

    76. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by SimonTheSoundMan · · Score: 1

      Oh, I live in the UK and was unaware of a third candidate. I thought the US was a two party only system?

    77. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      At least the Quebecois have some reasonable claim to being a nation, and to some extent were even given a separate constitutional status after the Plains of Abraham. The secessionist argument was lost in the United States a century and a half ago, at the conclusion of a rather brutal and bloody war. The Federal Government, in the most basic fashion, won the right to prevent any state from leaving the Union.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    78. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Woldscum · · Score: 1

      http://www.statemaster.com/graph/ene_pet_pro-energy-oil-production

      Texas and Louisiana produce a little less than 30% of US domestic oil production. That does not count the offshore wells in federal water. It only counts land based wells. How about chemical plants and refineries?

      Look at a map. Does not the Mississippi River enter the Gulf of Mexico in Louisiana? How would that work out for you?

    79. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Why would the states surrounding them be unfriendly? I'm sure the casinos and such in bordering states would welcome them, and all that. As for a growing hispanic population, I'm not sure how that changes when Texas leaves the union.

    80. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

      And what, we choose smog and poverty?

    81. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      I stopped reading at slave states.
      FACT: No Republican has EVER owned a single slave. The Democrats can't make the same claim.
      FACT: The DNC filibustered the Civil Rights act preventing it from being passed in the 30's when the GOP first proposed it and only passed in the 60's once the GOP hadn enought of Congress to get it passed.

      Thanks for your dishonest revisionist history. I see your public education serves you well in ignoring inconvient facts.

    82. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Over the past 8 years conservative, republican positions have become more and more untenable to the majority of voters.

      This. What should really terrify them is that the only reason they got anything positive from this election (holding onto the House) was that they swept into power in the 2010 midterms and gerrymandered the living fuck out of Congressional districts. If you sum all votes cast for Congressional candidates, Democrats won the popular vote by about the same margin as the Presidential race, but only picked up one or two seats for it, leaving it strongly Republican-controlled.

      Unfortunately this will last till 2020 (Congressional districts are redrawn every Census), so we'll have to live with the House being artificially packed with wingnut tea party types for eight more years.

    83. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by mrchaotica · · Score: 0

      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

      Why? We're insolvent, and any fiscal conservative ought to know that when you're deep in debt, the only responsible thing to do is to pay it off, even if it means taking a second job (increasing income) as well as cutting expenses.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    84. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      It depends on how you define "right" and "left" wing. According to the traditional definition, the choice is between someone who wants to nationalize all business and tell people what they can do in every facet of their life on the far left all the way to someone who doesn't want to nationalize businesses but wants to tell them what to make, how much of it to make and how much to charge for it and wants to tell people what they can do in every facet of their lives on the far right. From the perspective of most of those who call themselves "conservative" in the U.S., there is barely a fingers worth of difference between what Europe calls the "far left" and what it calls the "far right". And from that same American "conservative" perspective Romney was farther towards being on that political spectrum than most are comfortable with and Obama is squarely on it (and they don't really care if you call his position on that line "left" or "right").

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    85. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i am pretty sure that was just a halucination

    86. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by scifigod · · Score: 1

      If you look at our past two-three years of local and state level elections it's been doing it's damnedest to become a hardcore conservative state. I am rather proud and surprised at both campaigns though that her sexual preference wasn't made an issue of in the race because there were some seriously nasty attack ads floating about. Me and most of my co-workers didn't even know that until after the election was over.

    87. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by darkmeridian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
    88. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by frdmfghtr · · Score: 1

      Yes, but in the past few years the voters also voted in favor of amending the state constitution to ban gay marriage.

      --
      Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
    89. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by sensei+moreh · · Score: 1

      Well, it did produce Joe McCarthy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_mccarthy/

      --
      Geology - it's not rocket science; it's rock science
    90. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, the GP got it right. I doubt that any effort to petition the President directly without having the convention is going to lead to much success.

    91. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by multimediavt · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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!!!

    92. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Penguinisto · · Score: 1

      Well the Soviets did it, which shows it *can* be done, albeit perhaps messily.

      But even under the best assumptions, it would not be a happy situation for Texans. They'd be dominated militarily and economically by the United States, bottled up in the northwest corner of the Gulf of Mexico with unfriendly states on either side and a burgeoning Hispanic population internally to keep under control.

      ...and most of the oil that comes into the southern US, not to mention a clean majority of refineries - and a whole lot of gas pipelines run through and out of it. Enjoy that $15/gal gasoline until an alternate infrastructure could be built, I guess (assuming things didn't fall into anarchy nationally first).

      Think of a seceded Texas as having more influence in Washington than OPEC, but with barbecue at the meetings.

      The one and only state who could cut itself off would be California... and that would only last until the electricity and water get shut off from the surrounding states.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    93. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I really hate to say it, but aren't they the half of the country that's driving the country to energy independence?

    94. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Abreu · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sorry no. On behalf of all Mexicans, Texans can stay in the USA or become independent, but we don't want them back.

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    95. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by JakeBurn · · Score: 0

      Texas wants this. Their state is has been under attack by illegal aliens crossing their borders and the federal government tells them to not shoot even if they are being shot at.

    96. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      I'm glad one of us is confident in that...

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    97. Re: If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is only because with no state incom tax Texas is headquarters to many corporations. If they were to secede then those would need to relocate

    98. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 4, Funny

      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.

    99. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The regional attitudes seem to matter a bit more than the name of the party at any given point in time.

    100. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought evolution was a theory...

    101. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      FACT: No Republican has EVER owned a single slave. The Democrats can't make the same claim.

      What the hell does the politics of 1860 have to do with anything today?

      FACT: The DNC filibustered the Civil Rights act preventing it from being passed in the 30's when the GOP first proposed it and only passed in the 60's once the GOP hadn enought of Congress to get it passed.

      Then those racist southern democrats joined the GOP.

      The fuck is wrong with you?

    102. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Icyfire0573 · · Score: 1

      Why not? Term limits are 2 consecutive terms. He's been out of office, and so is quite eligible once again.

      Incorrect:

      22nd Amendment
      No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

    103. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      You know, I might have even found that amusing enough to sign but for the fact you decided to pick on Hawaii... They're good people, just have a bit of an economic challenge given their location. I suspect much of the tax money that heads their way though is probably used to support the military bases there, not the locals per-se.

      What I'd really like to see though is for the "red states" to get precisely what they're asking for. I'd have absolutely no problem with turning off the pump so long as we can also turn off the spigot.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    104. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by DaTrueDave · · Score: 2

      Hmmm... Well, you might have a point with Louisiana by itself, but Texas pays more to the Federal government than it receives, and we're talking about much greater numbers than most states, so I'm not sure I understand your point.

      http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/08/americas-fiscal-union

    105. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

      It's people that think this way that make it true.

    106. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      We get all the high oil and natural gas consumption states, you get all the oil and natural gas production states...
      We get most of the food importing states, you get most the food production states...
      We get most of the fresh water consumption states, you get all the fresh water sourcing states...

      Oh wait...

    107. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by DaTrueDave · · Score: 1

      You're implying that the US is effectively using national defense assets against Mexican cartels right now, and that's far from true.

    108. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, I live in Colorado and we're a blue state now too. California may be bat-shit crazy, but I'll take that particular crazy over Texas crazy.

      ps. to the Red states: Don't let Utah fool you, we have all the good skiing too.

    109. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Judging from the way you spell know, I am curious what you are smoking.

    110. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      The UK is looking into this at the moment with the Scottish independence movement. Apparently the rest of the UK doesn't have enough places to park nuclear submarines (or something along those lines), and there isn't enough time to build new ones before the deadline.

      Another interesting question which came up in the case of Scotland is how to divide up the national debt, which is something that seceding US states would also have to deal with. There's an additional quirk in the case of Scotland, namely, that the UK government currently holds an 82% stake in the Royal Bank of Scotland.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    111. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by the_Bionic_lemming · · Score: 1

      . 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.

      I hope you live in Illinois. They now have a veto proof democrat majority. All of the hopes and dreams you have listed will be tested in reality in Illinois over the next few years.

      I hope to revisit this point with you in the future.

      --
      _ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
    112. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      Kinda like the Panama Canal. In the long term though, I'm not sure it matters much anyway.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    113. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      Also worth noting, the security budget for Texas could be much reduced, as cmon, they Will be protected if attacked (the us won't want an aggressor in Texas).

      hey could save massive on military, and not support other poor states, and they have oil. They would win hard independant, which is why they won't be allowed to, they benefited for centuries as part of the us, they can't take their ball and go hone now.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    114. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by green1 · · Score: 1

      You can't stop them from using the dollar, only on having input in to policy decisions surrounding it. There are actually quite a few small countries that use the US dollar pretty much exclusively (even if they do have their own official currency too) There really isn't any way to stop them.

      You can however stop them from using your passports, millitary, and any and all other federal programs.

      I'm Canadian, and this topic keeps coming up in relation to Quebec, a small portion of them want out of Canada, unfortunately that small portion has a very large voice and sponsors a rather successful provincial political party, and an amazingly successful federal political party. Their separatist politicians told them last time there was a referendum that even if they left Canada they could still use Canadian Passports, Canadian currency, and still be defended by the Canadian military... obviously this is not so much the case. Never mind that they seem to think they'd still receive federal transfer payments from the other provinces...

    115. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by hrvatska · · Score: 1

      While Wisconsin isn't Mississippi, in 2006 its voters approved an amendment to its constitution that banned same sex marriage. I don't know if electing a lesbian senator can be used as a proxy indicator that attitudes on gay marriage have shifted in Wisconsin, but it does indicate that the public in Wisconsin is feeling more comfortable towards gays and lesbians.

    116. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      F u

      One nation, one state, 2 nation two state. How logical is that to you?

    117. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Should use diesel, when I was there couple of years ago was about 2cents a litre so roughly 8c a gallon

    118. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's another map that you'd find most of those states on as well: The "We don't want that goddamn nigger in the Whitehouse anymore" map. You know that's what this is really about, right? The Great White Male in this country is beginning to see that he's no longer on top of the heap, and most of them can't handle it, and having a black man in the Whitehouse is just the last straw for them. Never mind that the Bush family of long-time traitors to this country are the ones really responsible for the god-awful mess this country is in in the first place, there's that goddam nigger in the Whitehouse now, and since he's a nigger it must be his fault.

      Bull. Shit. Guess what? I am also one of the White Male Americans -- and I voted for Obama. Twice. Because I've got news for all of the myopians out there: Romney would have put us back into Bush-era bullshit again, and likely ruined this country for good. The 1950's are long gone, and good riddance to it, we don't need to fucking turn the clock back to 60 years ago. Fucking get over it, America.

    119. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Ossifer · · Score: 1

      > Look at a map. Does not the Mississippi River enter the Gulf of Mexico in Louisiana? How would that work out for you?

      So, you're saying we could charge them rednecks for our water?

    120. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by amanaplanacanalpanam · · Score: 1

      The novel The Fifth Sacred Thing explores what might happen if something like what you propose comes to pass, albeit on a smaller scale (northern vs southern California). Not a bad utopia/dystopia novel, if you can accept some metaphysicality (it's by Starhawk after all).

    121. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1
      Two terms, of which a term also includes holding the office (un-elected) for two years or more. According to the 22nd amendment:

      No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    122. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 1

      Honestly, voting for third party candidates to help build to 5% support is about all you can do. If they can get to 5%, 20% isn't that far away. While I did vote for Stein, I didn't actually know who the green party candidate was before last week.

    123. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by bolthole · · Score: 1

      Obama. The guy is to the right on Nixon and Reagan on many issues.

      Just not on any issues that "conservative" voters actually care about.

    124. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by green1 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I call BS on that one. I live in Canada, we also have a first past the post voting system, however we also have 5 major political parties, Conservative, Liberal, New Democrats, Bloc Quebecois, and Green. The Green party is in fact quite new and only won it's first seat in the past couple of elections, however they are quickly growing. This proves that even with a first past the post system, it is possible for new parties to form and be successful.
      I'm not sure what it is about the US that makes it impossible to have more than 2 parties, but first past the post isn't it.

    125. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by dcollins · · Score: 3, Informative

      "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

      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

      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.

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    126. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Delarth799 · · Score: 0

      If you want the land back but don't want them you have a nice ocean that's already filled with oil to dump them into

    127. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by dcollins · · Score: 1

      I voted for Jill Stein, too.

      However, math, game theory, and Duverger's Law all say it's impossible for her to win, so that's largely irrelevant to how our country is governed.

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    128. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought evolution was a theory...

      Evolution is a scientific theory.

    129. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Cwix · · Score: 1

      If everyone voted for the candidate that best represented them, then we would not have this two party problem.

      The problem does not exist with the people voting for a third party candidate, it belongs to the people who will not consider a third party candidate.

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    130. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      A shame, a true shame that the +1 Funny tops out at 5. Thank you I needed a good laugh.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    131. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are a horrible person.

    132. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of more interest to Slashdotters, since VA is now in the Blue, we get MAE East and MAE West.

    133. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the ~40% of eligible voters that stays home would actually show up and vote third party, there could be actual viable third parties.

      Remember the Coke/Pepsi "War"? They both won. Little brands are the ones that lost.

    134. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the point of the other comments. The people who are left won't have to work as they'll be the ones taking the dole from the federal government. Of course, this will simply drive the remainder that calls itself the USA (or maybe the USSA, United Socialist States of America) further into debt, but, hey, it's worked for the last few administrations and it didn't even matter whether the federal government was red or blue.

    135. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you charge the rednecks to move their goods through your water. Not a few countries of city states have made their living by charging such tariffs.

    136. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by CaptSlaq · · Score: 2

      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

      Why? We're insolvent, and any fiscal conservative ought to know that when you're deep in debt, the only responsible thing to do is to pay it off, even if it means taking a second job (increasing income) as well as cutting expenses.

      Which holy cows are you willing to turn into hamburger with regard to spending? The problem is that no one wants to donate their cow, just everyone elses.

      Drive it off the cliff. Let every branch take a 10% hit and maybe, MAYBE Congress learn some priorities. At least then everyone donates a side of beef to the grinder.

    137. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Snotnose · · Score: 1

      [quote]Mitt was a dreadful choice for a conservative presidential candidate. [/quote]
      Don't blame me, I live in California. The primaries were long over before we got to vote. For me, Rmoney was 4-5th down the list.

    138. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't get how he could think the far right would not vote if they didn't like him much for being FAR right. As long as he was on the right more than Obama, which they think is the devil incarnate, I can't imagine they'd just not vote and let the left win.

      He should have stuck with a more centered stance and just periodically remind his followers what they'll get if they don't come out to vote.

      He bent to much to what the Party wanted instead of doing his own work to win the office.

      But you have to love the comedy from the Faux News org and those 'experts' they keep around. They are just so much fun to watch explaining why they were wrong and some won't even admit they were.

    139. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the rick-and-nutter vote may be tied up at the election, but they seriously matter in the primaries.

      The Ryan pick, 47% remark, and all that the GP And GGP are talking about happened after the primaries.

    140. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Stiletto · · Score: 1

      Because of our first-past-the-post system, if you're in a swing state, a vote for a third party is not in your best interest, because it will likely help the viable candidate who you least agree with more than it will help the candidate you voted for.

    141. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by AaronW · · Score: 1

      California did something right about this for a change. Thanks to Proposition 14, the top two vote getters in the primary election end up in the main election and the electorate can vote for any candidate, regardless of party affiliation. This proposition was unpopular with both the democrat and republican parties but it passed.

      On top of that, thanks to propositions 11 and 20, the districts were created by a citizen commission of 14 non-political people to eliminate the gerrymandering that had taken place before. The commission was made up of 5 republicans, 5 democrats and 4 independent voters. 8 members were chosen at random from 31,000 applicants and the rest were chosen by those 8. A district had to be agreed to by 3 democrats, 3 republicans and 2 independent voters. From everything I have heard, the commission worked hard to do things right, taking many data points into account so that the various groups were fairly represented. Neither party was happy with the commission, since many formerly "safe" districts were no longer safe.

      The results of this in this election were huge. Republicans lost, big time. In fact, it is likely that after a special election in March that California may have enough democrats to override the 2/3 majority. What these propositions did is force elected officials to cater to the center.

      In my case I had my choice of two democratic candidates since the republican candidate was eliminated in the primary. We had an extremely liberal member who was just replaced by a more moderate democrat. As much as I liked the old member, it was time to replace him (he'd been in the house about 40 years). I liked him since he got copyright and voted against the new copyright laws that they tried to push. He answered my letters to him about copyright and clearly got it, but in other areas he was having more and more senior moments (he's about 80 years old). He couldn't tell the difference between Tesla and Solyndra, for example, and he was frequently absent from voting. He was also a bit too liberal in some ways.

      --
      This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
    142. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The one and only way to "fix the system" is for people like you to vote for them. When you vote against them, you are voting against fixing the system.

    143. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by runeghost · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

    144. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Gabrill · · Score: 2

      Ask the Confederacy.

      --
      Always going forward, 'cause we can't find reverse.
    145. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by StarWreck · · Score: 2
      Sir! Sir! I wholly contest your adoption of the word 'insolvent'. You should appreciate we're dealing with a body politic that barely apprehends at an intermediate level. I henceforth substitute 'insolvent' with 'bankrupt' to appease the proletariat.

      case:

      No "Mitt Romney would have allowed General Motors to become insolvent."
      Yes "Mitt Romney would have allowed General Motors to go bankrupt."

      Kindly ignore that General Motors did go bankrupt and was renamed Motors Liquidation Company. Pay no mind that a Motors Liquidation Co. then sold its healthy assets to a newly created entity that then renamed itself General Motors. Finally, flush down the memory hole that the same end game would have been achieved had Motors Liquidation Co., at the time still named General Motors, never received its much vaunted and extolled "bail outs".

      Its for the betterment of the nation. I'm sure you'll agree.

      --
      ... and in the DRM, bind them.
    146. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a resident of Austin, I think we could get a majority around here that would like to secede from Texas. How about we let Texas try making it's own state again with Austin are remaining as part of the USA. We could draw one of those republican style gerrymanders to connect Austin to the rest of the United States....

    147. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Caffinated · · Score: 2
      It's not BS, it's actually called Duverger's law:

      Duverger's law is a principle which asserts that a plurality rule election system tends to favor a two-party system.

      The wikipedia article specifically notes Canada and explains why there are more than 2 parties at the national level:

      In the case of Canada, the highly regionalised parties are evident in province-by-province examination: while the multiparty system can be seen in the Canadian House of Commons, many of the provinces' elections are dominated by two-party systems. Quebec, for instance, is driven mainly by the separatist Parti Quebecois and the centre-left Liberal Party, while in Saskatchewan, it is the left-wing New Democratic Party and the centre-right Saskatchewan Party (a coalition of those affiliated with the Conservative and Liberal Parties). Unlike in the United States, where the two major parties are organized and unified at the federal, state and local level, Canada's federal and provincial parties generally operate as separate organizations.

      So, Canada's a bit of an exception due to strong(er) regionalism, but first-past-the-post voting will tend toward two parties as the stable configuration.

    148. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Cwix · · Score: 1

      While this is a problem on the road to getting third parties recognized, it still would not be an issue if people voted for whoever best represents them.

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    149. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by mysidia · · Score: 1

      The one and only state who could cut itself off would be California... and that would only last until the electricity and water get shut off from the surrounding states.

      Shutting off the water to California, would be tantamount to mass murder.

    150. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Which holy cows are you willing to turn into hamburger with regard to spending?

      All of them, including (especially) entitlements and defense. But lest you think I'm some kind of Republican, I should emphasize that the Holy Tax Cuts must be slaughtered equally.

      In fact, "drive it off the cliff" is an excellent sentiment: I would be perfectly happy for Congress to do nothing and allow the government to drive itself off the Fiscal Cliff -- the "draconian" tax increases and spending cuts are exactly what we need anyway!

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    151. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, you won't - in fact exactly the opposite. Texas, for instance, is one of the states that is a net contributor of federal tax revenue, so it would be they who are saving a shitload of tax money that you and your blue-state tapeworms wouldn't be receiving any longer. What's more, Texas could actually make a go of it as a solo entity, being the 15th largest economy in the World.

    152. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look at a map. Does not the Mississippi River enter the Gulf of Mexico in Louisiana? How would that work out for you?

      As a rust-belt resident I say, "Woo hoo! The Eric Canal is back in style, baby!!!"

      Hey, even better, when the secession happens we can accommodate all the loyalist who want to "emigrate" by filling Detroit back in. It'll be like homesteading all over again except the houses are already there!* Win-win-win!

      * Some houses may be on fire or occupied by drug addicts. YMMV. Offer not available in Toledo.

    153. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by sacrilicious · · Score: 4, Funny

      If at first you don't secede, try and try again?

      --
      - First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
    154. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Sure, the government could inflate the currency all it wants, but that doesn't change the fact that its spending compared to GDP is unsustainable. Maybe if the money were being invested in the economy (e.g. infrastructure, research, etc.) it'd be different -- the leverage afforded by the low interest rates the US can borrow at would be quite lucrative -- but since it's being squandered on bread and circuses the borrowing is irresponsible at any interest rate.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    155. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by fyngyrz · · Score: 4, Informative

      No. They're the portion of the country that keeps us swilling oil. Look at any oil production map:

      Texas, Montana, North Dakota... etc.: red states.

      It wouldn't matter a bit, though -- they'd still want to sell oil.

      What intrigues me in Texas' case, is that they have been screwing up school books for some time now, and it would be a real boon to the country if somehow, secession resulted in our books being more reality-based. They can keep their "no sex toy" laws and immigrant hating, too... be good to get those kinds of influences out of the country.

      For Montana (my state) I'm not sure secession is really any serious goal; first of all, we've got a Democrat governor and senator, and part of the reason we have a Republican congress-critter is gerrymandering. There are some really "red" areas in the state, but there are some really blue ones, too. I expect these petitions are coming from the red areas and won't amount to a thing, even should others succeed (which I doubt, but that's another issue.)

      But... we've got a good state constitution, and our legislators and courts have demonstrated -- repeatedly -- that they're willing to abide by it, instead of making up bullshit at the drop of a hat the way SCOTUS does. We have oil, mineral resources, timber and grain. We raise cattle, too. What we don't have is a lot of people. Maybe that would change if coming here meant that you no longer had to worry (for instance) about the government taking your property to build a mall, pretending you have no right to arms, surveilling your communications and banking without warrants, etc.

      One thing I honestly think about the US as a whole right now is that it is no longer a constitutional republic. I'd describe it more as a corporate-driven plutocracy. It's not pretty.

      OTOH, I don't think a bunch of little countries here would be pretty, either. I give it a rousing "ain't gonna happen" :)

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    156. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about those of us who live in red states but don't buy into their bible-thumping ideology? What if you can't afford to get out? (and there's no point in moving until you have a job/place to live on the other end)

    157. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      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

      That's a legitimate reason to not vote for someone, you can't control what other people think.

      Winner-take-all systems throw votes away, that's a fact. Acting like its some sort of government mind control or the result of perfidious "SHEEPLE!" is elitist and solves nothing.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    158. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by thoth · · Score: 1

      Care to back that up? 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.

      Huh? Did you look at that site? From 1981 to 2005 it shows Texas sending $146932 million, and receiving $148683. That makes TX a net receiver, not a net payer. California is a net payer however.

      Do you have your GOP reading glasses on?

    159. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You _want_ Hollywood? You never want anything to ever come out of copyright ever again, do you?

    160. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by nbauman · · Score: 1

      Nixon's Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare was Patrick Moynihan, who was a drunken liberal.

    161. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by cynyr · · Score: 1

      Are any of those parties somewhat close together? would you also not feel like you needed to move out of the country if one of them were elected?

      Right my issue is that the guy from one of our two major parties is always so bad that I feel compelled to vote for the other major party just to avoid him. So it's not that I vote for the guy i like, but against the guy I dislike most.

      Also, why can't i have a no confidence vote, a "yes I voted, but no one gets credit for it".

      --
      All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.
    162. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The icing on the cake is the fact that Nixon was never impeached. He resigned in order to avoid impeachment and his sucessor immediately pardoned him.

    163. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      I'm a Republican who didn't vote for Romney. I know it's anecdotal and not scientific, but I'm hearing this from a lot of conservatives.

      It's not that he had to run so hard to the right and then pretend to be a centrist, it's because he has had no concrete principles that he won't compromise. He's pro-"choice", then he's pro-life, then he's pro-"choice" and then finally he's pro life. He's pro-gun, then he's anti-gun, then he's pro-gun again. We couldn't trust him. As much as I don't like the fact that Obama was re-elected, it would have been worse for both the country as a whole and the Republican party if Romney had won.

      Republican turnout was down versus 2008, primarily because we didn't care enough to turn out to support him.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    164. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by pellik · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately we would suffer too as these red states would completely disregard climate change and utterly destroy the environment in an attempt to bring about Armageddon.

    165. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by artor3 · · Score: 5, Informative

      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.

    166. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by camperdave · · Score: 1

      You have no say as to what currency a foreign country uses. In many parts of the world the US$ is the de-facto currency.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    167. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by TheGoodNamesWereGone · · Score: 1

      Texas, but not LA, could make a go of things as an independent state, but only for a short while. They'd be an enclave then, sandwiched between a third-world nation and a European-style brave new socialist utopia. They'd dare not prosper too much or they'd be invaded and all their stuff taken. You know, instead of outvoted and having all their stuff taken.

    168. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by supertall · · Score: 1

      Opryland was razed and replaced with a mega-mall years ago. Good riddance just the same.

    169. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are spouting nonsense without forethought. The states all have militias (armed citizens), they would not lose a military. The whole world uses the U.S. dollar, it is a global currency even in countries that are enemies of the U.S. The federal governemt is incapable of building any such fence, the failed attempt along the southern border proves it.

    170. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I NOW call BS on your knowledge and Information. The green party is not 'new' by any means, it has been around for more than 30 years, remember them running often in the 1980s. The Bloc Quebecois is Defunt, and was a fringle party from Quebec. In the last election, the Bloc was wiped out as Quebec voted NDP.

      It is also important to note, in Canada today, the names of the parties do not mean anything any more. The merger of the Reform and the PC(Progress Conversatives), resulted in a very mixed and vastly different party. This is not the traditional conservative party.

      Another reason why the names do not mean anything, is becuase people have changed parties going from provinca to federal and back.

      It woud be best for you to review 'REAL' history and not what is taught in current high schools.

      If you would like to learn more send a letter or E-Mail to Joe Clark.

    171. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by arthurpaliden · · Score: 1

      Actually the Reform party went from church basement to Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition in about two decades.

    172. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      pay more attention next time, some independents won in 2012

    173. Re: If there was a Bad at Math Map... by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Why would they have to relocate? You just set up a wholly owned subsidiary in the other areas.

      Yes, Toyota Motor Sales is an American company. But that company is owned by a Japanese company.

    174. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by pellik · · Score: 2

      I voted for Jill Stein, too.

      However, math, game theory, and Duverger's Law all say it's impossible for her to win, so that's largely irrelevant to how our country is governed.

      The Green party isn't even trying to win the election. If they can just manage to get 5% of the vote they will break into the mainstream and the next election will have three candidates at the big debates. The hope is that having someone at the debates who is willing to speak truthfully, instead of just trying to win over those few nutcases who can't decide on a major party yet still think voting matters, could bring about real change.

    175. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by kenh · · Score: 1

      Wonder where the Capitalists that have built up those coveted locations you are claiming for "Nuevo California" will wind up? Will they stay where they are and enjoy their new-found responsibility to shoulder nearly all financial responsibility for an entitlement citizanry OR will they flock to the large, mostly open states with the promise of smaller government and lower taxes?

      I'm sure they'll all stay right where they are.

      BTW, the "agreement" you copied from that humor site leaves out an interesting factor - where are all the oil fields? Aren't they all bunched up in the states you've "given up" on? You have given the other folks Alaska (including ANWAR), the Gulf, and Texas, Louisiana, etc... But I'm sure you'll just keep burning coal to power your plug-in electric cars... Oh wait, where is that Coal again? Hey, there's always wind power, if you don't mind the sight of windmills everywhere.

      Good Luck.

      --
      Ken
    176. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was a drug-induced delusion. Third parties make sense until you sober up and realize the free drugs and criminal coddling policies can't work in reality.

    177. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 0

      the texans and palistinians should team up.

      no one wants either of them living next to them.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    178. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by TheCarp · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    179. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by TexVex · · Score: 1

      Not only that, it's not actually a fiscal cliff. It's more like a manageably steep slope.

      --
      Fun with Anagarams! LADS HOST, SHALT DOS. HAS DOLTS. AD SLOTHS, HATS SOLD. ASS HO, LTD.
    180. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      "if at first you don't secede,
      keep on suc'ing till you do succeed!"

      (just a victim of circumstance!)

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    181. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by hallkbrdz · · Score: 0

      If at first you don't secede, try try again! Seriously - the time has come. I signed it for Oklahoma. We have a divided nation. This is not about Obama vs. Romney (who I did not vote for BTW), or even Republican vs. Democrat. Half of the nation wants socialism. Half wants liberty. There can be no middle ground. The USA was a grand experiment as a republic. It lasted longer than most have. It has now failed. Time to admit that and move on, as two separate nations. Let the best nation win.

    182. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

      No, we're going by how America defines it, which is the only relevant measure. Obama is leftist, in that his policies are taking the federal government further to the left. Romney was just slightly right, in that his policies were a muddled mix of left and right. We didn't have a candidate running that would make any substantial rightward movement in the government.

    183. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Runaway1956 · · Score: 0

      Texas' hands are tied by the federal government. Not to mention Arizona.

      And, what makes you think that those two states don't have plenty of military equipment of their own? As has already been noted, Texas gives more than it receives from the federal government. They already have a huge National Guard. They have their own hardware. They can secure their southern border, with little advance preparation. Given plenty of lead time and advance preparation, they could almost certainly move into Mexico, and start wiping out some of the cartels.

      So long as Texas is a member of the union, the union won't permit them to make a move that would get drug cartels under control, let alone the illegal alien problem.

      I see ignorance on both sides of this question. Your ignorance involves what Texas contributes to the national defense.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    184. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hahaha, go back to selling your sisters for drug money.

    185. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

      Quebec recently elected an extreme separatist to lead the province, who is pushing laws to make the use of anything but the French language illegal. The province is closer to secession than at any point in it's history. Any external financial analysis is being brushed aside, since the separatists have their own rosy financial picture.

      In other words - even if it is completely financially stupid, doesn't mean that it won't happen.

    186. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      That federal reserve note has zero value anyway. Each of the states could run out and print anything they like, or they could jointly print monopoly dollars, and that new currency would be just as viable as the US dollar. Fiat money is fiat money. You are familiar with the term, fiat?

      Or, did you think that the world would still honor the valueless dollar when the union begins to unravel?

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    187. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by khallow · · Score: 2

      At least, they probably won't be shipping arms to violent Mexican gangs. It's worth noting that the federal government has with the notorious Fast and Furious operation participated in the killing of over a hundred Mexican citizens and some number of US citizens including two law enforcement officers.

    188. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hard to say "On the other hand" without getting confused if there are more than 2 parties.

    189. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by disambiguated · · Score: 1

      Wow, thanks for that link. Gotta love the economist.

      If you compare the map from that article to a 2012 election map (e.g. this one), there is an unmistakable correlation. Texas is an anomaly.

      Of the 20 states that give more than they receive, 16 of them are blue. The first red state is Nebraska at 9th place, but it's surplus (44.3bn) is tiny compared to the big surplus states (e.g. New York with a surplus of 956.2bn). Of the 4 surplus red states, only Texas (surplus of 389.8bn) tops 100bn surplus.

      If the country were to split to USA_red, and USA_blue, USA_blue would have a huge tax surplus, while USA_red would be screwed (Texas would be carrying them, in fact.)

      If I can figure out a way to OCR the economist data (in PNG format, FFS, why?), I'll post some numbers.

    190. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

      I used to live in MO...sorry- we have to pay for having Rush Limbaugh and John Ashcroft...
      Red States, here we come...yeeeeeahhhhhh!!!!!

      Mike

    191. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      So, you missed the part where the (relatively) moderate candidate won the primary and then picked a hick-and-nutter running mate?

      What makes you think he picked him? He didn't even pick his speechwriters, who put even more batshit crazy shit into his mouth than what comes out if you leave him on his OR. And there's lots of precedent for the presidential candidate not having any choice of running mate. In the immortal words of Ronald Reagan, "anyone but that guy"

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    192. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Fine, but "succession convention" is a terribly awkward phrase.

    193. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you have OCR software but cant convert a png? png is about the most open image format out there, next to pnm ;P

    194. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by mbkennel · · Score: 1

      "Finally, flush down the memory hole that the same end game would have been achieved had Motors Liquidation Co., at the time still named General Motors, never received its much vaunted and extolled "bail outs""

      No it would not have. You need debtor-in-possession financing, and a bunch of it for bankruptcy, and no private banks were remotely interested in lending for such an enterprise in 2009. The bankruptcy would have been legally extremely long and arduous, like Lehman Bros which is still ongoing. The suppliers were themselves weeks from bankruptcy and that would have resulted in Ford collapsing as well. Ford's CEO explicitly advocated that the government engage in this plan even though it meant saving a fierce competitor.

      It would have been, in practice, a catastrophe.

    195. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by fizzer06 · · Score: 2

      I thought Austin was part of California.

    196. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The things that ensure a 2 party system are Gerrymandering and restrictive ballot access laws.

      The two on top give each other a safe 40% so that if anyone else breaks into the contested 20%, they can team up to drive the new guy out before any scary change happens.

    197. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by sumdumass · · Score: 0

      Of course someone should point out that while an asset, those states aren't owned by the US. They are owned by themselves and joined a Union of other states specifically for certain benefits like protection from aggressors.

    198. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And whose responsibility is it to fix the system? Clearly somebody else's job...

    199. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're mostly the poorest states that use the most welfare and medicaid and medicare per capita.

      I just want to point out that Medicare doesn't really belong on your list here, since it has nothing to do with poverty.

    200. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by StormyWeather · · Score: 1

      Umm you do realize Cambodia had city sized areas of weapons and supplies for insurgent fighters right? Also that is where fighters were being trained and attacking from. I'm not saying the invasion was smart but saying that Cambodia was not involved at all is a bit short sighted.

    201. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      It would save us a shitload of tax money and we would no longer have to worry about the American taliban getting their voice in our laws.

      http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2012/09/who-receives-the-disproportionate-share-of-government-spending.html

      I call bullshit. The blog in your link quotes from a David Brooks editorial in the NYT:

      The people who receive the disproportionate share of government spending are not big-government lovers. They are Republicans. They are senior citizens. They are white men with high school degrees.

      That editorial was in response to a quote from Mitt Romney

      There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it.

      The first is a good example of yellow journalism while the second is a good example of how politicians use valid statistics to lie to the public, made all the more easier because most people automatically translate “entitlement program” to “welfare” when in reality it also includes benefits paid for or earned by the recipients, like Social Security, Medicare and VA benefits. As to how Brooks derived Republicans, seniors and white males, he never does really make it clear but one has to guess that's his bigoted idea of who a senior receiving Social Security or someone receiving VA benefits must be.

    202. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by kd6ttl · · Score: 1

      If enough citizens object strongly enough, the government will be gone. In the words of Joseph de Maistre, Toute nation a le gouvernement qu'elle mérite - Every nation gets the government it deserves.

    203. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Most of the federal programs only get the states to do things they normally wouldn't. That's why the argument about who pays and who takes is pointless.

      As for the military, every state already has a guard program and recently, it has been used more to support the US military then the states. But the US wouldn't withdraw military support. We wouldn't want something like Cuba happening in a country bordered by land.

    204. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by lightknight · · Score: 1

      Hmm. You seem to be making the fatal assumption that those who wish to secede from the Union are all conservatives.

      --
      I am John Hurt.
    205. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NDP, Liberals, Greens are all fairly left, the Conservatives are fairly right. If we had a rank voting or IRV system, the conservatives would no doubt lose, and the majority of Canadians are left-leaning; they win because of FPTP. And yet, the left parties have not merged into one to opposed the Conservatives, and there's no signs that they will any time soon.

    206. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      the same end game would have been achieved had Motors Liquidation Co., at the time still named General Motors, never received its much vaunted and extolled "bail outs".

      Nope. They'd have to proceed to liquidation or very messy bankruptcy because there was no chance in hell to get bridge loans in the 2008-2009 climate. Federal government acted as a lender of last resort. And it worked.

    207. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by hey! · · Score: 1

      Actually you make my point. Superpowers don't take kindly to being jerked around by small countries over strategic resources, which is why many small, resource-rich countries end up run by corrupt, compliant regimes. In a cooler-heads-prevail scenario the oil card is a good one to hold in your hand, but we're not talking about a cooler-heads-prevail scenario. We're talking about an alternate-history scenario where hysterical hotheads hijack the state, and they'd be bound to push their luck too far.

      Venezuela (which is just a bit larger than Texas) gets away with it because they're just an annoyance. They have no choice but to sell their oil on the international market, so Hugo Chavez can shoot his mouth off all he wants. But if Venezuela actually had some kind of strategic hold over US energy supplies, Chavez would not be in power long.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    208. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by lightknight · · Score: 1

      Well, they need to protect their interests. We are well past the point of looking out for the good of everyone, and well into the looking out for yourself.

      Hell, if everyone thought the way they did, the country would be destroyed. It's only because a fair portion of the populace is blissfully unaware of how things are run that we haven't had a revolution yet. They just assume, blindly, that if it isn't bothering them, then everything is going fine.

      --
      I am John Hurt.
    209. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2 party system is the result of a winner take all plurality.

    210. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      Mitt was a dreadful choice for a conservative presidential candidate.

      A dreadful choice for the Republican Party indeed as Ritt Momney is an actual conservative. Those folks who call themselves "conservative" are anything but. They are radical reactionaries bordering on fascism who want nothing more than a return to the GIlded Age with Jim Crow, monopolistic industries, Wells Fargo as union (and head) busters, women without the vote, barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen and on and on and on.

      If these folks want to lie to themselves and call themselves "conservative," fine. But when they lie to me, I'm going to call them on it.

      What, IMHO, will eventually happen is that the non-batshit crazy Republicans will join the Democratic Party and the Left will end up in the Green Party or something similar. This will leave the reactionaries without a base and they will be exposed to all and sundry as the racist, misogynistic, greedy scumbags they are. Maybe then we can actually start to make this country great again.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    211. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      The last time that rhetoric was used the secessionist states were steamrolled into submission. No President will ever allow any group of states secede. And before you go one inch further down your idiot road, do remember that the vast majority of the big guns are in the hands of the US military, which answers directly to the President of the United States.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    212. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by disambiguated · · Score: 1

      No I don't have OCR software, but I figured out Google will do it (it's an option when you import an image to Google Docs.) I'm happy with PNG, if it must be an image, but FFS, why post a table of numbers as an IMAGE?

    213. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure what it is about the US that makes it impossible to have more than 2 parties, but first past the post isn't it.

      It's the fact that the 2 main parties run the elections.

    214. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except, you know, Texas is likely the only state that could pull it off.

    215. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by HermMunster · · Score: 1

      I think their success after secession would be limited to the point of starvation. They'd flip-flop in short order. And why complain now? They have had the same president for 4 years now and will only have him for 4 more. There's no rationale behind their actions.

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
    216. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't understand how secession works, do you?

    217. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See, if only it were that easy. Oklahoma recieves $1.36 per dollar sent while California receives $.78 per dollar sent, but that spread is covered by the cost of living difference between the two. $100,000OK-USD salary equates to $175,000CA-USD salary in spending terms, so the disparity that you see is simply inflation adjusted dollars being sent around. The dollars sent back are not inflation adjusted as the COLA is not that tightly regional for Medicaid, Medicare, and SoSec payments (at least last time I looked).

      Not bad for a state with 3.7million people, that supports a disproportionately large number of military bases and interstate highways.

      That's another reason that playing the "who gets a fair share" game is silly, for instance although Oklahoma is 28th in population, we are 5th in beef production, 8th in pork, 4th in wheat, were once #1 in peaches, 4th in oil, 3rd in natural gas. 18th in producing soldiers...

      So, you can eat your cheese and lettuce, I will be here grilling my steak relaxing after putting the boot to someone's ass to protect you and the Canadians.

    218. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      You just demonstrated why. Make it minorly annoying and few will bother.

    219. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by mark-t · · Score: 1
      I wasn't suggesting anything of the sort.... the reason most people vote for either of those two candidates is because people are failing to think longer term than just one election.

      If every single person whose *best* reason for voting for a particular candidate was only because they didn't want "the other guy" to win actually voted for the person who best represented their ideals, while a main candidate would still probably get in for that election, it would forever change the face of American politics as it becomes obvious that there are more than just two viable ways to vote. It's possible that the winner of the election wouldn't even have a majority

    220. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Nope. You're confusing the pre-bankruptcy bailouts with the governmental loan guarantees that took place post-bankruptcy. The bailouts were intended to prevent General Motors from having to go into bankruptcy. In the end, General Motors was forced into bankruptcy by the Federal Government and was given special privileges that would not normally be legal in a bankruptcy. If General Motors would have been forced into the same type of bankruptcy sooner, the bailouts could have been avoided entirely. In the end, the bailouts ended up becoming money that disappeared into effective nothingness.

    221. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not just about the primaries. The Republicans may have the H'n'N vote tied up, but that doesn't count for anything unless the H'n'Ns are sufficiently fired up to turn out to vote for their candidate. If those people see the candidate as "too liberal" (just like his opponent), a lot of the H'n'Ns will stay home, and then the Repubs will lose what should be eminently winnable states like Virginia and Florida.

      The GOP alliance built by Reagan - combining militarists, fundamentalists and plutocrats under one banner - has always had strains, and now it's falling apart. The GOP has yet to decide how it will realign itself. The Tea Party was just one - let's call it a 'suggestion' - for how it might do that, but I'm sure there will be others.

    222. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Formalin · · Score: 1

      Canada is rather an anomaly in this respect, FPTP generally leads to only two viable parties.

      But, regardless, there have still only been two parties (if you count the different iterations of the conservative party as the same) that have ever had power at the federal level in Canada, so it still holds true.

      The only time a third party gets second place is when Quebec feels like it. (Bloc in 1993, which was really a party made of defections of the first two anyway, and just recently the NDP, which is a genuine third party).

      Quick look at how badly FPTP hurts small parties:
      (% vote) (% seats)
      39.62% 53.90% (con)
      30.63% 33.44% (ndp)
      18.91% 11.04% (lib)
      6.04% 1.30% (bloc)
      3.91% 0.32% (grn)

      See how brutally that favours the top two parties? 70% of the vote gets 87% of the seats.

      What's even worse is that the first place contender often receives an absolute majority with less than a majority of voters supporting it, as in this case. FPTP causes this, and it's inherently undemocratic as far as I'm concerned.

    223. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by cybernanga · · Score: 1

      Oh, you thought you'd get to use the dollar? Uh, no, that's a United States Federal Reserve Note. Fuck off!

      There are already 10 other countries that use the US$ as their sole official currency, with a further 10 countries using it in parallel with their own currency.

      So no reason that seceded states couldn't do the same, it's not like you could effectively go and take the currency back.

      --
      www.Buy-Proxy.com - A "buyer-driven" global marketplace.
    224. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by jd2112 · · Score: 1

      Textbook examples of "conservative" or "liberal" are virtually nonexistent in the current political landscape. I think both parties have become bad caricatures of the other sides worst qualities.

      --
      Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
    225. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the alternative parties are more bat-shit crazy than the Republitards or Demofags.

    226. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by green1 · · Score: 1

      Nowhere did I say that the names of the parties had anything to do with the platforms they ran on, or the policies they implement.
      The Green party is "new" in that it is a lot newer than any other party, and in fact is very new to having actually elected members.
      The Bloc still exists, and it would be very dangerous to dismiss them as simply a "fringle party from quebec"
      The Conservatives were formed by the merger of the PCs and the Reform party, however it is very difficult to see them as a new party, in reality the PCs absorbed the reform party, and some policies changed, but it's not a new party.

      It appears that it is not my knowledge that is lacking on this subject, and additionally, none of the above does anything to counter the only point I made which is that first past the post has not caused us to lock in to a two party system.

    227. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by green1 · · Score: 1

      And no longer exists.

      But they do prove the point anyway, which is that first past the post does not prevent new parties from forming and being successful, there is obviously something completely different at play in the US to force the 2 party system.

    228. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, just wait, Texas will be a blue state by 2020:
      http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/could-latino-voters-turn-deep-red-texas-democratic-by-2020/257738/

    229. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Can we sue Canada or something for violating this law and making people look foolish?

    230. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Voyager529 · · Score: 1

      Oh, I live in the UK and was unaware of a third candidate. I thought the US was a two party only system?

      I recall at least five presidential candidates on my ballot when I voted, plus a write-in area where you could write the name of any US citizen* you wanted (which is what I did).

      The fact of the matter is that you have to go back to 1874 to find a president who wasn't either a democrat or a republican. My numbers are shady and even looking it up on Wikipedia is tricky, but I'm unaware of a situation in which a candidate who won even a single state's electoral votes that wasn't endorsed by either one of those two political parties. Thus, it's considered a "two party system" in that, for presidential elections, you've got roughly the same chances of winning the presidential election as a candidate that isn't either democrat or republican as you are to have your bad day of having your winning lottery ticket destroyed by a meteor being turned around by a group of RIAA executives deciding to donate all their lawsuit money to charity after buying you a Delorean that actually flies.

      Smaller offices are a bit different; there are a handful of congressmen in the House of Representatives (and possibly a senator or two) that are of the 'Independent' party. State, county, and local officials that frequently require only a few hundred votes to win are also more likely to be independent or some more obscure party. "Working families", "constitution", and "green" were all on the ballot this year, though typically for "district court judge" or "town treasurer" or something equally obscure, or a rehash of a candidate already running either on the democratic or republican platforms.

      Hope that helps clear things up! =)

    231. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by green1 · · Score: 1

      The two parties in the US are almost identical. There are no two parties in Canada that are anywhere near as close together ideologically as the Democrats and the Republicans.
      As for "so bad that I fell compelled to vote for the other major party" you are just proving that you WANT a two party system, you are the one forcing it (you and everyone who votes like you)
      We have had coordinated campaigns in Canada to vote ABC (Anybody But Conservative) that turned out unsuccessful. So that's similar to what you propose. However in general I think most people here still vote for who they want to win, not against who they want to loose. That's probably the big reason we can have the vast diversity of political parties (at least by American standards). Unfortunately most of the major parties here have started running similar attack ads to those that run in the USA now at election time, and more people are voting against people rather than for people, so I do worry that we may loose a lot of our democracy that way eventually.

    232. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1

      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.

      Absolutely, which is why they're so f**ked now. It's impossible to do any sort of compromise between the "relatively moderate, boring" position and the current "right" of the GOP without both sides being seriously unhappy. Christ, you had serious candidates for office talking about how "women's bodies have ways of shutting [rape pregnancy] down" in legitimate, so not only do we not have to do anything allowing for rape victims, but any woman who got pregnant must have secretly wanted it. I don't even know how far back you have to go to find that as an acceptable belief.

      Even if Romney won the election, no matter his actual leaning, he'd have to spend 4 years trying to convince the right not to torpedo him come re-election. Honestly, that's what I was more afraid of than Romney himself - he seems like a mostly-reasonable man, but his hand would be forced to the right trying to reassure the nutters who were never going to believe him anyway.

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    233. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by disambiguated · · Score: 5, Informative

      This looks like a good place to post this. I took the data from this economist article and broke it down by red vs. blue state according to this map. This is what I found:

      * There were 20 surplus states and 30 deficit states.
      * Of the 24 states that voted for Romney, 4 of them had a surplus.
      * Of the 26 states that voted for Obama, 16 of them had a surplus.
      * Together, the blue states had a net surplus of 2.57 trillion, the red states had a net deficit of 1.50 trillion.
      * The average blue state had a surplus of 98.8 billion; the average red state had a deficit of 63.0 billion.
      * Four blue states (New York, New Jersey, Illinois, and Minnesota) each had a surplus greater than all the red states with a surplus combined.

    234. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by disambiguated · · Score: 1

      If you're interested, I did the OCR and posted some numbers later in this thread.

    235. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by arthurpaliden · · Score: 1

      The ironic thing is that it evolved ..... and is now the Government .....

    236. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bzzzzzt, wrong!

      The main reason they don't have a chance of winning is because of the voting system which makes it extremely likely that, if there are two candidates that one would like to vote for, both will lose.

      To have viable third-part candidates, either there needs to be a landrush vote all at once (vanishingly small liklihood), or we need to be able to assign rankings to each of the choices.
      A gets 10 points
      B gets 10 points
      C gets none. Screw that candidate.

      That would work.
      One vote? All you get is the choice of lesser evils.

    237. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Wrong, they have no chance of winning because everyone who knows how the presidency works knows they will not be able to do anything. A third party president has no support in congress to create legislation, so unless you are supporting something they already want to do, a third party president is basically screwed or not needed. Sure, they can veto a bill they don't like, but congress seems to be keen on uniting to defeat the parties that appose them so I doubt there would be a problem overriding the veto unless it was extremely biased legislation..

    238. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by balajeerc · · Score: 1
    239. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      It really comes down to whether you want to do the "right thing", or to actually interact with reality (our two party system).

      Honestly, because of exactly what you said, I wont fault someone for voting third party-- but lets not kid ourselves, theyre dealing with reality as it SHOULD be, not as it is.

    240. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by evil_aaronm · · Score: 1

      A sensible Republican? Now, dammit, don't go confusing me like that. I have it firmly in my head that all Republicans are bat-shit crazy because time and again they put forth the worst, extremist candidates, like Palin, or Romney, or Bachman. I've seen it over and over - Republicans are like Siths: they see only absolutes, never the shades of grey. And here you are, sounding like a reasonable person, yet claiming to be a Republican.

      Say... Are you a Democrat trolling as a Republican?

    241. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by green1 · · Score: 1

      That's a stretch... I'd say the current Conservative party is still the PCs but with a few policies from the members of the Reform party that they absorbed. Either way it's still a very "Big government"/increased laws and regulations/increased spending party... though they also cater to the religious right that was at least partly the old Reform members (though they really refuse to cater to the fiscal right)

      Honestly I'm pretty disgusted with all our current political parties. I want a party that would decrease government spending, decrease government regulation, and basically stop selling the population out to big corporations and foreign governments... Unfortunately I think that's the basic platform of all our parties right now... except possibly the Greens, who wouldn't sell out to big corporations, but would instead regulate all jobs out of existence...

    242. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by evil_aaronm · · Score: 1

      Can you point to some recent literature that supports your "Half the nation wants socialism"?

    243. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by evil_aaronm · · Score: 1

      Can you paint a picture of the people who might want to secede? I'm having a hard time seeing anyone other than conservatives.

    244. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by oiron · · Score: 1

      Some living space wouldn't be a bad idea either, eh?

    245. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      If it came down to it, so you think any president would want to send the army to fight against people who were US citizens until only a few months ago?

      Why yes, since it happened before....the president who did was from Illinois. The people who want to secede say they are of his party....but seem to disavow everything he stood for.....they even want to disavow HIM, refusing to use his name on the day they celebrate their party. Those people have more in common with Jefferson Davis than they do Lincoln.

    246. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by slashmydots · · Score: 1

      Well that's funny because anyone who can do math seems to be able to calculate the cost of providing healthcare (directly or indirectly) to more people than before costs more money and the government is perpetually over budget.
      Oh and that's nice that that summary blatantly implies that anyone who doesn't like Obama is racist.

    247. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oklahoma recieves $1.36 per dollar sent while California receives $.78 per dollar sent, but that spread is covered by the cost of living difference between the two. $100,000OK-USD salary equates to $175,000CA-USD salary in spending terms

      Really? You're going to adjust for cost of living on the same currency? Should we be adjusting tax rates then according to the same standard too? Great idea.

      , for instance although Oklahoma is 28th in population, we are 5th in beef production, 8th in pork, 4th in wheat, were once #1 in peaches, 4th in oil, 3rd in natural gas. 18th in producing soldiers...

      Yeah, well all the money for those military bases comes from the federal government (disproportionally paid for in constant US dollars by Californians), and I for one have no problem moving those government jobs and soldiers out of the state. See how your economy does. Given the fact your electorate put that hackTom Coburn and James "global warming is a hoax" Inhoff in power, I give you, what, three years before you're a 3rd-world country?

      Enjoy your steak.

    248. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I read Ms. Stein's platform. "The only reason that they don't have any chance of winning" is because they are pants-on-head retarded.

    249. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know nobody cares about Africa, but don't forget Somalia. Clinton just sent troops in there like he owned the place. IIRC, it didn't end too well. Hell, I'm not sure it has ended. It's not like Somalia has ever stabilized.

    250. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Phroggy · · Score: 1

      We need a conservative party in this country, and I'm not sure the GOP is going to be it.

      We need a liberal party in this country too, and the Democrats don't seem to be interested.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    251. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      McCain hasn't been middle of the road since the 2000 primaries. Get over it.

    252. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Such a short term perspective...

      In actuality, a third party president would accomplish far more than what you perceive.

      In particular, it could deflate the perception that there are only ever two candidates that are worth voting for, which would have a profound effect on the outcome of future elections.

      In fact, that would happen even *IF* a third party didn't win the election.... but as long as everybody whose best reason for voting for either of the main two was just to keep "the other guy" from winning... because independents would make a substantial showing, possibly even winning in some states.

      Again... it's about perception... not who wins or who loses in the next election. That's way to short a term to make a difference. Once people are wakened to the notion that a vote for someone other than the "main two" actually might have some sort of chance, the face of American elections will never be the same.

      But of course, I'm thinking long term....not something that would necessarily make any difference in a short 4 years. That's way too brief a period to be concerned with.

    253. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by lord_mike · · Score: 1

      The difference between the American system and the British-style parliamentary systems are the size of the districts represented. When you have 600 members of parliament for a country the size of a large American State (i.e. Great Britain), it's a lot easier for third parties to thrive. The state of Florida is one of the most populous in the nation. It only has 27 representatives and 2 senators. That's a fraction of most parliamentary democracies with similar populations. Add to the fact that the districts are Gerrymandered to favor incumbents, third parties die off very quickly.

      There are exceptions. The New Hampshire House of Representatives is massive--over 400 representatives, one per 3,000 residents. Not surprisingly, the New Hampshire house membership swings wildly from one election to another. However, third party representation is still limited--the representatives are picked at large in multi-member districts. Again, the size of the district, even in this situation, prevents third parties from gaining a foothold.

    254. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately, you don't get to choose which states will go. you wont build a fence along the border with mexico now, what makes you think they will build one around each state? those states would probably build them themselves to keep you out...

    255. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those blue states he listed as part of Nuevo California? They have a net tax income (after tax expenditures) of greater than $1 trillion/year. The left-over red states? They'll need to sell all their oil to make up their greater than $1 trillion/year tax deficit.

      Of the 20 states which receive more taxes than they pay, 16 are 'red states'. Of the 30 states which pay more taxes than they receive, 26 are blue states. The so-called 'entitlement citizenry' are virtually all in red states. It's a shame you've bought into the anti-fact Republican rhetoric so thoroughly that having these simple facts posted (with links to documentation) several dozen times in the thread above this post was insufficient to shake your groundless belief in your own superiority.

    256. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by mark-t · · Score: 1

      The funny thing about this is that if you only took all of the people in the USA whose single best reason for voting for either of the main two candidates was just to try to prevent "the other guy" from winning, you'd end up with a not remotely insignificant percentage of the population whose tallied votes could even be enough to actually *win* an election with an alternative candidate of their choice. Even if that alternative vote was too divided and one of the "main two" still won... the impact that would be created from seeing such election results would forever change the way people perceive voting in the USA, and the following election would have a very different feel to it indeed.

      But if you're only ever looking no more than 4 years down the road, then yeah.... there's no reason at all to change.

    257. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Duverger's Law doesn't say FPP only allows two parties, it says that natural forces will favour such an arrangement.

      The Federal Canadian system reflects this as well.

      Through the 90's, power was essentially held by the center-left Liberals, as the right was significantly fractured being spread over at least two heavily regional bases. When the cons finally got their act together and merged, (and the Liberals imploded), we saw a switch in the dynamic. Now two+ left-leaning groups are splitting the vote and the Conservatives are ruining the Country with a "Majority Government" that was elected by less than 40% of the voting populace....

      There's no disproof of Duverger's here...

      -AC

    258. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pack up and leave.

      And anybody who wants to stay can stay and collect unemployment from Texas and whomever.

      Of course unemployment won't last long if at all, you know that who personal responsibility bit.

    259. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by masmullin · · Score: 1

      It's inevitable to have a two party system. NDP is moving more to the right, and Liberals are moving more to the left. Eventually we'll have the Liberal Democratic party vs the Conservatives. In Quebec it'll be LD vs BQ as Quebec hates the Tories (and frankly they are addicted to the handouts from the rest of Canada)

      Green party is going nowhere and never will, It's policies will be adopted by the NDP before NDP and Liberals merge.

      I think this is really too bad, because our version of democracy is based on individual ridings. I really hate that people think they are electing a prime minister (they are electing a member of parliament to represent them to the House of Commons).

    260. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by masmullin · · Score: 1

      Simple, Bill Clinton isn't a person... hes a sex machine. Awwweee yaaahhhh

    261. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Richard Nixon: Elected on a secret plan to end the Vietnam War in 1968, he expanded it into Laos and Cambodia, two countries who's only crime was being next to Vietnam.

      His "secret plan to end the war" was a secret plan to get elected in a country tired of the war LBJ and Bill Moyers lied us into... but those who knew him record that he really did want us out (LBJ was done-in by the war and Nixon wanted 2 terms) but Laos and Cambodia were in fact part of the war and nobody saw a path to either defeat the North Vietnamese or at least force them to the table without stopping their use of Laos and Cambodia.

      Gerald Ford: Actually made peace in Vietnam. He's not a contender for the "most warlike".

      He just carried-on the Nixon play using Nixon's advisors... The man had no path to make his own way since he was our most-illegitimate president. He was never elected president, and unlike any other VP he was appointed to his position rather than being elected by the people.

      Jimmy Carter: A few minor things, such as trying to rescue the hostages. Also not a contender.

      His absolute, total, complete, utter incompetence arguably lit the match on the bomb that is US-Iran relations and setup the negative tone for the past 40 years of conflicts... oh, but this is slashdot and ol' Jimmy is a Democrat... ok... move-along, nothing to see here...

      Ronald Reagan: Invaded Grenada, Honduras, ordered various operations against Libya, was on the outskirts of the Iran-Iraq War (supplying weapons to both sides and using US ships to protect Kuwaiti oil tankers).

      Let's see... Grenada, Honduras, and Libya... all were responses to violence against Americans or American allies and that's not war mongering. Yes, Reagan's admin provided intel (not weapons...which Saddam got from Russia) to Iraq during the Iraq-Iran war (you may be too young to remember just how bad Iran was in the post-Jimmy-Carter years... there was simply no way an American admin would allow them to come out on top in that war). As for the "arming both sides" thing... just a lie; the only arms Reagan provided to Iran were a handful of obsolete Hawk missiles transferred indirectly to Iran in an attempt to free an American from his captors. Jimmy Carter had indeed transferred many American weapons to Iran including a bunch of F-14 Tomcats (but Reagan ended that transfer and prevented the transfer of the final components so that Iran was never able to deploy the Tomcats... but I guess this does not fit your lefti-wing narrative). Had we transferred a significant arms cache to Iran, they would have won (since we had not armed Saddam Hussein, a fact proven by the history since we encountered all that soviet hardware in the later gulf war). Using our Navy to protect innocent civilian merchant vessels is a long-standing tradition of the U.S. and other civilized nations like the Brits have done this too... it's the opposite of war mongering. I note that you neglect to point out his cold war success... I guess that might be because leftists spent the entire 8 years of Reagan screeching that he was a war monger as he said that we could win the cold war by being strong enough to convince the other side they could not win... and then when he won it that way, effectively freeing more human beings than any other leader in world history and without firing a single shot, there was not one single apology to the man and no Nobel prize.

      George H.W. Bush: First Gulf War. Several smaller operations in Panama, Hondurus, and Liberia.

      Panama was a good thing... getting rid of a drug kingpin dictator who was not just oppressing his own people but also directly importing industrial quantities of drugs into the US. Honduras and Liberia? Really? Yeah, you got me there... the evil war monger Bush41 brutally invaded and took-over those two in a savage act of colonization and natural resource grabbing... oh, wait... never mind.

      Bill Clinton: Enforcing the no-fly zone in Iraq, air operations in f

    262. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I say "good fucking riddance"!! Let them rot in their ignorance, evangelical stupidity. Just don't come crying when you're invaded by Mexico!

    263. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it's the fact that the US is not a Parliamentary system.

      Not being Canadian, I may be mistaken on this, but I believe that in your Government, you elect local MPs, from whom a Prime Minister is selected to serve a similar function as the US President? Also, as I recall, only one body of your legislature is elected, with the other being appointed by the Governor General on the advice of the Prime Minister? With a smaller population further dedicated to elections much smaller in scope, it's not surprising that you have multiple parties - the impact of local conditions almost demands it.

      Contrast this to the US where we do have a national election, elect both of our legislative bodies, and have a larger population with the smallest groups, districts, electing Representatives, larger groups of people electing senators, and entire states (some the size of California, like ... California) voting together to elect a president, and it's easier to understand how a third party might not be able to develop enough traction with the general public to be perceived as successful overall.

    264. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On behalf of all Americans, we didn't ask you when we took it back in the day, and we sure as hell won't when we shove it right back at you. Remember the Alamo!

    265. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not saying I agree with the quoted claim, but isn't your list overlooking military actions undertaken during the Clinton Administration in a little place called Africa?

    266. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

      Your problem is that you are not very American in the traditional sense (not questioning your citizenship, etc. just pointing out that you have a set of beliefs that are probably very different from those of most people who lived in the country pre-1969) and are very modern American (in the sense of having a modern US non-education. I'm sure you are very good at using condoms and dental dams and think it's super-cool modern art to piss on a crucifix and swear at people you disagree with and think it's reasonable to have government do as much as possible.)

      From the point of view of people who loved the country when it was good and decent, the Democrats have the sexual pervert, child killing, 7th-century-jihad-hugging, drug-addicted, no-values, no-morals, no-ethics vote locked up. (And don't even try the bogus argument that people who loved America in 1969, or in the 1950s, loved slavery or segregation... the huge majority of this nation NEVER had slavery or segregation and the states that DID have those things were run by Democrats.)

      See? When you are so insular and such an arrogant jerk with your positions, it becomes VERY easy to construct a caricature of you opponents and then ridicule and/or denounce them. This is what jokers like Colbert, Stewart, and Maher do all the time, and their no-information followers fall right into it.

    267. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by khallow · · Score: 1

      Your list is to first order. That creates a big flaw in your conclusions.

      How much of that money stays in those states? The top states on that list all have businesses with considerable interstate reach. Money that goes to computer systems is probably going to benefit California sooner or later. Similarly finance and bond issues money will end up in New York or perhaps New Jersey. Agriculture money? Illinois is a good bet along with New York. Insurance payments? Connecticut.

      One can't really understand the impact of such spending without considering where the money goes.

    268. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dunno, remember how well armed the stereotypical Texan is - they might remember how they brought Texas into the union and start conquering parts of Mexico - for that matter, the Mexicans in the conquered parts might be okay with it if it brought order and reduced corruption.

    269. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Technically, there are federally invoked legal restrictions on how much currency the Bureau of Engraving and Printing is allowed the print, both in bills-by-volume and in terms of a dollar amount. (The same restriction is bizarrely not applied to US Mints, and so technically you're correct in that the Executive Branch could simply order minted two or three $1 trillion coins... Which everyone knows is absurd.) Aside from the legal restrictions and issues to "printing more money", the simple reason that this isn't done is that it immediately leads to inflation that makes what happened in the 80's look like a hiccup next to a volcano. Germany did this prior to WWII, and it led to documented cases of people needing wheelbarrows full of middle-to-high-denomination bills to buy one loaf of bread. Essentially, this will be viewed by our creditors in exactly the same way as a school kid, having promised everyone in the class a square of his Hershey bar tomorrow to make up for stealing all of their candy today, realizes that the candy only has 12 squares but the class has 24 kids, so he cuts each square in half and hands it out. Now, each kid in the class got back half of what was promised, and they're all going to be pissed.

      The value of US currency is determined by the trust that others have in the US that we won't go and do something like this.

    270. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by fearofcarpet · · Score: 1

      I don't know about the rest, but Oregon has been griping about being Oregon for as long as I can remember. Along the Oregon/California border you will see big signs saying "State of Jefferson" which would split off Southern Oregon and Northern California (possibly including the Bay Area) into their own state. Parts of Eastern Oregon simply want to secede and become a libertarian paradise. I suspect that this petition is mostly a reflection of this long standing movement which is driven, at least in part, by the feeling that rural/conservative votes are drown out by liberal/(sub)urban votes, which is not uncommon in the West Coast or in many big states where the population centers drive politics, but where most of the land is farms/reservations.

      --
      Actually, I wrote my thesis on life experience.
    271. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nevada, Colorado, Florida, and Wisconsin are all swing states, not overly liberal ones. For that matter, if we look back through history, California was the state that gave us Nixon and Reagan, so its roots are not truly liberal in the sense of NY/NJ or Massachusetts.

    272. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by fearofcarpet · · Score: 1

      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.

      Texas is also America's oil refinery. I think it would be an interesting experiment to let the Gulf states split off into America Jr, with Texas as their economic engine, selling refined oil and access to the Gulf to America Sr in exchange for protection. They could have their own super-conservative banana republic and the Texas board of education could stop setting textbook standards for America Sr.

      --
      Actually, I wrote my thesis on life experience.
    273. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guarantee you that most of those states are edging bankruptcy and those are all blue states while the red states tend to avoid bankruptcy. There will always be people trying to beg for handouts and there are also some federal aid that is almost compulsory by the obama administration like the highway improvement thing. At the end of the day though, I want to punch people for pretending that liberals are better than republicans and vice-versa. The is the UNITED States of America, not the Divided Citizens of Some Bankrupt Country.

    274. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      To be fair:

      Along with some lone nutjobs from Texas and Louisiana, the other petitioners interested in secession are some lone nutjobs in Kentucky, Oregon, Montana, North Dakota, Mississippi, North Carolina, Florida, Georgia, New York, New Jersey, Colorado, Arkansas, South Carolina, and Missouri.

      This aren't state representatives or even anything remotely close to majority groups trying to secede.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    275. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      They don't even need to print money, as they have an excellent credit rating - well, as long as the GOP doesn't try to trash it like last year. Folks, government debt is not remotely comparable to your credit card.

      I,as an outsider find this whole debacle hugely amusing, to be honest. The very guys wanking off daily to the holy constitution decide that after losing a democratic election for the presidency - a very core concept of said constitution - they gonna petition for secession. Right. Very constitutional patriots you are. Not. Petulant 5-year olds throwing a tantrum in Walmart because they didn't get their candy.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    276. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by CAIMLAS · · Score: 0

      They're mostly the poorest states that use the most welfare and medicaid and medicare per capita.

      California, New York, Illinois, and DC are leaving the US? Maybe we were reading different articles...

      I also find it somewhat ironic that the lack of the balanced budget you claim those states are responsible for is "welfare, medicaid, and medicare".

      Give all the right wing conservatives a year to relocate to the red state of their choice then close the borders.

      By the following year, the "blue" states would be petitioning the "red" state capitols for redress and assistance, both independently and collectively.

      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.

      How horribly trite and small-minded. Do you live by stereotypes? You will indeed be fully energy independent - you'll be bankrupt, with no exploitable reserves or ways to refine them, your economy will be shot due to high energy costs, and everyone will be bemoaning the $1.50/gallon for fuel in the clean air/blue sky Free States.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    277. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Losing the right to print currency is legitimate, but there is no justification for depriving private citizens or even local and state governments of their current wealth. The US Dollar is a reserve currency for a number of fragile young nations, so there is no reason it shouldn't be able to be used by seceding states. Border towns in Mexico and Canada often are fine accepting the dollar as payment. A *former US state(s)* dollar would probably emerge that would start trading at parity and either appreciate or decline in value as the Euro did after it was established. There would probably be some form of sale of military bases in these states and their assets due to the expense of transporting all the war material and building new bases to house them. This would also be the only way to transfer part of the national debt to the seceding states.

    278. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He also mandated that all policies cover a heck of a lot more than anything Heritage would have endorsed - I'm in favor of requiring catastrophic coverage policies, but mandating annual wellness visits, free contraceptives, etc. is where I, as a fiscal conservative/social moderate, break with him. He also restricted Health Savings Account contributions (I still don't understand why they are set up as use it or loose it rather than as literal savings accounts that accrue interest until they are tapped when you are ill/injured). If the wellness visits/contraceptives are true cost savers, insurers will implement them without government interference and we can avoid the whole argument about what is a religious institution for contraceptive coverage purposes.

    279. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well i dont know about the rest of the states, but it is ILLEGAL for Texas to have a deficit. Texas always runs a balanced budget because they have to.

    280. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

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

      Yes, this makes total sense when talking about American politics. Pfft.

    281. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I hope you are young... like highschool aged... so that you will be around to accept responsibility for your particular insanity.

      The laws of economics, like the laws of physics, cannot be violated.

      Printing money with no underlying additional asset to justify it, just makes more "dollars" available to represent the value that exists... which means the value of each dollar falls. This means (as a simple example) that a particular item that used to be equal to 5 dollars in value becomes equal to 6 dollars in value (this is called "inflation") not because the seller is evil and greedy but because the dollar is more plentiful and therefore worth less (until you print so many that, like the Deutche Mark in Weimar Germany, your currency unit becomes worthless... this is called "hyperinflation" and leads to very bad things... like crowds of hungry citizens willing to support anybody who promises a way out, no matter how bad his upper-lip hair, comb-over, and apparent tan-shirts-and-black-boots fetish ).

      Obama has been printing money at an astonomical rate to cover for his insane spending levels (approx 1.5 TRILLION in new debt EVERY YEAR) that it will be nearly impossible to avoid hyperinflation. At some point, perhaps after he finally leaves office, SOMEBODY will have to let the inflation kick-in... just as somebody who jumps off a cliff without a parachute will EVENTUALLY hit the ground... the basic laws of the universe cannot be denied. The best part of all this is that it is the young people who voted for the dolt who will live to see the pain... the sad part is that many young people did not vote for him but they too will suffer, as will those who grow-up and realize their error but still must face the music.

      Obama's borrowing and spending is so insane that the money he BORROWS EACH AND EVERY YEAR would have funded Kennedy's entire Apollo moon program, or BOTH of Bush jr's entire wars. Judging from the responses of young people about this, I'd say they must no longer teach math in the schools...

      You are right that we are not technically "insolvent" in the sense that we still have assets that can be sold off by our creditors... but nobody who claims we are not insolvent would be willing to either sell-off the assets (wanna sell Hawaii?) or prevent our creditors from selling them off (want a nuclear war with China?)

    282. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      Speaking as a Californian:

      California is only liberal due to the 52% of the state that is Hispanic or Asian.

      Why do Hispanics like Democrats? Immigration issues.

      Why do Hispanics hate Democrats? Water issues.

      The Republicans could split the Hispanic vote away from the Democrats on these two issues and take back a majority - but since Bush Sr's decision to abandon the state there hasn't been any sort of organized conservative presence here, other than some Tea Party protests. So the state has been going more and more liberal. (Democrats now have a supermajority in our state legislature.)

      But yeah, we had a Republican governor right up through last year, which means it's not really as liberal as people think it is.

    283. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Cyberax · · Score: 1
      Is it you, Mr. Orwell?

      The company received $33 billion in debtor-in-possession financing to complete the process.[5] GM filed for Chapter 11 reorganization in the Manhattan New York federal bankruptcy court on June 1, 2009 at approximately 8:00 am EST. June 1, 2009 was the deadline to supply an acceptable viability plan to the U.S. Treasury. The filing reported US$82.29 billion in assets and US$172.81 billion in debt.[6][7] [8][9][10]

      They had to use government's help to keep running through reorganization. And even after it they haven't become profitable in a week (or even a year).

    284. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ..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.

      Secession is not necessarily economically a bad idea Texas is ranked 15th in world economy an there are almost 200 countries which gives Texas a good chance. Mitt has a record of turning debt into surplus and fixing things while Obama has only failed with his high point being the autobailout which Bush started but left office before it coul be finished. So congrats for taking credit for something someone else began. Second if Mitt was a bad choice economically then what is Obama? Our debt has skyrocketed family income has fallen and its going to continue to go badly once Obamas health care starts adding another 2 trillion of unfunded spending. Finally if Obama won fair and square how is Ohio so skewed to where Romney didn't get a single vote in almost 100 counties and one or two in almost 50 more. A vast amount of voting problems were reported and not addressed also how does Obama win an Ohio district with 130,000 votes out of 98,000 voters? That literally is not possible unless some fraud has occurred.

    285. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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

      Too risky to his re-election bid, maybe.

      Oh, and he's on the right side on the . . .basic-human-freedom issues that used to be considered part of the conservative promise.

      The basic-human-freedom issues like drone strikes on civilians?

    286. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See, I thought that was the case with McCain, too. But since the election he's maintained his crazy-ass right-wing stances that he suddenly picked up in the spring of 2008. I'm starting to think that he had a silent stroke, rather than just being an election tactic.

    287. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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

      Sorry, but I'd much rather have beef and bacon and whiskey than lettuce and wine.

    288. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Well, could the South rise again? I guess nobody will keep them from seceding this time.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    289. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You get to be both in the United States of Jesusland, and the Nuevo California! Though I'd go with going crazy, as a case of multiple personality disorder, bipolar disorder, or schizophrenia will be helpful in coping.

    290. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The pirate party may also make its way into Canada from what I hear. Not sure if they will succeed but that doesn't matter because we're talking about the US seceding.

    291. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Noughmad · · Score: 1

      If at first you don't secede...

      --
      PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
    292. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by fliptout · · Score: 1

      Fiat money blah blah. I am sick of hearing that. Feel free to cash out your bank account and start a bonfire.

      --
      A witty saying proves you are wittier than the next guy.
    293. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by CAIMLAS · · Score: 0

      And if we're being honest(snicker), you're wrong.

      None of those states, except Connecticut and Delaware, are really all that liberal. Even when you look at a county-by-county Presidential election map from last week, Obama only took the more populous areas. Due to how electoral votes are now divided, that was enough to win. It's quite clear that the electoral system was gamed, with the vast majority of the country preferring Romney, of all candidates, over him.

      So what really should be proposed here is letting the states secede the cities, on behalf of the cities.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    294. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by riverat1 · · Score: 1

      It should be "secession".

    295. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You aint leein the Rupert Murdoch machine over here in Australia only covered the 2 parties and when I told Australians there was a 3rd party they looked confused.

    296. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by CAIMLAS · · Score: 0

      You don't seem to understand how something like that would work.

      "Give" them a state? No, Texas would chose to leave, if they were to do so. If Texas were to go, AZ, Montana, North Dakota, Nevada, Utah, and pretty much everything in between would go, too. You'd lose a substantial number of the states West of the Mississippi, and they'd have a fair amount of sympathy from the non-urban, non-reservation parts of places like PA, FL, NV, etc. Alaska would likely throw in, or even say, "leave us alone".

      Congratulations, you just lost a substantial amount (even a majority) of your domestic refineries, domestic resources, and domestic food production. These are not states lacking industry, either - in many cases, they're where the industry actually occurs, in no small part because it's economically unfeasible to do those things at all in more tax progressive states.

      But that kind of loss wouldn't be all - you'd also lose out to competition. You could expect those states (and possibly the new nation) to do what is necessary to thrive. Since they'd be leaving a government-heavy nation for that very reason, expect small government. Expect taxes and regulations to not burden innovation or even the exploitation of resources. There would be a lot of opportunity for all kinds due to the restructuring of power, and it would result in strong competition with the "United States" - now divided by an economically competitive nation.

      Of course, the USA would not allow for that division - there'd be disagreement on whether or not they're even allowed to do that. The Civil War "concluded" it's not allowable for states to leave the Union. So there'd be military enforcement of the union. Lines would get drawn, and allegiance would be staked on one side or another (one reason why the US government composes its military units with troops from multiple regions instead of from geographic areas now). But it would still happen, particularly with the NG units. Military bases would come under the command of localities.

      Basically, you'd be looking at a civil war or a drastic reversal of Federal policies and urban attitudes. I'm not counting on urbanites looking at harsh realities, so it's more than likely another aggressive war forged by the Union against a lesser force with greater resources. It would not end well for anyone.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    297. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      So are you saying that the 'stuff that got (Nixon) impeached' were distinctly conservative? That's laughable. I guess all negative characteristics of a candidate are considered conservative, then? That makes Lenin and Stalin pretty damn conservative, then...

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    298. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Patch86 · · Score: 1

      The US is basically crying out for what happened in the UK in the early 20th century.

      We had a nominally left wing party, and a right wing party (Liberals and Conservatives). But both were creeping further to the right; the Liberals were arguably not really left wing at all, just "more left" than the other guys. A new "actually left wing" party was established- Labour. They quickly harvested all the voters who were voting Liberal because there was no better left wing choice. But moreover, their success dragged the entire discourse to the left; once Labour were popular, the Conservatives were some of the biggest backers of the Beveridge Report- the founding of the UK welfare state.

    299. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      There was basically not a single 'point' the GP made which wasn't also a half-truth (at best). No point in arguing with that kind of person.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    300. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by riverat1 · · Score: 1

      I don't see how gerrymandering has any effect on why your Congressman is Republican since the whole state is one congressional district.

    301. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by riverat1 · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, it won't be more than a decade, two at the outside before the effects of climate change become undeniable. Obvious enough for anyone with the least connection with reality to realize it's a problem.

    302. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by riverat1 · · Score: 1

      That's true of every state except Vermont I think. It's written into their Constitutions.

    303. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by mvdwege · · Score: 1

      Comrade, the talking point of today is how the timing of Petraeus resignation is suspicious with the Benghazi hearings coming up.

      Get with the program already.

      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
    304. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by pecosdave · · Score: 1, Funny

      I say we accept this proposal. We can move the capitol back to Houston, dig up Austin from around the edges, then when we have it up in the air turn it upside down and replant it.

      --
      The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    305. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, Arrow's Impossibility Theorem.

    306. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by pecosdave · · Score: 1

      Take care of the problems with illegal immigration - mostly the free ride which is exploited heavily in the western part of the state and a large part of why New Mexico is on the bottom of the list - and Texas would easily become dark green on that map.

      I'm not saying slam the border shut. There's reasons the anti-immigration people have their stance. Those problems can be fixed why liberalizing the immigration policy fixing many issues.

      --
      The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    307. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

      Quite right. My apologies. Total brain fart. Too much election, not enough sleep.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    308. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      I do not think that having a powerless figurehead as president that congress will likely buck at any chance would do anything you laid out. It would show how utterly powerless the presidency is if it does not have a backing in congress. In fact, that's probably the biggest reason third parties cannot get elected at all now anyways. We have 50 senators and 435 some representatives- not to mention state and local governments and if they cannot get elected there, they won't be elected in the one race where everyone is voting instead of just a percentage of the country.

      Third parties are a lot like Christian denominations anyways. Not to say they are ultra religious or anything, they agree with the majority of the religion (one of the major political parties) but strongly disagree on a few things making them a different denominations. Last time I checked, there were over 3000 specific Christian denomination. So third parties generally agree with 80% or so of the two big parties and if the disagreement portions aren't common enough err popular enough, no one with half a clue will bother with them. Especially when they concentrate their advertisement on the differences. Most independents who get elected that I can think of are one of the big party candidates who for whatever reason went party shopping (think Lieberman).

    309. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      | 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.

      Suicide bombers and all? Somehow I think you are projecting based on a total lack of understanding.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    310. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by MouseTheLuckyDog · · Score: 2

      I've only seen a couple of the petitions. They don't ask to secede they ask that they be allowed to secede peacefully

    311. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by terjeber · · Score: 2

      That would be a good long-term investment too, since all those Texans would eventually become new oil to harvest.

    312. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by guspasho · · Score: 1

      The big debates are run by the Democratic and Republican parties. No way in hell will they let a third party candidate in. The even had the third party candidates arrested for trying to attend one as an audience member. They also put the threshold much higher than 5%.

    313. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by guspasho · · Score: 1

      No, they don't have a chance because the system is gamed against them. How many times did you have to hear someone talk about Ralph Nader and spoiler candidates? You can't vote for Jill Stein because your vote might mean that your state will go to Romney, therefore a vote for Jill Stein is a vote for Mitt Romney. How many times did you have to listen to arguments like that? That's exactly the problem. The winner-take-all system naturally leads to a duopoly.

    314. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oregon isn't very red, nor poor, unless you take eastern Oregon by itself. Eastern Oregon and Washington have always been largely rural, conservative, and agricultural. There are actually some small movements to break up Washington or Oregon and make a new state, though it'll never happen.

    315. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Jawnn · · Score: 1

      While you and are, by most measures, far apart on our views, may I say, sir, that your post is refreshing in it's honest analysis of what a disaster Romney was for the Republicans and would have been for the nation. "Fiscal conservative" does NOT simply mean "lower taxes". Reagan and Bush tax cuts, along with neither party's willingness to control spending, have threatened to bankrupt this country. And may I add that your view of the "personhood" issue is also refreshingly out of line with Republican dogma. Now, kindly STFU. We don't actually want clear thinking, fairness and reason to gain a foothold in the GOP.

    316. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by guspasho · · Score: 1

      I seem to remember this happening recently, once or twice. The candidates got enough of the vote that the party got federal funding for the next election cycle, but the party was flooded with false flag operatives from one of the two big parties and they destroyed them. I think this happened to the Reform Party (Ross Perot's party) and maybe Jesse Ventura's party?

    317. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Xest · · Score: 1

      But even the British system is basically two party, so even there it doesn't work.

      The closest thing the UK has to a 3rd party is the Liberal Democrat party that whilst it gets a decent number of seats, even as a coalition partner for the first time in it's modern existence it's still been marginalised into irrelevance.

      First past the post just isn't healthy full stop. It exists purely to allow well oranised minority interests to get majority power to the detriment of the large swathes of the population (often 65%+) that they do not represent.

    318. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by guspasho · · Score: 1

      All that unregulated pollution isn't going to just get prayed away.

    319. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      I don't think most voters knew she was gay. It wasn't used as a campaign weapon and I've heard several Wisconsin residents tell me they had no clue until they were bragging about it after she won. I'm not sure it has much meaning at all.

    320. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, she's a moderate. The US lacks a left. That said, I'd vote for her.

    321. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Not really. A lot of that tax cost is in implementing federal mandates that are largely rammed down the throats by the blue states. Most of it would disappear and is only there because they know if the cost isn't picked up to some degree, the mandate would be ignored or challenged on the 10th amendment grounds..

    322. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

      Better plan:
      1. Let Texas leave.
      2. Declare War on the newly formed Terrorist Nation.
      3. Take over, but make it a Territory and don't even offer them Statehood.
      4. Keep going, and take over Mexico as well.
      5. Give Mexico official Statehood, so we're back to 50 and don't have to redesign the flag.

    323. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm from Montana. I haven't heard jack shit about any such petition, but I have a pretty good idea where these are coming from. They're coming from the NorthWest corner of the state where there are several small but active neo-nazi/white-power groups. Where I live, there are plenty of ultra-conservatives who can't stand the thought of a nigger in the White House, but even they aren't interested in leaving the union. Rather, they're just stockpiling ammunition and food supplies in case Obama's Nigger-Colored helicopters show up with the secret UN army he's got hiding under his wife's ass.

      And for the record, no I'm not a racist and yes I have actually heard people say shit like that.

    324. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by fuzzybunny · · Score: 1

      We "let" them try it last time. "Try" being the operative word.

      I still say the North should apologize for all that unpleasantness in 1860-65, tell them they're free to go, and throw in some cash and parts of the Midwest as a goodwill gesture. Buh-bye, don't forget to write!

      --
      Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage
    325. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "use the most welfare and medicaid and medicare per capita."

      That's because of the blacks. Were these states to secede, they wouldn't bother supporting black communities with welfare and medicare.

    326. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you neglect the fact that Southern states are the ones filled with African Americans who are precisely the people that use up welfare. Were the states to secede do you think they would spend tax dollars propping up blacks? Probably not. They would switch back to Jim Crow and let the blacks manage themselves.

    327. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I expect these petitions are coming from the red areas and won't amount to a thing

      MT guy here as well. I'd bet most of these "signatures" are coming from the Kalispell area.

    328. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by dave420 · · Score: 2

      California is socially liberal and fiscally conservative. It has little to do with Hispanics and Asians, just Californians in general being Californian in their outlook.

    329. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Surplus vs. Deficit isn't really worth much as a statistic. Without examining WHY each state runs a deficit/surplus it doesn't make any sense to try and make a political association.

    330. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by pgdave · · Score: 1

      right now, there is probably still a lot of countries in latin america that would love the opportunity to join the US.

      I can tell right there, that you've never visited South America.

    331. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not the media's fault. It's the "first past the post" voting system that's in place all the way from the bottom to the top. That's why there are two dominant parties. Until that's changed votes for a third party cannabalize votes that would go to one of the major party candidates and hurt their chances to be elected (see Gore, Al).

      I call bullshit. If there had been no third party on my ballot, I'd have written in someone like Cthulu... why choose the lesser evil, after all?
      But seriously, the third party is not stealing votes- you're assuming that had I not voted for the 3rd party, that I'd have voted for the loser. And at least for me personally, that has never been how I'd have cast my vote.

    332. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Alioth · · Score: 1

      Good. We need to get rid of the nuclear submarines, they are a complete waste of money.

    333. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lan for healthcare, which was based on the idea of individual responsibility

      Ok all other things aside, that's just not true. If it was based on individual responsibility, then you'd have to demonstrate a financial need and lack of assets before getting government assistance.
      When I was 20, I busted my arm and paid several grand out of my own pocket. Ya, it sucked a little bit, and I wasn't able to buy as many video games and fancy electronics or the new car I wanted. But I did it, and even if I hadn't come up with the cash I could have setup a payment plan. A couple years ago, I fucked up my ankle and although I could have paid the entire medical and rehab cost out of pocket, and without any financial hardship, I instead forked over about $400 for the insurance co-pay/deductible and "someone else" ended up making up the rest of that cost through higher premiums... including higher premiums for people who make far less money than I do.

    334. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, Bill Clinton had lots of war-lust. Do you remember his era? That was when people talked about Wag the Dog, and distracting from sex scandals by going to war. Clinton was the most warlike president of all since Johnson. At least until Bush Jr went crazy.

      The sex scandal just so happened to hit the news when Clinton was trying to get Congressional support to go after a group of assholes who had been making threats about killing Americans. Al Queda, they were called, and because the GOP was so desperately trying to dig up anything they could use to try and get rid of him all he was able to do was blow up a training camp with a couple cruise missiles.

      While I enjoyed the movie you mention, the "false war" they were drawing a parallel to was the Bosnian-Serbian conflict and the whole nasty business in Rawanda. In both cases there were horrible war crimes being committed, genocide, etc. but asshats like you can only stumble around muttering "warmonger".

    335. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by squiggleslash · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    336. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      haha, best beaches in the world are in Alabama, we'd get to keep the hottest chicks in the world (no walmart photos please), AND we'd get to teach our children how Jesus hung tough for over 8 seconds on a dinosaur!

      Seriously though, I think this is more about wanting to express disgust in the way our federal government is allowing the rich (large corporations) substantially more rights than the poor (the people). It has very little to do with any one state wanting to try to create it's own country overnight, everyone knows that's a horrible idea. However, suppose more states want this than anyone first thought, and something materializes and provokes change?

    337. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      From a political consultant's point of view a vote for a third party candidate is a vote that could have been won by your candidate had you more in common with them.

      If Obama had lost, and the socialist candidate at this election had picked up 5% of votes in each state, do you think the Democratic candidate in four years would be to Obama's left or right?

      If the Constitution Party's candidate had picked up 5% of votes in each state in this election, do you think the Republican candidate in four years will be to Mitt's left or right?

      Oh, and if the socialist candidate at this election had picked up 5% of votes in each state, Obama has won, and the Constitution Party hasn't won anything, do you think both the Democratic and Republican candidates in four years will be to the left or right of the two that ran this year? Likewise, run the same thought experiment with the Constitution Party winning lots of votes and the Socialists winning zero.

      I didn't vote third party this year, but I was on the verge of doing so. The problem is that the Republicans are so bat-shit crazy at the moment I couldn't take the risk.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    338. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not everyone in Louisiana is desirous of leaving the Union. I say we give them berks just what they want: Revoke their citizenship, and send them packing. Maybe Cuba can figure out what to do with them. Nobody is forcing them to be American, they can leave if they don't like it. But we keep the land and the resources.

    339. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "OTOH, I don't think a bunch of little countries here would be pretty, either. I give it a rousing "ain't gonna happen" :)"

      It's a fashionable thing these days to act all hurt about the "imposition" of taxes, laws, and anything else people can think of on their local concerns, while neglecting the fact that together states are stronger economically and politically. It doesn't matter if it's the states in the United States, Quebec and The Rest of Canada, Scotland and the UK, whatever. There's talk of separation and has been for a long time.

      There are a lot of (in my opinion) petty, nationalistic people around who think things will automatically become better if they just secede from whatever federation or other organization they are a part of, right down to little municipalities if that is what it takes for them to feel as if they have more control. Everybody else is the problem, not "us", so let's get rid of our connection to "them". In reality, the smaller and more local the government, the easier it will be for large companies to play states off against each other in a bidding war for lowest taxes and the best concessions (already happens, but worse), the easier it will be to corrupt local officials (because there's nobody over their head), the easier it will be to inflame the differences between people and start picking up guns to solve problems instead of negotiating, the harder it will be to conduct trade (because you have to cross borders and different laws), and the harder it will be to pool our resources to solve big problems. Maybe you'll *feel* more free, but you won't really be. You'll just be beholden to some local governor and local municipal king instead of someone further away, and they can become just as corrupt and self-interested as anyone else.

      Some of the people driving these smaller nationalistic sentiments just want the elevation of power they'll get by becoming master of a country. They aren't really particularly democratic. That's just a means to an end. The most egregious example I know of this was expressed during the last referendum in Quebec, when on the evening of the insanely close results (49.42% "yes" on separation, 50.58% "no"), the then-premier, potentially leader of a new free Quebec, said the loss was due to "money and the ethic vote" (translated). I remember sitting there listening to the French, and thinking "I can't be translating this right", but, no, after a whole campaign emphasizing how Quebec would be inclusive of all cultures, he basically blamed the loss on "them" versus "us" (francophones). It was pretty disgusting to watch.

      You can complain that broader national governments can get bloated and incompetent and local governments might become more answerable to the people, but I don't think a patchwork of laws and international borders helps anything either. There are some principles that we all share, and if we can agree on those, it saves a lot of time and money to consolidate the policing of those issues, at least. In my opinion the best thing to do if federal governments aren't doing their jobs is to get involved and fix them. If you have to, renegotiate the terms of the federation. Difficult, but worth it if you can work things out. Maybe the bargain is due for an update from time-to-time.

      But, hey, if people can't agree on the principles in a federation of states, I guess they can say "screw the whole thing" and separate. It's a democracy. I just think it gets a bit silly when there are probably pockets of people within those smaller states that would themselves want to secede from their newly-independent state, and it would be pretty hypocritical to not let them do so if they democratically voted that way (e.g., there are large parts of Montreal and northern Quebec who would want to stay in Canada if Quebec separated). If you are willing to deal with that kind of inevitabl

    340. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Congratulations, you just lost a substantial amount (even a majority) of your domestic refineries, domestic resources, and domestic food production. These are not states lacking industry, either - in many cases, they're where the industry actually occurs, in no small part because it's economically unfeasible to do those things at all in more tax progressive states.

      I disagree. The short term shockwaves would be pretty epic, but as far as food production Mexico, Canada, and South America work just fine. Secondly, as far as so-called 'industry' goes, a couple of Hyundai plants and the research triangle in Carolina ain't SHIT compared to the Route 128 tech loop in New England or Silly Valley out in CA. You don't have MIT. You don't have Stanford. Hell, you don't even have RPI or WPI... all you've got at that point is BYU, Rice, and the knuckle-dragging Carnegie Mellon wannabes at GA Tech. Also, do not forget that despite the economy, the rust belt has forgotten more about manufacturing than the bible belt will ever know. The one achilles heel is indeed oil refining, which sooner or later would be solved.

      As a blue stater I've wanted rid of you waste products for quite awhile.. I only wish it would actually happen. Your model is China: race to the bottom.. oh yeah, and that coupled with a belief of an invisible man in the sky. My model is Germany and Scandinavia. Looking at the south and most of the west is like going full retard, and you never, ever go full retard.

    341. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by smpoole7 · · Score: 1

      > I'm not sure what it is about the US that makes it impossible to have more than 2 parties, but first past the post isn't it.

      The media, for one. Remember, we have a free market, ratings-driven media system. Unless a candidate has more than a few percentage in the polls, he/she will rarely be mentioned in the news. The viewers/listeners/readers aren't interested, so the media isn't interested, which lowers interest even further. It's a positive-feedback loop. Net result: most Americans don't even know who Buddy Roemer and Gary Johnson are.

      The government itself, for another. I learned this as a lad. My father was Chairman of the Board of Elections in our little county, and was a good Democrat from a long line of Democrats. The rules state that the local board must have a majority of the same party as the Governor, so when the first Republican governor in decades was elected, the board became Republican and my father lost his position. Not a big deal, and I'm not whining (neither did my father), but that type of thing indicates why a two-party system is sort of hard-coded into things here in the States.

      But to illustrate the point: after that Republican governor won, there were magically and suddenly lots and lots of folks who changed their registration from Dem to Repub. In fact, the secretary at the Board of Elections office was one of them! :)

      It's not "de jure," it's "de facto." One thing that Dems and Repubs can agree on -- vehemently -- is that they will do nothing whatsoever to permit new political parties to prosper.

      --
      Cogito, igitur comedam pizza.
    342. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by smpoole7 · · Score: 1

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

      Actually, there's some fascinating analysis going on right now that shows that about 3 million registered Republicans didn't bother to vote. I'm still waiting on some hard numbers, but it *looks* like (as I write this) that a number of the "hick and nutter" voters, as you call them, thought Romney was too moderate to bother with. Ergo, they didn't vote at all.

      This line of analysis notes that Romney experienced a nice surge in the polls after the first debate, but by the third, when he was playing a prevent defense and agreeing with Obama as much as disagreeing, he went flat again.

      For what that's worth. Just an observation.

      --
      Cogito, igitur comedam pizza.
    343. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by njinsa · · Score: 1

      This is something you could get some major news stations to do a report.

    344. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

      Well, even hypothetically assuming they would not object to it, frankly, I think you are underestimating the problems those countries have when you so lightly wave your hand and declare that you would "put the place in order" just like that. In fact, if you look in your own backyard, and your own prison yards, you'll find out that even your place is not exactly in the order.

      The order comes from sum of vested interests into it. On the other hand, interests don't get vested into out of order places, for the good reason. You need to eliminate criminals, then make sure they don't re-spawn, i.e. you have to offer a proper way of success in life, for most anyone, in less than their lifetime. For that, there has to be at least one proper way, and obviously today it is hard to find a credible one.

    345. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bloc Quebecois is a regional party only. Is there anyone voting for them outside Quebec? If they get their major party platform do they cease to exist as a party? They have 4 seats out of 413, with their regional focus, lack of nationwide support and frankly irrelevant numbers they aren't a major party, just a loud one.

      According to the latest numbers the Green Party has 1 seat in the House of Commons. That's less than the regional secessionists. Not a major party either.

      The three way split between Conservative, Liberal and New Democrats needs further looking into. Particularly the anomaly that the New Democrats have 100 seats in the House but 0 in the senate.
      The Senate is clearly a two party split Conservative (60) / Liberal (38) with Vacant (4) outnumbering the other parties (3). The House is also a two party split Conservative (163) / New Democrat (100) with a sizable Liberal (35) minority. The other 7 are irrelevant not major parties.

      Because of the lack of the New Democrats in the Senate I'd say that the New Democrat/Liberal party is in a state of flux and will work itself out into a single party within a few election cycles. In fact doing a little research show that 2 parties the Conservative and the Liberal have ruled Canada since the mid 1800s. Swapping off being the majority. The New Democrats are lacking the Senate because it appears they appointed for life or age 75. Since the New Democrats have never had a majority they have never been appointed.

      Looking at it yes its a two party system. The New Democrats are on the rise and replacing the Liberal party and it is taking longer than it usually does in a first past the post system because of the appointment nature of the Senate. It will work itself out back to just 2 parties with a handful of extremists rather shortly.

    346. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check out the tax rates in those "surplus states" and then compare them to the average red state.

    347. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't be too quick to throw Florida in as a "liberal" state. Granted, it went to Obama this time, but only by a razor-thin margin (49.14% to 50%) [citation supplied], and they went D for the senate seat that was up, but 15 of the 22 "opposed" representative races went to republicans, and it's pretty red at the state level, too.

    348. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just what we need. Another protesting Jewess who wants to shut down America's energy supply.

    349. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not this tripe again.

      The United States was born to exceptionalism. It alone, amongst the nations of the world, was formed For the People, By the People.

      As such, your "world political spectrum" doesn't apply here. In the "world", Communism is left, Facism is right, and who knows where all the dictators fall. You are talking about an economic spectrum, because it's never occurred to any other government to include Personal Liberty in the equation. In the US, we classify all that garbage as Totalitarianism.

      Have a look at The 5000 Year Leap, W. Cleon Skousen. The US politcal spectrum, which is the only one that matters in the US, looks like this:

      On the left is complete government control, and zero liberty (Totalitarianism, to include Monarchy, Dictatorships, Communism, Facism, etc.)
      On the right is complete Liberty, zero government, which is Anarchy.

      As the founders realized we needed a foundation for society with some restrictions, the Constitution was drafted to set the US in the middle.

      We've been drifting left ever since. It doesn't help that all the leftists intentionally confuse the spectrum by calling all the moderates "Extreme Right Wing".

      We don't need a left wing candidate. We need a true right wing candidate.

      -zG

    350. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by metrometro · · Score: 1

      The insurers won't do prevention, even if it benefits them. Markets think in quarterly reports. Governments can take a longer view.

    351. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by metrometro · · Score: 1

      Do you understand how insurance WORKS? You're supposed to make claims!

    352. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by mrxak · · Score: 1

      You made a mistake including Hawaii. I would have signed it, otherwise.

    353. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ballot access. The 2 major parties have automatic-ins on ballot access and have worked to set up a web of rules to make it difficult for 3rd parties to get on the ballot. Then when they do get all the signatures submitted they have to fight court challenges from the major parties in multiple states. They are also strong spinners of they "you're wasting your vote" message, along with the "you cost us the election by your defection" message. But the 3rd parties here like Libertarian and Green are getting wiser to all the tricks.

    354. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Move into Mexico" ... nice, casual reference to *invading* another country.

      The Mexican army has many problems, but they'd straighten them out quick if they were invaded.

    355. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I understand correctly, you vote, in each precinct, for a party, not necessarily a person. Then, the votes for each party are tallied nation-wide. If there are (as an example) 50 seats up for grabs and the Green Party gets at least 2% of the vote, in the nationwide tally, the Green Party gets at least one seat at the table.

      Down here, you go to your voting precinct and you vote for a person, who represents a party. I can vote Democrat but, if the Republican candidate gets more votes than any other, the Republican candidate is elected. It doesn't matter if they won 50.01% vs 49.99%. They won. They get elected. The 49.99% who voted for the "loser" can just get over it.

      You have to win a plurality of votes in any district (whether it's a Congressional House district, a state-level House or Senate district or even a town alderman district). No plurality, no representation. Period.

      If we voted the way you do, the Libertarian Party and the Constitution Party (and possibly the Green Party; not sure if we even have one of those) would actually have seats in Congress. Because of the way we vote, they have NO representation in Congress. None. Nor are they likely to ever do so.

      The Tea Party is part of the Republicans, which is the only reason they have any representation in Congress. If the Republicans kicked them out and made them compete on their own, they'd be extinct within two election cycles. In the meantime, if they did that, the Democrats would have the majority in the House, not just the Senate (House Republicans - House Tea Party House Democrats).

    356. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

      As a Massachusetts resident, I can confidently tell you that Romney *is not* a far right conservative.

    357. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by jrumney · · Score: 1

      ending farm subsidies (does he mean all? what about food security?)

      Beleive me, as a New Zealander that went through that in the 1980's, you'll be a lot more secure in your food supply once your farmers stop overproducing subsidised crops like corn and diversify into producing what the market wants.

    358. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by jrumney · · Score: 1

      Why not? Term limits are 2 consecutive terms. He's been out of office, and so is quite eligible once again.

      This isn't Russia, and Bill Clinton is not Vladamir Putin.

    359. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is Schweitzer planning to do for the next few years?

      Perhaps he'd make a decent adviser to Obama in preparation for running in 2016?

    360. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is amazing how the top half of that list that you are promoting is also the top half of the list below (States with the largest budget shortfalls).

      State Projected FY 2012 shortfall
      (in millions of dollars)
      California $21,300
      Illinois 17,000
      New Jersey 10,500
      Texas 10,000
      New York 8,200
      Connecticut 3,800
      Minnesota 3,800
      North Carolina 3,000
      Ohio 3,000

      I'll let you draw your own conclusions regarding liberal state money management...

      http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2011/01/14/10-states-with-the-largest-budget-shortfalls

    361. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      I could "believe you", or I could stick to my belief that I don't want our food supply to fit the typical commodity market boom and bust cycle. Shortages of food have a much more serious effect than shortages of other commodities. I want my food to be a tiny bit more expensive, but to then be assured that it will never run out, and that its price will remain somewhat more stable.

      Also, please understand that your nation of 4 million could probably survive a local famine - your country is rich enough not to starve, and grain for 4 million people probably wouldn't put much of a dent into the world market. If 300 million people suddenly started buying grain from the world market, we'd have a much different situation. Especially if the world market had also taken a hit and there wasn't much of a surplus to sell.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    362. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      New Mexico number one in dollars gained per given every year.
      Mississippi 2-4 every year.
      Alabama about 5-10 every year.

    363. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the Green Party has about as much chance of winning the White House as I do.

    364. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by kvnslash · · Score: 1

      Maybe I've misunderstood something about this economist article, but it says absolutely nothing about surplus vs deficits in the sense most people think about those terms. The first sentence is, "SOME American states receive more in federal spending than they pay in federal taxes; others receive less. ". That is what the article is about. The way you've written this post, it seems you are comparing the actual individual economies to each other.

    365. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or perhaps having a openly gay senator and promoting gay marriage are two totally different things?

    366. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the Greens need to do is field more candidates in local/state races. No way I'd vote Green for President, they don't have enough experience as a party to be running the country. But given 20 years of service locally and in Congress, I'd consider it.

    367. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No they don't.

      They simply need nobody else who does have a "hick-and-nutter" appeal to attempt to run in the primaries. If R ran a moderate candidate who:
      * wasn't legitimate batshit on women's issues
      * simply said "LGBT rights are a state issue" (and never brought out any other opinions on it)
      * vowed to decrease spending (in whatever vague way they wanted)
      * talked about "increasing foreign security and more jobs for Americans" (more meaningless drivel to sound good to the lesser educated)
      * had little serious opposition in primaries

      This candidate would have a very good shot in a general election.

    368. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Opryland closed years ago. I think you meant Dollywood.

    369. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      You're an idiot. You have absolutely no freaking clue how much you depend on the states you seem to think are a 'drain'. In particular, this one pays far more than it takes, and without it, you'll be wondering where you're going to buy medicine and fuel for your car. Even your electric car gets power from a red state in the end.

      Don't be such an ignorant douche.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    370. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Move into Mexico" ... nice, casual reference to *invading* another country.

      Hey, if Dubya can do it, so can any redneck!

    371. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      You only THINK that you're sick of hearing that. Got any idea how much gold it took to buy a barrel of oil in 1970? Got any idea how much it takes to buy the same barrel of oil today? It's about the same. It may fluctuate a little, now and then, but the exchange of gold and oil has stayed very stable for the last forty years.

      How many dollars does it take to buy that same oil in 1970, and today?

      Don't believe me, Pal, go check it out yourself.

      You dollar bill has zero intrinsic value. It is tied to nothing. Laugh all you care to laugh today, but if/when China starts calling in debts, when international markets move to Chinese yuan instead of US dollars, you won't be laughing.

      Fiat money. Look it up in the history books. See how many governments have fallen when their worthless currency failed.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    372. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Obama should have won by a much thinner margin, if the numbers I'm seeing are correct.

    373. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      Thank you.

      I'm being honest, I'm a lifelong conservative Republican.

      You would most likely consider me to be an extremist.

      My problem with Romney wasn't his alleged conservatism, it was his transparent phoniness. He didn't believe any of the things he was saying. I can't support a man like that.

      If Palin had run, I would have supported her. Not necessarily because I agree with her on everything, but because I believe that she truly believes in her principles. I can respect a person with whom I have a sincere disagreement, but I can't respect someone who pretends to care about my issues.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    374. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Kiyyik · · Score: 1

      Agreed. If we ditch Texas we're totally keeping Austin. Been down there several times and love it.

    375. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Tyndmyr · · Score: 1

      Yes please. It would save us a pile of tax money, and Civil War 2 would provide us with good television. I say we go for it.

      --
      Support more choices in goverment-Vote 3rd party.
    376. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      No, because they would turn off your fuel supply and medicine. You're pumps wouldn't work anymore, your cars would stop and your power plants would shut down.

      Without the gulf coast supplying chemicals and fuel to you, you'd be fucked as you in particular are most certainly unable to cope without modern technology to support your ass.

      Its always amusing how retarded people can be about 'dumping' 'rednecks'. Cities can not exist without the red necks who supply you with product so your over populated models of inefficiency are able to function. On the contrary, those rednecks, while maybe a little inconvenienced because they'd have to do a little more manual labor, would still get on with their lives just fine.

      You'd do yourself a world of good to figure out where your necessities of life come from before being so arrogant.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    377. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Secession is not always a bad idea. Taiwan is a case in point, as are most of the "lands" that declared UDI from the Empire (one of which is the USA).

    378. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No worries there. The drug cartels will invade Texas about 2 seconds after it gets the boot.

    379. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by yog · · Score: 1, Insightful

      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.

      --
      it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
    380. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Tyndmyr · · Score: 1

      So, if they don't want the handouts...stop them? They're happy because of....something, and you're happy because you have more dollars in your pocket. Win/win?

      --
      Support more choices in goverment-Vote 3rd party.
    381. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      That's because your extra parties are Regional, and there is no nationwide plebicite on a single candidate. In each riding you can only have two viable parties, but it changes from riding to riding what those two parties are.

      For instance, let's look at the Green party's one seat. The election results in that riding were: Greens 46%, Conservatives: 36%, all others combined: 18%. Only two parties are viable there

      We've had several spurts in US history where we had regional parties too. The reason that situation is not stable here is our nationwide first-past-the-post plebicite for President. No more than two such candidates can be viable, so inasmuch as parties tend to be built around Presidents, we are forced into a non-regional two-party system.

      You can't get around Dveger's Law.

    382. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      The only reason mexican cartels get by with what they do is because the US government holds Texas back. You've got a silly idea of Texas if you think Mexico is some sort of a threat. The number of people that carry weapons and aren't afraid to use them is significantly larger than the number of cartel members in the entire country of mexico. Whats better is they'd get a pat on the back for every cartel member downed.

      Your European style utopia would have no medicine or fuel ... you do realize the gulf coast is where pretty much all of the oil in the country comes from, right? You know you don't get medicine without oil refineries ... RIGHT?

      Idiot.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    383. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Not when its because they didn't pay the bill.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    384. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      Good catch: Bill Clinton sent in 10,000 troops to Somalia, on what was intended to be a UN humanitarian mission. For comparison's sake, George H.W. Bush had approximately 900,000 US troops involved in the Gulf War.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    385. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Texas makes high explosives and nukes. Texas has a massive military presence of their own. Texans due to their nature, history and law of the land have a high percentage of people who carry their own weapons and know EXACTLY how to use them.

      Don't be so ignorant. ANYONE rolling into Texas after some sort of secession would be rolling into a blood bath for both sides, and to top it off ... the rolling would stop when Texas simply turned off the fuel pipelines. Guess where the reserves are ...

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    386. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      No, hundreds of nuclear silos all over the midwest are a waste of money. Nuclear subs remove that problem by reducing the number to a few really hard to find mobile silos that are capable of doing the same thing.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    387. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      Not in Oklahoma you didn't. She wasn't on the ballot in a quarter of the states, and wasn't even available as a write-in in half of those.

      In a first-past the post election, there cannot physically be more than two viable candidates. She wasn't one of them.

      So yes. Perhaps you marked a ballot that way somewhere, but for all intents and purposes, the Jill Stein candidacy was a figment of your imagination.

    388. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by onyxruby · · Score: 1

      Richard Nixon: Invaded Laos and Cambodia, two countries that actively were used to stage for Vietnam.

      Gerald Ford: Actually made peace in Vietnam at the cost of well over a million South Vietnamese lives.

      Jimmy Carter. Such a weak president that the Iran hostage crisis was undertaken. His failure to rescue them was studied by militaries for decades.

      Ronald Reagan: Successfully ended the cold war without WW3.

      George H.W. Bush: First Gulf War with incredible international support.

      Bill Clinton: Made such a disaster of Somalia with his half ass job that it is still the text book example of an anarchy to this day. /Thought I would fill in the other half of your half truths for you.

    389. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The popular vote of Representative Races was 50% Dem - 48% Rep.

      Based on races in the air, assuming all remaining ones go Dem (Not a good assumption), the distribution of reps is going to be 45.6% Dem/54.4% Rep.

      Please, don't try to use House of Rep races as a statistical basis for anything. They're useless because of rampant gerrymandering. Caused a distortion of 12% nationally, and when races are won or lost by 0.86%....

    390. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

      I think the per capita gun ownership in Texas might disprove your assertion. Also, what assets are in Texas stay in Texas in return for the billions in taxpayer funds taken from Texas. You can take the soldiers that want to leave.

    391. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, all those are the poorest states and redder than a ripe tomato.

      Oregon, New York, New Jersey, Florida, Colorado...These states voted Democrat just a week ago. What are you talking about? Oregon, New York, and New Jersey weren't even close races in this last election.

      http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/results/president
      http://uselectionatlas.org/

      Might want to check your information before you make claims like that.

    392. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know why you would think that it would not be economically viable. The federal government seems to be just as confused about where their money comes from. If I wanted real answers I sure wouldn't turn to Canada to get them. They have a very different system of government. Texas is the largest supplier of oil, has a large number of military bases, and provides the federal government with a substantial portion of our national GDP. Imagine for a moment if that went away. Further imaging if ND, SD, AZ, UT, MT, VA, WY went with them. I'm all for a tax plan that adds up, the only problem is Romney lost, and Obama's is worse. I think Romney was on to something reducing loopholes. I didn't see where his math didn't add up, and I think that was probably more Obama FUD than anything else.

      To me being a complete pacifist is every bit as dangerous as so called warmongering. Sure, we don't want to rush into war at the drop of a hat, but let's not forget that diplomacy had a twelve year history of failure in Iraq before Bush went in and did what should have been done a long time ago. It's not working too well in Iran either. Granted he maybe should have waited until we had a good handle in Afghanistan, but then when you have the intel agencies from 6 different countries telling you that Sadam is manufacturing WMDs what would you do? I mean without the ability to play armchair quarterback? What if he had the WMDs and we didn't act and he used them? What if he had them and in spite of our best efforts they are hiding out in somewhere like Syria? It's still possible. We did find mustard gas that he had supposedly destroyed in exchange for aid, so those who say we didn't find any WMDs are ignoring the facts. They found underground tunnels and bunkers all throughout the country.

      I'd be all for lowering spending, reducing ineffective / inefficient government programs (which would be most of them), and getting back to what government was originally intened to provide: national defense and a level playing field.

    393. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by sribe · · Score: 1

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

      Who needs such a sophisticated analysis. It's obvious these people are morons, because they don't understand that if you want your state to secede, you need to petition your state representatives ;-)

      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.

      Well said, but I fear that Romney's loss was not by a wide enough margin to get this message across. I think in four years, we'll get more of the same, same muddled up nonsensical message with more money and more attack ads supporting it. (I say this as a conservative who has now voted for Obama twice. Sigh.)

    394. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

      You seem to miss the point that all the unemployed, freebie seeking, pot smoking, over weight, uneducated losers will be coming to your country and all the conservatives will be leaving yours, mostly with the entrepreneurial income and jobs you thought you were going to "keep".

    395. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Seriously? Obama had a super majority and couldn't get jack shit done. Support in congress is irrelevant. Congress is broken, regardless of who the president is.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    396. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      And 50 to 48 doesn't look like a pretty even split to you?

      You missed the point. Florida is a swing state. We have enough "nearly-dead old farts" and "toothless chew-spewing rednecks" voting R match the "homo-loving commie pantywastes" and "dirty immigrant parasites" voting D.

      Personally, I voted "blow up the panhandle and let this shithole sink into the sea" but, as usual, I didn't get much support.

    397. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by jrumney · · Score: 1

      Why would you worry about a local famine in a country the size of the USA? Such a famine is much more likely when you have a monoculture of farmers producing the crop that returns the best subsidies, rather than when you have a diverse range of farmers finding their place in the market, but not really likely even then when farmers 3 timezones away are supplying the same market as your local farmers.

    398. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      I do not think that having a powerless figurehead as president that congress will likely buck at any chance would do anything you laid out.

      You mean ... exactly like we have now? Obama could not accomplish jack shit when he was 'backed' by a super majority democrat congress. How exactly is what you're describing different than what we already have?

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    399. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by emaname · · Score: 1

      Spot on!

      I will admit, as a life-long Republican, I didn't vote for Romney.

      The Repub's (or elitists, plutocrats, or whoever they are because they sure aren't anything like the Repub's I've supported all these years) became so extreme, I was beginning to suspect the Posse Comitatus had infiltrated their ranks.

      I wonder if they in fact threw the election. I mean, how out of touch can they be? Well, now we know.

      And now I hear them saying something like the white conservative is in the minority. Well, duh?!?! When you are as extreme as they were in their platform, odds are pretty good you ARE in the minority.

      Or maybe this is just all political theater. After Citizens United it's hard to believe our politicians represent our interests at all anymore.

      Personally, instead of attempting to secede, I think all those states should ask for a refund of their campaign donations.

      --
      An effective "democracy" creates the illusion the people have a say in their government.
    400. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Thats stupid logic in every way.

      If you think your 'viable candidate who you agree with most' doesn't have a chance anyway, then your vote for him/her is also a complete waste.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    401. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Medievalist · · Score: 1

      Hawaii gets a rather large payout because we blew up some of their islands with nuclear bombs.

      Turns out this was a bad deal for almost everyone involved. Certainly a bad deal for the islanders, post-war taxpayers, and the Japanese... but a reasonable bargain at the time.

    402. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, that's Quebec's motto up in Canada, anyway. I give it another 2 years absolute dead tops before they try to separate again

      Christ, at this point I just want them to fuck off already, purely so I don't have to hear that drivel again.

    403. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by omnichad · · Score: 1

      If they succeed at secession, then they'll need a successor to the US president for their new government. What better way than to hold a succession convention?

    404. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by s4m7 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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."

      --
      This comment is fully compliant with RFC 527.
    405. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That Federal Reserve Note? It's not worth the paper it's printed on and it's becoming less and less all the time what with inflation, and all these bloted programs to take care of everyone from the cradle to the grave. You can keep that Federal Reserve Note. You might need it when you run out of TP.

    406. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by omnichad · · Score: 1

      That's kind of a misleading statistic. You're also looking at places where the wealthy choose to live. They tend to concentrate into a few very nice areas, and therefore the state pays a lot more in federal taxes overall.

    407. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's that they're the only ones that get serious coverage because they're the only ones that generate enough national interest to be viable. If the libertarians had close to 40% of the public attention they'd get coverage too, but when they have 5% if you're lucky no one is going to give them the time of day. And I picked libertarians because they probably have more chance of being a third party than any of the others.

    408. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      What I'd really like to see though is for the "red states" to get precisely what they're asking for. Well, that would lead to a rather disjointed United States, and one that is about 1/5 or less the current size.
      I should point out that of the net consumer states that voted republican, all of them are rather sparsely populated. Most of the money is not going as free handouts to citizens, but as money for infrastructure and for subsidies for agriculture. So if the red states were cut out, then transportation of goods would have to be by air and the blue states are net consumers of food, so something would have to be done about that.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    409. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Congratulations, you've successfully pointed out what most people on Slashdot already know. Actually, given the vast number of replies on Slashdot saying they voted for one of the two Republicrat parties, that's probably a bad metric. At least what most not easily brainwashed people already know.

      Now go convince the other 99.998% of the USA, since all you're doing here is preaching to the choir, and maybe that pile of idiots that voted Obama or Romney on Slashdot.

    410. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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

      No, the only reason they don't have any chance at winning is because they don't have the multibilliondollar backing of national party committees, local party committees, and PACs.'

      Being a third party candidate is like bringing a knife to a thermonuclear war.

    411. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I'm not sure what it is about the US that makes it impossible to have more than 2 parties"

      I think it is caused by an oligopoly on propaganda.

    412. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Havokmon · · Score: 3, Informative

      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."

      You must be young - Perot handed the Presidency to Clinton in '92 and '96.

      The result of the increasing 3rd party relevance was the only cooperation we could get between the Republicans and Democrats, which was the effective removal of any other party from the election process.

      Bastards. All of them.

      --
      "I can't give you a brain, so I'll give you a diploma" - The Great Oz (blatently stolen sig)
    413. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by green1 · · Score: 1

      I am not defending first past the post as being a good system. I honestly believe that it badly needs to change. That said however, it is also obvious that this is not what is keeping the 2 party system in the USA, there is obviously something else happening there.

      I'm also not sure that Canada is that much of an anomaly. it seems to me that many other countries have more than 2 main parties with first past the post systems.

    414. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by MajroMax · · Score: 1
      I'm not sure what it is about the US that makes it impossible to have more than 2 parties, but first past the post isn't it.

      For the presidency, the US has a double first-past-the-post system for a single seat. Electing a minor party requires winning a majority of a pluralities: a plurality in enough states to get an electoral college majority. That's a very tough task, somewhat harder than trying to elect a Green party candidate nationwide if all Canadians voted for a single "Prime Minister Seat."

      Parliamentary systems like Canada also do more to encourage minority parties at the per-seat level, for a few reasons:

      • In a minority government, like Canada has seen for much of the last decade, minority parties like the NDP and BQ really do have legitimate power to shape the national agenda.
      • In a majority government, nobody expects the opposition parties -- any of them -- to have much if any influence on the agenda, so to first order it doesn't matter what party you vote for provided it's not for the nationwide winner. Strategic voting does affect this, but it also cuts both ways if a minority party puts out a strong, local showing.
      • Party discipline is also much stronger in Canada than the United States, so the parties occupy correspondingly smaller ideological grounds. In the States, a Republican in New York City is not necessarily the same as a Republican in Alabama, and a southern Democrat will still tend to be more conservative than a Northern counterpart -- and this really does influence legislation, to both good and ill. The upshot is that third parties are less likely to get a consistent regional base in the States, since the local duopoloy will incorporate the regional idiosyncrasy.
      --
      "Evil company X is threatening to restrict our rights! Let's all get together to stop--OOOH! SHINEY!!!" -- AC
    415. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by green1 · · Score: 1

      Our problem really is the combination of a riding system and a party system. You simply can't have both. Either I elect someone who will serve the interests of my region, or I elect a party that has policies I agree with. If the former, then there should be no such thing as a whipped vote, every member should vote on behalf of their constituents. If the latter, then the seats should be divided up based on popular vote, not based on ridings. What really messes us up now is that a party with 30% or so of the popular vote has absolute authority in parliament, and each member is accountable to the party, not to the constituents. One of these two things needs to change for our system to become an actual democracy.

    416. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by FatAlb3rt · · Score: 1

      And if we're being honest, Texas only makes the list because of the big liberal cities like Houston that drive their economy.

      Would that be the same liberal Houston that went Obama by 2 votes?

    417. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by green1 · · Score: 1

      I understand that there is a difference in systems, however it's not as large a difference as it seems. To be fair, I do see how a third party currently has no real chance at becoming President. However I don't see why they can't start by gaining seats in Congress. If a party makes headway in that area, eventually they should become a big enough player to field a Presidential candidate. No small party here ever honestly believes they will go from nothing to forming the government in their first election, but that doesn't stop them from fielding candidates, and it doesn't stop those candidates from having a chance.

    418. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Agronomist+Cowherd · · Score: 2

      Actually, we have 100 Senators. I'm going to use your tiny typo to float a different mathematical idea: increased representation at the federal level. I say there aren't enough senators.

      My thought is that there should be 1 representative (senator or house member) for each 100,000 voters. If we assume an even 310,000,000 in US population (it isn't even, but it's close enough, I think) then that would be 3100 representatives. If 10% go to the senate, divided by state, then each state gets 6 senators. The other 2800 get apportioned by population into the house of representatives; NYC would get (at an assumed 8 million citizens) 72 representatives, and the rest of NY would get 99. My small town would get about a quarter of a representative, which is better than we get now.

      I'd also make it a rule that districts must be cohesive. No more (or at least much less) gerrymandering. The ratio of the area of the smallest oval covering the district over the area of the actual district can't be over 2 (or some other small number). No more twisty outlines. And the representative districts need to fill the senatorial districts.

      I'd also allow voting on neighboring districts, but with less weight: 60% from the district itself, 40% from outside. So a local nutcase can be overridden by people nearby.

      If anyone sees this, let me know just how ludicrous it is.

      --
      -DwS
    419. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by green1 · · Score: 1

      The Pirate Party already exists in Canada, and has fielded candidates in our last two elections I believe. Though unfortunately they aren't big enough yet to even field a full slate of candidates, nor do they have enough money to run a real campaign. So far they are marginalized along with the Libertarians, Marxist-Leninists, Communists, and a few other parties which have no real chance at the moment.

    420. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by green1 · · Score: 1

      The media, for one. Remember, we have a free market, ratings-driven media system. Unless a candidate has more than a few percentage in the polls, he/she will rarely be mentioned in the news. The viewers/listeners/readers aren't interested, so the media isn't interested, which lowers interest even further. It's a positive-feedback loop. Net result: most Americans don't even know who Buddy Roemer and Gary Johnson are.

      I'm not sure that this is really any different from Canada. When the green party formed, and even after they had a significant share of the popular vote, the media still refused to let their leader join in any of the televised debates, several weird, and ever changing "rules" were invented, but eventually after a few elections, popular support was such that the media could no longer ignore them. (The green party is actually a really interesting case, I can't really stand their policies or platform, but I am still proud to see our system work in that a party like that can come from nothing to being a real contender)

      The government itself, for another. I learned this as a lad. My father was Chairman of the Board of Elections in our little county, and was a good Democrat from a long line of Democrats. The rules state that the local board must have a majority of the same party as the Governor, so when the first Republican governor in decades was elected, the board became Republican and my father lost his position. Not a big deal, and I'm not whining (neither did my father), but that type of thing indicates why a two-party system is sort of hard-coded into things here in the States.

      But to illustrate the point: after that Republican governor won, there were magically and suddenly lots and lots of folks who changed their registration from Dem to Repub. In fact, the secretary at the Board of Elections office was one of them! :)

      It's not "de jure," it's "de facto." One thing that Dems and Repubs can agree on -- vehemently -- is that they will do nothing whatsoever to permit new political parties to prosper.

      Wow... ok, now I'm learning something about the American system... and I'm not impressed! How on earth can you have even the pretense of fair elections if the people running the election are declared members of a specific political party? That would be a huge scandal here and would never be tolerated by the general public. (In fact there have been several such scandals when the party in power appoint someone they are close to to a post like that, and every time they stress how impartial they are and how they have no ties whatsoever with the party that appointed them)

    421. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by green1 · · Score: 1

      Go back an election or two. It's not that long ago that the Bloc Quebecois was the official opposition. And the Green party had approximately the same amount of the popular vote as the Bloc (though because it was more spread out they didn't get any seats) Quebec has so many seats that if every riding goes Bloc (which isn't that much of a stretch) and the other seats get split up between the three parties, the Bloc could conceivably form a (minority) government.

      The reason only the Liberals and Conservatives have senators is because the party in power at the time appoints the senators, and only those 2 parties have been in power, (our senate is BADLY broken)

      But the NDP, despite never having formed a government is a still a large force of influence in the government. I also do not see them merging with the liberals any time soon as their party is a lot further ideologically from the liberals than the liberals are from the conservatives.

      First past the post is obviously hurting Canada, but it has not turned it in to the two party system that exists in the USA.

    422. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by green1 · · Score: 1

      You misunderstand how we vote. We suffer from the exact same mess of voting for a single person in each region. We have a party in power right now with a majority of the seats in parliament that had only about 30% of the popular vote.

      To be fair, I understand the difference in how you elect a President from how we elect (or rather don't elect) a Prime Minister, but we elect our members of parliament almost exactly the same way you elect your congressmen.

      So while I understand why a third party can't yet be seen as a viable Presidential candidate, I can't see why they can't get anyone elected to Congress, which would seem to be the first step in making inroads in to the whole system.

    423. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by green1 · · Score: 1

      The green party is not regional, they are national, in fact that is what's been holding them back. They historically have about the same amount of the popular vote as the Bloc Quebecois, however the Bloc being a regional party, has had enough votes to form the official opposition in the past. In many ridings only 2 candidates really fight, but sometimes it's a 3 way race, and the 4 main parties (Conservative, NDP, Liberal, and Green) all field a candidate in every riding in the country.

      Our system seems to be the same way you elect congressmen, so I don't understand why a third party has no chance at getting seats there.

    424. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by green1 · · Score: 1

      And yet somehow our Green party managed to overcome that same hurdle (it was not in any way easy for them, but they did) So did the Reform party years ago (though they have since merged with the PC party to form the Conservatives)
      Our media isn't all that different, they have their biases too. But it is possible to get past that.

    425. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by mat.power · · Score: 1

      Amazingly successful federal political party? Did you miss the results of the previous election? Amazingly successful in the past, perhaps. Certainly not right now.

    426. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by mdenham · · Score: 1

      Think of it this way (warning: sort of a car analogy):

      You know those ads where they're like "We've got cars starting at $300, THIS WEEKEND ONLY!", and they'll mention some kind of halfway decent car at a ridiculously low price? That's entirely to get suckers to come in, and when they find out that the really good deal they were hoping for isn't there, well, there's the salesman, trying to talk up a new Honda Accord or such instead.

      Hawaii serves the same purpose. It's to draw bidders in. We run it early, sell it to Canada while nobody's really paying attention, and everyone else can stick around for the crap states because people don't like to feel like they missed out on the only worthwhile thing.

      (Alternatively, Hawaii was included just as an example so that I didn't get several metric tons of Southern butthurt for only including their states.)

    427. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Just because it is unlikely does not make it impossible. It doesn't need to be a famine of the sort that Africa experiences - even just a large spike in food costs could prove ruinous to the working poor, and even the lower middle class.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    428. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm so glad that a few [racist nut case] drips now constitute a "flood".
      No surprise that absurd, radical extrememism is endemic to the rabid
      right wing rapists and their teabagger terrorist puppets.

    429. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by painandgreed · · Score: 1

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

      See, I think this is an actual case of begging the question. Third party candidates are a fantasy. Why? Because they can't win? Why? Because nobody votes for them. Why does nobody vote for them? Because they can't win.

    430. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by green1 · · Score: 1

      To judge any political party's success based on a single election is rather foolish. They have in the past formed the official opposition, and even nearly formed a coalition government. Remember that the Conservative party who currently form the government were down to only a small handful of seats not that long ago. I'm not naive enough to think we've seen the last of the Bloc Quebecois.

    431. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by mat.power · · Score: 1

      Well call me naive if you want, but given that support for separation is extremely low these days, especially among the younger population, I don't think they have much chance of making a big comeback.

    432. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, so organizing some cronies to commit burglary and other assorted felonies in order to try to interfere with an upcoming election, and then obstructing justice to prevent discovery of your complicity in the crime is just de rigeur these days? I mean, sure, the R primary was apparently rigged (analysis strongly suggests votes were being "reassigned" to Romney from the other candidates) but as far as I know, the two major parties have kept a kind of gentleman's agreement not to fuck with each other directly.

      And Nixon was no liberal. He had an overwhelmingly liberal congress and senate to deal with, and was a foreign policy hawk. He had no desire to engage in a long, protracted fight with the democrats, especially when they could override his vetos, so he let the domestic policy be as liberal as they wanted -- but he didn't like it. You can hear him on these tapes vilifying all those pinkos, hippies, and liberals like a proto-Michael Savage.

    433. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Ossifer · · Score: 1

      Hilarious. What a sore loser...

      I'm certain us educated, intelligent types can figure out how to work the machines--it's not exactly such that inbreeding is a requirement...

    434. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by CosaNostra+Pizza+Inc · · Score: 1

      Then Texas would build a big wall around Austin and form a blockade around it. The U.S. would have to air-drop food supplies and stuff in. Hmmm...this all sounds familiar.

    435. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Yunzil · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

    436. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you'd just have to worry about a hostile theocracy sharing major borders with you. Oh, and you'd probably depend on them for food.

    437. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They should also take their portion of the debt they created with them, that way they can join Greece in the race to the bottom.

    438. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      Maybe there's something I missed, but I was under the impression that agricultural subsidies were free handouts to citizens albeit farmers and near to the field industries. But, given that the rural economy is predominantly farming that's pretty much everyone. As for the infrastructure, well, that's now a "state" issue. If they want us to buy their food and supply their Wal-Marts then they surely better find a way to pay for it. I really don't have a problem with supporting farmers in third-world nations. I do already anyway when produce is locally out of season. Given the hard life of the typical third-worlder, I'd prefer to help them anyway.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    439. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The primary reason is the electoral college. In most states the "majority" candidate gets 100% of the electoral college representitives and if a candidate does not get enough electoral representives the vote goes to the House of Representitives (President) and the Senate (Vice President.) The nature of national politics makes it almost impossible for a third party to gather the necessary financial and political support to run an effectice campaign.

    440. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by MissVicki2013 · · Score: 1

      > Good point. Those opposed to Obama's policies would be better off looking for ways to bring class action lawsuits against GM, Chrysler, and the PCG investment firm: http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2012/09/nancy-pelosis-brother-in-law-owns.html Crony capitalists have a lot more influence in Washington now than voters do. They don't get multimillion (or multibillion) dollar bailouts and kickbacks for nothing. Voters who want to influence policies in D.C. should find creative ways to put pressure on the crony-capitalists who wield the real power behind Obama. check out: Oligarchy's Ascent in America, by Mark Farha. (Abstract from IPSA.org: "This paper examines how the Obama administration, hiding behind a rhetorical smokescreen of “believable change,” has overseen arguably the most severe socio-economic polarization in modern American history. Income inequalities today outstrip even those witnessed during the Great Depression. Despite his rhetoric of change, President Obama’s financial policies have continued the policies of prior Presidents in skewing the financial system in favor of mega-banks. The unprecedented bailouts by the US Treasury and Fed amounted to a disenfranchisement of the US citizen under both Republican and Democratic administrations. Far from making good on the campaign promise to exclude lobbyists and increase transparency of governmental decisions, the Obama administration has set new records in the employment of well-entrenched Wall Street bankers and veteran K Street lobbyists to key positions. Increasingly, however, the Obama administration finds difficulty in upholding its carefully constructed media image of renewal. By highlighting the common calls for transparency found at both ends of the political spectrum, this paper will examine how dismay with a status quo ante foreign policy, as well continued opacity in fiscal and monetary matters, may have kindled a critique and constituency cutting across partisan lines of left and right as the dominant pattern of crony capitalism and lack of transparency violates both the principles of free markets and social justice.") Also, making economics a required subject for all K - 12 students is a pretty good idea too, and the Mises Academy has courses that are very appropriate for high school student-levels: http://www.iwf.org/news/2789583/Demography-Isn't-Destiny-When-Voters-Are-Economically-Informed

    441. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Opryland has been closed for over a decade, you insensitive clod!

    442. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We need a conservative party in this country? Really, do you realize the mainstream Democrats are more conservative than virtually all industrialized nations in the world. We are already very conservative and if you listen close enough to the right wing (Tea Party) we would have a darned near theocracy if they took power. Funny thing is the same people screaming the loudest about the middle east want to push us in the same direction. Eliminate higher reasoning skills in primary and secondary education, done (TX), eliminate any mention of scientific theory of evolution in schools done (TX), etc. It seems that the right wing in this country wants to take us back to the days when the earth was flat and the only education our children need was when to plant and pick.

    443. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      Well, could the South rise again? I guess nobody will keep them from seceding this time.

      At first glance, it would help the economy if they did. There are only 17 states that pay more in federal taxes than they receive back, and only one of them (Florida) is in the south. Mississippi takes back over double what they put in.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    444. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Third party candidates are a fantasy in the US because everyone thinks they are. Every other major UK-inspired democracy in the world has viable third parties when they're required, and lots of times when they're not.

      Third parties in the US poll at around 1%, get about 1% of the vote, and get LESS than 1% of the donations and members.

    445. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Don't quite Duverger's Law. Even Duverger doesn't believe it.

    446. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Romney had not appealed to the far-right factions, he never would have won the nomination let alone "energized" the base. The Tea Party has pulled too many candidates to the far right, too far right of the moderate range making them almost un-electable at the state or national level in all but the most "red" states.

      Living in a red state it is almost comical to watch the reactions of the same people who completely believed that by completely blocking any legislation for two years and trying to make Obama and un-American, socialist liberal wackjob for the past four years failed to beat him. "Everybody" agreed with them, at least that is what their entertainment news told them anyway.

      If the Republican party wants to win more statewide and national elections they must adapt, stop focusing on specific narrow minded focus points to get a series of small minorities energized and focus on the general will of the American public.

    447. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Mabhatter · · Score: 1

      That would be treason... There is no Constitutional right to remove yourself for. The Union...we had a little war about that.

      On the same subject, it's time to end those discussions NOW. It is LAW that succession is not legal... We've reached the point where people need to go up against the wall (to be shot) over this stuff. In the last few years it has clearly crossed the line from "free speech" to sedition... it's example making time... The President is the President, legally and so forth... Recant your statements, AND GO TO JAIL, or up against the wall. These celebrities and politicians KNOW they are rocking the boat. They KNOW they have crossed the line... They have so demonized Obama he's going to be e "bad guy" ... Just like Lincoln was.

      The Tea Baggers want a shouting war to be a shooting war... It gets their ODD and Asperger's off. Somebody need the guts to Shut them up.... And fast. Those people are using every emotional blackmail in the book to get people on their side...

    448. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by lonecrow · · Score: 1

      Oh really? So all the rhetoric from the the right about the absolute necessity of balanced budgets is just so much talk? Call the Rupugs what they are, either hypocrites or idiots. All their talk about fiscal responsibility and family values is just cynical psychological emotional framing designed to garner more votes. All that talk has NOTHING to do with the policies or programs they would institute that really are designed to rip off the little guy.

      So the repugs talk fiscal responsibility and frame the dems as irresponsible spenders. But when you show dems with a surplus and repugs with deficits you claim what? Either that those repug states are no better and probably worse at guarding the public purse. Or that there actually ARE valid reasons for running deficits. One of these options reveals incompetence then other hypocrisy. Take you pick.

    449. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by knirps · · Score: 1

      The problem with the Libertarians that, by definition, any group of them numbering more than one is unstable.

    450. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by CosaNostra+Pizza+Inc · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what it is about the US that makes it impossible to have more than 2

      Here's a hint: $$$$$$$$

    451. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by jittles · · Score: 1

      No but the point he is trying to make, I think, is that you need all those roads and other things you spend blue money on to get goods from one blue state to another. Sure in the northeast all of the states are considered blue, but I bet goods still pass through plenty of red space. Look at California, most goods pass in and out of the state through I-5, CA-99, and I-15. All of which go through red counties (I-5 and CA-99 are red most for hundreds of miles in CA). Urbanized areas are always blue, in my experience. Even if you wanted to carve out most of the red, you'd find that rural areas of almost every single state would disappear.

    452. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by knirps · · Score: 1

      Sorry - you live in Missouri. You're stuck with the crazies. Just drive anywhere not within 10 miles of I-70 for proof.

    453. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by DeadCatX2 · · Score: 1

      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.

      Had Gore managed to trigger a state-wide recount, he would have won.

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A12623-2001Nov11.html

      But the study also found that whether dimples are counted or amore restrictive standard is used, a statewide tally favored Gore by 60 to 171 votes.

      --
      :(){ :|:& };:
    454. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People always point this out, that the red states are anti-tax and yet receive the most benefit from taxes, as if that doesn't make sense of them. You could just as easily say that that makes them the most qualified to deride the effects of the welfare state, after all, they know its effects best.

    455. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by SDotAnthony · · Score: 1

      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.

      I live and work in New York and this is the first I am hearing of New York wanting to secede from the union since President Obama's re-election, or ever in my lifetime. I really wish the right (especially the "racist" right) would learn to do math and stop saying most Americans want "X" (in this case New York State Americans), when only five or so thousand out every fifteen or so million want something; especially something like secession.

    456. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember the Alamo: The legendary patriots and frontiersmen of our country died defending someone else's shithole, while the 'leaders' of the country were too busy arguing 'Slave or Free?'. :)

    457. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, most hardcore "bottom to top" libertarians (as opposed to those who prefer to limit libertarian ideals to federal govt) DO see corporations as a flawed govt intervention. They believe that laws allowing corporate personhood and such screw up market signals, because they limit liability for the owners/investors in business enterprises. They would abolish corporate charters, making everyone involved in a business fully liable for misbehavior (pollution, fraud, etc). This would, in particular, have the effect of decentralizing/localizing businesses to a much greater extent, as owners/investors as large, widespread businesses would come with larger risk.

    458. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The guy who overthrew the Libyan government under force of arms with four American fatalities

      I apologise for going of-topic - but I've seen statement a lot in the last few weeks, and it confuses me. Was the Libyan conflict reporting drastically different in the US compared to UK (where I am), because I seem to remember most of the heavy lifting being done by the Libyans themselves....?

      I know US and French forces provided air support after the first few weeks - but pretty much everything done on the ground was by local 'rebels' wasn't it?

      Isn't your statement a little bit like a Frenchman claiming credit for winning the US independence?

    459. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what you fail to mention is that the Gore campaign didn't want to trigger a statewide re-count, they wanted to cherry pick the counties that contained the largest number of registered Democrats in order to make it easier to get the the outcome that they desired. They also went to court and successfully blocked the the Republicans from doing the same thing in Republican leaning districts and also blocked a large number of overseas ballots cast by US military members serving abroad due to the fact that the D.O.D. did not get the ballots in on time. This from the group that was adamant that "every vote must count".

    460. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny how nobody mentions the Mexican-American War. Or how Puerto Rico became a territory :)

    461. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder what it would look like if you removed all the red voters from the blue states, and all the blue voters from the red states.

      I would like to see where the spending goes. Seniors, government employees, administering federal lands and forests, military bases, Indian tribes, etc.

      As far as the red voters go, I would guess that its partially the farmers getting the handouts. Under the CRP, (Conservation Reserve Program) they get paid for not farming land, and planting grass on it.

    462. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by mccoma · · Score: 1

      I should point out that part of that map is not very truthful. It counts money going to Native American reservations, maintenance of Federal land, and military bases and missile silos as returned state funding. This is deceptive and tips the balance in states with a low population. I also believe they seem to be failing to note the "Minerals Management Service royalty".

    463. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just wanted to reply to this one: We really should box off some territory and let these guys go at it. When they fail and (violently) blame it on us for ruining their illustrious white nation, go in and carpet bomb them. If anybody asks, state it's always been a firing range, as the signs outside it had indicated for quite some time.

      America's biggest problem is all the fucking pandering to one group or another.

    464. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Tsu-na-mi · · Score: 1

      First order of business would be to divert the river through another state further upstream.

      --
      I've built up so much character I have an alter-ego
    465. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      Well, there's been a Socialist in congress (Bernie Sanders) for years. There are occasionally independents too (we just lost one, but gained another. However they almost always caucus with the Democrats, so for all intents and purposes they are Democrats.

      However, as I tried to say previously, our parties are pretty much built around the President, or trying to win the Presidency. Since that's a nationwide vote, and no more than two parties can have a shot at winning a majority in any election, the stable-state of the American Democracy will always be a two-party system.

    466. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Texas. Basically a bunch of gringos set up homes in Mexico, flaunted Mexican law, then rebelled. Then they maneuvered the US into taking them in and engineering a war against Mexico. Not content with this, they rebel again against their new home. Ever since then they've been a bunch of cantankerous malcontents.

      So let them go, they really don't seem all that reliable.

    467. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Obama got plenty done his first two years in office. Just because it wasn't what you wanted or that democrats thought some of it was too extreme and wouldn't support his agenda doesn't counter what I have said. In fact, it sort of empowered it. Here you have a sitting president with all the support in the world and still couldn't get what you claim he wanted to do done. Do you realistically think any third party president without any party members in congress would be any better?

    468. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

      You can keep it all. Just give us the freedom of local self-determination, which, tellingly, is nowhere to be found in your list of things that you're dividing up like assets in a divorce. Well, enjoy your things, enjoy your assets. We've no doubt you'll have the most comfortable and safe tyranny in the history of the human race. Buckle up and and strap on your approved helmet, wrap yourself head to toe in federally mandated safety foam and everything will be okay. It's so delightful to finally escape from freedom back into the womb. You can keep the car, you can keep the house, and all the debt that goes with it. We're looking forward to the challenges of building a new life without your dead weight. Namaste.

    469. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Obama got plenty accomplished when he had a super majority. In fact, that was one of the reasons why the republicans took the house in 2010. How is having a third party president with no support in congress at all going to be any better? How it would be worse is that both parties would work together to defeat the third party anomaly.

    470. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Machtyn · · Score: 1

      The media sure did a poor job at showing just how conservative Romney really is. Few actually bothered to research him more than what the media narrative was. Obama couldn't be more pleased. They and the Republican challengers did a terrific job at stifling turnout. It's really too bad. Mitt would have greatly improved the United States financially, secured the borders while being fair to legal immigrants, raised the standing of the US among the international players, and been able to bring the disparate groups together. How do I know this? Because that's what he has done for the past 30+ years. He really does care about the people. As it is, we're getting more of the same double-talk from Obama. His contradictory speeches with actions that don't really match anything he said in the speech (the statement or the contradictory statement both made within the same speech). As for secession. If you can't trust the government, which I don't, then what do we have? A dictatorship. Truly, the people voted for free stuff and not for responsibility. We get a POTUS mired in scandal from Benghazi to Fast&Furious, from cronysim to a corrupt DOJ. It will be a bad 4 years... probably longer.

    471. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, it's a correlation, but not a causation issue. The fact of the matter is that there are many factors that include the fact that people are already willing to put up with higher taxes or perhaps have a higher percentage of actual individuals with incomes in the highest brackets, or business headquarters.

      Another consideration is that after secession, businesses and individuals would intentionally go to whichever side benefited them most tax-wise.

    472. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the media-driven society. If people never SEE a certain candidate, and they don't HEAR about a candidate, how can they VOTE for that candidate? The media runs the elections.

    473. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Your right, it is 100. I thought I wrote 2 senators for 50 states but didn't.

      However, I don't think your idea of more representation would work. First, the senate is supposed to represent the states not the people in the states. That is the entire purpose of the house of representatives. It sort of muddles the situation when we directly elect senators instead of having the states appoint them but that's the idea behind the government, representation is the state, the people, and a president to temper them. The entire idea was to limit the federal government unless there was a large agreement of the states and the people. Just adding people would defeat that completely. It wasn't until recently that everyone thought the federal government should be doing something every minute in office.

      as for your redistricting. I also think it's a bust. For one, its simply unattainable to do. You will always have waving line districts simply because population growth and migration does not line up into a nice little neat box. Most of the crap that is called gerrymandering is this problem being worked out with reality.

      And for voting in neighboring districts, what's the use of having someone represent you if outsiders can defeat their election? You idea of nutcase could be other's idea of sane and rational. What you are trying to do is get everyone in politics that you don't agree with hamstrung so that they cannot represent their constituents. It defeats the entire purpose of representation. It's even worse then the current game of idiot stacking where anyone in most states can switch parties and vote in a primary then attempt to get the worst possible candidate to win the primary just so they don't stand a chance at winning the general election. I had people who claimed they were doing it and tried to get me to do it in the last several elections. These same people got pissed when the republicans kept calling them thinking they were republican voters because they voted in the republican primaries.

    474. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1

      John Huntsman waves "hello" from his little tip of the GOP iceberg, having been prematurely and foolishly jettisoned by the rest of the pack.

    475. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes, he is. 2 consecutive terms, not total.

    476. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Reziac · · Score: 1

      One problem with all of this is that it's one giant broken window fallacy. Every dollar sent to Washington produces a net 60 cents back. If every state kept that dollar, they'd have a dollar instead of whatever proportion of 60 cents they get back. Even if you get 140% back, that's still just the same dollar someone else paid (after gov't overhead).

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    477. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by weszz · · Score: 1

      Both side have been dumb for decades. Both sides need to compromise. When one side rams things through, the other side waits till they can and does the same.

      Both side do it, both sides are the source of the problem, if either side doesn't compromise, things get worse. (or if the compromise things into a steaming pile of ****, then things get worse anyway...)

    478. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Reziac · · Score: 1

      You're claiming someone in a blue state wants to find work??!

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    479. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Remember a few years ago, 40-some members of Montana's *state legislature* went so far as to sign their names to a document threatening secession over 2nd Amendment rights. Has any other state gone that far??

      Documents:
      http://web.archive.org/web/20080225160154/http://www.progunleaders.org/resolution.html
      http://web.archive.org/web/20080226113128/http://www.progunleaders.org/officials.html
      http://web.archive.org/web/20080225151900/http://www.progunleaders.org/argument.html

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    480. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, yes, but younger whites tend to go democratic and older whites tend to die. Not really much news there.

    481. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      You missed Texas. They pay more in than they get back. The population centers work that way, which is another reason why CA and NY pay more in than they get back. And a state like AK gets more back than they pay in. There's something like more coastline to guard in Alaska than the rest of the US combined, so a disproportionate level of protection on a per-capita basis seems natural. On a $ per square mile, AK gets the least. It's only when you are talking about states of a similar size and density where such comparisons make any sense at all.

      Alaska also gets screwed on these because there's some federal money paid in from non-income-tax sources (oil leases and taxes) and they are excluded. Also excluded are payments to corporate headquarters of companies that have contracts. The government buys MS OS? Then put that money aganist WA. The government buys a plane, put that against wherever Boeing is this week. Do that, and you'll see a vastly different map.

      The ones that look at income tax-only income and a subset of expenses (should they count payments to servicemen as being to their home state?)

    482. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, dumbass -- that story says Obama won by 585 votes.

    483. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Fallout2man · · Score: 1

      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.

      IF they succeed at making that point, then sure. The problem here is that you can "send a message" that you completely did not intend to send with your stunt. The thing that people need to realize is that for better or worse Narratives to some extent are real and dictate what the "message" of an election is to each party. These are not things YOU have control over, they're just how the political apparatus interprets events.

      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.

      Yes, I can! Republicans would think, as they always do: "The People clearly handed us a Mandate to throw the Kenyan Usurpur Obummer out of office! They also completely support each and every plank of our G.O.P. party platform including no-abortion exceptions for incest and rape victims, mandatory transvaginal ultrasounds, and they like the rest of us consider Homosexuals a virulent disease to be purged from the Face of God's Green Earth." In short, they'd take it as a validation of absolutely everything they ran on and the idea that their win means people support all of who they are and want them to go Hog wild on the lawmaking accordingly.

      The Democrats would think, as they did both after Gore and Kerry's Loss: "The People clearly are more Conservative than we thought! Quickly, move the overton window rightward!" Nader being a factor in Gore's loss did not embolden Liberals to be more liberal or Green party minded, it instead caused many avowed Democrats to get a hate-Boehner (I love spelling it that way! ;p) for the Green party voters. This is because the perception among Democrats of those who voted Green is that they're More Democrat than Republican and if they can't reliably court their vote while keeping that big tent open (In other words supporting some environmentalist policies and some green party ideas without going whole hog) then they'd rather try to court other more reliable voting blocs.

      If you're given a choice between being able to herd sheep and herd cats, you pick the sheep. Acting indignant about it isn't going to change that it's what WILL happen every time. Democrats see what are essentially a bunch of indignant and capricious ideologues that can't be expected to reliably vote as a bloc based on who tries to cater to those issues (and is likely to actually win a national election.) So naturally they chose to build their coalition without them because why bother giving them any red meat policy wise if they can't guarantee doing so buys them votes?

      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.

      Now on this one I do agree. The most important thing about politics is what issues enter our national dialogue, how they're discussed, etc. The framing/wording here is essential. With that being said however there are arguably other ways to change the national dialogue without running candidates. One of Occupy's great victories was putting Income Inequality into the national dialogue and framing it well from a perspective of the average worker. I just really do believe that protest voting on principle is a bad idea. Unless you have a large coalition of voters and are able to get real airtime a

    484. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

      It has worked quite well for the frenchies. They don't want out, they just whine about it so they get everything they want like some bratty kid.

    485. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Classic shallow understanding that drives so many opinionated slashdotters.

      The Paris Peace accords were signed under Nixon. US forces were completely out of the country in 60 days.

    486. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by mpeskett · · Score: 1

      I think it's fairly established that FPTP normally favours a 2 party set-up. Canada may just be an oddity on this one, or it could be in the process of settling out to 2 major parties yet. I know nothing of Canadian politics though; has the makeup of your parliament generally been getting more diverse or more concentrated recently?

      From what I understand the normal track is for small parties (or those that have their support spread thinly and evenly across voting regions) to gradually lose favour because they "don't have a chance", until only two remain. You then really can't blame people for voting 2-party, it's the rational choice to maximise your effect on the result.

      May not be the best way to maximise your effect on policy though (every third-party vote being a message to their rivals of "Be more like this guy", so there is that. If Canada has a tradition of coalitions, could be that despite FPTP, people know which "half" they're voting for, and can influence policy better by picking a party specifically. Again, speculating for lack of knowledge; would that make sense?

    487. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      Well, to be honest they could still use the currency and the military, they just wouldn't have any input into, or control over, that use. They wouldn't be able to print Canadian currency without international issues, but using it wouldn't be a problem, and given that most of their land and sea borders have Canada on the other side, they'd have a large degree of de facto military protection.

      However, given the size of Quebec in terms of land, people, and economy, it's not unreasonable to assume they would quickly develop their own military, currency, and passports.

      The rest of the political promises, well, we all know how loose politicians are with reality.

    488. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by operagost · · Score: 1

      I don't think there is any state in the union so bad off that Puerto Rico would be a good replacement. Honestly: those people are struggling, and becoming a state will not help on its own. Mostly, it poses the risk of creating an imbalance in the Senate towards the entitlement mentality: the Puerto Ricans who believe they're entitled to the wealth of the rest of the US, and the glad-handers in Congress that would like to take credit for being generous with OUR money.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    489. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by smooth+wombat · · Score: 1
      There is no Constitutional right to remove yourself for.

      There also isn't a Constitutional prohibition about doing so. Just like the 9th Amendment, just because it's not written doesn't mean you can't.

      As to the legality, Scalia replied to someone on this subject and, as usual, his "logic" shouldn't be taken seriously. Quote:

      If there was any constitutional issue resolved by the Civil War, it is that there is no right to secede. (Hence, in the Pledge of Allegiance, âoeone Nation, indivisible.â)

      HUH? WTF does the Pledge of Allegiance have to do with secession. It was written by a Baptist Minister as a way of bringing the nation together, not as something that one MUST do or has any bearing on governmental activities. Then the Christians went and forced the government to change the pledge, over the objections of the person who wrote it, because not it would have been criminal not to have their religion left out.

      BTW, the pledge was written in 1892 and not adopted until 1942 so for Scalia to somehow claim the Pledge had anything to do with secession shows his complete lack of understanding of basic facts.

      So, getting back to your original comment, there is noting in the Constitution which says a state can secede, nor is there is anything which says they cannot secede.

      For reference: Link

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    490. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Thanks for that. There must not be many people in this camp - most people I speak with who claim to be Libertarian talk about deregulation and corporations in the same breath. I find the same inconsistency when discussing intellectual property.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    491. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by MZoom · · Score: 1

      Sorry no. On behalf of all Mexicans, Texans can stay in the USA or become independent, but we don't want them back.

      It would seem that even the Mexicans don't want Mexico back judging from the number of Mexicans illegally entering Texas!

      --
      Integrity is what you are when nobody is looking.
    492. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you're confusing "conservative" with "statist". A political graph has two axes, probably best described as representing cultural conformity/freedom and economic conformity/freedom. Hippie communists would be opposite of the Puritan work ethic, and Chinese communists would be opposite anarcho-capitalists. Big Government Democrats and Big Government Republicans fit comfortable on the same side of the economic axis, with various forms of coercive economic policy as the main focus of power.

    493. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      It's alright, most people in the US have that impression, too.

    494. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

      Colorado? I live in Colorado, and this is the first I've heard of any secession petitions.

    495. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ..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.

      That's just it. No one of real substance can run and win. The system is set up to nominate the same people (kinds of people) every time.

      That's both sides of aisle.

      Thinking this is just a "conservative" thing shows your ignorance in the matter.

    496. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      I'm comfortable with a calculation that just involves income taxes taken in versus federal money received. I understand Alaska is a special case, there's no need to justify that. I'm not sure why New Mexico pays so little and gets so much though unless that figure includes research money like the kind that goes to Los Alamos or White Sands. Mississippi is a different matter though. They're dead last on taxes paid per capita even though the state still pays between 10 and 20 billion per year (similar to Utah or Iowa). They're not within the top 5 states receiving the most federal money and they still manage to have a higher ratio than 48 other states.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    497. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by green1 · · Score: 1

      Not really, our political landscape in the past couple of decades has gotten more diverse, with the introduction of the Reform party (though admittedly they no longer exist as they merged with the PC party to become the Conservatives) The introduction of the Green party, and The introduction of the Bloc Quebecois. All 3 of which have elected members of parliament, and 2 of which have at one time or other formed the official opposition.
      Even among the 3 main political parties (Conservative, Liberal, and NDP) the balance of power is constantly shifting (though admittedly the NDP have never gotten quite as far as forming a government, but they are currently the official opposition)

      First Past the Post hurts democracy, there isn't much question of that, and it is the biggest thing holding back the Green party, (for an example, in the 2008 election, the Greens had 6.78% of the popular vote, but failed to win any seats, meanwhile the bloc Quebecois who had 9.98% of the popular vote won 49 seats due to their regional nature)

      I just don't see why your congress should be that different from our parliament in this regard.

    498. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by GrumpySteen · · Score: 1

      10k votes out of millions of people isn't even 1%, another out-dated law in our system

      You do realize that this is just to get a response on the whitehouse.gov web site, right? The number of signatures required is just an arbitrary threshold (currently 25k signatures within 30 days) to determine whether there's enough interest in the question to warrant a response. There are no laws involved, much less out-dated ones, and nobody can force a state to secede this way. No laws are being passed or changed.

    499. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by green1 · · Score: 1

      Support for separation doesn't correlate as well to the Bloc's success as one might expect. The Bloc Quebecois, and their associated Parti Quebecois have both campaigned on a platform of staying in Canada whenever the polls have told them that this is what people want to hear. They were beat this time by the NDP, but with Jack Layton's passing, I doubt the NDP will manage to hold half those seats in the next election, and the Bloc has a knack for picking emotional and charismatic leaders...
      If we don't see anything of the Bloc in the next few elections I may start to believe you, but for now I won't put much stock in that idea.

    500. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by green1 · · Score: 1

      However, given the size of Quebec in terms of land, people, and economy,

      Of course this is another issue Quebec politicians refuse to think about, most of northern Quebec is populated (albeit sparsely) by Aboriginal peoples, most of whom want to stay in Canada, they have proposed separating from Quebec and re-joining Canada (and taking most of the land, and resources with them). Interestingly the answer by Quebec politicians was that Quebec couldn't be divided because it is a sovereign nation... (as opposed to Canada?) It would certainly be quite messy...

      it's not unreasonable to assume they would quickly develop their own military, currency, and passports.

      Thing is, it's not about reasonable. The promises were made because the Quebec people like travelling abroad on a Canadian passport (It's widely recognized as one of the most "valuable" passports when travelling) they don't want a Quebec one because they don't know how other countries will react to it. The same with currency, how well would the Quebec dollar trade on the international markets? Given the shape of the Quebec economy, not likely very well. Military was simply a financial thing, they didn't want to have to spend money there. Not realizing that Canada hardly wants to spend money to prop up a foreign country either.

    501. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 1

      If you recall from 04, this same thing was going on, only in the opposite direction. Slashdot even linked a map proposing separating the "united states of canada" being the blue states joined with canada, and the rest being "jesusland"

      This isn't the same map, but closely resembles it.

      http://reason.com/assets/mc/_external/2012_11/jesusland-vs-united-states-of.gif

      --
      Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
    502. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 1

      A lot of people who receive this money in the states that do so don't really want it to begin with. This mostly comes in the form of welfare payments to e.g. single mothers, which sort of clashes with the "jesus" perspective.

      The trailer parks might not do so well, but most of the residents are farmers, which are producers and are also self sustaining. Even aside from that though, many states have their own self sustaining agriculture. Take Arizona for example, who has an ample supply of water, food, and electricity. In fact, Arizona provides large quantities of both to California, in fact 25% of California's energy supply comes from Arizona, who has the largest nuclear power facility in the US, as well as a number of other "green" power facilities. Long story short, without Arizona, California could not survive.

      --
      Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
    503. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 1

      I voted for Jeff Flake. He was one of the few anti-SOPA candidates, in addition to being one of few people who actually support an anti-earmark bill (in fact, he is the one who introduced it into the house.)

      --
      Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
    504. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Republicans somehow insist that the 2010 elections indicated that the right wing had a mandate. It's ridiculous to think that an election with such a tiny turnout would result in any kind of mandate.

    505. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 1

      Dear California:

      We provide a sizable chunk of the electrons migrating through your power grid, which is already so short on power that there are rolling brownouts, and most of our energy production is also considered "green energy" which most Californians strive for but don't produce. We also provide a chunk of your food supply.

      Without us, Hollywood would have to create the second Globe Theater in order to stay employed. On the contrary, we won't have your industry bigwigs constantly pressuring us to enact SOPA style laws, primarily because nobody would be able to film them in the first place for piracy to even happen.

      However, you have already legislated the pornography industry out of your state and into ours, so we'll always have that form of entertainment.

      The worlds most advanced semiconductor fabrication plant also resides in Arizona, so be prepared to negotiate a trade with us if you need to make use of its products.

      Signed, Arizona.

      P.S. Have you seen the new NBC show "Revolution"? That's you if you secede.

      --
      Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
    506. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by dzym · · Score: 1

      They sure did a good job of this in 2000, I wonder why they're not in the mainstream yet?

    507. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by hardwarefreak · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This looks like a good place to post this. I took the data from this economist article and broke it down by red vs. blue state according to this map. This is what I found:

      [snip]

      What I found is that you have no clue how to do data analysis and have concocted some bogus correlations to push a liberal agenda. In 1984 and 1972 all states were red but one . That one shot just sank your bogus analysis and agenda, but I'll add some detail. I'll focus on a prime example we can all relate to of why these federal spending "deficits" into states exist and that they have nothing to do with which presidential candidate carried the state in the last election, i.e. whether the state is "blue" or "red". Since 1968 New Mexico has voted Republican 7 times and Democrat 5 times. It is blue after the 2012 election and was blue in 2008, Obama winning the state easily both times. In 2004 it was red when G.W. Bush won the state by a gnat's hair. New Mexico has the highest federal spending to taxes paid ratio of any state, $2.03 for each $1 in taxes as of 2005, and has been roughly equally blue and red over the last 50 years. Why such a deficit?

      * population of only 2 million people
      * Los Alamos National Laboratory, 2.2 $bn/year, $100+ million each year on compute hardware
      * Sandia National Laboratory, 2.1 $bn/year, $100+ million each year on compute hardware
      * 3 US Air Force bases: Holloman AFB, Kirtland AFB, Cannon AFB, many $bn/year, no time to research exact $$
      * White Sands missile testing range, unkown $
      * Protection and management of 6 National Forests in the state, unkown $
      * many other fed govt facilities

      The reasons for these federal spending "deficits" and "surpluses" have nothing to do with red and blue. New Mexico has been blue 5/6 recent elections, and red in 6/6 from '68 to '92. New Mexico's current 2:1 ratio and the state's growth are directly linked to a single project in the 1940s called "Manhattan". The first nuclear bomb test of the Trinity device destroyed nothing in New Mexico but the tower upon which it was perched and some wooden shacks. But it was nuclear fertilizer for the state, spurred population and economic growth for decades, with nearly all of the money coming into the state economy for 50 years from Uncle Sam for nuclear weapons research.

      To understand these federal spending "deficits" and "surpluses" into the states you must look at each state individually. It usually boils down to how many federal facilities and employees are in a state, and/or defense/govt contractors, vs population. California has a great number of military bases, defense contractors, govt labs, etc, but the state's population is over 1/10 of the entire US, 37 million people, greater than the population of Canada and 160 other countries. Thus private sector output and federal taxes are greater than the dollars Uncle Sam is injecting into the state's economy.

    508. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...it would be a map of the entire Unites States.

      I am no mathematician with my lowly bachelors degree in Math... however the math skills of the vast majority of my fellow citizens seem to be appalling.

    509. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anguirel · · Score: 1

      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."

      You must be young - Perot handed the Presidency to Clinton in '92 and '96.

      The race would have been closer, but the analysis I've usually seen indicates that Perot pulled pretty equally from both parties, so it would have simply been a slim victory for Clinton, particularly in Electoral College numbers (several states switched back, but still not enough for Bush to win). For example, this looks like a good write-up.

      I will agree that it did lead to some of the fastest bi-partisan changes ever seen, though, shoring up the election rules to reduce the chances of having a similar third-party candidate ever again. It's too bad, I was hoping the Republican's treatment of Ron Paul and the Libertarian-faction within their party would have led to a larger defection to Johnson during this election, possibly gaining him enough to at least hit the debate floor.

      --
      ~Anguirel (lit. Living Star-Iron)
      QA: The art of telling someone that their baby is ugly without getting punched.
    510. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      This is my position. I think these states should secede. Most of them are not really helping the union any, they're really just parasites, and they're ungrateful parasites at that. Let them go. I say we should encourage MS and AL to secede first. They can form their own little union. It'll be fun to see how they fare on their own. Maybe GA and SC will join them.

      Ideally, I'd like to see the whole country break up into a small number of republics. The southeast should become one country, where the "American Taliban" will finally be able to erect their own theocracy, without that pesky First Amendment clause about religion. Anyone who wants to live that way can move there, and be surrounded by megachurches and crappy fast-food restaurants and jacked-up pickup trucks. The western states can form their own country, which will be the world's leader in technology. The northeast can form their own country, which will either be an important financial center, or mired in all kinds of business-unfriendly laws, or both. Anyhow, the people will get better representation since their votes won't be competing with 310M other people, but only roughly 1/3 of that, the US federal government won't have such an enormous amount of power at its disposal for evil deeds, and there won't be so much infighting like there is right now. How can we possibly make progress on, for instance, education quality, when we're constantly fighting over whether we should teach our kids basic science and math, or religious nonsense?

    511. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      OTOH, I don't think a bunch of little countries here would be pretty, either.

      The alternative to a single union is not "a bunch of little countries" (though that is one possible alternative). The more likely alternative is a small number of unions of states. There's no reason the seceding states can't form their own regional unions. That's exactly what they did back in 1861, and several other secession proposals have proposed regional unions (such as the proposed nation of Cascadia).

    512. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      He was my actual vote too. He was the most reasonable of the candidates; he was libertarian, but not to an extremist degree like many people in that party. And since I live in Arizona, it was a foregone conclusion that Romney would win my state, so there was no concern about needing to vote for the "lesser of two evils" and avoid what happened with Nader in 2000. So Johnson got my vote.

    513. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ..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.

      I often wonder where these petitions would actually bring these states, if instead of shooting their mouth they actually thought about what it would take for a state to secede.

      As an independent state how are they going to field a viable defence force? Conscription?

      Are all of the constituents in that state willing to secede, or simply the petitioners.

      I am not saying certain states don't have a viable economy, but the supply of goods and service will be in proportion to what they can provide to others (exports, i.e. I got something you want, do you have something I want?).

      Whereas I would have liked to see a better choice in the field, to elect from, democracy is built on elections, we have what we have to pick from, it is simply sour grapes.

      I think they are just mouthing off, to even comprehend what would happen if my state seceded, is mind boggling, I do not think these people even give that a thought of the logistics required for their state to actually secede.

      It's all sour grapes. If you want to see what will actually happen, I would let the president say, "Yes, go ahead and secede, your on your own", this is no longer the 'United States', but the 'Divided States'. We need to get people in office that are actually willing to work with others and make it 'United' again. The people that promote this are grossly irresponsible, and deserver to live in their own 3rd world country. I see secession to be more prone to having to provide dictationships and very much more hardship than they have ever experienced. Let's see what it will actually get you to secede. I served in the military under 2 different (parties) presidents, yet both were still my commander in chief, and it was my job to uphold their bidding, and I was just as proud to do that, with both.

      JFK said it well, "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what can you do for your country'

    514. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

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

      Hey, shut up! We don't want to dissuade them.

      there is probably still a lot of countries in latin america that would love the opportunity to join the US.

      The US already has enormous problems with infighting preventing any progress. We can't even decide if we want to teach our kids math and science or religious fantasies. How is adding a bunch of countries with a totally different culture and different language (which many in the US really don't like) going to help things? It's only going to increase tension and infighting. Worse, adding those countries will make the US extremely socially conservative. You think it's bad right now with the right-wingers? You haven't seen anything; add the Latin American countries in and suddenly abortion is illegal, contraception is possibly illegal, gay marriage is illegal, gay rights are gone, everything the liberals have been fighting for is gone. Nepotism and corruption would be far, far worse than what we already have (Latin American countries are famous for their corruption), and you can kiss the middle class goodbye (there's no middle class in those countries, just a ton of dirt-poor people and a few ultra-wealthy tycoons).

      What the US needs is to break apart into a handful of smaller countries. Smaller countries equals less infighting, and less infighting equals more progress. Let the southeast break away and form a theocracy, while other regions form tech powerhouses.

    515. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      The so called steam roll only happened after they were economically isolated and Europe refused to support the south due to fears of the US intervening in their own troubles between France and England.

      Also, the big guns, they won't be used. This is because the north has lost it's will to fight a war that gets messy. As for the military, we didn't have a large standing army when the civil war broke out, but each and every state had and still does have, a well equipped guard that will remain with the states. The south were originally kicking our asses too.

      I personally do not think the president would invade a seceded nation. Another might, Biden might utter the wrong words somewhere and cause it. But I doubt Obama would invade.

    516. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by eldepeche · · Score: 1

      If your only objections to the way Congress works are procedural rather than substantive, you have absolutely no idea what's going on.

    517. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by redlemming · · Score: 2

      You have established a correlation between a particular mathematical quantity (the difference between tax income and federal spending) and how states voted.

      Correlation is not causation.

      By itself this data is meaningless, although apparently appealing to those who spend mod points to support their political party affiliation (instead of being nerds and actually examining what is being said).

      Within a state that voted for Romney, it is entirely possible that most of the federal funding goes to districts that voted for Obama, and vice-versa. Without a more careful analysis of the data, you can't say one way or the other.

      There are strong differences between the political views of rural and urban populations in many jurisdictions, and sometimes may be strong differences in which of these locations receive the lion's share of the amount of funds. Even when these numbers is known, the analysis of benefit is not simple as receiving a larger dollar value does not neccesarily translate to receiving more benefit.

      As a first step in understanding federal spending, you will almost certainly have to break the spending into categories, and consider who benefits within each state, and this in itself is a complex task, as the categories may overlap. Further, how do you determine who benefits from a particular spending decision? Is it one group, or are there multiple groups? Are there both direct and indirect benefits, and how do we quantify these? There is no algorithm for doing any of this, so, considerable thought and careful analysis is required.

      Federal spending goes to many different things, and different (sometimes overlapping) groups benefit from each. Some examples of federal spending include military-related spending, maintaining the national transportation network, and education.

      Some states with smaller populations get a disproportionate amount of money due to the need to maintain certain military bases. Bases may exist in a particular location either for strategic purposes, or perhaps because huge amounts of suitable land (e.g. land that supports training year round) is readily available, or even because of historical reasons and inertia.

      Some federal funds are spent to take resources such as water out of one state and send it to another, which may benefit the receiving state more than the sending state.

      Other federal funds are spend to support the transport of goods across the state. Movement of goods across a state may or may not result in significant benefit to the state: the benefit to the state from this spending may vary considerably, especially in comparison to the benefit to the states receiving those goods.

      Consider the importance of having forests to provide lumber to build houses, and having a transportation network to move the wood to the house sites. Not all types of wood are equally suitable for any particular use, and those that are suitable may not grow in every state.

      Educational spending is an enormously complex topic in and of itself.

      Details like these need to be considered before you can draw political conclusions from looking at where federal funds are spent. Without such an analysis you can't hope to determine which political party actually benefits the most from particular federal spending.

      At present, no meaningful conclusions can be drawn from the numbers you present. This is Slashdot. Please put more thought into this matter.

    518. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You missed Oklahoma. They had someone on the news tonight talking about a petition they started. I got a good laugh when they said they weren't right ringers, and the one that said it was wearing a shirt with a cross that said 'This shirt is not illegal'

    519. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And we will be happy to reciprocate by sending all the Negroes up north. It will increase the average IQ of both regions.

    520. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correction. The "red states" don't benefit as a whole. The Negro parasites in those states are the liver flukes who suck up the bucks. Remove the Negroes, problem solved.

    521. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by eldepeche · · Score: 1

      I don't think there's any reason for each location to only be represented by one person. As long as we're dreaming, why not draw a border around each metropolitan area and assign a number of representatives proportional to population on an at-large basis? So NYC gets 72 representatives, 200 people run, and the 72 who got the most votes win. That way, you can avoid a situation where a district goes 51-49 for a relatively extreme major party candidate, and there's no one to advocate for the interests of the losing side (especially since the sides break down pretty closely on center city/suburb lines, and each has a unique set of problems).

    522. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Allow me to add: "We get the Whites and Asians, and you get the niggers".

    523. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by riverat1 · · Score: 1

      Nothing to apologize for. It happens to me too from time to time.

      What's amazing to me is that Montana has a Democrat Governor and 2 Democratic Senators. And the incoming Governor and Lt. Governor are D's too. I'm fairly impressed by Brian Schweitzer when I hear him. I wonder what he's going to to do after he leaves office.

    524. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by doccus · · Score: 1

      Bang on on all points.. The way the ultra-right are acting though, does seem to be different from the past.. The amount of vitriol being directed at Obama far exceeds the natural response to policies they dislike. This is clearly personal. Although I loath the terrible choices re the erosion of rights and freedoms that your President has continued to erode, policies that started with Bush, It is clear to me they are not bothered about the loss of these things, but rather it's something else.. I may disagree, but I don't *hate* him.. Those people clearly do...

    525. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is nothing insightful about this post. Inciteful perhaps. It is more of the childish tribalism Yunzil supposedly dislikes in the opposing party.

    526. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      You seem to be under the idea that the US is a democracy. It isn't, legally. It's a democratic republic. Republics operate differently than we operate today; that's why those 'excess' urban votes shouldn't matter.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    527. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      Oh, I didn't mean "unreasonable" in the sense of what the politicians promised, more in terms of what would actually happen if they somehow managed to get their way. I understand there's probably an enormous crevasse between what they have promised and what could be objectively expected if reality is taken into account.

    528. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by mpeskett · · Score: 1

      I just don't see why your congress should be that different from our parliament in this regard.

      Actually I'm from the UK, but we have the same problems with FPTP - 2 major parties, ostensibly on opposite sides of the left/right divide, but with not all that much daylight between them. Well, three parties that get sensible percentages of the seats, but only two with a shot at an outright majority.

    529. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      Simply bring back the law that only landowners can vote, and republicans will win everything. Danged poor and middle class people wanting rights.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    530. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reason they don't have a chance of winning is the first past the post system and the fact that none of the poll in high enough double-digits to not only knock out the candidate most like their views but the guy on the far other side as well. Until that happens, only a stubborn, head in the clouds fool would risk a rerun of Bush v. Gore v. Nader in Florida in 2000. From the sound of it, that may be you, but don't assume that the rest of us are willing to cut our noses off to spite our face.

      The only way for third party candidates to succeed is:
      1) Implement voting schemes other than first past the post so that people can register approval for third party candidates without risking the spoiler effect.
      2) Eliminate the electoral college. Obama only had a 2% advantage by popular vote that was distorted into a 20%+ advantage by electors. Not only does that distort the real picture of who won (and make large parts of the country write-off for every elections), but any successful third party challenge that got far enough to keep one of the other two parties from amassing 270 electors would toss the final decision to Congress, and nobody sane wants that.

    531. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by willaien · · Score: 1

      Could be argued? Yes.

      Accurate? Probably not. They would then be responsible for everything that the federal government does for its citizens.

    532. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The secret is that you already have more than two parties. With two, candidates nestle up against each other in the middle of the political spectrum – safe in the knowledge that they'll capture their base's votes – and basically try to eke out the fifty-first percent of the vote.

      As soon as you add a third viable party, that all changes. Now it's no longer safe to hug the middle, because the third party is in your base, winning the election with your votes. So you move away from them to get enough to beat the other guys, and they chase you around and around and ne'er an equilibrium is reached.

      That chaos presents as more choice for voters and less of a need for strategic voting. That, in turn, engenders an environment where third parties can and do form to eat an existing party's lunch.

      The problem is not our voting scheme, or our two party system. It's that our voting scheme has stable equilibria at the two- and more-than-two-party points (and Canada happens to occupy a different one). So if we want to move away from two parties, either we need a tremendous political event – like the Republican leadership going nuts – or to change our voting system so it has different stable equilibria.

    533. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by AaronLS · · Score: 1

      How is the statement "That is what they wish for." at all insightful? LOL vocabulary fail

    534. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem with Mitt Romney is that there wasn't anything bad enough about him for the media to exploit for people, that the media had to keep sending mixed messages about what he was wrong on.

      The problem with Mitt Romney is that too many Americans get their political news from idiots like SNL and The Daily Show.

    535. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Duds · · Score: 1

      "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."

      Well he has of course, by the standards of virtually the entire rest of the world, Obama is, at the absolute best, centre right. He's more right wing than virtually every world leader.

    536. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd also like to point out that Missouri's governor is also Democrat, who won re-election in a near landslide. Perhaps Missouri is going the way of West Virginia and Kentucky, that vote plenty of democrats in-state but overwhelmingly rail against a Democrat on a federal level (unless they are based on the south, like Clinton or Carter).

    537. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by jdavidb · · Score: 1

      If China can use the dollar, then seceded Texans can use the dollar if they want to. I would imagine they wouldn't want to. And I would hope the law would be like early America, where people used whatever other people would accept, and currencies could compete (and therefore held their value). In those days, most people used the Spanish milled peso, Spain's answer to the Thaler coin. Both Thalers and pesos were about an ounce of silver. The Thaler name gave rise to "dollar."

      Personally, I'd rather see seceded Texans use silver ounce coins, but I'd want them to be able to make up their own individual minds.

    538. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly you don't remember "Bush Derangement Syndrome" Same vitriol, different president.

    539. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The argument would be that while the current election left things essentially unchanged, the 2010 elections resulted in a major Republican sweep of many (not all) government seats. (Governors, House, etc.) The results in 2010 could be more fairly interpreted as a rebuke to the ruling party.

    540. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by bhiestand · · Score: 1

      I *really* hate /. sometime. I had a nice writeup done for you, with bulleted lists and everything. I hit options to change something, hit save, and it refreshed the page and destroyed my writeup.

      So instead, here's the ugly version: All that bullshit about F&F that Fox News was spewing has been thoroughly debunked. AG Holder was not aware or culpable. The Federal government did not sell, transfer, give, or transport weapons to anyone. The IG Report on Fast and Furious is available. Feel free to read it.

      Agents from the Phoenix Field Division screwed up. They allowed guns to walk in favor of trying to build a case against the entire organization, including drug traffickers on the Mexican side. They failed. These procedures were a carryover from the Bush administration and have been ended.

      --
      SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling
    541. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      are you just attracted to a discussion with the subject line containing "bad math", as a result of your own complete lack of ability to handle even the simplest of mathematical calculations?

      and one other thing - you might want to at least use spell check next time you post a rant. you have so many typos and misspelled words that it almost masks the failure of your argument - or was that your goal?

    542. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize that more than 20% of our troops are Texans right? I think a loss of 20,000 + troops might be a big deal. Not to mention I do not know a single Texan who doesn't own at least 4 guns and many have a lot more so defending themselves would not be a big concern. Also in case you didnt know Texans already hold off the Mexican Cartels on their own. The military has nothing to do with border patrol :)

    543. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by khallow · · Score: 1
      Where's the evidence?. Note who issued that report. the Inspector General of the Department of Justice. That's not an independent body. All I see is the usual whitewash with a lot of people not recalling potentially incriminating conversations. For example,

      Melson, Hoover, Chait, and McMahon told the OIG that by late summer 2010 they became increasingly frustrated with the failure of the U.S. Attorneyâ(TM)s Office to bring an indictment in Operation Fast and Furious. ATF e-mails beginning in July 2010 show multiple inquiries from its senior leadership about the status of the indictment. For example, on July 14, 2010 Melson emailed Chait and Hoover and asked: âoeWhen will we be taking Fast and Furious down? An awful lot of guns seem to be flowing south.â221 Melson told the OIG that by the end of July 2010 he understood that apart from arrests, Operation Fast and Furious was at its conclusion and he began asking about the indictment âoepretty frequently.â Melson told us that he asked the Office of Field Operations representatives about the status of the case at weekly staff meetings and that the timing of the indictment kept moving from month to month.

      Newell told the OIG that by October 2010 âoeHeadquarters [was] calling me nonstopâ because the case had not been indicted. According to McMahon, the U.S. Attorneyâ(TM)s Office was giving Newell âoeexcuse after excuseâ for why the indictment had to be delayed.

      Melson told the OIG that by the end of July 2010 he understood that apart from arrests, Operation Fast and Furious was at its conclusion and he began asking about the indictment âoepretty frequently.â Melson told us that he asked the Office of Field Operations representatives about the status of the case at weekly staff meetings and that the timing of the indictment kept moving from month to month. When we asked Melson what steps he took to address the delays in the indictment, he said that because the delays in bringing the indictment were a âoesignificant frustrationâ to him, he probably raised his concerns about the U.S. Attorneyâ(TM)s Office with Grindler. However, Melson also said that he did not have a specific recollection of raising the issue with Grindler, and Grindler said he did not recall discussions about Operation Fast and Furious other than at the March 12, 2010, briefing that ATF provided him. Hoover said he did not recall discussing with Melson the need to inform Grindler about delays with the case. However, Hoover told us that he believed he raised the issue of the delay in the indictments in late summer or early fall 2010 to Ed Siskel, the former Associate Deputy Attorney General who handled the ATF portfolio during 2010. Siskel stated that he did not recall discussions with Melson or Hoover concerning Operation Fast and Furious other than at Grindlerâ(TM)s briefing, including any discussions about delays in the case. We found no e-mails or other evidence showing that Melson or Hoover raised the issue of delays caused by the U.S.

      Note that this is prior to the death of agent Terry which closed down Fast and Furious. Supposedly there was all this butt-covering communicating going on, but no one remembers any of it. And it's worth noting again that no one has been providing weapons to Mexican gangs which supposedly turned up at several hundred murders.

      The investigation seems remarkably disinterested in why peoples' stories seem to not agree with their recollections.

      There's another explanation which fits what we know just as well. The Sinaloa Cartel and its then current allies bought a window of a year for smuggling high quality guns and who knows what else into Mexico from the US.

      The Federal government did not sell, transfer, give, or transport weapons to anyone.

      It merely aided in such criminal activities. About half a year before Fast and Furious ended, it was determined that about 15% of the

    544. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Naturally this person's inclusion was meant that geographical considerations were irrespective, and not dependent in the reasoning. Indicating that land is the primary basis for all economic development, thus none were confined by resources, hindering them from being a value to the whole. How is that for a refresher?

    545. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by bhiestand · · Score: 1

      I was going to give you a nice long, serious reply addressing all your points, but then you said this:

      Bottom line is that the people who conducted this operation, apparently provided weapons used in hundreds of murders and many other crimes in both Mexico and the US.

      Not only is that an unsubstantiated claim, it is the lie I was attempting to disprove. The people who conducted this operation failed to interdict the weapons and arrest the suspects in a timely manner. They did *not* provide any weapons. I know that seems like a "tiny detail" to some people, but it is quite significant.

      If you won't acknowledge that difference, I don't see a point in trying to discuss anything else.

      --
      SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling
    546. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by khallow · · Score: 1
      What lie? That is what happened. A lot of those guns wouldn't have been smuggled into Mexico and a large number, 30% as of last year, showed up at crime scenes including a large number of murders.

      The people who conducted this operation failed to interdict the weapons and arrest the suspects in a timely manner.

      This isn't about arresting suspects in a timely manner. They deliberately failed to interdict the weapons or halt Fast and Furious even when they knew those weapons were appearing at crime scenes. That is how they provided weapons to the Sinaloa Cartel. They didn't notify Mexican police to what was happening. They didn't keep track of the weapons except when they turn up at crime scenes.

      And we should find out who knew what when. An internal investigation by the DoJ which didn't bother to find any evidence of wrongdoing isn't going to cut it, especially when coupled with efforts to protect the principals in the affair.

      If you won't acknowledge that difference, I don't see a point in trying to discuss anything else.

      I won't "acknowledge" that difference, because you are wrong here. It is remarkable how far people will go to forgive the actions of this administration. If this had been Dubya doing it (and the analogous operation during his administration got halted early when weapons started to go missing), I bet we'd have strung up some people by now.

    547. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is remarkable how far people will go to forgive the actions of this administration.

      It's not remarkable. It's no different than any other time in US history (or world history)

      People forgave the administration for printing money to fund the war for independence. That money, the Continental, became worthless as a currency soon after, but that was forgiven and the union remained.

      Most people forgave and in fact supported the government sending in militia to suppress people who didn't want to pay a whiskey tax (even though one major trigger for independence was about taxes)

      People forgave the administration going into the Civil War, on BOTH sides of the war (there's a whole movement to try and depict the defeated South as having noble causes)

      People forgave the administration for Jim Crow laws, Chinese Exclusion Act, the breakup of Standard Oil, internment camps during war, the Federal Reserve, the Nixon Shock, the New Deal, the various clandestine operations (many of which lead to problems today) that don't even come to public knowledge until long after. That is not an exhaustive list.

      It's quite normal for people to forgive what might be conceived as great injustice and immoral, when there are (perceived) benefits to do so. The value of those benefits don't even have to outweigh the injustice. Those benefits might not even be "benefits", but simply "less bad" - the master who whips you less is better than the master who whips you more.

      It is precisely because people are willing to forgive and look beyond their own petty moral values that lets civilization progress.

    548. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by jwhitener · · Score: 1

      http://www.jillstein.org/issues

      Are you sure? As far as I can tell, many of her issues seem left of what even most European countries are doing. Like 'break up the "too big to fail" banks'. Or imposing an immediate moratorium on foreclosures. And public financing of elections.

      But yeah, a lot of her ideas are basically already implemented in many places in Europe. Single payer health care, free college, etc..

      What sort of ideas do the far left have in European countries?

    549. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Last two decades at least. FTFY.

    550. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by navn · · Score: 1

      Sure it's not 1984 right now, but who knows what tomorrow will bring?

    551. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by khallow · · Score: 1

      It is precisely because people are willing to forgive and look beyond their own petty moral values that lets civilization progress.

      That's a remarkably bullshit rationalization for appeasement. With Fast and Furious, we have a crime that harms that civilization by tainting with blood the relationship between two long time friendly neighbors. We also have a large number of people dying for no particular reason except it protects some cartel turf. And because the operation allowed considerable weapons smuggling for a single cartel, it also provided an unwarranted boon to an unseemly side in a nasty war.

      No, we have civilization because we have rules and generally follow those rules. That includes punishment for not following the rules, such as brazenly occurred with Fast and Furious. Forgiveness is fine, if you can afford it. But forgive too much (especially without doing anything to keep the people responsible from doing more acts that require "forgiveness") and you run out of civilization.

    552. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by khallow · · Score: 1

      As an aside, I do forgive those who commit crimes by "paying their debt" to society with a court decided sentence. If Fast and Furious participants had gone to court, then I'd abide by the sentence. That is reasonable in my view, but the administration has instead protected those involved.

    553. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      "what a disaster the "personhood" amendment would be"

      Because of course, we need the right to kill inconvenient people.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    554. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Which is exactly why I support Cascadia Separation. Why the hell are we sending $4 billion extra to all those free loaders?

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    555. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      I've noticed that urban populations, just because they have more people, never seem to recognize that maybe people live outside the city too.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    556. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Either that- or he simply has an alternate theory of how a democracy should work. But I think the result would be the same, because by far 5 banks in New York City own the majority of land in the United States.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    557. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      How much thinner? He won by less than the statistical error!

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    558. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Not quite, because thanks to the housing bust, Democrats own all the land. Republicans just have mortgages and foreclosures.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    559. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      The popular vote was like 62.5 million to 59 million, 3.5 million, a 5% increase over Romney (59 * 1.05 ~= 62.5). Obama got 61% more electoral votes! 206 * 1.61 ~= 332. That means the people voted 51.4% Obama 48.6% Romney (not quite: 50.61% and 47.76%) and the Electorate went 61.7% Obama and 31.3% Romney. Obama should have won by a more narrow margin. 257 Romney and 272 Obama, 5 for Gary Johnson.

    560. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by sd.patricia · · Score: 1

      Speaking as a Californian, we are both a blue state (coastal areas from San Francisco south) and red state (everywhere else). Does this make us a purple state? And if we seceeded, we'd be the California Republic, which we were for 26 days in 1846. We already have that on our flag, so we wouldn't have to make new ones!

    561. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a remarkably bullshit rationalization for appeasement.

      Forgiveness and appeasement are two different things.

      With Fast and Furious, we have a crime that harms that civilization by tainting with blood the relationship between two long time friendly neighbors.

      So? Not the first time government action led to death and suffering, nor the first time people forgave them for it.

      We also have a large number of people dying for no particular reason except it protects some cartel turf

      No particular reason? But you just stated the reason: to protect some cartel's turf. You might not like the reason due to your own moral compass, but that's the reason.

      No, we have civilization because we have rules and generally follow those rules.

      No, we have civilization because of power. Rules are useless with no power to enforce them. Even forgiveness is meaningless if you have no power to forgive (if somebody more powerful than you doesn't want to forgive person A, you forgiving him makes little difference)

      What I said though wasn't about simply having civilization, but how civilization progresses. Civilization progresses through forgiveness. Those who are more powerful forgive those who are less powerful. The weak then become strong, civilization has more strong people than before, which leads to progress.

      Forgiveness is fine, if you can afford it. But forgive too much (especially without doing anything to keep the people responsible from doing more acts that require "forgiveness") and you run out of civilization.

      That's the risk all civilizations must take if they want to advance. You MIGHT run out of civilization. But if you don't take that risk, then you will FOR SURE run out of civilization. The saying is you miss 100% of the shots you don't take.

    562. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by khallow · · Score: 1

      That's the risk all civilizations must take if they want to advance. You MIGHT run out of civilization. But if you don't take that risk, then you will FOR SURE run out of civilization. The saying is you miss 100% of the shots you don't take.

      I see you choose to continue with this foolishness. I will forgive them after they've been judged in a court of law. That is how genuine civilization works. Not by enabling the powerful to commit acts of harm.

    563. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see you choose to continue with this foolishness.

      I didn't choose anything. It's just the way things are. You're the fool confusing your petty moral arguments with reality.

      I will forgive them after they've been judged in a court of law. That is how genuine civilization works.

      Nope, genuine civilization works on power. Courts and laws are useless without power.

      Not by enabling the powerful to commit acts of harm.

      The powerful do not need you "enabling" them. They'll help themselves to commit whatever acts their power allows. Don't like it? Become powerful enough yourself to change things.

    564. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Won't someone think of the angry, wealthy, white men?

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    565. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by khallow · · Score: 1
      The thing is, we have millennia of evidence that the rule of law works.

      The powerful do not need you "enabling" them. They'll help themselves to commit whatever acts their power allows. Don't like it? Become powerful enough yourself to change things.

      From the very first code of law:

      When Anu the Sublime, King of the Anunaki, and Bel, the lord of Heaven and earth, who decreed the fate of the land, assigned to Marduk, the over-ruling son of Ea, God of righteousness, dominion over earthly man, and made him great among the Igigi, they called Babylon by his illustrious name, made it great on earth, and founded an everlasting kingdom in it, whose foundations are laid so solidly as those of heaven and earth; then Anu and Bel called by name me, Hammurabi, the exalted prince, who feared God, to bring about the rule of righteousness in the land, to destroy the wicked and the evil-doers; so that the strong should not harm the weak; so that I should rule over the black-headed people like Shamash, and enlighten the land, to further the well-being of mankind.

      The whole point of law from the very beginning was to curb power and wickedness. When you don't do that, when you allow evil to fester and the powerful to exercise their will freely, rather than constrain it in a fair and lawful manner, then sure you are in your euphemism, taking a "risk". That's the same sort of risk someone who tries to commit suicide takes.

    566. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well I have to give it to the stat.e of Montana You guys did not take that Court reversal of your Corrupt practices Act of 1912 laying down.....states rights now thats what a libertarian like me likes to see. Uncle Sam isnt done with you guys yet so keep vigilant...

    567. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why the republicans court the so-called religious nuts? Well evanglicals make up roughly 30% of our populations that is why. 70% of our pop...worships some type of religion and out of that 51% are protestant..24..are Catholic and the rest other..buddist muslim..ETC...so ...now do you see why Republicans play the god guns and family song every four years and it works?......Now I have nothing against people who worship...if that is your thing..Do you BooBoo..Me personally I like science fiction..The writings better, and they are not blaming every bad thing that befalls a man on women, on every other page.

    568. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The GOP will always receive a slapping with black people (Now before I began the education lesson I must make a disclaimer: BLK 37 F and parents were civil rights fighters one worked with Malcolm..my mother and the other Martin) So I know a little from which I speak. First Martin was NOT a democract he was republican..second in 64 and 65 respectively one for My folks to vote w/o BS of registration and desegregation of the schools...second was racial discrimination of voting and using literacy tests as a means of disinfranchising blacks. When the vote was taken republicans voted overwhelmingly for both acts in the Senate only one desented in both acts in the house out of the 138 members of the repub side only 24 voted nay. however Dems? in the Senate in 64 ..14 voted nay out of 64 dems and in 65..17 out of 66 and the ratio was even larger in the house ...but they had the democratic president so they got credit because preception is reality in politics even though the jackass on tv who had the bull horn screaming @ those children entering Little Rock High School in Arkansas was George Wallace who Btw was Democrat!!!........Now I am NOT a republucan or dem.... I am however a reader of books and find you can learn a lot by reading history....it is all in there...I say this because Dems have had a monoply on the black vote that quite frankly was not deserved....many blacks blindfully vote democratic due to generational voting habits. Many blacks who are poor and live in the ghettos are going to vote dem because they are the only party that doesnt say every 4 years we want to cut welfare even though welfare is one of the biggest culprits in the systematic distruction of the poor family, urban and rural america. Why would any man stay around and take care of the children that he father out of wedlock if the government is willing to make tax payers cover the cost of the child and the mother w/ food housing and all the essentials until that child turn of legal age? Explain to me how a woman would find upward mobility even if she sought it.....if she has these children w/o a man under government assisstance which only covers the bear minimum..where she is supposed to get time to educated and work? Then you have teens who muck up and get preggers and instead of facing the mountain of hardship that would befall someone who didnt have the ability to care for this child, the teen can ask tax paying citizens to essentially subsidize her error/errors in judgement and help her and child. Then you have the lifers i call them who generation after generation only know government assisstance....none of the children born into the family leave the impoverished area and the school district is a disgrace....This again you can thank dems for "The Great Society" So when everyone is beating up on the GOP remember these douchebags arent the republicans of Jefferson Eisenhower Lincoln and Nixon...hell Iwasnt even a fan of this man but I will even through in Regan.....because Regan may have had issues...but he didnt give us GATT WTO NAFTA .......and none of them would have piggybacked on black folks either....using the civil rights acts as if it was a giant diving board for liberal, social, and progressive legislation......women rights..gay rights...ETC . The Democractic P:arty that you see today would not exist w/o it.

    569. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      All of them, including (especially) entitlements and defense.

      How about...no. "Entitlements" are we why have a middle class that can weather a recession. And in the case of Social Security, has never contributed one cent to the federal deficit.

    570. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Or perhaps having a openly gay senator and promoting gay marriage are two totally different things?

      Not when homophobia is involved. It would be like Alabama electing a black senator in 1950, just a few years after passing a new round of Jim Crow laws.

    571. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Yes, this makes total sense when talking about American politics. Pfft.

      Yeah. It does. Which is why wingers get all poutraged when anyone does it.

    572. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      In a first-past the post election, there cannot physically be more than two viable candidates. She wasn't one of them.

      Perot was perfectly viable, before he started to crack under the pressure of a presidential campaign. 2012 was an even greater opportunity for a rich 3rd party candidate to sweep in, as he could have run against both Obama's and Bush's failures - something Obama can't do after being in power for four years and pissing away his congressional supermajroity. I'm still surprised that someone like a less-dead Steve Jobs didn't do just that.

    573. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Right, because the power of the president is totally totally TOTALLY constrained by what new legislation he can get through Congress. Nevermind that existing laws could have been used to:

      Halt DADT via stop loss order.
      Break up and prosecute the banks.
      Order complete withdrawals from all our semi-declared and undeclared wars.
      Prosecute Bushco for war crimes including torture.
      Use the EPA to regulate carbon emissions.
      Move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III, and reign in the DEA.

      And that's just off the top of my head. Finally, there's the small, almost inconsequential matter that what is or is not considered a state secret is controlled by the Executive. So, President Stein would come into office and promptly declassify Obama's drone war program, and Bush's incompetence before and criminality after 911. Israel starts whining about Iran again? President Stein declassifies Israel's nuclear program and uses existing laws to halt all funding to the rogue state.

    574. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      What a pantload of winger revisionist history.

    575. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Just not on any issues that "conservative" voters actually care about.

      Because "conservative voters" tend to be political hacks, just like Obamabots. What you raised holy hell about when it was their guy doing it ("perjury", draft dodging, deficits, warrantless wiretapping, war without authorization, Unitary Executive) doesn't even get you to roll out of bed in the morning when it's your guy doing it.

    576. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Seriously. I voted for the guy who said he's end the wars

      He's started several new ones, and the Iraq "withdrawal" his fans give him credit for was negotiated by Bush. Obama wanted to extend the occupation, but the Iraqis refused Obama's demand of American immunity from Iraqi prosecution.

      and raise taxes, because there's a deficit, yo

      Extended the Bush Tax Cuts and used the resulting deficit hysteria to push his Catfood Commission's recommendations to slash social spending, particularly on earned benefits. Which in the case of Social Security, has never contributed one cent towards the national debt. As opposed to corporate tax cuts, which he wants more of.

      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.

      It has nothing to do with responsibility, and everything to do with killing the possibility of getting single payer while rescuing the dying insurance industry with millions of new customers.

      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.

      The guy who overthrew Gaddafi because he was "killing his own people", but continued selling arms to the Yemeni and Bahrain governments as they led brutal crackdowns on their own protestors.

      Oh, and he's on the right side on the inclusion of gays

      After kicking a thousand gays out of the military when he could have halted DADT with the stroke of a pen, either using a stop loss order or under DADT itself, which allows the SecDef to declare discharges would 'not be in the best interest' of the military.

      And he spent years saying he had to defend DOMA in court, only to turn around and say he would no longer do so. Still enforcing it, though, until it is eventually struck down or upheld.

      And, if that weren't enough, his equivocation on favoring gay marriage have also come with statements supporting the rights of states to ban it. Yes, the first black president has taken a full "state's rights" position on another minority.

      women

      Overruled the FDA on Plan B, exactly the sort of political decision he campaigned against. And there was all that contractor rape from Iraq that he swept under the rug, or the billions he continued giving to Mubarak before he was forced from power, when Mubarak was known for using rape as a torture device.

      immigrants

      Deported them at a much higher rate than his Republican predecessor, until the election started to heat up and he needed latino support to get re-elected.

      other basic-human-freedom issues

      Like being worse than "sharia law" countries on the most central of civil rights: the right to a fair trial?

    577. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      And you just listed all the other reasons no one would elect a third party president. Bravo, you get it.

      Except you probably shouldn't use president as a title to stein, It is like closing your eyes and wishing you weren't an idiot and expecting it to be true when you opened them. It simply would never happen. People who think stuff like that is remotely important are so far in the minority that it wouldn't even be a significant enough count to list a percentage of the population.

    578. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      I still say the North should apologize for all that unpleasantness in 1860-65, tell them they're free to go, and throw in some cash and parts of the Midwest as a goodwill gesture. Buh-bye, don't forget to write!

      In that case, how many trillions will the South be paying out as reparations for slavery?

    579. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      You're an idiot. You have absolutely no freaking clue how much you depend on the states you seem to think are a 'drain'.

      Or maybe he does, as the only thing you could point to would be grain and sugar beets in the midwest. Which California can easily trade for with all their fresh produce...

      In particular, this one pays far more than it takes

      The only red state to pay more out is Texas, and there it's just breaking even.

    580. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      You must be young - Perot handed the Presidency to Clinton in '92 and '96.

      An urban legend, as Clinton had pulled head of Bush before Perot got back into the race.

    581. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      In 1984 and 1972 all states were red but one .

      And 1964 was a blowout loss for the Republicans, and after the 1936 elections, Republicans only held 17 Senate seats.

      WYFP

    582. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      And the part you are leaving out is that they asked for recounts in the counties with the highest percentage of errors. Which happened to be Democratic counties. Republican counties tended to have the much more reliable op-scan ballots.

      They also went to court and successfully blocked the the Republicans from doing the same thing in Republican leaning districts and also blocked a large number of overseas ballots cast by US military members serving abroad due to the fact that the D.O.D. did not get the ballots in on time. This from the group that was adamant that "every vote must count".

      That's a lie. They didn't want illegally cast ballots to count, but Lieberman took care of that when he went on TV and said otherwise. The ones trying to have it both ways were Republicans, by wanting absentee ballots cast after the deadline to count, but not to count "hanging chads" where the intent of the voter was obvious.

    583. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      If you were an idiot or a sophist, I suppose you could see it that way. First Republicans stole the national election, then they let the worst terrorist attacks in American history happen due to their grotesque incompetence and negligence, then they lied us into a war, and all the while shredding basic Constitutional rights that would have had the teabaggers and militias losing their shit if it was Clinton doing it.

    584. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      That's not a counter-argument, that's you being too lazy to make an actual response. Since you skipped it the first time, Stein (or Anderson, or Johnson) would or would not be able to do the following:

      Halt DADT via stop loss order.
      Break up and prosecute the banks.
      Prosecute the telecoms and the Bush Administration for warrantless wiretapping.
      Order complete withdrawals from all our semi-declared and undeclared wars.
      Prosecute Bushco for war crimes including torture.
      Use the EPA to regulate carbon emissions.
      Move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III, and reign in the DEA.

    585. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      I didn't ignore those, I said they were unimportant to the vast majority of people and nothing significant to what they want. I also said those were the other reasons besides what I said that is why they will never be elected. They are even flawed and so biased that your ignorance is outshining everything associated.

      The ban on gays in the military needed congressional action to remove, DADT was exactly the limit the pres could do on it and it was already done.

      The law already says no court can hold a case against the telecoms or bush over the warrantless wiretaps so you need congressional action there too.

      You also need congress to move pot from a schedule one drug to a schedule 3 drug.

      The rest will likely be overruled by congress and stoped before it happened except for the with drawl of troops. And that would likely cause the impeachment and removal of any third party president who tried.

      Powerless to do anything, but wouldn't have the chance because of how batty those ideas are in the first place. They are losers from the start.

    586. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      Great, so let me announce that all European politicians are right wing fascists, because I'm judging them from some extreme left-wing Marxist perspective!

      Or, you know, we can fucking use the terms in the context that they are used in.

    587. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I realize it's fun to call the folks who lost the election whiny childish douchebags. It seems to be a style these days among libs: instead of answering or ignoring concerns about Obama being irresponsible, they just attribute all these arguments to "whining about losing." BTW secession may have been discredited by the Civil War but it's a good thing if it regains credibility. Secession may be a good tool for keeping a moronic federal government in check. But liberals care about this? No. Because their man won the presidency. They might care later when they lose control, but by George they don't care now. Because they can't see past the ends of their collective upturned noses.

    588. Re:If there was a Bad at Math Map... by bolthole · · Score: 1

      Replace "conservative voters" with just "voters", and you have an even more fully accurate general statement about the electoral landscape.

  2. 7000 more needed for a response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Response:

    No.

    1. Re:7000 more needed for a response by HiThere · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    2. Re:7000 more needed for a response by ChinggisK · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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...

    3. Re:7000 more needed for a response by Smidge204 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Here's the proper response, IMHO:

      "Dear Pertitioners;

      If you loved this country as much as you claim to, you would know - or would make the effort to learn - that the Executive Branch of the Federal Government has absolutely no authority to determine who is and is not a state or territory. Next time try talking to your Senators and Representatives.

      Sincerely,
      President Barack Obama"

      Maybe it would be worded a little less snarky, but that's how I'd do it.
      =Smidge=

    4. Re:7000 more needed for a response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      That's just an answer that will piss people off. Better to reason with them on an issue they find important:

      You do realize that seceding from the union would make your football teams ineligible to win a BCS national championship, right?

      That alone should convince almost the entire south to stay.

    5. Re:7000 more needed for a response by Firehed · · Score: 1

      To be fair, I'd take the whitehouse.gov petition route knowing that information, simply due to the increased visibility. There's no state-level equivalent AFAIK, and bringing awareness to the issue (ridiculous or not) is still of benefit.

      "The White House responded to over 25,000 petitioners" is a lot catcher than "a couple of people emailed their senators, then posted about it on Facebook".

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    6. Re:7000 more needed for a response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's the proper response, IMHO:

      "Dear Pertitioners;

      If you loved this country as much as you claim to, you would know - or would make the effort to learn - that the Executive Branch of the Federal Government has absolutely no authority to determine who is and is not a state or territory. Next time try talking to your Senators and Representatives.

      Sincerely,
      President Barack Obama"

      Maybe it would be worded a little less snarky, but that's how I'd do it.
      =Smidge=

      Just like the executive branch has no legislative power. . .right?

    7. Re:7000 more needed for a response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...the Executive Branch of the Federal Government has absolutely no official authority to determine who is and is not a state or territory.

      FTFY. It doesn't take much US history to learn that the last time states tried to leave, the executive branch played a leading role in forcing them to stay.

    8. Re:7000 more needed for a response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's the proper response (IANAL):

      "Dear Petitioners;

      This issue was decided by the Supreme Court of these United States in 1869, in Texas v. White. You literally cannot secede, ever. The branch you appeal to is irrelevant. The United States is “an indestructible union” from which no state can secede. If you do not like it you can leave the country, but the country can never leave itself unless it is the will of all the people.

      Sincerely, ...
      "

      The court opinion: http://www.potowmack.org/texwh4.html

    9. Re:7000 more needed for a response by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      Maybe it would be worded a little less snarky, but that's how I'd do it.

      If it was my job to reply I'd just post a link to the constitution.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    10. Re:7000 more needed for a response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This issue was decided by the Supreme Court of these United States in 1869, in Texas v. White. You literally cannot secede, ever. The branch you appeal to is irrelevant. The United States is “an indestructible union” from which no state can secede. If you do not like it you can leave the country, but the country can never leave itself unless it is the will of all the people.

      So the US is the Hotel California for states?

    11. Re:7000 more needed for a response by SecurityGuy · · Score: 1

      The response *should* be: "Hahahaha! Go ahead."

      I wouldn't be upset to have everyone who threatens to secede or emigrate thown out. I'm tired of the bluster. If you're leaving, leave. If not, stfu.

    12. Re:7000 more needed for a response by RandomFactor · · Score: 1

      "the Executive Branch of the Federal Government has absolutely no authority to determine who is and is not a state or territory. "

      Tell it to West Virginia

      --
      --- Mercutio was right.
    13. Re:7000 more needed for a response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unlike most Slashdotters, I'm madly in love with my own username. God I'm such a narcissist.
      =Smidge=

    14. Re:7000 more needed for a response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not - he's been bypassing Congress for a while now with all his executive orders.

      He didn't care then, why should he now?

    15. Re:7000 more needed for a response by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      It's simpler than that. The state simply has to raise taxes and cease taking federal government money, cease supplying money to the federal government, and pass a law stating that no citizen of Texas shall pay federal taxes and that the national military of Texas (the state national guard) shall provide force for protection of its citizenry from prosecution for taxes not paid and for other encroachments of the US Government on the Sovereign State of Texas.

      What are they going to do? March the US Military into Texas?

    16. Re:7000 more needed for a response by T.E.D. · · Score: 1
      Technically, the proper response would be:

      As per article 4 section 3 of the United States Constitution, the disposition of the territory of the United States of America is under the perview of Congress. Convince them of your case enough to make a law of it, and I may sign it. Convince two thirds of them, and it doesn't matter what I think.

      So if you think you have a good case, go talk to my collegues in Congress. Its the big white building up on the hill over there. I'll be here running the country while you are gone. Good luck!

      Yours, Barry.

    17. Re:7000 more needed for a response by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 1

      Well, technically they do. If the US wants to either annex land into its territory, or admit a new region into the union, the federal government has to make that decision, not the states.

      Granted, if a state secedes, that is their decision, but if the US wants to oppose, that is a federal government matter.

      --
      Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
    18. Re:7000 more needed for a response by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 1

      Oh and just to add, although congress has to take action for that, the president has to approve of it. So yes, both branches are involved.

      --
      Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
    19. Re:7000 more needed for a response by DiEx-15 · · Score: 1

      Make everyone who signed the petition watch this for over 100 hrs.

  3. Re:first post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    u fail it

  4. Good luck with that. by Arancaytar · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.

    1. Re:Good luck with that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A better response would be "WWABD" (What Would Abraham Lincoln Do?)

    2. Re:Good luck with that. by X0563511 · · Score: 2, Insightful

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

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    3. Re:Good luck with that. by MightyYar · · Score: 2

      Obama says that he models himself after Lincoln, so...

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    4. Re:Good luck with that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      I guess everything IS bigger in Texas. Including the crybabies.

    5. Re:Good luck with that. by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

      Ya, how do you respond to that.

      There is no appropriate response to that request.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    6. Re:Good luck with that. by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Do you have a photo of him with a top hat and a cool beard? I'd love to have that.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    7. Re:Good luck with that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If he starts hunting vampires, it's gonna be like having blade in the office.

    8. Re:Good luck with that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Michelle is his beard. If you know what I mean. And if you don't, I'm implying that he's homosexual.

    9. Re:Good luck with that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

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

    10. Re:Good luck with that. by aralin · · Score: 3, Funny

      I vote for: "Please, can you take Kansas with you? Thanks. B.O."

      --
      If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
    11. Re:Good luck with that. by AaronLS · · Score: 1

      I want to see THAT civil war. Wasn't Rush calling for revolution anyways? Some of them are in a way vampires.

    12. Re:Good luck with that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

      My guess is it would work out awesome for them, considering the lion's share of domestic oil production is done in Texas and North Dakota...

    13. Re:Good luck with that. by hondo77 · · Score: 1
      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
    14. Re:Good luck with that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bill Clinton gets a blowjob and lies about it, Ronald Reagan sells guns to Iraq and can't remember doing it, and we impeach who?

    15. Re:Good luck with that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Been one of those days. Iraq should be Iran.

    16. Re:Good luck with that. by Abreu · · Score: 3, Funny

      As stated before, we Mexicans don't want Texas back, you can keep it.

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    17. Re:Good luck with that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His reply should be the offer of a trade:

      Any racist bigots who wish to renounce their U.S. citizenship, pool their financial assests and finance the immigration of all current citizens of the Maldives can leave and never come back. We will not prosecute you for insurrection, and we will allow your children the right to return for college education as long as they pay out of state rates and use private, unsubsidized financing.

      Everybody wins!

    18. Re:Good luck with that. by McGruber · · Score: 1

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

      The White House should suggest the petitioners "Self-Deportation" themselves to Mexico!

    19. Re:Good luck with that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhh...whatever did WE do to deserve YOUR crazies?!

      captcha: intently

    20. Re:Good luck with that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no appropriate response to that request.

      Sure there is. The Supreme Court ruled, in Texas vs. White in 1869, that secession is illegal.

    21. Re:Good luck with that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "See ya Texas! Why, hello, Puerto Rico!"

    22. Re:Good luck with that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kinda, but do you really think these tea partiers are big fans of old prog rock?

    23. Re:Good luck with that. by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Here.

      Cool! Thanks! :-)

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    24. Re:Good luck with that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A better response would be "WWABD" (What Would Abraham Lincoln Do?)

      WWALD

  5. FIRST by rsmith84 · · Score: 1

    A Federation of Independent Republics STates

    1. Re:FIRST by rsmith84 · · Score: 1

      Republic*

    2. Re:FIRST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Theocracy*

    3. Re:FIRST by AwesomeMcgee · · Score: 1

      TheCrackSmokeracy*

  6. White House Response by RelaxedTension · · Score: 3, Funny

    No

    1. Re:White House Response by multicoregeneral · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

      --
      This signature intentionally left blank.
    2. Re:White House Response by kd6ttl · · Score: 1

      The executive branch doesn't control statehood. The states, congress, and people do.

      Here's a link: http://constitutionus.com/

      The relevant parts are Articles 1-6 and Amendments 9 and 10.

    3. Re:White House Response by Mitreya · · Score: 1

      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.

      Oh, not at all!
      Sometimes they are fine with offending, too

      The director of TSA writing an answer to "Abolish TSA" petition is the best example. He didn't even feel the need to _pretend_. The answer didn't say:
      We heard your complaints and while we will not abolish the TSA, we will strive to improve and fix things

      Instead, the answer said:
      TSA is the awesomest thing ever and by the way here's our exciting plan for next 10 years. It really did look like he copy-pasted it from the brochure "Is TSA awesome or is TSA super-awesome? - you decide."

    4. Re:White House Response by MarkGriz · · Score: 1

      Really? I was thinking more like "Don't let the door hit you on the way out..........bitch"

      --
      Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.
  7. Now's our chance! by ChinggisK · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Quick! Someone make a "Let Texas and Louisiana Secede" petition!

    1. Re:Now's our chance! by Bradmont · · Score: 2

      Wish I had mod points...

    2. Re:Now's our chance! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent up! I'd sign that in a heartbeat.

    3. Re:Now's our chance! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      But where will we file patent, trademark and copyright lawsuits !!!

    4. Re:Now's our chance! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Here, I made one. Probably not the most cleverly written but hey.

    5. Re:Now's our chance! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Signed.

    6. Re:Now's our chance! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Props for actually making one, but I can't help but be amused by the fact that you didn't include Florida in your list of 'let them secede' states... given Florida is one of the highest ranked polls of all these states on We The People.

      Given it has one vote... I imagine yours... I guess you didn't want to be stuck in the South then, huh?

    7. Re:Now's our chance! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah I just grabbed the top 3. From the looks of it almost every state is on there, had to stop somewhere.

    8. Re:Now's our chance! by Princeofcups · · Score: 1

      Quick! Someone make a "Let Texas and Louisiana Secede" petition!

      But just like the former Soviet states, we will have to disarm them first. There would be great fun when all their military leaves. "Oh, wait, we don't get to keep our nukes?" No, boys, you don't.

      --
      The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
    9. Re:Now's our chance! by hey! · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm not signing, out of respect for the 41.4% of Texans who voted for Obama and the fraction of the 57.2% who voted for Romney who aren't loudmouthed fatheads. Together they surely form a majority of Texas voters.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    10. Re:Now's our chance! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see what you did there....

    11. Re:Now's our chance! by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      I've been to Florida, as a tourist. The part I want to was run by Disney. Even outside the parks, it was Disney. A thousand gift shops, all selling identical Disney merchandise. I'd say keep the space center, but with the shuttle gone and any replacement decades of government paperwork from launch, I'm not sure what you'd use it for.

    12. Re:Now's our chance! by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      They already did, it's the Texas one. The first 20 listed signers come from:

      TX
      WV
      VA
      IN
      MO
      FL
      OH
      CO

      I also like the petition to "allow" New York to secede (which voted Democrat). The first 20 listed signers there come from:

      ND (the creator)
      TX
      PA
      NY
      IN
      AR
      KS
      GA
      AL
      IN

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    13. Re:Now's our chance! by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 2

      Given how much whining there is over base closures now, imagine when the US suddenly closes every base in the seceding south. And immediately discharges every servicemen who comes from a seceding state (unless they move to a northern state and apply for US citizenship during the transition period.) And cancels all contracts with defence contractors in the seceding states. And...

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    14. Re:Now's our chance! by jbengt · · Score: 1

      Quick! Someone make a "Let Texas and Louisiana Secede" petition!

      Only if they sign a nuclear non-proliferation treaty first, and allow international inspectors in!

    15. Re:Now's our chance! by tj2 · · Score: 1

      Here, I made one. Probably not the most cleverly written but hey.

      Singed up just so I could vote for this. Thanks!

    16. Re:Now's our chance! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've signed it!

    17. Re:Now's our chance! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But they have to take Oklahoma too!

    18. Re:Now's our chance! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's cool. What song?

  8. The likely response: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

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

    1. Re:The likely response: by Hatta · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Many people survived neither Bush nor Obama.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    2. Re:The likely response: by MightyYar · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think Presidents should automatically get added to the list of hurricane names.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    3. Re:The likely response: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll get back to you after December 21, 2012.

    4. Re:The likely response: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A double negative, filthy liberal!

    5. Re:The likely response: by hrvatska · · Score: 2

      Agreed. And not just their first or last name. When it's named after a president it should use the full name. It would be awesome to hear weather reports saying something along the lines of "People are fleeing inland as Barack Obama is on track to deliver a devastating blow to Mississippi."

    6. Re:The likely response: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

      As of today, every man, woman and child in the US has $50k of Treasury debt and a further $150k of unfunded entitlements hanging over them.

      The 100m net taxpayers each have to service $600k of obligations ($50k + $150k) * (300m / 100m).

      By the end of Obama's second term, that figure will most likely exceed $800k per net taxpayer.

      Do you pay tax? Could you service an extra $800k on your mortgage?

      Didn't think so.

    7. Re:The likely response: by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 1

      Every single one of those people is a non-voter.

      --
      "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
    8. Re:The likely response: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's their own fault for being old.

    9. Re:The likely response: by guspasho · · Score: 1

      I'm sure that anyone that didn't survive Obama did in fact survive Bush, and anyone who didn't survive Bush never made it to see Obama?

    10. Re:The likely response: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blow it out YOUR ass! Bush didn't pass legislation that is as overreaching as Obamacare, which will be with us all forever. And it's too costly, both in expense and in jobs. Hell, even now, employers are making plans NOT to expand or to fire employers so that they can comply with Obamacare without incurring MASSIVE expense and/or tax penalties.

      It's the MAKERS that pay for all of this stuff. The TAKERS are the ones who've voted for the Communist-in-Chief! You want to be Europe, go move over there, don't make the U.S. like them!

      I didn't spend five years of my life in the U.S. Army during the Cold War learning to fight Communism to have it become the law of the land 25 years later! And I've got the fucking medals to prove it! I love this country, but I'm ashamed of what it's become. Common sense is no longer common and we accept things as right that used to be wrong and vice-versa. To be honest, I'm tired of it all! If you haven't served, then STFU and go away. If you're not willing to put your ass on the line for your country then you're not worth my time!

      BTW, I signed the Texas petition as a protest. I know nothing will come of it, but I want washington to KNOW, we're pissed off and we will not be placated by smooth talkers. We want action, specifically, cut spending and lower taxes for all so we can get some fucking jobs going here. Repeal Obamacare and Dodd Frank and we'll have something to finally talk about. Until then, make damn sure you don't knock on my door or you may find some hot lead in your ass!

    11. Re:The likely response: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      my brother didn't survive bush

    12. Re:The likely response: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah - they retire the really disasterous names...

  9. Several V flood by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 1

    So which is it, "a flood" or "several"? I realise there's probably an xkcd for this, but floods and "several" seem to be two different extremes to me. I wonder how many are submitted in the average month as well. In the UK we can also submit online petitions to a government website, they're mostly "bring corporal/capital punishment", "make region X independent" and "say the UK government loves Bieber". Doesn't mean any of these things are likely to happen, or indeed a good idea.

    --
    Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
    1. Re:Several V flood by gman003 · · Score: 2

      I realise there's probably an xkcd for this, but floods and "several" seem to be two different extremes to me.

      Obligatory XKCD

    2. Re:Several V flood by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to the article and counting the states listed, that's 16 states that have made petitions. That's over 30% of the entire USA.

      Yeah, I'd say that qualifies as a flood. It may not involve large numbers in general, but that percentage is pretty damn up there.

    3. Re:Several V flood by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      That's a statistically insignificant number in a few states.

      It's like far less than the margin of victory in the battleground states. (in any presidential election)

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    4. Re:Several V flood by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I always use "several" to mean around seven, due to the similarity in naming.

      But I'm sure that's just my OCD acting up.

    5. Re:Several V flood by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      "a few" is 3 or more

      "a handful" really ought to be 4 or more, and practically, nobody means it to mean two things.

      "a couple" means two.

      XKCD is not the law.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  10. Bad at Everything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    They petitioned the White House to secede from the Union...

    1. Re:Bad at Everything by h4rr4r · · Score: 5, Funny

      You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons.

    2. Re:Bad at Everything by HiThere · · Score: 2

      Blazing Saddles!

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    3. Re:Bad at Everything by lysdexia · · Score: 2

      Mongo like succession.

    4. Re:Bad at Everything by vaccum+pony · · Score: 1

      Dammit I'm out of mod points. You'd get them all.

    5. Re:Bad at Everything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah well those moron grow most of your food and supply 40 % of our domestic oil production... and most of our beef ...large percentage of seafood comes out of the gulf of mexico and LA .....not to Mention the MS river is a major route for shipping products.....inland....so.....Blue may have currency, education, tech, and fresh water, however not the land or the climate in which to grow enough food to feed all the inhabitants of the blue states considering they have the most.

      sir_wolfie@yahoo.com

  11. Let them go. by bmo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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

    1. Re:Let them go. by mk1004 · · Score: 1

      Or Australia: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/08/kristen-neel-anti-obama-australia-tweet-backlash_n_2093160.html

      "I'm moving to Australia, because their president is a Christian and actually supports what he says."

      --
      I can mend the break of day, heal a broken heart, and provide temporary relief to nymphomaniacs.
    2. Re:Let them go. by twakar · · Score: 1

      As a Canadian...

      KEEP THEM.. don't bring us into this please..or we'll hold back the maple syrup.

      We don't want your nutjobs

      --
      Progress is man's ability to complicate simplicity!
    3. Re:Let them go. by Hnice · · Score: 1

      Well, they're not going to fucking Mexico, amirite? That place is a little, what's the word, colorful for them, if you catch my drift.

      --

      god is just pretend.

    4. Re:Let them go. by paiute · · Score: 4, Funny

      "I'm moving to Australia, because their president is a Christian and actually supports what he says."

      "And it's right next door to Switzerland."

      --
      If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
    5. Re:Let them go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We don't want them here either, thanks.

    6. Re:Let them go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the other hand, we can trade them for Quebec.
      No problems for the people there, but their language issues really mess up rest of Canada.

    7. Re:Let them go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Texas and Louisiana have a lot of oil refineries. I think they'd do better economically than you speculate.

    8. Re:Let them go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck that shit. We sure as hell don't want the teatards. You can keep those motherfuckers.

      Sincerely yours,

      Canada

    9. Re:Let them go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      1. Australia has no President.
      2. Our current Prime Minister is a "she".

    10. Re:Let them go. by bmo · · Score: 1

      >or we'll hold back the maple syrup.

      No skin off my nose. We have plenty of sugar maples in New England. It's a pretty big deal in NH/MA/VT/ME.

      >We don't want your nutjobs

      Just ship them off to Nanisivik. They can be all bootstrappy and mine lead and zinc.

      --
      BMO

    11. Re:Let them go. by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 3, Funny

      "And it's right next door to Switzerland."

      You mean Sweden, right? People are always mixing those two up.

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    12. Re:Let them go. by gmack · · Score: 0

      Forget Canada.. don't want them in my country and I'm certain they wouldn't be happy anyways. I suggest Somalia: Limited government, no public health care and no gun control.

      It is exactly what they keep asking for so they should be happy there.

    13. Re:Let them go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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.

    14. Re:Let them go. by mk1004 · · Score: 0

      Unless Google Maps is playing Apple Maps, Austria does indeed share a border with Switzerland.

      --
      I can mend the break of day, heal a broken heart, and provide temporary relief to nymphomaniacs.
    15. Re:Let them go. by mk1004 · · Score: 4, Funny

      And she's an Atheist. It was a triple fail.

      --
      I can mend the break of day, heal a broken heart, and provide temporary relief to nymphomaniacs.
    16. Re:Let them go. by Carewolf · · Score: 2

      Seriously if you are going to confuse australia with austria, then confusing swiss with swedish is next in order. And Sweden and Austraalia are so good neighbous they even co-hosted the olympics once (I am not making that part up).

    17. Re:Let them go. by captjc · · Score: 1

      Well to be fair, most of them only know of a few countries. Mexico is a hell hole filled with illegal immigrants; Europe is a communist country with filled with Nazis and gay people who talk funny; Russia is filled with Castro loving KGB commies who hate America; Asia is filled with commie chinks who eat rice and steal jobs; Australians have an obsession with BBQ Shrimp and crappy beer; Africa is filled with starving naked black people with spears; and the Middle East is a turrist filled desert. Canada is just like America and filled with polite people who like to say "aboot," "hosers," and "eh".

      Personally, I wouldn't be surprised to find that most of these people think that the rest of the world live in caves and mud huts devoid of indoor plumbing.

      --
      Slow Down Cowboy! It's been 1 hour, 47 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment
    18. Re:Let them go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We don't want them either

      -- Canadian

    19. Re:Let them go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

      3 of the 6 states that make up New England get more than they pay in taxes returned in federal spending (Maine, Rhode Island, and Vermont get more). So, on average, you are not "paying for their highways and such"...

      For fucks sake. Leave already.

      Great idea, get rid of 31% of the population and 32% of the super-rich...and how high do you think our taxes will get then?

    20. Re:Let them go. by Greystripe · · Score: 1

      Actually BMO you are the bigot as you lump everyone who disagrees with your politics together. You are the one calling people retards and racists. The AC said nothing that would indicate he is either racist or a retard, he merely said something you disagreed with.

    21. Re:Let them go. by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

      I see what you did there....

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    22. Re:Let them go. by paiute · · Score: 1

      Wasn't that blind girl Anne Frank from Swaziland?

      --
      If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
    23. Re:Let them go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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

      Exactly. All of these red state whiners about big government are the biggest beneficiaries of big government. Idiots. I am tired of subsidizing them as well. Go! Please!

    24. Re:Let them go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lookie here. Who is the intollerant asshole? BMO! Just like every other liberal seems to be, once outsmarted they just quickly turn to calling everyone racist because their ideas have failed so completely they can no longer debate any issue any more every based on merit of ideas.

      Liberal argument: Its just tax more and spend more money. What? A different idea to fix things? Your a bigot!

      Yep, discussing politics with liberals is like arguing with a 5 year old any more, and BMO has shown how he is more immature than most.

    25. Re:Let them go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do the **** you Americans think that Canada would WANT them?

      We have single-payer. We have limited free speech. We have fairly high taxes. These aren't things traditionally conservative Americans want. So why come here then? To change our land to the social mess and hyper-divided mess you have south of the border? No. No, thank you.

      Why on EARTH do you all consistently say "Go To Canada" or "I'll Move To Canada"? Do you think for a moment that we'd want your cultural attitudes on several mainstays of our society?

      How about you all stay down there, liberals and conservatives alike, concentrate on getting along and working together, fix your own bloody culture and economy first, then start spreading your knowledge and attitudes about?

    26. Re:Let them go. by mk1004 · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's the only thing she didn't confuse. 1) PM, not president. 2) She, not he. 3) Atheist, not Christian. Paiute (550198) was joking about Australia/Austria.

      --
      I can mend the break of day, heal a broken heart, and provide temporary relief to nymphomaniacs.
    27. Re:Let them go. by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you can see our schools are failing in the red states.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    28. Re:Let them go. by bmo · · Score: 0

      >Actually BMO you are the bigot

      No, I'm not. I'm anti-moron. If this makes me a bigot, then so be it.

      > as you lump everyone who disagrees with your politics together. You are the one calling people retards and racists.

      I called people threatening to go to Canada because Obama is not as right of center as they like retards. This is because Canada is the exact opposite of what they want.

      Read. My. First. Message. Again.

      >The AC said nothing that would indicate he is either racist or a retard,

      No, he brought up the issue of racism his own self. He doth protest too much.

      >he merely said something you disagreed with.

      No, he accused me of being a bigot and calling him a racist in the first message. Which I didn't. I called people with a complete lack of understanding of what they said tea-tards. Because the people who said they were moving to Canada were tea-partiers and stupid at the same time, thus tea-tard.

      On the other hand, he's a fucking moron.

      Fuck you.

      Asshole.

      --
      BMO

    29. Re:Let them go. by bmo · · Score: 0

      Tax and spend is surely more sensible than cut-taxes and spend more, which was the Romney/Ryan agenda.

      People who support that are utter retards and should not be trusted with even a single penny.

      --
      BMO

    30. Re:Let them go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Oh, you're from Austria, huh? Well then, G'day mate, throw another shrimp on the barbie."

    31. Re:Let them go. by bmo · · Score: 0

      Furthermore, until the GOP shouts down idiots that say slavery (and publish it in books, yet!) before it hits the newspapers and causes embarrassment, the GOP are tacitly approving racism. Even to this day.

      And in general it hasn't exactly deep below the surface in public Republitard discussion in general. So much dog-whistling. The thing is that they think nobody but themselves and their base can hear it.

      --
      BMO

    32. Re:Let them go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who lives with someone she is not married to. Quad fail!!

    33. Re:Let them go. by Cwix · · Score: 1

      Iraq has a lot of oil, and they all live in mud brick houses.

      I suppose mud brick IS a step up from trailer park.

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    34. Re:Let them go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't even make sense at all. The GOP started as a single issue party, that issue being the abolishment of slavery. The DNC fought tooth and nail, including a civil war against the GOP stance of abolishing slavery.

      At what point anywhere in history has the GOP been pro-slavery? I can point to many cases of the DNC being pro-slavery and anti-civil rights.

      Opps, I said somthing BMO probably doesn't like, time for him to retort with calling me a moron and bigot. (That is his only retort to anything he doesn't like)

    35. Re:Let them go. by bmo · · Score: 0

      It's like you didn't even pay attention at all.

      >At what point anywhere in history has the GOP been pro-slavery?

      This year. This election cycle.

      http://www.suntimes.com/news/elections/15611617-505/arkansas-rep-calls-slavery-blessing-in-disguise.html

      This is what I'm talking about. He was only castigated by his fellow Republitards only *after* it hit the news.

      Morons. All of you.

      --
      BMO

    36. Re:Let them go. by CaptSlaq · · Score: 1

      You're offended by "tea-tard"?

      How about retard? How's that?

      > 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

      No, you're called a bigot because you had a bumper sticker on the back of your truck, right above your trailer-hitch testicles, that said "Don't Re-Nig in November" like a lot of retards had.

      -- BMO

      Completely relevant: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/03/19

    37. Re:Let them go. by artor3 · · Score: 0

      Ah, good ole Switzerland.... Australia's path to the sea!

    38. Re:Let them go. by RandomFactor · · Score: 1

      Or all the Dutch in Deutschland?

      --
      --- Mercutio was right.
    39. Re:Let them go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unlike most Slashdotters, I'm desperately in love with my own username. So much so, that I copy it into the body of every single fucking thing I post.

      --
      BMO

    40. Re:Let them go. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      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.

      Being a resident of California, I feel the same way, only moreso.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    41. Re:Let them go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I'm moving to Australia, because their president is a Christian and actually supports what he says."

      "And it's right next door to Switzerland."

      The sad part is...Australia's PRIME MINISTER is a female atheist living in unmarried bliss with her man...talk about your fails...

      Mike

    42. Re:Let them go. by bmo · · Score: 1

      You're the only person I have ever known that has had a problem with my sig.

      I'm not the one with the problem. Take your OCD madness and get out.

      --
      BMO

    43. Re:Let them go. by Mitreya · · Score: 1

      You hear the bipartsianship from the GOP?

      No, not recently.

      It just went away with comments like yours. No one will ever work with the DNC because their attitude is just like yours.

      Not true.
      GOP does not work with DNC because compromises are viewed as a sign of weakness and encouragment for Obama/Democrats.
      Also, if Republicans and Democrats ever accomplished something good together, Democrats may claim credit for this. Republicans strive to avoid such outcome at all costs

    44. Re:Let them go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Half, do you not know how to pay an accountant a few hundred - few thousand for some solid advice?

      IE incorporate, keep contract money on the company books, and pay significantly less... Re-invest in your company, maybe buy a "company" cell phone or "company" car, and spend some money on advertising.

      With Advertising comes more clients, and then comes the possibility that you now have to hire employees and pay them a salary for your "contract" work.

      Now you become a Job Creator. YAY YOU!

    45. Re:Let them go. by evil_aaronm · · Score: 1

      Conservative leadership likes it that way. Dumb people are easier to control. Ya know, that whole thing in Kansas about Intelligent Design and all-powerful sky daddies, etc. Keeps 'em in line.

    46. Re:Let them go. by Formalin · · Score: 1

      Yeah. We should get them all to mine and smelt lead with no personal protective equipment / exposure limits / safe handling procedures / etc.

      All these regulations are just tying business down, right guys!?

    47. Re:Let them go. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      You could always set up internment camps in Alberta, to process all those tar sands. After all, that would be a dream job for many of those people, judging by their propaganda, so it's a win-win!

    48. Re:Let them go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Naaahhh... Liberia is the place to go!

    49. Re:Let them go. by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      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.

      That's a pretty damning judgement on the US Government's ability to perform or execute those things properly, then, not an indictment on the policies in concept. But no matter, there's really no need to pay attention to actual causes...

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    50. Re:Let them go. by shilly · · Score: 1

      I think it's fair to say that it's been a loooong time since anyone heard the bipartisanship from the GOP. Comments about tea-tards did not strike the fatal blow to bipartisanship: a toxic mess of ideologies inside the GOP did.

    51. Re:Let them go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can we ship all the blacks and Mexicans that live down here up to you guys? New England has, what, about a 3% minority population? You're all about equality, so surely you wont mind a flood of 400 lb. welfare moms will you?

    52. Re:Let them go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a Canadian, there are some states we are willing to accept, but not any of the ones on this list. If Texas wants to leave so bad, let them crawl back to Mexico.

    53. Re:Let them go. by mk1004 · · Score: 1

      Truth be told, it's been so many years since geography/history classes, I'd major fail trying to correctly name/place all of the countries on a map of Europe. That, and back in my day the maps had labels in the oceans reading "thar be monsters" and other such stuff.

      --
      I can mend the break of day, heal a broken heart, and provide temporary relief to nymphomaniacs.
    54. Re:Let them go. by DemonGenius · · Score: 1

      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

      Actually, don't come here. I'd prefer the people who wanted to hightail it because of Bush. Mexico is a lot closer, and warmer.

    55. Re:Let them go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well that's the whole point, dude! We're talking about what would/could happen if different states seceded from the union. You'll finally be able to live somewhere where your money isn't going to the federal government. Find a red state with a petition to secede and sign it if you haven't already. It's what ya'll wanted, right?

    56. Re:Let them go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Australia != Austria

    57. Re:Let them go. by bhiestand · · Score: 1

      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.

      Being a resident of California, I feel the same way, only moreso.

      I know the feeling. After the Northridge quake (94?), my extremely patriotic military colleagues' family was throwing a celebration party. They were excited about the prospect of California falling off into the ocean. And yes, this was in Texas.

      --
      SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling
    58. Re:Let them go. by PhxBlue · · Score: 1

      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 are absolutely correct, sir. Terms like "tea-tard" are insulting to people who are mentally disabled. "Tea party" should suffice to describe the willfully stupid portion of the American population.

      --
      !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
    59. Re:Let them go. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I know the feeling. After the Northridge quake (94?), my extremely patriotic military colleagues' family was throwing a celebration party. They were excited about the prospect of California falling off into the ocean. And yes, this was in Texas.

      I had a pretty good time in Texas, but then, I lived in Austin. I just got done relating on G+ the time I went into a Denny's and some cowboy (of three in a booth) told me "I'll suck your dick if you suck mine" and I told him "Sir you are quite the comedian" and he and his friends waited around to kick my ass or something (or maybe fuck it, who knows) but I didn't notice because I was buzzed and they eventually left. But that was in College Station, shock amazement.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    60. Re:Let them go. by bmo · · Score: 1

      No no, don't send them to Alberta. Leave that for actual Canadians. They deserve a cut of their own resources.

      There's a reason why Fort McMurray is nicknamed Fort McMoney. There is a lot of money to be had mining tar sands. 6 figure income for general labor. Honest to glub. PRI's Marketplace devoted like a 20 minute segment on that. People work there for 5 or so years and then buy a cottage on Pigeon Lake (God's country, you should go some time ).

      No, no. Send them to Nanisivik. It's uninhabited so they won't disturb anybody else.

      --
      BMO

    61. Re:Let them go. by ryzvonusef · · Score: 1

      It's all Baby steps with that man...

      http://satwcomic.com/still-a-long-way

      --
      I am an ACCA student. Got a query on Accountancy/Finance? Maybe I can help!
    62. Re:Let them go. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      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.

      Frankly, after 4 years of obstructionist policy, with the prime goal of making the current occupant a one term president - we know who is lacking on bi-partisanship. Self deportation is possible. I'm not trying to be a smart-ass here, but there are countries that have the form of government I think you want.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    63. Re:Let them go. by bhiestand · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I had a decent time in Texas, too. It was nice to be called "Slim" by people who actually meant it :). But if I mentioned my views on politics or religion, or told people I was from CA, I got a different version of southern hospitality. I suspect it would have been a very different experience if I was homosexual or dark-skinned.

      I actually remember you telling the cowboy story in a previous post, maybe a year or two ago. It's hard to forget events like that...

      --
      SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling
    64. Re:Let them go. by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      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.

      Tell us again how your standard of living is independent of the society in which you live.

  12. The Texas one is now over the threshold by sexybomber · · Score: 4, Insightful

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

    1. Re:The Texas one is now over the threshold by Anubis+IV · · Score: 2

      Hell, if Bush had one of these petitions up during his presidency, he'd probably be able to get 29K votes from Texans who wanted to secede (it's up to 32K now, by the way). Texans love to threaten secession at the drop of a hat, since it's a commonly-repeated myth that the Republic of Texas negotiated with the U.S. to retain the right to secede when the territory was annexed in 1846. Of course, a clause of that sort does not exist (though there are a few other ones that are odd, such as the ability to split Texas into more states), but a lot of people haven't gotten the memo yet. Plus, the fact that the state has its own independent power grid, oil, and an economy that would put it in the top 20 countries worldwide if it were a sovereign state means that a lot of people, for better or worse, think it can actually be viable.

      Obama or not, Texas is a state with a large population and a lot of people who are fine with threatening secession (though few of them actually mean it). It comes as no surprise to me that the petition garnered so much support. Plus, the fact that Texans tend to be regarded as arrogant and ignorant probably helped to garner more support from people who would like to see them gone.

      Moving past that though, I'm always a bit annoyed at comments like yours. You've just generalized a little over 8% of the U.S.'s population as being people who you'd be fine cutting off all ties to. More than likely, you've done this based on some stereotypes you believe about the types of people that make up the bulk of the population in the state. As someone who grew up in south Florida and moved to Texas 13 years ago during my high school years, what I've seen is that a lot of Texans feel compelled to constantly fight the type of stereotypes you've likely come to believe and accept as fact (I still remember the host family that helped us get acclimated when we moved here was relieved to find out, and I am not making this up, that we didn't think most people used a horse to get to school, since they had dealt with that misconception more than once). Yes, a lot of folks here have a drawl. And, as with every other state, we have our share of idiots here too (unfortunately, some of ours just happen to be more well-known). Couple those together and it makes for a convenient and comfortable-to-believe stereotype that doesn't accurately reflect the vast majority of the state's population.

      Most people overlook the fact that we also have world-class universities, multiple cities oriented around cultivating technology, the best medical center for cancer treatment in the world, Johnson Space Center and all that NASA and its subcontractors bring, and the largest theater district in the nation other than Broadway. None of those are gathering dust. Texans have a love for the arts, technology, engineering, and sciences...as well as a massive independent streak that oftentimes gets misunderstood for arrogance, ignorance, or other things that it is not.

      Besides which, my family was shocked by just how nice they everyone was when we moved here. Growing up in south Florida, hearing a car honk its horn was typical; it'd happen a dozen times on the way to school each morning. When we moved to Texas, it was several months before we heard someone honk a horn. And I still remember that during the first week my family was here, we went to pick up a pizza at Papa John's, only to have an employee walk it out to our car before we could even hop out, simply because she saw us pull in and figured she'd save us the hassle of coming into the store to get it. I talked to more than a few friends who moved out-of-state after college and were just as shocked at how inhospitable people are elsewhere in the country, and that the sort of hospitality and genuine friendliness they were used to in Texas was not the norm elsewhere.

      So, as one of those people who you've just wished good riddance to, allow me to say that I feel sorry for you and your small, uninformed view that must have led to your statement, and that I'd encourage you to get to know some Texans personally (they're not hard to find) before you continue to callously dismiss them as you did.

  13. Something not adding up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So as the summary says, there's several states that have created petitions on there (because we all know how totally effective that is).

    What's peculiar is that Florida was on the list. If recent memory serves me correctly, didn't Florida vote Obama? Umm... guys... he won. You're petitioning against your own victory.

    I assume it's a pile of the 'Romney' supporters who created that petition... do you guys not realize that your petition is doomed to be essentially ignored (moreso than the others, anyway)? Because y'know, they can just respond with "Your state voted for Obama, Obama won, congratulations, quit complaining".

    Although personally, I think it'd be about the best thing in the world if the USA were to split apart into North half/South half or something, since OBVIOUSLY this country has some severe agreement issues, and always has ever since the first days of the USA.

    1. Re:Something not adding up... by blueturffan · · Score: 4, Funny

      Although personally, I think it'd be about the best thing in the world if the USA were to split apart into North half/South half or something, since OBVIOUSLY this country has some severe agreement issues, and always has ever since the first days of the USA.

      We could call the countries North America and South America. Then we'd have a North America in North America and a South America in North America, but neither a North America nor a South America in South America.

      And I thought the whole Washington/Washington DC thing was unnecessarily confusing.

    2. Re:Something not adding up... by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      We could call the countries North America and South America.

      No way! Why should we change? They're the ones who suck.</office_space>

      We could call the countries North America and South America.

      That's going to cause a little confusion. Mind if we call the new country "The United States of America" to keep it clear?</monty_python>

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    3. Re:Something not adding up... by evil_aaronm · · Score: 1

      Since secession won't happen, maybe we could at least change the name to "Dis-united States of America," or "Not-Exactly-United States of America".

    4. Re:Something not adding up... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought North America in North America was Canada...

  14. Won't happen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure, the general population can push for secession. If enough of them push, maybe the state reps will take them seriously. But in order to secede, it needs to either be agreed to across the board (which I cannot see happening), or the state in question has to have a big enough army to defend itself against the rest of their former country. If the state can't defend itself against an invasion, there's absolutely no point in even trying to secede.

    Bunch of malcontents who have been lapping up far too much of Faux News' spin. They'll be dragged back down to earth really fast, if it gets to the point where it even looks like their wishes will come to fruition.

    1. Re:Won't happen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Sure, the general population can push for secession. If enough of them push, maybe the state reps will take them seriously. But in order to secede, it needs to either be agreed to across the board (which I cannot see happening), or the state in question has to have a big enough army to defend itself against the rest of their former country. If the state can't defend itself against an invasion, there's absolutely no point in even trying to secede.

      Bunch of malcontents who have been lapping up far too much of Faux News' spin. They'll be dragged back down to earth really fast, if it gets to the point where it even looks like their wishes will come to fruition.

      In modern times it's a lot easier to have an army that can deter invasion. You just need a handful of nukes. Since the US is a nuclear power the ability of a state to enforce it's secession is a very different game than it was the last time it was tried. It'll depend a lot on what kind of defection rate they get from nuclear assets when they declare independence, and not nearly as much on the ratio of national guard to federal army.

    2. Re:Won't happen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unlikely that the nuclear launch codes will be available at the state level. And no, even the Navy doesn't get to launch without them, unless there's absolutely *no* communication with US command or anybody else for quite a long period of time. TX is never going to have even one nuke at its disposal, let alone "a handful". Dream on.

    3. Re:Won't happen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, the general population can push for secession. If enough of them push, maybe the state reps will take them seriously. But in order to secede, it needs to either be agreed to across the board (which I cannot see happening), or the state in question has to have a big enough army to defend itself against the rest of their former country. If the state can't defend itself against an invasion, there's absolutely no point in even trying to secede.

      Bunch of malcontents who have been lapping up far too much of Faux News' spin. They'll be dragged back down to earth really fast, if it gets to the point where it even looks like their wishes will come to fruition.

      Are you kidding me? The Greatest Military On Earth has been in stone-age Afghanistan for 11 years and still can't claim victory. You think they're just going to roll over an industrial and economic powerhouse like Texas?

  15. The return the Confederacy? by inhuman_4 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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?

    1. Re:The return the Confederacy? by MightyYar · · Score: 3, Informative

      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?

      They'll have to pick a different capital - they lost Virginia, by virtue of it being too close to the Capitol. Or they could just split it up like last time. And they'd better hurry before whites are a minority in Texas. Currently they are only 52% of the population, and Hispanics make up something like 90% of the population growth in the state.

      I think Republicans are going to either change tactics, or become a permanent minority party.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    2. Re:The return the Confederacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's really not that clear cut. Take a look at the "Purple Map" of the 2012 election (basically blends red and blue in the ratio of the popular votes):

      http://www.princeton.edu/~rvdb/JAVA/election2012/

      There are definitely pockets of pure blue and red, but in general you'll see that there is a spectrum.

      There are definitely folks in Texas and Louisiana and the other states that are rolling their eyes to all this secession nonsense. Note that this was triggered by a handful of twits who were brainwashed to think that another 4 years of Obama meant the end of the world. I recall that there were many lefties in 2004 who felt the same about George W. Bush getting another 4 years in office. In either election, the result may not have been the best thing to happen to our country, but we're still here.

    3. Re:The return the Confederacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. The "social issues" typically driving the right will die off with its aging support base. Typically how these things go once the winds of change have started blowing.

      I'm hoping once we're passed that we can get back to having a responsible opposition party that sees empire building and a giant bureaucratic clusterfuck of a federal government as a bad thing, instead of the opposition party of "don't tell me what to do but you better not do that!"

    4. Re:The return the Confederacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it's pretty simple-minded to bring religion into it from that perspective. There are many religious people that vote to the left as well. From my perspective it seems that the right uses religion as a catch-all to say if you don't vote for the conservative candidate, it's not God's will or whatever. Pretty sure most religious texts don't talk about the rich guy being at the front of the line no matter if they are conservative or liberal. Period.

    5. Re:The return the Confederacy? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but no. The entire country has been moving to the right. This isn't a real surprise, as it's an expected result of an aging population, but it's an unfortunate one to happen just as automation is rendering more and more jobs superfluous.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    6. Re:The return the Confederacy? by amiga3D · · Score: 2

      I doubt it. People like to bitch but the 50 States together are a superpower. Separately they're just little countries. The problem is that the art of compromise seems to be lost. No one wants to meet in the middle anymore. We need some leadership that knows how to reach across these boundaries but it appears to be at least four years out and maybe more. It's gonna be a rough ride in the meantime.

    7. Re:The return the Confederacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm probably wrong, but in several hundred years (assuming we haven't made the world a radioactive dead rock by that point) I'm predicting more of a South Korea/North Korea type split, where the North is the "normal" half that everyone looks up to, plays well with the rest of the world, and is all fine and good. The 'South' will be a mass religious cult, mired in ancient technology, refusing to do business with the heathens of the world, and still declaring themselves to be the greatest thing since sliced bread... which will be approximately where they will end up technologically as well.

      And to the South with their dictatorship, I say good riddance. Then at least they can destroy their own little world, and stop fucking with the rest of the planet.

    8. Re:The return the Confederacy? by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      Our military is far too advanced for that to fly. There won't be another Gettysburg, just dead leaders.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    9. Re:The return the Confederacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The states themselves have a lot of power on their own, things aren't even remotely as bad as people paint them to be.

      It's simply a matter of our candidate didn't win, theirs did. It's an entirely political play to shift the power balance they lost when Obama won.

      Still, I'd be curious to see what happens when they actually succeed. I think people don't realize how much infrastructure a country needs for simple things, that the states have provided for them.

      It's kind of sad though, historically speaking, regions with people of same heritage, and same language speakers usually struggled to unite and make a single cohesive nation, these people are going in the opposite direction ... WTF

    10. Re:The return the Confederacy? by LionKimbro · · Score: 4, Informative

      And if you look at a county map, you will almost certainly see the CITIES.

      Time to update the urban archipelago maps. I bet they still hold.

    11. Re:The return the Confederacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

      It's not a growing dichotomy...it has always been there.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:101st_Airborne_at_Little_Rock_Central_High.jpg

      That wasn't all that long ago.

    12. Re:The return the Confederacy? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      A lot of this isn't even state vs state but it's city vs country with the country tending to be much more Red. All of those county maps that CNN was showing on election night helps put this in perspective.

      Tiny counties in the panhandle vs blue Miami.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    13. Re:The return the Confederacy? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      People like to bitch but the 50 States together are a superpower. Separately they're just little countries.

      Ya. No would ever be afraid of a little country, like Italy, Germany or Japan - oh, wait... :-)

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    14. Re:The return the Confederacy? by khallow · · Score: 1

      Well as long as bigots with your attitude aren't running either half, I think we'll be good.

    15. Re:The return the Confederacy? by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      This isn't accurate. While you see the nutjobs growing more vehement in some areas of the country, places like Texas are actually moving more to the left due to large influx of immigrants. There are stories now that point to the shifting demographics as an indicator that Texas will be a battleground state in 8-10 years, and will (barring other voting pattern changes) shift further left after that. Non-hispanic whites are already a minority in the state, and this will only continue to change, and Hispanics vote for liberal candidates by a large majority.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    16. Re:The return the Confederacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      West Virginia
      You'll contin-ya
      To be constantly a part of you
      You'll never part and you will be
      The party who will be partial to you

    17. Re:The return the Confederacy? by metrometro · · Score: 2

      Actually, no. Texas is going to be a swing state in a few cycles, because while some Texans are moving to the right, a lot of other folks are moving to the north, and they tend to vote Democratic. While Texas may be the craziest, it's not nearly as solid red as the current elected officials would suggest.

    18. Re:The return the Confederacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True, but not in the way you're thinking. With the civil war the north imported food and manufactured weapons, while the south imported weapons and grew food. That war was lost the moment the south's foreign support fell through. If it happened again today, 2/3 of the military leadership and the bulk of enlisted are conservative, while liberals are heavily concentrated in cities (i.e. utterly dependent). It wouldn't be much of a fight. Who has the guns? Who grows the food? Who runs the factories? Who controls the wealth? Who has the more defensible position?

    19. Re:The return the Confederacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the fuck is "pro-gay"? Does that mean my kids *have* to be gay? Do I need to bend over (heheheh) to the will of the 10% of the population that is gay? Just them or to any of the other 10% nutjobs too. Go away. I might have to be tolerant and polite. I do NOT have to be "pro".

    20. Re:The return the Confederacy? by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Parts of Cali and Texas (along with the other border states) are mostly Hispanic. In fact, for many schools, Spanish is the official dominant language. Don't laugh, but we could see an entire backstrip of land along the border being balkanized. The process has already begun in some isolated areas.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    21. Re:The return the Confederacy? by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      No, what is going on is that Texas was gerry meandered. As such, right now, the neo-cons rule the state. This will be the last decade that they do. By 2020, when the census is in, it will be seen that Texas is a latino majority. And that is when the neo-cons will be booted for good.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    22. Re:The return the Confederacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not surprising considering how anti-urban the GOP is. And as more and more people live in urban areas, as opposed to rural ones, you'll see that continue.

      Really, what the GOP needs is Steve Jobs to convince everybody else that things aren't really what they are.

    23. Re:The return the Confederacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize that "our" military split down the middle just like the country did during the Civil War? Any real civil war tends to produce such an effect. Civilians fighting an oppressive government is History Channel "prepper" nonsense. Politically organized secession will yield a real war with men and equipment ending up on both sides.

    24. Re:The return the Confederacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While true, unfortunately the Evangelical megachurches I've been exposed to have completely ignored that portion of Christian teaching in their elaborate stage shows that were passed off as a church service.

      There's undoubtedly one out there that's different, but when I went it seemed to be mostly about comparing each others wealth and prosperity with little more than lip service paid to helping the poor and downtrodden (unless you count donating money to the megachurch as "helping the poor").

    25. Re:The return the Confederacy? by TubeSteak · · Score: 2

      No one wants to meet in the middle anymore. We need some leadership that knows how to reach across these boundaries but it appears to be at least four years out and maybe more. It's gonna be a rough ride in the meantime.

      Who's this "no one" you're referring to?
      Obama and the Democratic leadership were bending over backwards to try and accomodate Republican demands.
      But, as it turns out, you can't negotiate with fanatics and fundamentalists.

      For example, let's talk about spending and taxes: What do you think a compromise in "the middle" would look like?
      Now here was the Republican Party's idea of compromise: No new taxes, no military spending cuts, all the offsets will be in social spending.
      Romney is gone, so "closing loopholes" has died and the party now is vacillating between "$2 or $3 in spending cuts for $1 in revenue" and "no"

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    26. Re:The return the Confederacy? by dcollins · · Score: 3, Informative

      Fact: In this election, young people (18-29) cast more votes than old people (65+) for the first time ever; and they vastly prefer Dems positions on social issues (immigration, health care, women's rights, gay marriage, etc.). Demographics say this will only increase in the future -- http://news.yahoo.com/gop-faces-steep-climb-young-voters-080006202--politics.html

      That's not everything, not a panacea for all our problems, but saying "the entire country has been moving to the right" just doesn't seem generally valid.

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    27. Re:The return the Confederacy? by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      Bending over backwards? Man you're delusional. Their attempt was about equal to the Republicans. A little show and no go. Both sides drew a line and dared the other.

    28. Re:The return the Confederacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no we will not see the return of the CSA. in 10 years, republicans, conservatives, whites, whoever makes up this body of people that calls for secession will be so vastly outnumbered by immigrants, their descendents and black people that they will disappear into the mists of time. it pays to have babies like rabbits, in terms of government assistance and in terms of political/social power. what will happen after that, i have no idea but i believe it will be either really good for us or really bad for us.

    29. Re:The return the Confederacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      cool. i'm glad i'm not the only one that has noticed that. i think we need to turn cities into city-states and then defer power/decisions to the states.

    30. Re:The return the Confederacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, actually, California grows most of the food. Nuff sed.

    31. Re:The return the Confederacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meh, that's easy. Republicans can grab the Hispanic vote any time they want it, they just have to pay the price (sensible immigration reform).

      My bet is, they'll cross that particular Rubicon before 2016, and the next president will be a Republican elected with at least 70% Hispanic support.

    32. Re:The return the Confederacy? by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      I doubt it. People like to bitch but the 50 States together are a superpower. Separately they're just little countries. The problem is that the art of compromise seems to be lost. No one wants to meet in the middle anymore. We need some leadership that knows how to reach across these boundaries but it appears to be at least four years out and maybe more. It's gonna be a rough ride in the meantime.

      Unfortunately, those who could compromise have forgotten an important maxim -- "You know a compromise is a good one when *neither* side is happy." Since certain folks won't compromise when they're offered something like 80% of what they want, well that's how we got here.

      Hmm...who was it that stonewalled at every turn? Who was it who wouldn't or couldn't even *discuss* compromise -- even to the detriment of the country? So hard to remember. Maybe someone could help me out with that?

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    33. Re:The return the Confederacy? by Darby · · Score: 0

      The left states seem to be moving closer to the Europe and the rest of the world in terms of politics.

      No, that's not what's happening. The Liberal states remember the basis of this nation and still hold true to the ideals Europe and the rest of the world began embracing only after we showed that Liberalism was viable and that completely banning church influence in government was not only viable, but optimal.

      While the right leaning states seem to be rallying around the Church.

      No, the right leaning states are pissing straight into the face of every decent thing this nation has ever claimed to stand for. Right wing politics are diametrically opposed to American values and that's part and parcel all the way back to the definitions. The American Revolution was Liberalism versus the canonical right wing form of government known as monarchy.
      WW2 was the defining war of Liberalism and the Left versus the right wing.

      There is no American supporting any tinge of right wing government who isn't a traitor of the yellowest streak by definition.

       

    34. Re:The return the Confederacy? by Darby · · Score: 0

      Hmm...who was it that stonewalled at every turn? Who was it who wouldn't or couldn't even *discuss* compromise -- even to the detriment of the country? So hard to remember. Maybe someone could help me out with that?

      Sounds like a pack of traitors.
      Wait, you mean the party who avidly supported the Nazis prior to, during and even long after WW2? Oh, right, the Republicans.

    35. Re:The return the Confederacy? by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      That's great, except that Democrats can easily jump on the same train - and without the constituent backlash.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    36. Re:The return the Confederacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm...who was it that stonewalled at every turn? Who was it who wouldn't or couldn't even *discuss* compromise -- even to the detriment of the country? So hard to remember. Maybe someone could help me out with that?

      Perhaps it was the guy living in the White House that said (paraphrased), "We won. You lost. Sit down and STFU."

      That statement from the leader of the Democrat party showed just how much the Democrats wanted to compromise.

    37. Re:The return the Confederacy? by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      Hmm...who was it that stonewalled at every turn? Who was it who wouldn't or couldn't even *discuss* compromise -- even to the detriment of the country? So hard to remember. Maybe someone could help me out with that?

      Perhaps it was the guy living in the White House that said (paraphrased), "We won. You lost. Sit down and STFU."

      That statement from the leader of the Democrat party showed just how much the Democrats wanted to compromise.

      I guess you can't remember any farther back than last week, huh AC?

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    38. Re:The return the Confederacy? by heavyion · · Score: 1

      What you really want are the cartogram maps (area proportional to population rather than geographical size). Have a look at:

      http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/2012/

      especially the last 4 on the page.

    39. Re:The return the Confederacy? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      The states that would be middle or even great powers on their own are all strangely the ones that are mostly not interested in separating.

    40. Re:The return the Confederacy? by PhxBlue · · Score: 1

      I doubt it. People like to bitch but the 50 States together are a superpower. Separately they're just little countries.

      There's something to be said for gracefully letting one's superpower status fade. Just ask England.

      --
      !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
    41. Re:The return the Confederacy? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Those aren't little countries, if you look at their population rather than their land area.

      If the US split up into, say, 3 separate countries, each one would probably be comparable to Germany, Italy, and Japan in terms of population.

    42. Re:The return the Confederacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the solution is a genetic biological "bomb" that targets specific inferior races.

  16. Let's give them back to Mexico... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since Mexico is a libertarian's paradise right now: low taxation, high corruption, and ineffective central government-- you can pretty much do anything you by paying off the right people. It's a wonderland!

  17. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  18. succession = racism? by Bodhammer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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...

    --
    "I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
    1. Re:succession = racism? by Hnice · · Score: 0

      No, those two things aren't equal in every case. Just this case.

      --

      god is just pretend.

    2. Re:succession = racism? by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      I think it highly likely that a lot of it is racist based. I'm diametrically opposed to President Obama's policies but I don't understand the need to demonize him. I keep telling people how it could be a lot worse and they always respond "How? How could it be worse?" When I respond with the fact that Joe Biden is next in line for the presidency I see the sudden look of understanding, and horror, in their eyes. Then I hit them with the fact that when Nancy Pelosi was Speaker of the House she was third in line the invariable response I get is "OH FUCK!" It's amazing how people tend to focus on the bad and fail to see how things could be lots worse. Compared to a lot of what I see in the Democratic party the President is almost conservative.

    3. Re:succession = racism? by multicoregeneral · · Score: 1

      He's drinking the radical blue kool-aide. The rest of us are drinking purple punch.

      --
      This signature intentionally left blank.
    4. Re:succession = racism? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The summary isn't saying that secession petitions are racist. The summary is just says there may be a correlation between the two and further analysis is warranted. It's hardly a condemnation of anyone who may have secessionist tendancies.

    5. Re:succession = racism? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Seems that Danny Quayle was the first of a long line of 'assassination' deterrent VPs.

      People that hated Bush Jr. would have taken a bullet for him, same as Bush Sr, Clinton and now Obama.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    6. Re:succession = racism? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So succession = racism?

      No, but secession is the word you are looking for, and after all, slavery was the primary motivation the only time it was ever seriously tried.

    7. Re:succession = racism? by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      I don't think Joe Biden qualifies as an assassination insurance VP. I mean, he has about 45% approval (with 14% undecided), and during the VP debate he appeared to be at least reasonably sane and mentally capable.

      Dan Quayle, on the other hand, had, at the same time in his tenure, 33% approval, and by all appearances was a moron.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    8. Re:succession = racism? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      I bet you didn't think Gore was assassination insurance ether?

      Biden is absolutely a moron. That said the other choice was Hillary, who would have been an assassination _guarantee_.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    9. Re:succession = racism? by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Hardly. The map that highlighted racism based on tweets showed Texas as being pretty much in line with the national average (i.e. no more or less racist), yet apparently Texas wants to secede. But hey, if that's correlation in your book, let me tell you about some stocks whose performance is strongly correlated with how much money you send me.

    10. Re:succession = racism? by dcollins · · Score: 1

      So look at the map of racist tweets as suggested in the summary. True or false: The hotspots are located particularly close to those states asking for secession.

      The two things are not automatically equal, but in this case we have hard data that does suggest a correlation.

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    11. Re:succession = racism? by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      So look at the map of racist tweets as suggested in the summary.

      That's some pretty good cherry picking, I have seen more open bigotry and racism from democrats in the last 8 years than I have in the last 12 from republicans. Then again, this does follow the standard mantra it's not racist if a democrat does it.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    12. Re:succession = racism? by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      He does okay as long as he remembers his lines. Every time you get him off the script it's bonkers time.

    13. Re:succession = racism? by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      Actually I'm starting to think most Republicans wish they could go back to the primaries for the 2008 election and do something to help Hillary. After her tenure at State she looks like a pro compared to most of the other clowns in the cabinet. I think she did a good job as President from 1992-2000 as well.

    14. Re:succession = racism? by Ogre332 · · Score: 1

      Just like you, sir, are free to think that succession and secession mean the same thing.

      --
      Shut up brain or I'll stab you with a Q-Tip. - Homer Simpson
    15. Re:succession = racism? by NotSanguine · · Score: 1

      So succession = racism? Does the OP work for MSNBC and Chris "Tingles" Matthews?

      Probably not. English much? succession

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    16. Re:succession = racism? by evil_aaronm · · Score: 1

      That's why Obama - a black man - had so much support from racist Democrats? I'm not following.

      That said, I think what you'll find is that, when you get down to the truth, much of the opposition and hatred toward Obama is racist in nature. I mean, objectively, his policies aren't that far off from Bush, who was supposedly a god in the eyes of conservatives. Name one radical departure from Bush on Obama's part. Go ahead - I'll wait. The health care thing? That was Republican before it was Democrat. Anything else? No? Didn't think so.

      So if Obama is so much like Bush, why the dislike toward him from the red staters?

    17. Re:succession = racism? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How DARE you defy a slashdot true-ism!

      ANYTHING that opposes the policies of big government Democrats (like Obama) is RACIST!

    18. Re:succession = racism? by srobert · · Score: 1

      Moreover. I strongly suspect that the vast majority of these modern day secessionists are motivated by racist sentiments toward the President.

    19. Re:succession = racism? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      I had a 'Run Hillary Run' bumper sticker on my truck (the front bumper).

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  19. Fuck The South by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

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

    1. Re:Fuck The South by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the problem. We're getting tired of being fucked. I think this occupation has dragged on over a century too long. Time for the Yankees to go back home.

  20. Race card by onyxruby · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Race card by amiga3D · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      It's not like the democrats need to bring the country back together and they know it. Johnson's great society has arrived and the Democrats know that from here on out they own all those non-working votes out there. As long as they can keep getting those checks out the first of every month there will always be a Democrat in the White House. It's not a race issue either as I have many relatives of my own that line up to get their checks every month. It's funny because I brother-in-law that used to talk about "Them ni***rs lining up with their food stamps at the checkout." Now he's one of them. He was a real shit bird then and he's a bigger one now. Like most bigots spouting that shit he was just jealous.

    2. Re:Race card by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      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.

      we were NEVER together.

      get real, buddy. neither you nor I believe we are one country in anything other than name and having lots of walmarts and mcdonalds restaurants.

      we are two ideologies and you saw that during the debates. very very different views on how they see society being.

      those are fundamentally incompatible (see what I did, there?)

      the war is not a bloody civil war but its a war, nonetheless. if you can explain how they can be compatible, I'm all ears. been thought about for over a hundred years and we have not become one nation in our entire history!

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    3. Re:Race card by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      When you tolerate and encourage bigots you tend to get associated with them. There's really no "nice" way of putting that.

      People like that should not be pandered to. They SHOULD be marginalized. That's already being done by the demographic shifts that have started within the nation.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    4. Re:Race card by metrometro · · Score: 1

      Why, I do declare, I do not understand how these charlatans wrongly associate SECESSION and RACE. As any son of the South knows, secession has always been an issue of states rights, with the Negro Question being a trivial, secondary concern...

    5. Re:Race card by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

      Who needs to insinuate? Nobody is saying that absolutely everyone who dislikes Obama is racist, but it doesn't take a genius to see that Republicans exploited racist resentment against Obama. The right hasn't been able to be overt about it because that won't fly in today's America, but somehow dogwhistle racism still does get a pass, and they've been flogging that for all it's worth. How many times did serious Republican candidates call Obama the "foodstamp President" during the primaries and beyond? (answer: too many times to count)

      (And yes, if you are planning to deny it, that really is incredibly thinly veiled racism. It is intended to evoke the "lazy welfare n----rs" stereotype, and the target audience of white racists heard it loud and clear.)

    6. Re:Race card by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretending like the opposition isn't based primarily on racism just sweeps the problem under the rug. Unlike W, Obama has shown himself to be willing to work with the opposition. And unlike W, the opposition hasn't been willing to work with him.

      Racism is not something which should be allowed to fester, that's what got us into the position where it's so prevalent in the first place. Obama is a right of center Democrat who regularly pushes for conservative policies and hasn't managed to back off on the most egregious of W's policies.

      The reality is that the folks on the GOP side refuse to compromise and they're ultimately the ones who broke it, so they're the ones who need to fix it. Pretending like that isn't the case isn't going to solve anything.

    7. Re:Race card by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Maybe you've heard about this "melting pot" idea, where people from different races, nationalities, backgrounds, and ideologies can come together and make something awesome. Some of us still believe in that, even if we don't agree with each other all the time. The only thing stopping us is people like you who refuse to even come to the table.

      I'm pissed at both major parties, to be honest. Everywhere I look it's a polarized political system catering to base instincts and shouting matches instead of honest intellectual discourse and an ability to recognize the best ideas, regardless of where or with whom they originate.

    8. Re:Race card by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who wants to bring the country back together?

      The country does not need to remain in its current abusive relationship with itself. The country needs to get a divorce.

    9. Re:Race card by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I can see it might be flamebait. Not because it's wrong but because it's so accurate. Nothing hurts like the truth.

    10. Re:Race card by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

      I assume that was its intended effect, consciously or otherwise. The United States aren't, and don't want to be, united. You have a pervasive us-vs-them mentality, internally and externally.

      Captcha: prejudge

    11. Re:Race card by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I tell people all the tell I voted for Obama in 08 only....and the reason I did in 2008 was because for 232 years White men have been screwing this country doggy style I figure why not give the brotha a turn? So I voted for Obama because he was black essentially...lol I am blk woman so people often asked if I did or not so that was my rebuttal. However in 2012 I voted for Gary Johnson......sir_wolfie@yahoo.com

  21. Stop..It hurts to much to laugh at this... by who_stole_my_kidneys · · Score: 0

    it just too damn funny.

  22. A trade? by SmaryJerry · · Score: 5, Funny

    Remove Texas and bring in Puerta Rico so we don't have to change the flags.

    1. Re:A trade? by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      As a Texas, fine by me. Besides, you guys wouldn't want a 51 star spangled banner manufactured in a CHINESE FACTORY!!!

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    2. Re:A trade? by evil_aaronm · · Score: 1

      Probably because, since they're cheaper to make, there, and some conservative business executive wanted to pump up the quarterly figures, he had the work out-sourced. Yep, conservatives: always looking out for the well-being of this nation.

    3. Re:A trade? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a Texas, fine by me. Besides, you guys wouldn't want a 51 star spangled banner manufactured in a CHINESE FACTORY!!!

      Of course not! Romney is moving his flag factory to Malaysia to avoid China's strict environmental and labor laws.

    4. Re:A trade? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Silicon Valley; a liberal mecca of corporate activity is well known for their outsourcing too.

  23. Wholly Crap! What is wrong with your country?! by holophrastic · · Score: 1, Troll

    Look, I hate the way democracy is handled, and I'm as white as most Texans (though no where near as tall), but this kind of thing doesn't just make your entire country look foolish. Quebec's done that to my country for a while. This makes your country look like 14th century racists. It's not even modern racism.

    Haven't you guys had civil wars over this shit already? Aren't there movies and books and statues and abstract rail-roads about all of this?

    Way to remind everyone that the USoA isn't a country, it's just a collection of independent states. Quebec doesn't want to "leave" Canada, they want to start their own country. Texas wants to simply leave.

    Quite frankly, it's embarassing to share a land-mass with you guys. You do know that most of the world can't distinguish Canadians from United Statians, so they call us all Americans, you know, since we share that land mass known as the Americas. The British are going to mock us!

    Good thing you still have the right to bare arms. Even if the British aren't coming, I guess the blacks sure are.

    Wow. Little brother to big brother, grow up.

  24. Updated map of states net fed taxes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd like to see it compared to an updated map of states' net federal taxes.

    Texas could make it on its own, but most Red states receive more federal money than they pay.

    1. Re:Updated map of states net fed taxes by bobthesungeek76036 · · Score: 1

      And I bet every blue state receives more than they pay...

      --
      Karma: Bad
    2. Re:Updated map of states net fed taxes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You'd lose that Bet.

      California, known Blue State, pays 60 billion more than it gets back. Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Minnesota also belong on the list.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_taxation_and_spending_by_state

    3. Re:Updated map of states net fed taxes by WhitePanther5000 · · Score: 1

      I'd like to see it compared to an updated map of states' net federal taxes.

      http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2012/02/is-your-state-a-net-giver-or-taker-of-federal-taxes/

    4. Re:Updated map of states net fed taxes by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      You're right. It's absolutely miraculous how everyone is getting more than they pay in...

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
  25. As a Louisiana Resident. by oic0 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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"

    1. Re:As a Louisiana Resident. by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Well, you DO have congressmen that will help out your local economy. I suspect that more than a few of them are still hitting the prostitutes.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    2. Re:As a Louisiana Resident. by RandomFactor · · Score: 1

      "Louisiana's incarceration rate is nearly five times Iran's, 13 times China's"

      True dat. We could cut our incarceration rate quite a bit following some of China's policies...

      --
      --- Mercutio was right.
    3. Re:As a Louisiana Resident. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A majority of Louisiana inmates are housed in for-profit facilities, which must be supplied with a constant influx of human beings"

      Not being an American I don't really understand the concept of a for-profit prison facility. How does that work?

      Our law is written with the idea that prison will re-educate the criminal, show him the wrongs he did etc... So that when he is let lose he can become a valued member of society again. (The idea doesn't always turn out that way, but we try).
      So how can you make that profitable before the prisoner is released?

      (It certainly does explain why some European countries don't extradite to the U.S. on the basis that the U.S. doesn't really respect human rights for their prisoners much)

    4. Re:As a Louisiana Resident. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you doing there? Life is short; get the fuck out.

    5. Re:As a Louisiana Resident. by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      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"

      Ya, but once they leave the union and stop all that welfare crap, those criminals and welfare cheats will have to go out and get jobs and become productive citizens or starve. Louisiana's biggest problems solved with the result of a booming economy!

    6. Re:As a Louisiana Resident. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Two ways. The first is standard government contracting: "Hey, you were gonna pay 4 million to run that prison. We can run it for 3.5 million, with our private industry magic. Pay us 3.75 million and you get to save 250 grand while we make the same in profit."

      Of course, they cut on safety, on compliance with punishment regulations, on food quality, on staffing - since if they manage to run it for THREE million, their sole motivator is profit. Even lawsuits only matter in terms of 'Being forced to go through lawsuits and pays penalties hurts profit.'

      This is also combined with Prison Labor. This is usually touted as 'training and educating in worthwhile trades, so they have things to do outside of prison instead of being criminals' - but this flatly fails as long as we refuse to expunge records, ever. Really, it's that you -can- pay prisoners wages that would not fly even in China, and produce full-price goods. And even non-private prisons will do this (Although there's SOMEONE private in there to take their cut, because oh god this system is corrupt and our government has rules that they are kept to much more harshly then their 'private contractors')

  26. Succession? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who's equating racism with a number of people or things sharing a specified characteristic and following one after the other?

    1. Re:Succession? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. I strongly recomment that you support this petition: http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/11653

  27. The country is terminally divided. by hessian · · Score: 2

    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.

    1. Re:The country is terminally divided. by LionKimbro · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's not about states. It's about cities.

    2. Re:The country is terminally divided. by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      So you understand the language in 1861 properly: When secessionists talked about states' rights, the rights they were concerned about were the rights to own slaves, not, say, issues of taxation. They were quite explicit about that, and any other interpretation is Southern whitewashing.

      cite

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    3. Re:The country is terminally divided. by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      Sorry, broken link. Correct cite:
      NYTimes Disunion series

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    4. Re:The country is terminally divided. by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 2

      Here is a better take from a map perspective: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/2012/

    5. Re:The country is terminally divided. by ancientt · · Score: 1

      Very interesting essay and map. Thank you for sharing.

      --
      B) Eliminate all the stupid users. This is frowned upon by society.
    6. Re:The country is terminally divided. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If conservatives liked results they wouldn't have advocated a return to the 2000-2008 methodologies that got us into this mess in the first place.

    7. Re:The country is terminally divided. by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      Map looks vaguely familiar.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    8. Re:The country is terminally divided. by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 2

      Or if Hessian prefers to read it from the horses' mouths:

      The declaration of causes of seceding states: http://sunsite.utk.edu/civil-war/reasons.html

      For fun, ctrl-F "slave", then quickly alt-N through the document. "Obsessed much?" But, Hessian, do read through them properly. Note the tone of indignation that anyone would dare object to slavery. Hell, the Mississippian declaration is a check-list of rhetorical arguments still used by conservative politicians and Fox's talking heads:

      "It has enlisted its press, its pulpit and its schools against us, until the whole popular mind of the North is excited and inflamed with prejudice." The lamestream media and liberal schools/teachers' unions are brainwashing the nation against conservative values.

      "It has nullified the Fugitive Slave Law in almost every free State in the Union, and has utterly broken the compact which our fathers pledged their faith to maintain." "State's Rights!"... except for the other states. (And those endless appeals to the sacred Founders, who were totally on our side.)

      "It seeks not to elevate or to support the slave, but to destroy his present condition without providing a better." Substitute "welfare" for "freeing slaves".

      "We must either submit to degradation, and to the loss of property worth four billions of money, or we must secede from the Union framed by our fathers," We're not slave-owners, we're job creators.

      "It advocates negro equality, socially and politically, and promotes insurrection and incendiarism in our midst." Or gay rights, or equal pay, or affirmative action.

      "It knows no relenting or hesitation in its purposes; it stops not in its march of aggression, and leaves us no room to hope for cessation or for pause. " It's War! War on Christmas, on Christianity, and on America!

      "It has recently obtained control of the Government, by the prosecution of its unhallowed schemes, and destroyed the last expectation of living together in friendship and brotherhood." That illegitimate, divisive government; how dare they win elections!

      "It tramples the original equality of the South under foot." No awareness of irony.

      Oh, and there's even made-up "science": "and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun."

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    9. Re:The country is terminally divided. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is that cities will quickly collapse without those vast tracts of rural land producing resources like food and building materials.

    10. Re:The country is terminally divided. by Narnie · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about? According to your reasoning, I must believe 99% of the country is wrong. I can't imagine that I cannot find commonality with 99% of Americans.

      Perhaps it is ignorance, single issue voters, stereotypes, and assuming absolute political polarity is what is wrong with American politics. In an actual discussion, I believe most voters could agree with some of the R's arguments just as voters could agree with some of the D's arguments. I doubt that the majority of voters stand firmly on political lines for all issues. I am disappointed to see that neither party is willing to field a presidential candidate that is willing to break party lines in a major way.

      --
      greed@All_Evils:~#
    11. Re:The country is terminally divided. by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Holy shit, mod parent Interesting 8-(

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    12. Re:The country is terminally divided. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      And it's interesting that the blue counties tend to be heavily union, and/or highly welfare-ized, and/or Indian reservations (which explains some of those in the middle of nowhere).

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    13. Re:The country is terminally divided. by NewYork · · Score: 1

      I think http://www.lietaer.com/2010/03/the-worgl-experiment/ is a good alternative to secession.

    14. Re:The country is terminally divided. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am betting sadly on the White men because they have had enough time to get there pieces into play,all the while they play distract politics with the rest of the suckas...oops I mean liberals....race baiting.....reproductive rights baiting( that whole fluke thing was genius BTW, having a congressional hearing on contraception with a woman in front of a all male panel really?? come on textbook baiting...since everyone knows preception is everyting in politics.) and ETC..... and every year all of you fall for it. and election cycle whether it it is congressional or presidential they all by it. Mitt was never meant for President He was the good soldier for the party. He did what he was supposed to...and you all bought it...well most of you...Obama was always going to be reelected because both parties have a vast interest in him doing so. The right hate him vehemetly and it reinfores the left base....stop drinking the kool aid people......it is only getting worse

  28. Self fulfilling prophecy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. Troll/Spam WH petition site making it even more useless than it currently is.

    2. Advertise your trolling campaign.

    3. Report constantly on the progress of your trolling campaign while speculating now that more people know about it your campaign is about to reach critical mass.

  29. Is it racist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wanting to succeed doesn't necessarily mean you're racist, it just means that you don't like how things are currently run.

  30. Re:first post by JustOK · · Score: 3, Funny

    He seceded from the main thread.

    --
    rewriting history since 2109
  31. 3 Words by Hnice · · Score: 0

    Let. Them. Go.

    I'm so tired of this shit. Let them fucking go. Tennessee's a third world country without federal fucking dollars -- they want a part of that? Let them have it.

    Let them eat bibles.

    --

    god is just pretend.

    1. Re:3 Words by bmo · · Score: 2

      >Tennessee's a third world country without federal fucking dollars

      East Tennessee is a third world country *even with* federal fucking dollars.

      --
      BMO

    2. Re:3 Words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let them eat bibles.

      Two punches in one line. I like that!

    3. Re:3 Words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Third-world countries have Gigabit internet now?

      Damn.

      America has fallen behind.

  32. "Flood?" by Carcass666 · · Score: 1

    Per the article (and submitter, it's politico.com not "political.com"), there more than 10,000 petitions each for Texas and Louisiana secession. Is this even close to a flood by web standards? Just because something happens on the web, does that necessarily make it "news for nerds?" Perhaps it's the inflammatory "racist" link that got the editors' attention. There are plenty of blog sites for "everybody in the South is an idiot racist", why do we have to add Slashdot to the list?

  33. Re:Wrong Branch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You're assuming the rebels won't have predator's and won't have nukes. You can joke all you want, but this is a serious sign of a philosophical divide in our nation and those weapons you think will be in the hands of the Federal Government may not end up there should a civil war envelope our once great nation.

  34. Easiest way to shut them up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obama: "If your state seceded, you would no longer be a citizen of the United States and therefore the United States federal government would no longer be obligated to pay you Social Security or Medicare benefits when you retire. (And if you think the Confe-DUH-racy is going to be able to afford to do it, think again.)"

    1. Re:Easiest way to shut them up by HornWumpus · · Score: 1, Informative

      The feds can't afford to pay anyhow. They will just print money, which any independent state can also do.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    2. Re:Easiest way to shut them up by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      No social security taken out of each pay check? I think that is exactly the sort of thing they want.
      They will likely want to sue (in an international court) for all their social security contributions back.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    3. Re:Easiest way to shut them up by geoffrobinson · · Score: 1

      If I had mod points I would rate this post funny since you think there's actually going to be money for Social Security or Medicare when I retire.

      --
      Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
    4. Re:Easiest way to shut them up by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      There will be loads of money to fund them. All they have to do is tax everyone making over 250k a year (the rich) and take the money spent on unfunded wars and convert it to medicare or social security.. I mean that's why they put the wars on budget- so they could continue spending the money when it is no longer needed for the wars. That is some they couldn't do when it was off budget emergency spending. It would have been counted as new spending and congress would have to show how it would be funded either by increased revenues or cuts to existing spending elsewhere. Now it appears that we will spend it forever instead of on a war(s).

    5. Re:Easiest way to shut them up by SomePoorSchmuck · · Score: 1

      Obama: "If your state seceded, you would no longer be a citizen of the United States and therefore the United States federal government would no longer be obligated to pay you Social Security or Medicare benefits when you retire. (And if you think the Confe-DUH-racy is going to be able to afford to do it, think again.)"

      This just demonstrates that you live in a liberal filter bubble, because you think that threat is some kind of game-ending trump card. On the contrary, you'd have total bedlam as millions of people rushed to line up asking where to sign their names.

      In the last 6-7 years I have witnessed is an increasing number of rank-and-file conservatives (especially under the age of 45) who have started saying, "Look, I know the system is going to implode and evaporate long before I get there. And even if it doesn't, I find the policy/economic side effects of the federal government filling this role to be inherently, inescapably hostile to a free society. Therefore, LET ME OUT NOW. I will gladly forego any benefits I would have received at retirement. You can even keep whatever I've paid in up to this point. Just LET ME OUT NOW to stand or fall on my own financial choices with whatever money I earn from the sweat of my labor."

      Pragmatically, a very very large percentage of the younger conservative generation has ALREADY kissed their "benefits" goodbye because they believe the system is irredeemably corrupt and bankrupt. Your threat doesn't scare them any more than it would if you threatened a terminal stage 4 lymphoma patient with execution.

      --

      Hollywood, Television, has become the dream machine. We need to take that back; each of us is a Dream Machine
  35. Predicted Official White House response ... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    The Texas petition needs only 7,000 more signatures to trigger an official White House response.

    ... No.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  36. Signatures from other states by achbed · · Score: 1

    Most of the signatures for each state are from people signing every petition (even if they don't live there). NJ has 161 signatures from people who live there out of 960 (determined by my unscientific "load page really long and use find" method). If they wanted to really make waves, they should introduce legislation at the state level directly instead of pussyfooting around signing petitions that will get a response of "asked and answered in 1865".

  37. Welcome back! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure, back here in Mexico we'll take y'all Texans, Arizonians, New Mexicans back. We'll take a pass with the Californians cause they're too many dopeheads and would smoke all our pot. Look at the bright side: we ain't got no niggers over here and our new Presidente is great at wowing the ladies.

  38. Legitimate and necessary response! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given the current state of the economy accompanied by the fact that the federal government has all but thrown out the US constitution (You know? That thing that once made this a great nation!) along with the fundamental principles of the declaration of independence, and the painfully obvious decline of our civil liberties, the over burdening, over controlling, and corrupt government that on a whim makes decisions for the entire nation with no concern for what we the people who elected these talking heads to office want, feel, or desire as a state, a country, or as an individual I feel that these states as do the rest of the members of this "Union" have every legitimate right to want to secede from a system of broken values, broken legislation, broken foreign policy, broken economy, broken judicial system........ I could go on and on and on.. But, you get the point...
    If these States as we refer to them truly desire to secede that is their right as it is deemed by the people as this nations government was once upon a time.
    When the system has failed, and there truly is no where else to turn... This is what we see happen in a civilized society instead of armed and bloody rebellions (not ruling it out as a future possibility either, because when left with no recourse people can and will fend for themselves, their families, and their neighbors.).
    If our federal government righteously championed the voice of the people and acted in favor of the people instead of profits or power we would not be seeing great states such as Texas attempt to secede.. Alas, we are coming into a new era in the US, and it's about damn time. People aren't going to take the abuse lying down any longer, and the petitions for secession are blinding proof of that.

    Now, my personal ramblings aside... Seriously consider the consequences of multiple states attempting to secede just days after a president takes/retakes the office. This tells you that not only have people lost faith in their government but they have lost trust in the elected leader . When a nation feels it can no longer look to it's leaders to lead, the results have in recent years proven often catastrophic as was the case in Egypt, Libya, and at the forefront Syria. Granted, these nations were under a much different state of duress when they revolted than we are here and now. However, how far away are we, the United States of America from catastrophe when our united states feel the need to remove themselves from the union... Apparently, things are not going as they should here and this is made evident by the reactions of our brothers and sisters in this nation voicing their opinions and desires to remove themselves from the union.

    Think about the implications of a state "wanting to secede" from the nation.... I mean really think about it... What does that really say about the "state of the union"?

    I'll take my answer off the air......

    1. Re:Legitimate and necessary response! by TopherC · · Score: 1

      This sounds to me like a reactionary statement that may be fueled by media hyperbole and exaggeration. Have we really thrown out the constitution? Remember that the US Constitution is a living document and was far from perfect at its inception. I have lots of respect for it but do not worship it. I'd like to tell you to actually read it but I'm ashamed to say that I myself have not done so. I've read some parts of it and found that it's actually very readable and not affected much by "legalese" so I plan to read more of it in the future. I'm just trying to say that going to the source sometimes helps de-fuse our emotional triggers that are abused by the propaganda of our day.

      Our tax burden is not crippling. Our standard of living continues to improve. Lifespans are improving. Our income tax rates are lower than most developed countries and our corporate tax rates are on a par with others. Government revenue has been between 15 and 20% of GDP since the 1940's, and in the past 4 years it's gone down and is closer to 15%.

      There are a lot of political issues today that I'd love to be able to correct, but I don't think everything is "broken." What I most want is more education in propaganda analysis (deconstruction -- see for example http://propagandacritic.com/), and less two-party partisan nonsense. These are both problems as old as our country. Yes, corporate lobbyists are another way of spelling "corruption" but this too is nothing new. The national debt and CO2 emissions are serious problems that are new to the past few decades, and they both frighten me a little, but they are complex problems that will need to be solved in an intelligent manner without reactionary thought.

      And finally, as many people pointed out above, these succession petitions are far from representative of the majority opinion. There's a massive gap between a signed petition (to let off steam mostly) and finding that these states want to actually secede.

    2. Re:Legitimate and necessary response! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's think about this: the petitions are all basically identical. How many people submitted them? I respectfully suggest that it might well be one, or only a few people, and is not, broadly speaking, representative of the entire populace of the states for which they have submitted petitions.

      The rhetoric about the people who allegedly pay no taxes etc (the nation-of-takers meme) misses something that's key: the social contract.

      We as human beings take care of each other. Or we should. That's kind of the point of having a nation that covers this much ground. Everyone's not going to be doing well all at the same time. When one area has a natural disaster - hurricanes, floods, earthquakes, whatever - the rest of the country pitches in. It's the very idea of a commonwealth - the idea that we're all in this together.

      Look, I work in a place where you can do *very* well - but only if you're in advanced IT, and have an advanced degree. What about the folks in the rust belt whose jobs were shipped overseas by corporations? They can't find work, they don't necessarily have the education or skills to open their own businesses, and there's only a limited market right now anyhow, irrespective of recent improvement in the economy. I don't especially have a problem with long-term unemployment for those folks - structural unemployment costs me money but it keeps families afloat, might help keep them from being homeless. Even if I don't care for how they vote, it seems to me that the very idea of "nation" adds a certain amount of filial obligation.....I might not care for you or the way you think, but unless you're actively screaming for my extermination, I should have your back at some basic level.....

      I don't have a problem with so-called entitlements. An awful lot of the people receiving benefits have worked their entire life for those. And while I would rather see people have children mindfully and with resources to support them, they don't, and I recognize that marginalizing children born in poverty and (often) ignorance should have at least a minimum standard of living so that they aren't starving. And no, that's not code for minority, as there are way more white poor single mothers than minorities - and there are significantly neglectful parents in all camps, ranging from ignorant neglect to active neglect (drug use, bad choices, etc). Just because someone's parents are stupid doesn't mean we should punish the children. IMagine if you did something bad and someone punished your dog for it.....punishing the kids makes about that much sense to me. Yeah, it costs money. But if it means the difference between a kid getting something to eat and not, or getting a decent education, I'm all over it.

      I think that healthcare should be universal, too, once again because we're all in this together. If I get sick, fine, I can take a day off and not lose my job. If my office cleaner gets sick, he or she might not be able to do that - either because of an employer who would fire them or because they can't afford the time off. If there's a bug cruising around that is nasty - think H1N1 - I want the *whole* population covered. If my office cleaner has something virulent and works, and I'm at my desk late - happens a lot, fwiw - then I stand a good chance of getting it and passing it on to my (fortunately well-covered) family. From my perspective, having the office cleaner getting decent healthcare and having the chance for a respite in sickness is self-preservation - epidemics exist because people panic and don't take precautions or isolate, often for economic reasons, though sometimes it's from ignorance. If everyone is covered, our herd immunity is increased.

      Will there be abuse of the system? Oh, hell yes. That's a given - we humans do that. We're wired to game the system, to get advantage. But why is it more wrong for the poor to do it? Is it really any worse than the rich writing their taxes down to zero or very nearly so, or corporations doing the same? Gaming the syst

    3. Re:Legitimate and necessary response! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "This sounds to me like a reactionary statement that may be fueled by media hyperbole and exaggeration."

      My statement was quite reactionary, I mean.. When one makes a statement, it is often times a "reactionary" statement. xD
      And, unfortunately although this quite obviously does not reflect the beliefs of a state's population as a whole, it is still worthy of notice and concern when the thought of secession arises for any reason. We "we're" a great nation since the beginning and have struggled through our share of failures, and awful histories, but even with all of the bad that we have made and been through we are still trying to get it right, and that has to count for something... Our values and how we choose to uphold them define who we are, they define us as a great nation or they don't. Our choice.. But when we as "free" Americans can't even get a handle on our own affairs to the extent that states want to break away because they feel those values are not being upheld or won't be upheld it is in my opinion a "big deal" and greatly diminishes my own personal faith in our current system.

      Now, to the effect of this being fueled by "media hyperbole" and "exaggeration.", in case you don't recall there was this thing, actually there were two.. Patriot Act I and Patriot Act 2.. Just do a google search if you're feeling lazy, I admit, it's quite a read and I have not read every single entry myself but I have read more than enough to tell you that your rights/liberties and mine have been mangled and twisted. The constitution however, I have read in whole.. And, although I may not "worship it" as you have put it, I do uphold it's values and for you to imply that it was not perfect from it's inception does not make it any less (I mean nothing is perfect and I can accept that, but can't you admit that it was and is a damn good try?). http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html The constitution is a doctrine of ideas, ideas to ensure a happy, fulfilling, and tyranny free life for all who cared to make the choice to come here to these "United States". So yes, I uphold those values and those ideas because they meant something to the men who penned them and to many that came after.

      This nation was founded upon the beliefs of the constitution, for those of you that feel it is acceptable to manipulate and bend to suit your needs or that it is "old" and outdated I truly feel sorry for you specifically if you are an American. Those "old" ideas are what allows you to live as you are now.. When we start picking apart the threads we don't like or want, it all unravels.
      When this nation is divided enough that even the thought of secession creeps into the fold the big picture needs to be re-examined and corrected.
      Our standard of living is not improving from what I have seen.. I don't know where you live, but where I am from I see upwards of 40 of people losing their jobs every week just where I work and it's actually increased since the election.. I still see entire streets with foreclosure signs, the unemployment line still wraps around the block on most days (drive by on my way to work.). Maybe the quality of living is going up for some, but it isn't everywhere and certainly not evident here.
      Exaggeration is not needed when the facts are there to support themselves.

      My reactionary statement, and my subsequent response may be emotional to some extent. But, hey I'm only human. I wasn't perfect at conception. ;)

  39. not a problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    There is still plenty of room left on the no fly list.

  40. 803,849 votes by ZombieBraintrust · · Score: 2

    803,849 people in Puerto Rico voted to have Puerto Rico become a state compared to 10,000 petitions each in Texas and Louisaiana for secession. I think America will be fine.

    1. Re:803,849 votes by Legion303 · · Score: 1

      If we just do a straight trade of TX and PR, we won't even have to redesign the nation's flag. Good luck defending your southern border, TX.

  41. Love it or leave it by paiute · · Score: 1

    I seem to recall any criticism of Bush met with "Love it or leave it". Now that the tables have turned, we see what little pussies these rednecks really are. Like middle school bullies who can't take a punch without going bawling to the principal.

    --
    If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
    1. Re:Love it or leave it by illumnatLA · · Score: 1

      There was a spoiled, bratty kid who lived in my neighborhood growing up. Whenever the rest of us didn't want to do what he wanted to do or play by the rules he wanted to play by he would go running home "WHHhhaaaa... I'm telling my mom."

      Some people in the United States have participated in as best of a democratic process as we can muster here and didn't get their way.



      "WHHhhaaaa..."

      --
      Web hosting that doesn't suck!Dreamhost
    2. Re:Love it or leave it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you don't like our criticism you can love it or leave it... Yep, still works.

    3. Re:Love it or leave it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I seem to recall any criticism of Bush met with "Love it or leave it". Now that the tables have turned, we see what little pussies these rednecks really are. Like middle school bullies who can't take a punch without going bawling to the principal.

      This doesn't make any sense. Previously the group's mantra was "Love it or leave it". Now that they no longer love it, they wish to leave it. Sounds consistent to me.

      In fact, if New Jersey or Massachusetts tried to leave in 2005, you'd not hear a peep from Texans other than, "Okay, well.... y'all have a good one".

      I think you're the one who is missing the point.

  42. They are petitioning for another ass kicking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    They got the crap kicked out of them last time they tried. We all know they want their own country were they can stop black people from voting and they can beat gay people. However, we wouldn't really be granting freedom if we allowed them to engage in that conduct, would we?

    They can just go back to whining "The south will rise again!" and wait twenty years for their voting block means nothing.

  43. That's a pretty feeble stab at the race card by argStyopa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:That's a pretty feeble stab at the race card by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To deny the heavy correlation between racists and their calls for secession is to claim that the Confederacy wasn't about trying to preserve slavery.

      Pretend all you want about legitimate grounds trumping the racist bigots, but at least recognize their presence in said movements. I say the same to anybody who says the Tea Party isn't racist.

      Yeah, right, and you can sell me the London Bridge.

    2. Re:That's a pretty feeble stab at the race card by capedgirardeau · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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.

      --
      Wax on, wax off baby!
    3. Re:That's a pretty feeble stab at the race card by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      You realize that your little diatribe, by and large, could have been pulled out of a Southern secessionist speech almost verbatim, right?

      Lincoln won, Jefferson Davis lost. Get over it already.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    4. Re:That's a pretty feeble stab at the race card by iluvcapra · · Score: 2

      I'm well versed in the works of John C. Calhoun and I'm pretty sure he never used the word "weaksauce."

      And most secessionists aren't racists. Some are racist, and the rest just think racism is an imaginary conspiracy theory invented by liberals in the 1950s in order to shame and embarrass good honest folk, and the real racists in America are the people who talk about diversity.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    5. Re:That's a pretty feeble stab at the race card by pellik · · Score: 1

      I enjoyed this juxtaposition of this well spoken post and the word weaksauce.

    6. Re:That's a pretty feeble stab at the race card by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      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.

      The problem with your idea is that you could as easily have used the same arguments for secession under any president we've had for ages, but they're only making these noises now that we have a black man in office.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    7. Re:That's a pretty feeble stab at the race card by evil_aaronm · · Score: 1

      True dat. I posted as much, above. Where has Obama radically departed from Bush's script? How is Obama NOT "Bush III"? Yet all this discontent among conservatives and "real Americans." Bullshit it's not racist.

  44. Oh, Please. This Happens EVERY Election by medv4380 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Oh, Please. This Happens EVERY Election by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but Clinton and Obama were elected, W not so much. SCrOTUmS should really have kept their noses out of the process and let it complete. Had the vote completed and W been elected, that would have been one thing, but they took sides which mean that when Ohio had hundreds of thousands of votes disputed in 2004 nothing was done to check up on it at the time and W was reelected.

      It's one thing to lose the election and quite another to be in a position where a conservative court makes the call in defiance of the vote of the people.

  45. Good news for the secessionists.... by mseeger · · Score: 3, Funny

    Reasonably capable general is on the market :-)

    1. Re:Good news for the secessionists.... by RandomFactor · · Score: 1

      A (playing the) field General no less.

      --
      --- Mercutio was right.
    2. Re:Good news for the secessionists.... by mseeger · · Score: 1

      Well, beggars can't be choosers ;-)

  46. Power to the states by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm a leftist and voted Obama. However, I do think the Red States have a point: they aren't allowed to run their sovereign states as they would prefer. I think much too much power (read: tax dollars) go to Washington DC instead of the state capitals. Some 80% of the Californians' income taxes go to the Federal Government. Compare that with the European Union, where Brussels gets maybe 200 euros from each EU citizen per year. The bulk of their taxes go to the state and local governments following the principle of subsidiarity.

    Nothing prevents the coastal states from practicing European-style social democracies with steeply progressive tax codes. So if the Republicans manage to liberate the wealthy from taxes, the Franchise Tax Board can take the money instead.

    I understand that would cause some of the wealthy to settle in the Red States. Let them. This no Soviet Union where we try to prevent people from defecting.

    1. Re:Power to the states by ancientt · · Score: 1

      Agreed and well said.

      --
      B) Eliminate all the stupid users. This is frowned upon by society.
    2. Re:Power to the states by srobert · · Score: 1

      No the "sovereignty" of the states doesn't translate into the right to leave the Union. If the state I live in tried to secede from the United States, it would happen over my dead body. The Union soldiers of the Civil War died a long time ago, but I don't think the debt owed to them has ended. Let us remain resolved, even in the 21st century, that these dead shall not have died in vain.

      And another thing. Real leftists voted for Jill Stein. Obama's to the right of Eisenhower and Nixon.

  47. Re:Is this news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is an argument that I absolutely despise. "X isn't as important as Y, so don't bother me until Y^2 happens."

    You do realize that it only takes one serious whackadoo to take some pop-shots at the presidential cavalcade to make the direction of the world change, correct? Further, do you realize that this funny little petition is the top-side of some real, and very confusing, anger in the country?

    Stop being a negative douche. By the time that something like this gets to the governor or state legislature, some "random retard" will have already taken the wind out of their sails by blowing something/someone up.

    In other words - stupid things are generally the leading edge of something more serious.

  48. again?!? by swschrad · · Score: 1

    this time the North has nukes. sit down, shut up, and grow up, folks. stop being Kluxing idiots.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
    1. Re:again?!? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Might want to check which states actually 'have' nukes.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    2. Re:again?!? by Score+Whore · · Score: 1

      And chemical weapons and actually have a habit of sending their young men to military service.

    3. Re:again?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guess what pussy, we got some too and we have the balls to use them, especially if it means melting down a few hundred thousand socialist turn coats. See how stupid it sounds when people start tossing around threats? Is that really the world you want to live in? In all truth I'm not a violet person, nor do I wish you any real harm, I just want you to realize that your own threats could be taken very seriously but someone who is disturbed. Now shut the f@ck up pussy before I cram one of those nukes up your cock hole....

    4. Re:again?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Might want to check which states actually 'have' nukes.

      You might want to check WHO those nukes belong to and are controlled by in the first place.
      Hint : they are not the property of Texas or of any other state. They are the property of the USA.

    5. Re:again?!? by evil_aaronm · · Score: 1

      Well, if Bubba could figure out how to light the damn thing, he'd probably end up blowing off one or more of his fingers, if not quite a bit more. Yeah, I'm not worried about Bubba with a nuke: as long as he stays down in his neighborhood.

    6. Re:again?!? by srobert · · Score: 1

      That's mighty brave talk there, Anonymous Coward.

  49. Website? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So did this only make it to slashdot because it contains the word "website"?

  50. Re:Wrong Branch by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    Who says that not the rebells will have the predator drones?
    If a new civil war breaks out the firs causalities will be on the Navy Ships where people are taking sides and try to get the ships under controll. Same for air fields and air crafts, but well, have not many in the USA as 9/11 showed ...

    However I guess missible bases and submarines will have well elected crews so that it is unlikely they bombard the soil of america, regardless what 'political side' they choose.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  51. Not the only ones... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I would not doube that there are probably non-Texan citizens from other states petitioning for Texas to secede.

  52. I down for losing texas by Nyder · · Score: 1

    We probably do better if we let Texas leave. just sayin...

    --
    Be seeing you...
  53. Re:Wholly Crap! What is wrong with your country?! by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    Your quite right but wrong about how you get called.

    If an european says 'american' he 99.9% means a citizen of the USA. For you guys we have a more proper name: Canadian. And we use it. Or Mexican or Peruian etc. ...

    Just because the greatest nation on earth has no idea how punny it is, that does not mena the rest of the world has no idea how the two continents north and south america look like.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  54. Re:Wrong Branch by sharkman67 · · Score: 3

    You sir are a complete ass. Ruby Ridge was a tragedy that should never have happened.

  55. Re: we survived bush by girlinatrainingbra · · Score: 1

    Quite a few people in New Orleans, LA, did not survive Bush and Katrina and the "heckuva good job" that Brownie did with FEMA in the aftermath of that hurricane.

  56. Nuke Texas from orbit by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

    Is the only way to be sure.

    --
    Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
  57. Excellent summation of how this would go... by NinjaTekNeeks · · Score: 5, Funny

    (Source : Comments section of - http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/267413-texas-secession-petition-gains-enough-signatures-for-white-house-response) 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

    1. Re:Excellent summation of how this would go... by kwiqsilver · · Score: 1

      Wow, condescending, divisive and fallacious. Good find!
      Of course it ignores that the Wall Street thieves are in a blue state, that most blue states are in serious economic decline (with a few exceptions like Washington, where we have 0% income tax, gay marriage, legal pot, and minimal gun laws--the perfect shade of purple), that most of the economic growth in the US is in the South and West (sans California), and that VA, MD, FL, and DE were all slave states, and DC was a slave district.

    2. Re:Excellent summation of how this would go... by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      We also need to give the red states all of the bushs, and romneys.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    3. Re:Excellent summation of how this would go... by reboot246 · · Score: 1

      We'll take it, but only if we can get rid of all the welfare parasites that you love so much. You may have them.

      You also left out the facts that we have better weather and most of the guns.

  58. Texas... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Texas is a state we can afford to lose.

    1. Re:Texas... by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 1

      Actually Texas is one of the only Confederate states that is currently paying its own way. (Ie, providing more in Federal revenue than it takes in welfare.) Losing the South would be a net win, but losing the South and keeping the blue parts of Texas would be even better.

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
  59. Re:Is this news? by kwerle · · Score: 1

    +1 if I had mod points. The question is: where does one go for nerdly news, now that /. has let its standards slip even lower?

  60. Good Idea by hackus · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Anyone with half a brain I know of didn't vote.

    I didn't vote, and none of my friends voted.

    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.

    I use to wonder how the German people could stand by and watch the transformation of their country when Hitler came to power and enacted citizen execution laws like the USA just recently enacted along with the bull crap for travel....(i.e. Papers please.).

    We have all that now, and it just keeps getting worse.

    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.

    If any of you have half a brain and actually read history, you should be making plans to leave the country, seriously because this isn't going to get better it is going to get far far worse.

    Especially when all of the criminal banking activity comes home to roost.

    -Hack

    --
    Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
    1. Re:Good Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You could have at least tried to get Gary Johnson or another third party candidate 5% of the popular vote so that they could receive federal funding next time. And btw, that has happened before, but not since the 90s.

      Also, try not to slip on that slope you're standing upon and perhaps put forth a little effort to at least delay your doomsday scenario. Doing nothing is certainly less effective than doing something.

    2. Re:Good Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone who abstains says that.

      Do you know what would happen if everyone who abstains instead voted for a third party?

      Or: Fuck you, you lazy, self-righteous asshole.

    3. Re:Good Idea by stretch0611 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

      --
      Looking for a job?
      Want your resume written professionally?
      DON'T USE TUNAREZ!!!
    4. Re:Good Idea by dbIII · · Score: 1

      You are playing into their hands by not voting. Personally I think if it was compulsory like in my country the minor parties would have a chance and you'd have more than a choice between corporatism that makes minor efforts at keeping society running and the far side of crazy. If Nixon ran today he'd be called a communist even by the Democrats.

    5. Re:Good Idea by artor3 · · Score: 0

      Anyone with half a brain I know of didn't vote.

      Meanwhile, those of us with full brains did vote. I'm sorry to hear about your condition and the crippling pessimism it brings.

    6. Re:Good Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Canada's our Austria

      Mexico's our Poland.

      works for me

    7. Re:Good Idea by codepigeon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Anyone with half a brain I know of didn't vote. I didn't vote"

      Then shut the fuck up.

    8. Re:Good Idea by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 1

      Anyone with half a brain I know of didn't vote. I didn't vote

      Man you just walked into that one.

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    9. Re:Good Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem with that is that eventually you'll run out of countries to flee to.

    10. Re:Good Idea by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      I use to wonder how the German people could stand by and watch the transformation of their country when Hitler came to power and enacted citizen execution laws

      Maybe it had something to do with a good chunk of them being very enthusiastic about those laws?

    11. Re:Good Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyone with more than half a brain realized that voting is important and exercised their voting rights.

    12. Re:Good Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How the hell is that "insightful", mods? Srsly? It's not even logical. Why must one vote in order to be entitled to expressing one's opinion on the matter? I assume the mods voted for the winning candidate, and this is symptomatic of the smug belligerence that infects those who have just seen their sports team win the final.

    13. Re:Good Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe he realizes that .01% of the population can't out-vote the other 99.98% of the population, no matter how hard you fill out that ballot.

      Not saying I didn't vote... I'm in Canada and tend to vote for the Green party just to see a new party fail us for once... but our election process isn't as horrendously broken as the USA's (yet).

    14. Re:Good Idea by heefeneet · · Score: 1

      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.

      How, exactly? You only get to pick from a bunch of politicians. Its like picking whether you want to be fucked in the ass by a red or a blue dildo while laughing at the people who say no to both.

    15. Re:Good Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Vote for a third party and let America know it can happen.

    16. Re:Good Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Edmund Burke: All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing - In other words go Vote & do Something.....

    17. Re:Good Idea by jwhitener · · Score: 1

      You didn't even vote on local issues? That can have a huge impact in your daily life. And the political tone of the states can shape federal politics. Like for instance, Washington and Colorado legalizing pot is going to force the Feds to rethink their policy, and will likely encourage other states to legalize it when people can see that nothing really bad happened as a result.

      I agree that the main power structures never really change president to president. The wealthy stay wealthy, the military industrial complex keeps right on rolling along, but there are tons of other issues that really do matter. Like if Romney were elected, he would likely have appointed 2 supreme court justices, which would mean that Roe vs Wade would have a very good chance of being undone.

      I think of voting locally and federally like a tug o'war between the people and the power structures. We have to keep the young and progressive people excited about voting, keep pushing them to turn out, because that tugs back against corporations and other powers that, if they were not challenged every 4 years, would quickly bring us back to a serf-king society. Or whatever the modern equivalent is of a very very poor mass and a few wealthy elites at the top.

  61. Instant Patent Reform! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No more troll friendly Texas Eastern District! Hmm...this is looking like a win.

    1. Re:Instant Patent Reform! by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      I forgot about that angle. So to reiterate. Please, please do secede.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    2. Re:Instant Patent Reform! by RandomFactor · · Score: 1

      Separating East Texas from the U.S. Patent system should appeal to damned near everyone on /.

      --
      --- Mercutio was right.
  62. Re:Is this news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is here for the same reason as so much other news: we all love to laugh at random retards doing stupid things.

  63. Can we start with Texas? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Would it really be so bad if Texas went away? I don't live in Texas, but I may support their secession efforts...

  64. ... why court them? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

    You can't risk that they will be disgusted, stay home and not vote. Remember when the Republicans made sure anti-gay-marriage measures were on the ballot in order to get their base out to vote.

    http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=285143

  65. Why ask the Feds? by kwiqsilver · · Score: 2

    Asking the feds if we can secede is like asking a burglar if we can opt out. This is more of a publicity stunt than a real attempt.
    But if it increases people's awareness of secession and its benefits, then it's a good thing. I'd love to see the US split into 20 or more independent countries. It would be much harder for a single state or federation of states to run around the world killing and destroying the way the US does. It would also be easier for people to flee from an autocratic regime to a more liberal state (by the actual definition of liberal, not the modern political one).

    1. Re:Why ask the Feds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ask the feds? hell no, last time I asked the feds could I secede from a union , she got everything and I got stuck with the legal bill!

    2. Re:Why ask the Feds? by RandomFactor · · Score: 1

      That was the design and intent. The US was -supposed- to be a bunch of what amounted to almost independent countries, separate 'states' if you will..

      --
      --- Mercutio was right.
  66. It's more complicated than that by EzInKy · · Score: 2

    Even in "red" states their are "blue" areas. Usually these are located in urban areas where people are more exposed to differing ideas. Maybe this is an evolution challenge? Which human will prove superior, the one that can accomodate the needs of others or the one who can't?

    --
    Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
  67. At last! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Hope and change you can believe in.

  68. 2 Words by ZombieBraintrust · · Score: 1

    Self Deportation

  69. So... by ski9826 · · Score: 1

    Why does opposing Obama so much that you don't want to be a part of the US anymore have to have something to do with race? I'm sure this is the case for some (maybe more than some), but I would disagree with almost everything that man does and stands for, whether he was white, black, or purple polka dot.

  70. Re:Wrong Branch by Mullen · · Score: 2

    Because Predator Drones are made in San Diego, California.

    --
    Linux O Muerte!
  71. So which state are we naming by martijn+hoekstra · · Score: 1

    As most likely to secede?

  72. When was this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When were we a great nation? Was it before or after the Civil Rights Act of 1964? I'm trying to figure out if you're talking about recent history or some fantasy from long ago that exists only in your mind.

  73. Re: we survived bush by Greystripe · · Score: 1

    Convenient how everyone gives a pass to the Democratic governor who didn't do her job which prevented the Feds from doing theirs.

  74. Not Legal by kmitchner · · Score: 1

    Secession is not legal under our constitition. What IS legal is revolution. So if a state wants to start a revolution and fight against our military, more power to them.

    1. Re:Not Legal by dbIII · · Score: 1

      So like Chechnya in your own back yard? And some idiots in the USA calling for revolution think it's a good idea? You really do need to tax more since you are obviously not spending enough on educating your children.
      The above poster may get it, but the ones calling for revolution may have some silly idea that the military will not touch them. A soldier from Detroit is not going to have much empathy with a Florida redneck that is pointing a gun in his direction. It wouldn't be brother against brother but most likely some stranger from the other end of the country that just sees a dangerous threat.

  75. Let Texas go. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let Texas secede. Their laws are insane, the politicians aren't compatible with reality, their courts a dictators dream. You have the right to be patent trolled, to see a judge if you break rules in school, and to die quickly with less chance for appeal.

    If history is any guide, they'd be part of northern Mexico before too long - the military history of Texas is pathetic. They declared their "independence" after winning a couple of small battles against a few thousand Mexicans while a good portion of Mexico was still in turmoil from their recent independence. No border was established, no treaty ratified by Mexico, Mexican troops would still be invading over the next 6 years after Texas "won". It wasn't until they became a state and the US Army was involved Mexican American war that the borders were established and a treaty signed.

    The next time they faced an army, in the civil war, they surrendered before the army even got there.

    What did you expect from a state that celebrates, as one of it's greatest military accomplishments, a battle they lost badly?

  76. let the red states secesede; we'll be better off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I like some of the practices/traditions of the red states. However I'm going to be the first to admit these are the people who are really screwed up. I am not a fan of Obama although definitely learn more toward libre (freedom) and socialist state (not one which guarantees employment though- just one that guarantees the essentials; life, liberty, a minimal standard of living, food, housing, energy, heat, water, Internet/communications, safety, transport, education, and health care).

    Unfortunately what we have got is a system that is capitalist leaning. We don't fund programs to develop drugs or ensure peoples health. We fund corporations through private business / government which do everything they can to avoid covering the costs.

    What we needed was a 100% no-cost health care system for all persons living within the United States. Compensate the current investors and nationalize hospitals, transport, drug/health care, basic communications infrastructure (companies can lease services and provide ISP support, etc), and so forth.

    Anybody living here more than a certain number of years and can prove it (utility bills, entrance visas, employment records, etc) should be covered. If you moved here after your 18th b'day you should have to stick around five years (legal or illegal) before non-basic coverage begins (makes it difficult for foreigners to take advantage of our system to cover expensive procedures). Inexpensive procedures, basic health care, etc. should not require identification or even proof of residence. If it is non-life threatening nor causing a significant quality of life issue then don't cover it. And not everything is a yes/no issue. For example; Generally cosmetic plastic surgery shouldn't be covered except in cases where life has been seriously impacted such as in the cases of burn victims.

  77. Huh... by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

    How to we mod an entire article as "Flamebait" or "troll"? Because, you know, disagreeing with a black president doesn't automatically make you a racist. When a black president wins an election there's an uptick in racist comments? You don't say... who'd have thought the racists would say more stupid stuff when a minority achieved something? Obama won the election, there's no need to this "racism is the only reason anyone wouldn't vote for him" nonsense anymore. It was bullshit before the election and it's bullshit now. I didn't vote for him because of his policies, not his ethnicity... I didn't vote for Mit either... but I really do hate Mormons. You get to pick your religion after all...

    1. Re:Huh... by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      Racism is only one of the ingredients in the pot. The main thrust of the secession is the 47% thinking that Romney was their champion.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
  78. Re:Wholly Crap! What is wrong with your country?! by mk1004 · · Score: 1

    Good thing you still have the right to bare arms.

    Canadians have the right to 'bare' arms. Americans have the right to bear arms.

    --
    I can mend the break of day, heal a broken heart, and provide temporary relief to nymphomaniacs.
  79. Interesting thing about those petitions... by xmundt · · Score: 1

    Greetings and Salutations;
              I have not looked at ALL of them, but, I have looked at several, as this came up on a FB posting a bit ago. One very interesting thing I noted was that at the time, a vast majority of the signers of the petition were NOT from the state supposedly wanting to leave. Another point is that I do not think that any such actions should be viable, unless a super-majority - say, 85% - of the population votes for it.
                To me, this is is the action of a small minority of cry-baby deniers who cannot accept the fact that a majority of the voters in the US felt that, even with his flaws and failures, President Obama is putting America onto a positive path that will lead to an improved life for all of us.
              Regards
              Dave Mundt

    --
    YAB - http://blog.beemandave.com/
  80. Re:Wholly Crap! What is wrong with your country?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Way to remind everyone that the USoA isn't a country, it's just a collection of independent states.

    you speak as if this is something to be ashamed of.

  81. Yes, he is. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The limit is two terms in succession, not in total.

    1. Re:Yes, he is. by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      You might be confusing your state government with the federal government. The president is limited to a max of ten years. Two 4 year terms he can be elected and up to 2 years of another president's term the he finished serving. At 2 years and one day, he can only serve as president by being elected once.

  82. What the Right Needs Now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I say all the bible thumping right wingers just need to pool their power of prayer and focus on bringing about a nice avian flu, or other deadly infectious outbreak, to a few of the major urban population centers and they'll have their country back. That doesn't sound like something a truly compassionate Christian would get behind. But I bet after publicly mourning the losses, they'd quietly accept it as a mandate from God in the pews.

    Me personally, I see the worst of the left as being just as bad as the worst of the right. They're two different flavors of the same brand of nutty candy bar. The worst of the left are lazy, underachieving people who live on handouts. The worst of the right are racist, homophobic religious fanatics who are still stuck in a Victorian mindset. I don't see either of those extremes as being terribly beneficial in the 21st century, and I wish we could all just move towards the middle a bit and get some moderate sanity in politics.

    1. Re:What the Right Needs Now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The worst of the left are lazy, underachieving people who live on handouts.

      That's the worst of humanity. The spectrum of those receiving aid runs from left to right. The only difference between those on the left and right is the left are smart enough to know who butter's their bread.

  83. Let's see them manage that border on their own... by damn_registrars · · Score: 2

    Texas has far more of the Mexican border than any other state. If they become an independent nation they will no longer get money from the US government to patrol and defend that border. On top of that, they'll then likely need to keep people from illegally leaving via the northern border...

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  84. The Answer by bl968 · · Score: 1
    --
    "GET / HTTP/1.0" 200 51230 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; Setec Astronomy)"
  85. Re:Wholly Crap! What is wrong with your country?! by holophrastic · · Score: 1

    Not ashamed, just clear. The people don't actually agree on anything overall. It's a tentative union at best -- apparently.

  86. I say let them by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    Seriously, let the states go that want to go.
    HOWEVER, they need to return to the union all of our goods.
    In addition, they must take their portion of the debt based on per capitia, UNLESS a president came from their state. Then they should get whatever % of the debt that president contributed. So, Texas would get just under 2/3 of the debt.
    Now, that is fair.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:I say let them by WindBourne · · Score: 1
      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  87. annnnd... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    here's an anti-secession petition: http://wh.gov/9Hej

  88. Re:Wholly Crap! What is wrong with your country?! by AdamStarks · · Score: 1

    Native Texan, here. I don't support Secession by any means, but at least read the petition before you label us all as racists.

    The summary doesn't make any mention of Obama or Race, and is instead about things like the NDAA, the TSA, the Patriot Act, etc. While I doubt it would have appeared (and gotten nearly so many votes) had Romney won the election, I think the vast majority of Slashdotters would actually agree with most of the listed grievances (whether or not one thinks the stated motivations are the only ones).

  89. Re:Wholly Crap! What is wrong with your country?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The US hasn't been a "collection of independent states" since the Civil War. The Federal government is definitely in charge, despite whatever the founders may have intended.

  90. Marshall Law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder if this has anything to do with the fact that this country has been under marshall law since President Lincoln was in office. He was assassinated before he could revoke that rule and that is why we have been in a constant state of war since the Civil War.

    That gold-fringed American flag that is in every court room across the country? Yeah that's not a real flag that represents our nation. That's an Admiral law flag that represents something completely different.

    And from what I've seen, MOST Obama opposers I know ARE secretly racist. Most Republicans I know didn't vote for Mr Romney because they thought he was a good choice, they voted for him because they absolutely HATED Obama but can't put their finger on exactly why, but I bet if you could read their minds it was because he's not white.

  91. Re:Wholly Crap! What is wrong with your country?! by holophrastic · · Score: 1

    Oh, certainly that's all true. Myself included. But I can't imagine that going it on your own would make things any better. That's just not a valid solution. Making the entire thing just straight crazy.

    But I'll tell you what would work. You can get your Texan friends to all agree.

    You should join Canada.

  92. Re:Wrong Branch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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.

    Georgia does have a Nuclear Missile Base (google will be your friend for this one). And the local rednecks will over run the base and send a missile to YOUR storefront and make for a REALLY BAD DAY.

    The last thing we need is a civil war involving guns. We need to come together and reform the education system, and by reform I mean throw it out and start all over from scratch for grades 1-12. We need to bring back education not training, but very few will know what I mean. I have met a lot of liberals and conservatives who if they quit calling each other names could very well be friends and get along great. They have many things in common but they concentrate on the differences in the culture. Oh well, I know these are the musings of a bored engineer.

  93. Re:Wholly Crap! What is wrong with your country?! by holophrastic · · Score: 1

    Can't even agree on capital punishment. There's no uniform education, no uniform science, no uniform anything. About the only things that are nation-wide (aside from insurance companies of course) are the military, the fbi, and the cia.

  94. Re:Wholly Crap! What is wrong with your country?! by holophrastic · · Score: 1

    (: I was hoping someone would notice that!

  95. put down the crack pipe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obama is definitely not a right wing conservative

    1. Re:put down the crack pipe by Mabhatter · · Score: 0

      I would separate "right wing" from the rest of that statement. The Democratic Party is about where Republicans were in the Reagan days. Remember, Reagan was a "kinder gentler" Republican than Nixon.

      The religious side has cooped "Right equal Right". The unrestricted Republican Party is closer to the Nazi (economics) or Taliban (religion) and the Big Gipper would want nothing to do with them.

      It's these same people that are stirring up the "dummies" to write these letters. The Constitution has NO MECHANISM for leaving. They tried the "Second Amendment" approach in the "War Between the States" and those states lost. At some point sending theses letters to the White House is OFFICIALLY Treason.

      With Lincoln it was an undecided matter... He didn't want to punish the speech because there was serious argument if leaving was legal on BOTH sides. Since the Civil War, the matter is de facto decided... If there are enough petitions, then the individual States need to take action on their citizens to prevent breech of the State's Duty to the union.

      Frankly, that's the play here. The President tells the State Governor's to find these people and recant their letters. Otherwise, should the States not take action against sedition. The Federal Government will have to step in and appoint Executive Officers in the States that WILL enforce the Constitution. The key is to make this all about the States. Expect the STATES chief LEO to stop these letters... Or the President gets involved... And starts at the top by arresting elected officials responsible for enforcing the law. And THIS time there is no amnesty... We put them against the wall... Down to women and children if need be.

    2. Re:put down the crack pipe by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      The Democratic Party is about where Republicans were in the Reagan days. Remember, Reagan was a "kinder gentler" Republican than Nixon.

      Reagan could have switched back to the Democratic Party and challenged Obama from the left this year. If he were still alive, not term limited, or made an empty shell from alzheimers, of course.

      Because Reagan: supported a treaty requiring the prosecution of those who commit torture, raised taxes multiple times to lower the deficit, granted amnesty to millions of immigrants, withdrew from Lebanon, wound up the cold war but then wound it back down with arms reduction treaties, declared that Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit, and started prosecutions for the S&L scandal that eventually put ~800 bankers in jail.

      All in noted contrast to Obama, who has continued warrantless wiretapping, wants to cut Social Security and Medicare, and assassinated American citizens.

  96. Permission to secede? I don't think so by Drunkulus · · Score: 2

    Don't give Texas away. Sell it to Mexico.

  97. as a Texan... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm a Texan and I have to admit that both sides of this argument sound like crap. On the one hand, anybody that wants to secede is, plainly, fucking stupid. Seriously. On the other, what's this, "all Texans ," crap? You ARE aware of this little known town, not exactly on the political right, more on the mid left, not really a big deal...you know, our fucking capital. For those concerned about a civil war, it won't happen, probably ever. The first was a battle over a way of life. Now we all have food, we've all got TV and we've all got fucking Internet. These people will bitch and whine until it's time to actually DO something at which point they'll puss the fuck out, 'cause that would take actual work and sacrifice.

    All you game lovers here that hate Texas, I got a surprise for you, we're practically a gaming MECCA. Id software, ea, rockstar, bioware, and HUNDREDS of indie studios, and even lord british...weve got something for EVERYONE who loves games, tech, and otherwise awesome stuff. Deal with it. We also have no state taxes, and it's actually the most pleasant place I've ever driven which means a lot when you're on two wheels most of the time.

    So come on, Slashdot, we're supposed to be smarter here.

  98. Cue the butthurt responses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here comes a flood of retards insisting that Obama isn't a failure or that Bush was so bad that it somehow makes Obama okay. Here's a simple fact: as much as people complained about Bush, nobody ever actually tried to leave.

    1. Re:Cue the butthurt responses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody tried to leave. Except for the hundreds of soldiers who decide to secede from planet Earth thanks to Shurbya.

  99. Re:Wrong Branch by Nethead · · Score: 1

    Sharkman67 is correct. And I say this as a Seattle area lefty, Ruby Ridge was a massive cluster fuck by the BATF assisted by the US Marshals. Weaver was framed. Read up on what really happened.

    --
    -- I have a private email server in my basement.
  100. sexism at its finest by SuperBanana · · Score: 3, Interesting

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

    No, actually. A solid majority of white women voted for Romney. Also, while virtually nobody black voted for Romney, a very large number of other non-white citizens did - each category, it was around 1/3rd.
    http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/johncassidy/2012/11/why-white-women-voted-for-romney.html
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2012-exit-poll

    1. Re:sexism at its finest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just a thought...citing Fox News lends little weight to your post.

    2. Re:sexism at its finest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

      No, actually. A solid majority of white women voted for Romney. Also, while virtually nobody black voted for Romney, a very large number of other non-white citizens did - each category, it was around 1/3rd.

      So according to the submitter and these stats, blacks are the most racist of all.

  101. Obama isnt the problem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Personally I wish texas all the luck in what its doing. When you have a ruling class that does nothing but lie and fail you year in and year out eventually you have to say youve had enough. Sure it might suck for them some but real change is better than no change. Whats the old saying something about repeating the same actions and expecting different results? Thats what we do every 4 years with a new president, we expect different results but just keep doing the same thing and then we are stupid enough to be surprised when we get the same results.

    What people seem to not know or just plain forget is the president is just the front man for the government. He cant actually do anything on his own, nor does he actually do much of anything. All the president is in reality is a mouthpiece that does the talking. He cant do anything unless the government approves and votes on what he wants. Really in terms of individual power a police officer has more of it than the president does.

    So stop bitching about the president. The real problem is the government itself. No matter who you elect things will never change. Sure they might change a little bit but nothing that will actually matter.

    What this country needs is to give the president and congress the boot. Get rid of all those people in congress and replace with them with real world and compotent people. Put school super intendents in, fire chiefs, police chiefs, hospital directors, doctors, and so on from all across the country instead of a bunch of stuffed shirts from washington. And really, congress should be changed out every 8 years to keep them from getting lazy and fat like virtually every congressman now.

  102. we should all secede... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Into 50 separate countries, declare each one free of federal debt, then incorporate after a year under a new name like, ''The unified states of America'' ( Saves a bundle on stationary). No debt. Economy fixed. Everybody's happy.

  103. Secession isn't a racially-neutral act. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You'll recall the last time there was a secession crisis in the States, it was over the liberty of black people. Now that a black president has been re-elected, calling for secession is either a conscious, or bone-headedly ignorant, stab into those old wounds.

    Fortunately, this is just empty blowhardery. Any real threat of secession would be a disaster for the states leaving the union and would hurt the citizens of that state far more than they would gain by independence.

  104. Except he split is not 50 / 50 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's 51 / 49. That's democracy for you. Citizens disagree, and work it out at the ballot box. To suggest that we kill one another over these differences is unpatriotic, cowardly and disgusting.

  105. A Better Solution by merc · · Score: 1

    What the Seperatists [as I am now calling them] should do is:

    * Find a better country that fulfills all of their political, economic and social needs and desires. I'm sure for many of these fine folks there is something in the Middle East, Northern Africa or Eastern Europe that qualifies.

    * Pack their bags

    * Renounce their U.S. Citizenship.

    I see no cause that Americans should drag down these good folk with our democratic ways. Secession is utterly unnecessary.

    --
    It's true no man is an island, but if you take a bunch of dead guys and tie 'em together, they make a good raft.
  106. Your entitlement is showing. by Tenebrousedge · · Score: 1

    They don't have taxes in lots of places. Nor any other hallmark of civilization.

    I only work freelance at the moment. I about as much in taxes as I would working for anyone else, the difference being that I don't see the payroll taxes my employer has to pay. Perhaps I pay more this way -- so it goes. What the exactly is wrong with paying taxes? I don't pay for any of the code I use: someone else wrote it. I don't pay for clean air, food, and water: someone else passed laws for me. I don't pay for the liberties my society affords me: someone else died for those.

    I spent a couple years in Costa Rica lately. It was beautiful, people were happy, the government was largely ineffective. The rivers had untreated sewage in them. Criminals went unpunished -- commit murder and you'd spend like, at least a day in jail. If there was such thing as an electrical code no one had heard of it. The country's Supreme Court equivalent had mandated wheelchair access to public buildings a few years back, and you probably don't need this reporter to tell you its efficacy.

    You don't like paying taxes? Fine. There are plenty of places where you don't have to. You don't want to pay taxes, but still want the civilization that goes with them? Well, I can only really suggest living extraterrestrially.

    --
    Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
    1. Re:Your entitlement is showing. by geoffrobinson · · Score: 1

      This type of argument is very telling.

      You need cholesterol to live. Why are you complaining about high cholesterol? You must be for zero cholesterol in the blood stream. Stop complaining about being force fed Big Macs. It's the price of living.

      --
      Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
    2. Re:Your entitlement is showing. by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      They don't have taxes in lots of places. Nor any other hallmark of civilization.

      I only work freelance at the moment. I about as much in taxes as I would working for anyone else,

      Yet, if you were Apple, you'd only have to pay 2% of income taxes... Maybe if we reduce the %33 tax on the little guys and increase the tax a bit for the guys who can afford to pay (and aren't pulling their weight, doing all that business, using our economy, but not paying their fair share in taxes), then a lot more people would have more spending cash to buy over priced things and afford healthcare?

  107. One small problem with that by Weaselmancer · · Score: 1

    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.

    Someone like that would be branded a screaming liberal by the Tea Partiers and Fox News - and never get the nomination. You need to start your cure a few paces back from that position.

    Clean your house.

    Ditch the Fox news. Dump the Tea Party. Stop allowing these fundamentalists to tell you what's what. Take your party back. Push for your values (the good ones) like small government. No political party that wants to criminalize abortions can possibly with a straight face tell you that they are for small government.

    Stop talking about rape. Just stop it.

    Embrace diversity. There is more to the world than 50-something Caucasian southern Baptists. You want to win? Start by representing America, not just your favorite part of it. And by that I don't mean "fake it to get votes", I mean tell the other half of America how you can change the world for the better for them.

    And pick better role models. Bill O'Reilly, Sarah Palin, Ted Nugent, and Rush Limbaugh are all morons. Sorry, but they are. And we've got Neil deGrasse Tyson, Rachel Maddow, Jon Stewart, and Bill Maher. Find some intelligent people for your side. Start with Colin Powell and build from there. Ditch the ones you've got. They're not helping.

    Stop with the anti-intellectualism. Science is real. It's why we can read this on the internet. If you had to pick a single reason why the Republicans lost, I feel it is best contained in this graphic. That's your problem in a nutshell right there. Fix that.

    Fix your house, dust yourselves off, and come back as someone we can respect and even occasionally admire (which hasn't been since Reagan), and then you guys will see some results.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
    1. Re:One small problem with that by Mindcontrolled · · Score: 1

      While I do agree with your general remarks, one small question. Why is "small government" as such a good value? I find it a totally meaningless phrase. Small what? Small banking regulations? Small army? Small EPA? Small social security? Small police? The term says nothing at all.

      --
      Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    2. Re:One small problem with that by Weaselmancer · · Score: 1

      It's something Republicans like. I had the concept explained to me once. Something about how there are a lot of social programs designed to help people, but some are less effective than the others. Those are the ones you cut so you can replace them with ones that work better. At least I believe that's the gist.

      I picked that one because it's a Republican idea I don't mind.

      --
      Weaselmancer
      rediculous.
  108. Advice to White House Staff preparing a response by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Advice to White House Staff preparing a response:
    Try not to break the photocopier when you sit on it.

  109. I'm sorry, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Deal with it, Texas. We survived eight years of your village idiot. You can handle eight years of our guy who was legitimately elected (twice).

  110. Keep Texas, kick out the Texans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Texas is a great state. The only problem is that it has Texans.

  111. Good riddance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Texas provides absolutely nothing of value to this country, now or ever.

    1. Re:Good riddance by Johann+Lau · · Score: 1

      I have 4 words for you: "Bill Hicks" and "Fuck You".

  112. Re:Wrong Branch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The executive cannot declare war, issue signing statements, or half the other BS it does by executive order.

    The constitution only applies when it is convenient.

  113. Well then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now that Puerto Rico has decided they want to be a state, we can ditch Texas, add Puerto Rico and then we don't even have to worry about redesigning the flag.

  114. Dont forget.... by LoRdTAW · · Score: 1

    Lets not forget where most of the worlds helium comes from:

    From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium#Modern_extraction_and_distribution
    "In 2008, approximately 169 million standard cubic meters (SCM) of helium were extracted from natural gas or withdrawn from helium reserves with approximately 78% from the United States, 10% from Algeria, and most of the remainder from Russia, Poland and Qatar.[80] In the United States, most helium is extracted from natural gas of the Hugoton and nearby gas fields in Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas"

    Science depends on it!

  115. This has over 36,000 signatures by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    outlaw offending prophets of major religions

    To enact a law that prohibits any action or literature that offend prophets of major religions:

    - Moses

    - Jesus

    - Mohammad

    Such acts offend billions of people, and cause unrest in the world. Furthermore, acts like this contradict the essence of coexistence and peace among humans. Labeling these acts as freedom of speech is similar to labeling murder as freedom of expression!

    We all know the chaos such acts can cause, but it's difficult to answer the question: What do they contribute to our nation, or humanity in general?

    ***********
    God help us!
    ***********

  116. Dear Texas... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Re: You petition to succeed from the Union

    Dear Texas,

    Didn't we cover this with you and most of the other red states with an ass whipping in 19th century? Grow up.

  117. Size of Texas? by charlieo88 · · Score: 1

    Did you hear they are going to cut Alaska in half and make Texas the third largest state?

  118. While we're on the secession issue ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    News just in :

    Russia wants Alaska back
    France wants the Louisiana Territory back
    Spain wants Florida and California back
    Mexico wants Texas back (minus the Texans)

    The rest you can keep.

  119. So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well if you don't like America, then you can getttttouuuuuut.

    Seriously, go. You won't be missed. I double f'kin dare you to try illegally crossing the border.

  120. WH said I already signed this petition, huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/peacefully-grant-state-california-withdraw-united-states-america-and-create-its-own-new-government/Rfg4ZhhC

    I followed the link and the site informed me I had already signed this petition.
    No.
    Anyone else see it?

  121. Re:Wrong Branch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You posted earlier. You don't have the first clue about US nuclear weapons safeguards. Hint: there will never, ever be a detonatable US nuke in any but Federal control. Keep dreaming.

  122. Re:Wholly Crap! What is wrong with your country?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your poor grammar and spelling detract from your message.

  123. Sore losers! by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

    We lost so we don't want to play anymore.

  124. How's this for a petition? by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

    3.3 million Texans signed to say they want Barack Obama to be their President.

  125. Romney has every position by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Romney has stood on absolutely every part of every platform, except raising his own taxes. And with a little research someone could probably find where he's done that too.

  126. Re:Wrong Branch by evil_aaronm · · Score: 1

    Yeah, more likely, Bubba with a nuke would blow himself - and his neighborhood - up, starting with "Hey! A NUKE! Hold my beer and watch this!!"

  127. Better Map... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ah, but if the fences went up by county lines and not state lines, the smart-asses here would be in real trouble...

    All of the food, energy, water, natural resources, etc would go one way, and liberals would be packed together tightly inn their big cities with no way to survive for more than a week or two... and they'd be left to try to survive by convincing people to sell them stuff using those precious federal reserve notes that would no longer be backed by any implicit claim on anything...

    See, the let's "break-up the country to escape the lunatics on the left" line is nutty and short sighted, but the whacko theme "shut up ad take the abuse!" or "hey stupid losers, take your god and guns and get lost" line is every bit as idiotic. Nobody is going anywhere. Unfortunately. You lefties were always free to go to any of the many countries like France and Greece that were more-inline with what you wanted...you did not HAVE TO ruin this one. For Conservatives, the US was the only such country; there's no other place to go that is more like what they want... which is why a very few in their despair suggest breaking-off a few of the remaining good pieces and trying to save them.

  128. Re:Wrong Branch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "rebells"? "missible bases"?

    Idiot.

  129. Liberal bigotry? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm still waiting to see the tweet maps of all the anti-religion bigots that tweeted about magic underwear and such.

    I wonder why the media doesn't promulgate stories about that.

    1. Re:Liberal bigotry? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Calling people who are against religion bigots is like calling Oncologists abortionists.

  130. wait... what???? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nixon was not a conservative, he only pretended to be one at election time, like Romney... Nixon implemented wage and price controls which are the opposite of conservative in economics, he created the EPA gave us left-of center judges, cozied up to communist China and did the big arms treaties with Russia which favored them more than any conservative would have, etc.

    Obama is not a conservative from the perspective of anybody to the right of Karl Marx, unless you are butt-chugging.

    Obama to the right of Reagan?!?!?!?!? ... oh, I see... you are butt-chugging...

  131. The opportunity here by seth_hartbecke · · Score: 1

    Here's the political opportunity here: making the case for how we're all better off together.

    Red states feel they can live on their own.
    Blue states like to point out they tend to receive more fed dollars then they send.

    Neither of those arguments are why we're better off together, and convinces the other side to try to work together.

    Sign the petition. Make DC make the argument.

    But ... they won't ... *sigh*

    --
    END
    1. Re:The opportunity here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Red States CAN live on their own. They grow all the food.

      Blue States, on the other hand...

      Really, it's the same thing that led to the civil war - Northern Bankers exploiting Southern Farmers to get cheap food for the north, leaving southern farmers in a perpetual cycle of debt and bankruptcy, ended up as tenants of the banks.

      The most recent farm around here that went bankrupt was an operation that grew organic, free range chickens. Our monetary policy had deflated the value of the farm's assets, to the point that it could no longer maintain a balance sheet. The last 3 years in business, the farm netted under $15K/year income for the farmer.

      Now the farm is owned by Purdue, is staffed with "migrant workers," and churns out 10 million steroid and hormone laden chickens/year. I am certain it generates more than $15K/year for Purdue and the banks that financed the deal in bankruptcy court.

  132. Progressica & Dumbfuckistan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    new names

  133. Yes. Secession is racism. by ishpeck · · Score: 2

    It was racism that caused Americans to secede from the British crown. It was racism that caused the Yugoslavians to secede from the Soviet Union (just ask Trotsky!) It was racism that caused Indians to secede from Britain -- that racist jerk Gandhi needs to be put in his place! It is racism that causes Tibetans to want independence from China. It is racism that Indonesia is no longer a Dutch colony. Oh, and I bet you Prince Pedro was being racist when he decided to secede from Portugal, too.

    I'm going to say something that is sure to get me negative kharma from the polemicists but couldn't it be possible that people are dissenting on the policies of the president rather than on the race of the president?

    I got a lot of crap from my family when I told them that I was voting for Obama. Yeah, they were kind of bigots about it. But if you can't actually try to speculate on the rational reasons somebody might want to secede and just chalk it up to "they hate black people" that makes you guilty of bigotry, too.

    --

    "If I were to ask you a hypothetical question, what would you like it to be about?"

  134. Let's ALL vote! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can I vote for the peaceful secession of Texas from the union even if I'm NOT from Texas? [broad grin]
    We could build that fence they're so keen on just one state higher.

  135. Not gonna moderate by BenEnglishAtHome · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...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?

    1. Re:Not gonna moderate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All you need to do to show Texans are stupid is look who they elected governor over the last decade.

    2. Re:Not gonna moderate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You think we'd let them keep what isn't theirs? It would be a divorce preceding that would end poorly for them.

    3. Re:Not gonna moderate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you're vastly underestimating the amount of firepower the cartels have, Texans may pack a lot of heat and immediately convert it to automatic but those lone ranchers would be targetted one by one, overwhelmed and made an example of. These people are evil, I don't think you've looked atrocity in the face, neighbor, look at pictures of some piles of ripped up and burned children sometime. Then ask yourself if the hardasses in Texas are ready for that.

      As well, that PANTEX plant would be dismantled by the US government before anything ever happened, trust me.

    4. Re:Not gonna moderate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Mexican gangs would probably have far more sophisticated hackers able to easily hack the automated guns.

    5. Re:Not gonna moderate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Without the US law enforcement apparatus the texans would be out gunned by a wide margin. The cartels have defense budgets that rival many small nations and certainly would far excede anything Texas could put together.

    6. Re:Not gonna moderate by BenEnglishAtHome · · Score: 1

      See? Now that's putting a little thought into it. :-)

    7. Re:Not gonna moderate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Delivery wouldn't be that bad. Texas ANG is rather large.

    8. Re:Not gonna moderate by jdavidb · · Score: 1

      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.

      You've got me wrong. I'm a Texan who wants to secede, but my policy would be open immigration: you can come from anywhere, so long as you buy or rent a place to stay, or get permission to stay with someone else. I'm for a much more liberal immigration policy, and I welcome a fusion of American+Texan+Mexican culture.

    9. Re:Not gonna moderate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...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?

      Figure out a way? The nasa hq is here too I'm sure they know a thing or two about rockets

    10. Re:Not gonna moderate by BenEnglishAtHome · · Score: 1

      I'm Texan, too, and I (and perhaps you, too) know that the fusion culture you describe already exists in some places along the border. It's not a bad thing. If Texas secedes and such attitudes hold sway, Texas could be an even better place than the one I already love.

  136. Like a blind man, or a European... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...your perception of the spectrum is VERY limited.

    Europe is SO far to the left that to them an international socialist (the soviets) is extreme LEFT, and a national socialist (the NAZIs) is extreme right with most of Europe straddling a narrow strip of vague socialism between the two; in other words, their "spectrum" is a small slice of the political spectrum that is located way over on the left.

    From the more balanced American perspective where our founders offered us a very conservative(in the modern sense) vision where there is nearly no government (and very few laws) and the individual is paramount (classical liberalism.. sometimes now called "small-L" liberalism), ALL of those guys are FAR to the left. America, as originally created, was essentially a small libertarian federal government with a bunch of northern states that were essentially conservative republican, and a set of southern states that were essentially conservative democrat; this was essentially so through the civil war. So by European standards Obama is indeed on the conservative side (of a narrow euro-socialist spectrum) but in the broader spectrum of America, the man is a left-wing extremist whackjob. Our founders would never have tolerated his drone strikes, warrantless searches, car company grab, health insurance grab, EPA power grab, the piles of new regulations that get added EVERY DAY (quite literally), mandates on religious people, incessant desire to be entangled in foreign affairs, desperate drive to inject the federal government into the lives of the citizens etc. Our founders went to war over a tax on stamps, for heaven's sake! But people who believe in huge government with power over the people support all this nonsense, and more....oh, they might find the drone strikes distasteful... but only because of the targets not because they object to huge government making life or death decisions about individuals. I suspect that quite a few slashdotters would be fine with the drone strikes if the targets were mormons in Utah, or Baptists in Alabama...

    1. Re:Like a blind man, or a European... by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      your perception of the spectrum is VERY limited.

      As opposed to your ignorance....

      Europe is SO far to the left that to them an international socialist (the soviets) is extreme LEFT, and a national socialist (the NAZIs) is extreme right with most of Europe straddling a narrow strip of vague socialism between the two; in other words, their "spectrum" is a small slice of the political spectrum that is located way over on the left.

      What are you babbling on about. A fascist government (Germany and Italy in the 30's and 40's) is by definition a far right-wing government.

  137. ...And patent reform! by KingSkippus · · Score: 1

    And without that Texas district doling out billions to every idiotic patent troll, maybe we can finally get some patent reform, too.

  138. As a Georgian... by KingSkippus · · Score: 1

    As a Georgian, I'm sorry we're on that list. If it goes through, I'll do my best to make sure that Atlanta (which is actually a bit more liberal than the podunk villages out in the sticks where most of these people live) promptly secedes from the New Confederacy and rejoins the Union. We'll be like the Andorra or Lesotho of the South. Please don't burn down my house when Civil War II starts, I really like my stuff...

  139. Prepare for the natural gas prices to go up by tlambert · · Score: 1

    Prepare for the natural gas prices to go up as soon as they hit the export tariff at the Texas border. Most California electricity is generated by natural gas piped in from Texas and other red states, with the second largest portion coming from nuclear, with hydro at a far third.

    Texas already has a net-positive economy, without going into the money it could make, were it not for the interstate commerce clause.

    A few years back, a couple of companies, including a holding company whose only purpose was to play market games at the California border, were able to extract usurous rates for the natural gas sold to California, and the governor (who we removed from office, partially over this) signed long term contracts that still have California paying those rates. One of the companies involved was this little company no one has probably heard of: Enron.

    So yeah, that little money pump works, and don't expect that that switch would not be thrown, should the Lone Star Republic secede (check their constitution for who they are liable to, based on their joining the union in the first place).

  140. Undemocratic scum! by YoungManKlaus · · Score: 1

    is it only me or anybody else thinking these people don't understand what democracy means?

  141. You, sir, are insensitive by Benfea · · Score: 1

    I for one hope those redneck douchebags secede again. I for one will support their secession movement in any way that I can.

  142. Dear Blue Counties... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dear Blue Counties,

    We're ticked off at the way you've treated those of us who are civilized, and we've decided you are indeed leaving. We intend to preserve our own country and we're keeping the other Red Counties with us. In case you aren't aware, that includes something like 80% of the land. Most of even places like California.

    We believe this split will be beneficial to the nation and especially to the people who are still Americans... you can keep the names of your big cities as their new national names, we suggest "SanFrancisostan", "Chigagoslavia" etc.

    To sum up briefly:

    You get All the huge cities with the gangs and crime, we get all the fresh air, clean water, gas, coal, oil, uranium, copper, iron ore, farms, ranches, orchards, powerplants. etc

    Yes, you get the embryonic stem cell research that requires the destruction of human life, we keep all the other stem cell research that has is not morally-shady and has already proven its value. Yes you get Venice beach and Malibu, etc... but we get most of the beaches, rivers, lakes, rivers, etc.

    Yes, you get Client number 9 (Elliot Spitzer)... but you also get stuck with Ken Lay and his other crony capitalist Enron friends who invented carbon offsets and cap-and-trade schemes for manipulating the public. You guy loved him before he collapsed and you still love his ideas.

    You MIGHT get the Statue of Liberty (did they ever settle which county it's in?) and we get OpryLand... and we also get the kennedy space center and lots of other stuff you tend to forget about...

    You get the headquarters of Intel and Microsoft...we'll buy what we want from them (at the low prices they sell their stuff at outside their home countries) and you won't get that many new jobs because they outsource and H1B with the best. You also get all the DRM they demand because they and their lawyers and Hollywood are yours too; our people will be free to own the stuff they buy and the politicians in our areas who were bought by your big media firms will lose that money and be defeated. Oh, and we get the things like all the rare-earth mineral mines you closed because of your eco-voters... we'll have all the superconductors, rare-earth magnets etc that we need (while your geek engineers were making google and facebook, our geek engineers were making big useful physical things like rockets, missiles, planes, bombs, ships, trucks, etc. (many were working in quietly in cubicles in companies located in your big cities... you presume too much when you think they'll stay...)

    Yes, you are stuck with the big universities that no longer provide classical educations... good luck with all the graduates who need careers in "gender equity studies", "political science", "journalism" etc in your overcrowded cities... we'll have plenty of great schools who's lefty idiots will want to emigrate to your cities as we restore the best engineering, math, physics, chemistry, agriculture, etc programs.

    Yes, you get 85 percent of America's venture capital and entrepreneurs whose money will be backed by no assets and undercut by a projected spiral of skyrocketing debts. Congrats! you might end up with Mitt Romney! LOL We get many millions of hard-working, industrious, self-reliant patriotic individuals.

    You get two-thirds of the tax revenue...payed in increasingly worthless fiat currency...with no way to grow. We go back to living within our means, re-building the churches, charities, mutual-aid societies, communities etc, free from all your meddling massive government rules and regulations and programs.

    Yes, you will have few divorces, since marriage will be an meaningless concept to you... many people who "love each other" will "marry" until they get over it and then no-fault divorce, but most will not bother since all lifestyles, including hookups are just as valid. We return to stable families, no longer influenced by your government programs and rotting morals that encourage family destruction. You DID promise to take Hollywood, right? Oh, yeah, we

  143. Well, they actually have to do that... by jvonk · · Score: 1

    It's because they think they need a nutjob in order to get the Republican "base" out to vote, when what they really need is a moderate to win over the undecided voters (who are the real deciding factor).

    If they don't have sufficient appeal to their base, they run the risk of fracturing it through disaffection. To a certain degree your reasoning was correct: "who else were they going to vote for?", and the answer is clearly "not Obama". However, that's insufficient because the answer can also be "no one at all".

    Let me put it this way. I live in a safely red state, and two weeks before the election I noticed a Romney/Ryan bumper sticker. What really struck me was that was the first one I had seen. Paul Ryan was a critical choice for the GOP in an attempt to keep their base engaged while their presidential candidate (the perceived moderate) went after the independents. I'm not exaggerating when I say there were more McCain/Palin and W bumper stickers on cars driving around here than Romney ones on the day of the election.

    This election was the Republicans' to lose given unemployment, the economy, and the incumbent's name used as an epithet for the most controversial legislation passed in the last fifty years. When you look at all that, you asked how the Republicans could lose. When you looked at the candidates in the primary, you asked how the Republicans could win.

    Also, many Ron Paul supporters defected for Libertarian party after the Romney campaign's machinations during the primaries and convention to disenfranchise the Paul delegates despite there never being any plausible threat to Romney's nomination. Why is this relevant? I'm guessing the 0.53% of the vote the Libertarian candidate won in FL, for example, looks rather appealing to the Republicans in retrospect—given they lost by 0.86% of the vote there.

    It was untenable. When it comes down to it, effectively no one really liked or was enthusiastic about Romney. He got loads of anti-Obama votes but very few pro-Romney votes.

    1. Re:Well, they actually have to do that... by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      However, that's insufficient because the answer can also be "no one at all".

      That sort of ridiculous bullshit is why Congress is full of screaming whiny childish assholes who can't compromise or get anything done!

      For every rabid dumbass vote Romney would have lost by being reasonable, I'm absolutely convinced he would have gained two moderate votes.

      Let me put it this way. I live in a safely red state, and two weeks before the election I noticed a Romney/Ryan bumper sticker. What really struck me was that was the first one I had seen.

      Let me put it this way: if you live in a safely red state, who the fuck cares if some of them stay home?!! OMG, Romney won by 9% instead of 10%! Whoop-de-fucking-do!

      Also, many Ron Paul supporters defected for Libertarian party after the Romney campaign's machinations during the primaries and convention to disenfranchise the Paul delegates despite there never being any plausible threat to Romney's nomination. Why is this relevant? I'm guessing the 0.53% of the vote the Libertarian candidate won in FL, for example, looks rather appealing to the Republicans in retrospectâ"given they lost by 0.86% of the vote there.

      And here's what those Republicans don't get: the Republicans lost the Libertarian vote because of their authoritarian social platform, not their fiscal platform! The Republicans could cut taxes to fucking zero and it wouldn't matter because Libertarians refuse to accept their brain-damaged Baptist Sharia Law! I know this because I myself voted Libertarian, and that's exactly why.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    2. Re:Well, they actually have to do that... by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      I love how you just called a Mormon ... a Baptist.

      You're just as ignorant, treating all religions as one and the same.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    3. Re:Well, they actually have to do that... by jvonk · · Score: 1

      I think we're in general agreement (albeit seemingly... vociferous).

      That sort of ridiculous bullshit is why Congress is full of screaming whiny childish assholes who can't compromise or get anything done!

      Okay, but the sordid reality is that simply because it's ridiculous doesn't preclude it. How excited was the Democratic base about Kerry 2004? Didn't turnout suffer? The lack of Republican voter enthusiasm was palpable this entire election cycle.

      For every rabid dumbass vote Romney would have lost by being reasonable, I'm absolutely convinced he would have gained two moderate votes.

      I'm uncertain that calculus works, unless you are asserting that Romney could have induced defection in conservative Democrats. There simply aren't that many "true independents": if a candidate loses a portion of their base that is greater than, say, 5% of the popular vote then there simply aren't enough true independents to make up for that loss.

      Essentially, that scenario happens when there has been an Overton Window shift. If it persists over several elections it is likely to cause a party to fracture and a successor party to form that is carved out of the remnants + a portion of the other main party.

      Let me put it this way: if you live in a safely red state, who the fuck cares if some of them stay home?!! OMG, Romney won by 9% instead of 10%! Whoop-de-fucking-do!

      Thanks, I do understand how the electoral college system works in practice. The point I was making was that even in a very red state essentially no one was enthusiastic about Romney. Do you see how this might signal a serious problem for a campaign? If not even your broad base is excited about your candidacy, then how are you planning to capture the undecideds or keep your turnout high?

      And here's what those Republicans don't get: the Republicans lost the Libertarian vote because of their authoritarian social platform, not their fiscal platform!

      Depends on the libertarian, of course. I was making a generalization in order to illustrate that defection within a party's base demographics can affect an election, as was also illustrated in 2000 Florida with Nader/Greens.

      The shorthand is that "typical" Libertarians caucus closer to Republicans, just like Greens caucus closer to Democrats. Yes, just like in Flordia in 2000, you can't just mentally assign those third party votes to a main party candidate because, again, given a lack of those third party candidates then some of their supporting voters might have voted for the other main party or (more likely) just stayed home... "no one at all".

      Coming back around: I assert Johnson netted a substantial number of votes from upset Paul supporters. Romney could have probably kept a lot of them had he directed his campaign not to be dicks during nomination, and adopting some of the more innocuous aspects of Paul's platform (eg. audit the Fed). You are correct that these particular voters could probably have been replaced through larger gains in true independents... "somehow" (ie. Romney wasnt campaigning in a vaccum and I don't discount Obama's ability to recruit them).

      What isn't as trivial is the perception Romney had among the wider base as being a Massachusetts Republican governor (RINO suspicion), the "disturbing" similarities between RomneyCare in MA and ObamaCare now (clearly hated among the Republican base), etc. Ryan was chosen to appeal to that broad demographic, because Romney was perceived/suspected to be to the left of that.

    4. Re:Well, they actually have to do that... by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      It was a figure of speech (specifically, synecdoche), you idiot!

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    5. Re:Well, they actually have to do that... by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      ...ObamaCare now (clearly hated among the Republican base)

      The Republican base couldn't care less about ObamaCare as a policy (How could they? Just like the Democrat base, they can't be bothered to even understand it!); they hate it because they were told by the Republican cheerleaders on Faux News and talk radio to hate it simply because it belongs to the Other Team.

      ...but that's not really the point. The point is that we've got one party with a decent social policy and a shitty fiscal policy, another party with a decent fiscal policy and a shitty social policy, a few True Believers on each side who will root for their team no matter what (i.e., the "Base"), and a majority who are pissed off that they've been disenfranchised by the system that insists on measuring orthogonal dimensions along only one axis (which is why total turnout is so low)!

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    6. Re:Well, they actually have to do that... by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Oh, and by the way, both parties are chock full of authoritarian despots who work tirelessly to shit all over the Constitution and expand Federal power at the expense of the States, which doesn't help either!

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    7. Re:Well, they actually have to do that... by jvonk · · Score: 1

      I concur. Unfortunately, as Duverger's Law implies, the situation is unlikely to ever change while we use a first-past-the-post voting system.

      Something like Condorcet would be ideal, but even IRV would be a massive improvement. That would all but eliminate the value of tactical voting, thereby allowing third parties to emerge as viable contenders.

      However, I must admit any such change to our system is very unlikely. It would have to be a grassroots movement because, as you pointed out, both parties are flip sides of the same authoritarian coin. Not to neglect the fact that they have deeply entrenched interest in keeping themselves deeply entrenched in all levels of our government.

  144. Patriots my ass by guspasho · · Score: 1

    Yeah, there is no higher form of patriotism than trying to secede from the union when your guy loses an election.

  145. You don't ask for permission to secede. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You tell.

  146. Airlift by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    If Texas secedes, I can see the need for an Austin Airlift, mainly to help keep it weird.

  147. A modest Petitiom on Thorium LFTR's... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If "extreme" petitions aren't to your liking,
    you might prefer one calling for Pres, Obama
    to:

    "REVIVE & FUND U.S. R&D for
      Safer & Plutonium-Free Thorium-based
      (a k a LFTR) Energy technologies,
      & RECLASSIFY Thorium."

    Read & - if you agree - Sign here:

    + https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/revive-fund-us-rd-safer-plutonium-free-thorium-based-k-lftr-energy-technologies-reclassify-thorium/Xdv6KfjL

  148. The News Cycle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is getting way too much traction in the news cycle. Anyone can put up one of these petitions. Even some GOPer from the bluest state on the map. It does not mean that the state wants to secede, any more than one lunatic shooting up a movie theater means that all moviegoers are mass murderers. Let's get some statistical perspective here. (But that doesn't sell papers, or gather page hits.)

    If you wanted to form two countries from the USofA, there's no way to geographically divide them so that all the Reds are in one bin and all the Blues in another, without gerrymandering down the the sub-household level. And even if we could (by forcing half the population to move), each subcountry would then find another set of issues to divide the population down the middle. I'm beginning to think the issues aren't the problem: it's us. Or, rather, the two-party system. Each party has to choose the stance that will garner 50.001% of the vote. So those wedge issues get undue attention, and divide us as a people. If you magically created the Liberal States of America and the Conservative (Confederate?) States of America, the issues would just change and the populations would again be almost equally divided by whatever the new issues became.

  149. Market Forces by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hmm...well, I'll try harder to be Apple. I don't see any point in reducing the lower tax brackets, they're already pretty low, effectively. Inserting other brackets in between the current top bracket and the four-orders-of-magnitude-higher current top income sounds like a damn good idea.

    Single payer is probably the only way we'll ever be able to afford health care.

    You have an immediate need for life-saving medical treatment. So, obviously, you start researching hospitals, comparing prices and treatment, rates of hospital-acquired infection* -- what's that? you just go the the closest hospital? Well that's not being a very informed consumer.

    You can imagine medical care as being pretty much a non-competitive environment. Now, imagine that you're a profit-driven entity. Absent forces of competition, your prices will tend to reflect the value of those services rather than the cost. The operative phrase is "what the market will bear."

    What is the value of a life-saving treatment? Everything. In practice, everything you have, and everything you're willing to indebt yourself for, everything your family and friends will contribute, and anything more than a starvation income for the rest of your life. That is what your life is worth at any given moment.

    You have to fine-tune these things a bit, of course, because some people would rather die than seek treatment. That's called, 'rejecting the value proposition.'

    It's not that I'm necessarily sold on single-payer, but almost anything is better than what we have now. The economics are clear.

    * More than half the states in this country do not require hospitals to publish these numbers. MRSA kills more people than AIDS

  150. Cut and spend! That'll fix it! by Tenebrousedge · · Score: 1

    You'll pardon me if I don't think GP was arguing for a 'reasonable' tax rate. You should also show that we don't already have that, and further that reducing income tax would do anything to improve the situation. You can force budget cuts, but the problem is that our politicians' spending priorities are not aligned with yours, and that won't change.

    We have a debt to pay down. Unless you like the idea of China owning 8% of everything you see in this country, you should be clamoring for higher taxes, not lower. At the risk of becoming a scoundrel, I submit that paying taxes is an act of patriotism.

    I enjoyed the hell out of Costa Rica, and didn't pay them a dime in taxes. I would go back in a heartbeat -- they have a great (socialized) medical system too. It's not like emigration isn't an option, or would be hugely unpleasant. My suggestion to GP is: put your money where your mouth is. I did.

    --
    Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
  151. They can leave if they pay their share of the Debt by Marrow · · Score: 1

    The national debt belongs to all of us. Secession is like trying to skip out without paying the check. If they have the gold or treasuries to equal 1/50th of our debt (or divide it by population) then I say let em leave.

    Pay up on your rent and you can vacate!

  152. Obligatory... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "On one hand", "On the other hand", "On the gripping hand". Problem solved.

  153. If it is not a legitimate secession... by Hillgiant · · Score: 1

    The body politic has ways of shutting that whole thing down.

    --
    -
  154. *sigh* by Shirogitsune · · Score: 1

    Dear World,
    I want to apologize for the childish actions of my fellow Texans that would setup and sign such a petition. Their actions do not reflect the wishes and nature of Texans as a whole. I wish they would go buy a Caribbean island (not sending them south...Mexico doesn't deserve that) and start their own 'country', if they feel they can run something like that. I would like to remind my fellow Texans that following the war for independence from Mexico we were barely a republic and really wanted to become a state, only staying a republic for about 10 years due to the United States wanting to avoid war with Mexico. It is important to note that US troops fought and died against Mexico to annex Texas ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Texas_(1845%E2%80%931860) ).

    tl;dr

    Not all Texans want what these jackasses want.

    Sincerely,
    Shiro

  155. Good riddance by chinton · · Score: 1

    I have the same response to the successionists that I did for the people threatening to move to Canada or Europe when President Bush was (re)elected. Good riddance and don't come back.

  156. Wow by Murdoch5 · · Score: 1

    Okay this is ridiculous, to sum up the issue a Non Republican, Non White man is running the country and this is such an issue for people that they need to separate from the country. It's amazing how in many ethical and moral ways the US is still fighting the civil war.

  157. Side Show by sycodon · · Score: 1

    It's all a stupid side show that distracts attention away from the looming financial catastrophe.

    We'll see what all those soccer mom and middle class tax payers think when they are stuck for about $2k more in taxes. And that's just the start as they will also start having to pay higher health insurance premiums (yes, Obama care raises costs, not reduces them)

    --
    When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    1. Re:Side Show by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      "It's all a stupid side show that distracts attention away from the looming financial catastrophe."

      Which is exactly why the Libyan Ambassador had to be sacrificed and why Obama started the Birther nonsense and why he allows idiots to create petitions on his website to begin with.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
  158. Isn't this Treason? by srobert · · Score: 1

    Maybe some lawyer among us can tell me. Are the people signing these petitions committing an act of treason? What is the punishment for treason?

  159. slashdot fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you are not tired of arguing politics, may I suggest an alternative website. Namely one whose name is not Slashdot

  160. The nation's political Id is just having a TT by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 1

    Nothing to see here folks. Just the nation's political id machine is going into one of its tantrums when it didn't get its way... hey conservatives... why not be more like the conservatives of yesteryear, you know the hunters , fishers, outdoorsmen conservationists who knew Berry Goldwater was a lunatic you'd never invite to your party and respected the earth?

    Today's "conservatives" are about excusing rape , both corporate and real, characterizing the first as the "invisible hand of Adam Smith" and the second as the "invisible hand of God Almighty".

    You minds are weird. You're weird. You have a weird, paranoiac belief system which has set up shop as a one-stop reality-denial depot where you can stop and get a fill-up of stupid religious fundamentalism, a steaming hot cup of climate change denial, your ties filled with a lot of hot air about creationism and your "stupid" and "gullibility" levels checked and topped off.

    You're stupid and your bizarre belief system is a danger to yourself and others. You may not like losing elections and are looking for ways to act out but I and the rest the country- and that would be the majority- understand that this s nothing more than the temper tantrum of a child who has to be put in his place for his own good.

  161. Let 'em go by moonwatcher2001 · · Score: 1

    This is old but still relevant.
    --
    Dear Red States,

    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 Dollywood.

    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 do 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 percent
    of the country's fresh water, more than 90 percent of the pineapple
    and lettuce, 92 percent of the nation's fresh fruit, 95 percent of
    America's quality wines (you can serve French wines at state dinners)
    90 percent of all cheese, 90 percent of the high tech industry, most
    of the U.S. 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, on the other hand, you will have to cope with 88
    percent of all obese Americans (and their projected health care
    costs), 92 percent of all U.S. mosquitoes, nearly 100 percent of the
    tornadoes, 90 percent of the hurricanes, 99 percent of all Southern
    Baptists, virtually 100 percent of all televangelists, Rush Limbaugh,
    Bob Jones University, Clemson and the University of Georgia.
    We get Hollywood and Yosemite, thank you.

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

    By the way, we're taking the good pot, too. You can have that dirt
    weed they grow in Mexico.

    Peace out,
    Blue State

  162. Racism is alive and well in America... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only reason many of those who voted for Romney did so, not because of his politics or his potential. They voted for him because he's not black.
    The same is true for many Obama voters, but I'd be willing to bet heavily that the ratio least double for Romney.

    It would be nice if we could detach the whole southeast U.S. and float it out into the Atlantic so it could form its own little self-hating nation.

    How anyone can be so upset over the color of someone's skin.

  163. petitions should contain perfect grammar/spelling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Normally I don't bother being a grammar nazi, especially with typical internet posts, but, when an official petition is created, it would vastly help the cause if every word is spelled correctly (plus, grammar must also be 100% accurate). There is a spelling error in the Texas petition.

  164. Petition? by moeinvt · · Score: 1

    You petition the government to demand that they act in a particular way.

    You DON'T petition the federal government to ask them to give you permission to secede, you just do it!

    I appreciate the sentiment, but this is just plain silly. By asking the government to give you permission to secede, you're granting them power that they don't really have.

  165. A Peek Inside the Republican Internal War by Epicaxia · · Score: 1

    Permit me to interject a perspective into my favorite bastion of anarchical Democrats. Read or ignore at your own prerogative.

    First and foremost (that is, most relevant to the OP) is the following observation: If any state has a chance of seceding, and doing so successfully in a way that leads to a growing and stable nation-state, it is Texas. The reasons are too many to list here--suffice it to say, there is precedence, will, and ability. (If you doubt it, consider the following: You are POTUS, and Texas secedes. You lose the Marine Corps. Immediately. In a closely-related event, 12 hours later you will also lose the capitol, Norfolk, and New York.)

    Second, schisms embodied by secession movements highlighted here do not strictly adhere to red-vs-blue state correlations. (Note, for example, that Oregon, New York, and New Jersey are also on the list.) Instead, movements like these are built around a perception that the governing body does not represent the best interests of a subset of their constituents--sometimes even a perception that they are actively working to their detriment. In many red states, this is realized in the perception that the federal government ignores, if not mocks and holds in contempt, those states, their residents, and their values. In the three aforementioned blue states, there is a sizeable portion (as measured by population or geography) that is soundly overruled by a larger subset (or a subset with stronger influence over state policy).

    I can speak from experience that non-Willamette Oregonians feel like they are ruled by those who live in the 'Valley'--Portland, Salem, Eugene, and surrounding burbs. Tax money flows from industries outside of the regions into one or two metropolitcan areas to build local light-rail projects, subsidize regional interests, and fund other policies exclusive to those areas. This is a major driver behind the movement to create a state of Jefferson, consisting of southern Oregon and northern California (residents of the latter face similar problems with their state government in Sacramento and the population centers of the Bay Area & southern California). I suspect there are similar sentiments in upstate New York and mid/southern New Jersey (i.e., urban and commuting populations effectively nullifying the idealogies of their rural and local counterparts).

    Lastly, it's worth pointing out the nature of the ongoing discussions (some would say civil war) within the Republican party. One major driving factor that is often downplayed (if noticed at all) is the degree to which ideology drives conservative politics--much more so than counterpart mechanisms on the left, which are typically more issue- and demographically-oriented. Here's an example, in which I attempt to list some of the major factions in the ongoing discussions:

    • * Republican Intelligensia (pundits, think tanks, and beltway thinkers) are primarily focused on the demographic issues--how do we best adjust our message (if not change it outright) to best appeal to voting block Z? Most truely wealthy Republicans fall into this group.
    • * "Value Voters" (i.e., those vote for Republicans primariliy on religious--as opposed to universally moral--issues) will be convinced of whatever their leaders tell them. That's the thing about religious movements--they're very finicky, and can change abruptly when they perceive slights or when their leaders start playing power games. Officials spend a lot of time running after their vote, particularly after the elections between 2000 and 2004, but (as can be seen in the recent election, where turnout was surprisingly low) to very little effect. Since this is Slashdot, I should point out that, to the degree that anti-science and fundamentalist viewpoints have grown into the Republican party platform, it is exclusively a result of efforts to capture this block.
    • * Dittoheads (middle class working voters) are the base of the party (numbers of the previous two are insufficient to successfully elect a national platform, though
  166. WTF? Equating Secession to racism??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ignorance knows no bounds. Secession does not equal racism. The fact that someone is equating the two shows their ignorance and insistence that anybody who disagrees with Obama is a racist.

  167. Re:Let's see them manage that border on their own. by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    As has been said before in this thread, they'd turn the southern border into a killing field, with automated machine gun turrets, moats of spike pits, and whatever other crazy shit you can imagine.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  168. Texas' four major cities leave, form new state by Dr.+Pantzo · · Score: 1

    The best petition is to allow Austin, Houston, San Antonio, and Dallas to withdraw from Texas and create their own NEW state.

    https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/peacefully-allow-austin-houston-san-antonio-and-dallas-withdraw-texas-and-create-their-own-new-state/P623n9Pz

  169. Re:Wholly Crap! What is wrong with your country?! by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    Good for you but I've seen what the GP's talking about as well, it's not just him. A lot of people from other countries seem to think that Canadians are a "subset" of Americans (as in "Estadounidense").

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  170. Re:Wholly Crap! What is wrong with your country?! by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    And both have the right to bear arms, depending on season, licensing and the species involved.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  171. Re:Let's see them manage that border on their own. by messymerry · · Score: 1

    You gotta be kidding. This is Texas we're talking about. The only thing that keeps our border porous is the Feds getting their fat A$$es in the way. Besides, we kinda like Mexican food down here. Trust me, Texas can secure her borders.

    --
    Dear Microlimp: I give you 2 valid product keys for win7 and you reject both of them. Piss off you wankers!!!
  172. Re:Let's see them manage that border on their own. by damn_registrars · · Score: 1
    I rather doubt it would work out quite so well in Texas. Ultimately there are at least three different populations in Texas with regards to the border:
    • People who need the cheap labor (they don't want to secure it)
    • People who talk about it, but don't want to spend money on it (they won't secure it)
    • People who want to spend money on it, but won't do it themselves (they might secure it)

    There may - though also may not - be a small population who is actually willing to do something themselves to secure the border. If any such people exist they are nowhere near numerous enough to be able to pull it off themselves.

    Of course, the irony is that the border might end up becoming less appealing to immigrants since they wouldn't want to be in Texas anyways. Immigrants will instead pass through New Mexico, Arizona, and California because they won't want to be anywhere near the crazed Texans.

    In other words, the Texans can look forward to paying a lot more for produce if they secede.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  173. Are you REAL? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You do not send letters to secede: you DECLARE YOUR INDEPENDENCE, then wait for the onslaught. Should be obvious this election was decided beforehand.

  174. Ok, let's say I take this "movement" seriously... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I will be sitting over in the corner, quietly masturbating.

  175. It's like the 1860s all over again... by iq145 · · Score: 1

    Only last time, it was to HELP black people :-)

  176. Good-bye Texas, hello ... by Randym · · Score: 1

    ....Puerto Rico, and Democratic Presidents as far as the eye can see. We won't even have to change the flag.

    --
    DNA is a Turing machine. You, however, being dynamic and emergent, are not.
  177. ...he feared the right... by Randym · · Score: 1
    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.

    Which appears to be exactly what happened.

    --
    DNA is a Turing machine. You, however, being dynamic and emergent, are not.
  178. "See ya, Texas..." by Randym · · Score: 1

    "...and hello Democratic Presidents for the next twenty years!"

    --
    DNA is a Turing machine. You, however, being dynamic and emergent, are not.
  179. The Best Election map I can find by ryzvonusef · · Score: 1

    Party divide according to:

    -County -State -Popular vote
    -Population density
    http://i.imgur.com/pflQf.jpg

    Relevant article (though the Image is not originally theirs:
    http://gizmodo.com/5960290/this-is-the-real-political-map-of-america-hint-we-are-not-that-divided

    --
    I am an ACCA student. Got a query on Accountancy/Finance? Maybe I can help!
  180. Secession: the fruit of the right-wing pundits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's examine the engine that whipped citizens up into a froth of secession-fever.

    Extreme right wing pundits screaming constantly, attacking any fiscal Republican who tries to negotiate or vary from their party line in order to make the economy function. Their influence has been growing steadily since the Clinton admin and they have completely ruined (IMHO) the Republican party.

    These pundits only care about their TV ratings because they are the business to sell advertising - not solving real world problems. They don't take any responsibility for their opinions - they are only interested in getting attention. They scream patriotism and Christian values yet they hold neither sacred. They only care for their own fame and power.

    I don't have any problem with free speech. But, I do have a problem with the pundits not taking responsibility for the resulting fear and fury they've created in the hearts of gullible people.

    They are dangerous. They have nearly crippled our ability to work with each other.

  181. PQ by phorm · · Score: 1

    The PQ is only really a "major" party except in Quebec. While they do have a good amount of influence in that province, at a federal level their influence mostly comes in making demands for Quebec (usually succession, but that seems a ploy to get more "keep them happy" handouts from the fed) and from reducing the number of seats the other major parties can have.

    Green is growing but they're not a "major" party (in terms of votes/seats) yet either. The big boys are the Conservatives, Liberals, and New Democrats.

  182. Re:Wholly Crap! What is wrong with your country?! by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    Sorry, I doubt that heavyly, I never met one who thought so.
    Eveyone who sees that at the olympic games canada has its own flag, knows that.
    Most people even know that Canada has 'british' and 'frensh' provinces ...
    Otoh who knows what idiots you have met ;)

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  183. Re:Wholly Crap! What is wrong with your country?! by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    One person put it as "The two countries are so close together you'd think they're like the same country." He was expecting the TSA treatment when flying in and was surprised that small shops and taxi drivers weren't keen on taking US dollars.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  184. Re:If there was a Bad at HISTORY Map... (FTFY) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The United States didn't take Texas from Mexico. Texas won it's own independence from Mexico, became an independent republic (and actually had an embassy in London), before eventually agreeing to join the US.

    As an aside, you can still visit something called the Texas Embassy in London, but it's not on the site of the old embassy. It does, however, serve pretty darn decent Tex-Mex food. Too bad they can't import Shiner over there.

  185. US are immigration hypocrits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No one seems to care so long as the illegals are quietly cutting our lawns, making our food, or building our houses. Only when it's time to milk them for votes (for or against) does anyone pretend to give a shit.

    1. Re:US are immigration hypocrits by pecosdave · · Score: 1

      Ever been to a hospital emergency room in an area full of illegals when you have an actual emergency and there's 50 people ahead of you with a mild tummy ache that don't want to pay a regular doctor?

      These are the sorts of things that need to be addressed before we throw the gates open.

      --
      The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
  186. Re:Wholly Crap! What is wrong with your country?! by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    But that souns more like an US american than an european, but funny :)

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  187. Reminds me of "The Old Man and Death" by Aesop by Eightbitgnosis · · Score: 1

    We would often be sorry if our wishes were gratified.

  188. Let 'em go! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Personally, I'm all for giving Texas back to Mexico and Louisiana back to France.

  189. Who should be running the country by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you asked me, I'd say Matt Gonzalez and Elizabeth Warren as co-equal in the Presidency would actually serve the nation's interest.

    Matt hasn't chosen to run, though and only Elizabeth is addressing the national agenda.

    Thank goodness for sanity in Romney's state—Massachusetts—in spite of him!

    Perhaps if Matt won't run, we can at least get Speaker Nancy to consider it.

    SWEEP THE HOUSE IN 2014! Vote out the louts in the House

  190. Oh Gawd...Here we Go Again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, I live in TX and I was raised here, too. I really detest these vain, dumb attempts of political posturing when things do not go a certain way. We had our State AG telling the poll watchers they could not watch. Now we have the dippy Gov favoring secession and not setting up healthcare markets. It is just so disappointing that being a moderate is such a dirty word these days.

  191. Re:Wrong Branch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Baby Killer!

  192. LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You idiots realize Texas would do very well on its own as it returns ~4% more in federal dollars than it takes in. It would take a HUGE portion of the defense industry as well as oil production with it. While I dont think Obamas reelection is reason enough (he is not the reason we are in this mess.. an EXTREMELY corrupt congress is both D & R).. the overall sense of entitlement of the majority of people in the country who want so much for so little effort that I dont blame em for wanting out.

  193. Any other opinion = Racism?????? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder if we can stop this . Please ?

  194. MONEY is at the heart of it (as always) by iq145 · · Score: 1

    Obama can't let any of those states secede. He'll need all the tax money they provide to pay for the two million new public assistance cases when he adds Puerto Rico as a NEW state. We can barely take care of ourselves right now!!!

  195. Willfully obtuse much? by Uberbah · · Score: 1

    It was racism that caused Americans to secede from the British crown. It was racism that caused the Yugoslavians to secede from the Soviet Union (just ask Trotsky!) It was racism that caused Indians to secede from Britain -- that racist jerk Gandhi needs to be put in his place! It is racism that causes Tibetans to want independence from China. It is racism that Indonesia is no longer a Dutch colony. Oh, and I bet you Prince Pedro was being racist when he decided to secede from Portugal, too.

    Did the Ygoslavians, Indians, Tibetans, Indonesians and Pedro want to secede because Britain/USSR/China just re-elected a black president?

  196. Nonsense. This has NEVER happened before. by Uberbah · · Score: 1

    Not in modern times, at any rate. Republicans mocked liberals like Streisand for saying they'd leave the country if Bush was re-elected. Obama won in 2008, and all of a sudden Texas and Alaska start talking about secession.

    If you insist on using Bill O'Reilly nutpicking and pretend three yahoos on USENET make a movement, I'll just ask which Democratic Governors and members of Congress started talking about withdrawing from the union after 2000 or 2004.

  197. Of course it does. by Uberbah · · Score: 1

    If you think that it's just a coincidence that secession talk got started after the election of the first black president, and then made a resurgence after his re-election, I have some shares in a sweet New York bridge to sell you...

  198. Re:Wrong Branch by Uberbah · · Score: 1

    Georgia does have a Nuclear Missile Base (google will be your friend for this one). And the local rednecks will over run the base and send a missile to YOUR storefront and make for a REALLY BAD DAY.

    As if seceding states would be able to keep their federal toys.

  199. You mean the debunked Urban Legend? by Uberbah · · Score: 1

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

    Far more Democrats voted for Bush than there were Nader voters in total. Then there's the almost inconsequential matter that Gore would have won with a statewide recount under any scenario, but the election was stolen by corrupt Republicans at the state and national level.