Hell yeah!! Legislation to split Washington state...

[PNWguy]

1 hour ago, windowasher said:

Did we not sacrifice about 600,000 American lives to settle this S^!t about 160 years ago?

Liberty and freedom from tyranny are not "****"...  

[Jammersix]

There will always be dense, urban areas and large expanses of less populated rural areas.

The only way it's even close to fair is if all political areas have some of each. Otherwise, the rural areas would never stand a political chance of anything.

So be grateful we let you hang on our coattails.

[PNWguy]

7 minutes ago, Jammersix said:

There will always be dense, urban areas and large expanses of less populated rural areas.

The only way it's even close to fair is if all political areas have some of each. Otherwise, the rural areas would never stand a political chance of anything.

So be grateful we let you hang on our coattails.

Grateful for what?

You see, that's the exact perfect example of liberal and urban narcissism, sense of self-importance, ignorance, and just plain ******* attitude that just really pisses off the rural areas.

Nobody needs you and nobody gives a **** what you think.  You've fucked up your own area and **** where you ate.  You have high crime, high taxes, no liberty, no morality, and are turning into lawless war zones full of useless assholes who couldn't survive a week without a ******* Starbucks.

Your exact attitude is what is pushing this nation towards another civil war.  

 

[G26S239]

9 hours ago, Citra47 said:

Actually, you could look at many more states beside Washington that could benefit by splitting. To name just a few, Upstate New York, virtually the whole state of Illinois south of Chicago, possibly Florida north of Palm Beach County although Tallahassee is a hot bed of far left CommieDemDuh's,.  Probably several states would benefit from a split. Texas in the future, but Texas can legally be formed into - if memory serves me correctly - up to five sections or states.  The problem - other than the far western U.S. - is in the large cities which tend to turn CommieDemDuh. More rural areas tend to be conservative. 

Article 4 Section 3 applies to Texas as well as every other state.

[Moeman]

3 hours ago, Borg warner said:

If at first you don't Secede, try, try, again.

So the likes of Boeing and aerospace and Microsoft and high tech companies and workers don’t pay ?

Edited February 2, 2019 by Moeman

[Jammersix]

And I understand all those companies are useless.

Well, you know, except for the stuff the farmers buy.

You really should give a **** what we think, after all, it's the way your laws are going to be.

[Citra47]

1 hour ago, G26S239 said:

Article 4 Section 3 applies to Texas as well as every other state.

Because Texas was The Republic of Texas (a sovereign nation) when they joined the United  States, part of their agreement to join was that up to four additional states could be created from Texas territory with the consent of the State of Texas. Texas became the State of Texas on December 29, 1845 without ever having to pass a territorial phase as most other states had to do. 

[Moeman]

2 hours ago, Jammersix said:

And I understand all those companies are useless.

Well, you know, except for the stuff the farmers buy.

You really should give a **** what we think, after all, it's the way your laws are going to be.

Reference to me? I live  in the biggest agriculture state in the nation, along with Silicon Valley , the biotech etc... we bring in a lot of foreign dollars... so yes, farmers matter but not the end all. Archer Daniels Midland, Monsanto the good guys? Heavy farm equipment is mostly from the the Midwest, caterpillar, John Deer,  et all, good luck.

Edited February 2, 2019 by Moeman

[autogeddon]

And I understand all those companies are useless.

Well, you know, except for the stuff the farmers buy.

You really should give a **** what we think, after all, it's the way your laws are going to be.

Until the next Civil War, and the right destroys your existence in urban environments. You're welcome!

[Moeman]

36 minutes ago, autogeddon said:

And I understand all those companies are useless.

Well, you know, except for the stuff the farmers buy.

You really should give a **** what we think, after all, it's the way your laws are going to be.

Until the next Civil War, and the right destroys your existence in urban environments. You're welcome!

There a lot of fishing companies in eastern WA that add to the economy? Tourism? Ports? 

[Jammersix]

9 minutes ago, Moeman said:

There a lot of fishing companies in eastern WA that add to the economy? Tourism? Ports? 

If you took all the fishing companies in eastern Washington, added them together, added a zero and then another zero, they would equal one day's income from one of the smallest tech companies in King County.

[Jammersix]

48 minutes ago, autogeddon said:

Until the next Civil War, and the right destroys your existence in urban environments. You're welcome!

Any civil war won't be lead by the right. Hang on tight, now, we're going to crack the whip!

[Jammersix]

1 hour ago, Moeman said:

Reference to me?

No. The axle, and, therefore, the point we turn around, is located elsewhere.

[G26S239]

6 hours ago, Citra47 said:

Because Texas was The Republic of Texas (a sovereign nation) when they joined the United  States, part of their agreement to join was that up to four additional states could be created from Texas territory with the consent of the State of Texas. Texas became the State of Texas on December 29, 1845 without ever having to pass a territorial phase as most other states had to do. 

Article 6 proclaims that the US Constitution is the supreme law of the land.

Article 4 Section 3 states that New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union;  but no new State shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.

No treaty or agreement supersedes the US Constitution. Reid vs Covert and other rulings confirm this. If Texas wants to split into 5, 6, 7 or more states it can do so only if it does so in accordance with Article 4 Section 3.

If a treaty or act of congress was all that is required to over rule any Article or Amendment than we would be up **** creek next time the Dems have the votes to **** can the 2nd Amendment.

[Mrs.Cicero]

I'd like to separate Wayne County (Detoilet) Michigan from the rest of the state... they are the reason we can't get decent Senators elected... 

[UnifiedFieldTheory]

14 hours ago, PNWguy said:

Grateful for what?

You see, that's the exact perfect example of liberal and urban narcissism, sense of self-importance, ignorance, and just plain ******* attitude that just really pisses off the rural areas.

Nobody needs you and nobody gives a **** what you think.  You've fucked up your own area and **** where you ate.  You have high crime, high taxes, no liberty, no morality, and are turning into lawless war zones full of useless assholes who couldn't survive a week without a ******* Starbucks.

Your exact attitude is what is pushing this nation towards another civil war.  

 

I've lived in the country, I've lived in the suburbs, I now live in about as close to urban as I'm going to get.

Living in the country doesn't confer some special kind of enlightened halo on you.  Folks who live in more densely populated areas aren't automatically liberal, godless assholes who "couldn't survive a week without a ******* Starbucks".  

Living in the boonies - as you do NOT, friend - doesn't make you special.  It just means your ZIP code is different.  Get over yourself.  And that was a harsh as **** attack that was undeserved in the extreme.  Although you've got me on ignore, other people can see this post.

So I'll repeat it, having lived in the country*, I've learned that people who live in the country can be just as liberal, crime-ridden, self-important, ignorant, and just plain assholes as city dwellers.  Clinging to the myth of the Noble Country Dweller™ is stupid, because it's a myth.  There are good and bad people everywhere, and how much acreage they have around them isn't indicative of their moral character.

*As in "Carry a pistol in your front yard because of critters, 40 minutes from nearest grocery store / police / hospital, stitch your own cuts with Superglue, haul your own trash to the dumpster, plow your own road, kill your own turkeys" kind of lived in the country.

Edited February 2, 2019 by UnifiedFieldTheory

[UnifiedFieldTheory]

12 hours ago, autogeddon said:

And I understand all those companies are useless.

Well, you know, except for the stuff the farmers buy.

You really should give a **** what we think, after all, it's the way your laws are going to be.

Until the next Civil War, and the right destroys your existence in urban environments. You're welcome!

You say this as if you think folks in suburban and urban areas aren't armed, as well.  Guess again, buddy.

[Moeman]

11 hours ago, Jammersix said:

If you took all the fishing companies in eastern Washington, added them together, added a zero and then another zero, they would equal one day's income from one of the smallest tech companies in King County.

And I should have been more accurate with”commmercial fishing companies” those are the ones providing fish to a nation.

[Rizzo]

Where do y’all think most meth is cooked up? Hint: it ain’t in the cities... 

[UnifiedFieldTheory]

Just now, Rizzo said:

Where do y’all think most meth is cooked up? Hint: it ain’t in the cities... 

We regularly walked our property boundaries and the areas outside them (since we backed up to several thousand acres of NF land) to make sure there weren't any nasty surprises lurking for us out there.  So yeah...not in my neighbor's nice house to the west of us here in the DC area, but far more likely some jackwagon with a tent and some chemicals on the back edge of the property.

[minderasr]

@PNWguy Good luck with that.  There has been an ongoing movement to separate New York for years.  NYC & Westchester County (overwhelmingly Democrat) would remain NYS.  All the counties north of Westchester (Republican/Conservative with a few exceptions) would become New Amsterdam.  The problem is NYC has the majority votes wise, and we'd need their votes to approve this.  As far as I know the movement is still alive, but going nowhere.

[G26S239]

40 minutes ago, minderasr said:

@PNWguy Good luck with that.  There has been an ongoing movement to separate New York for years.  NYC & Westchester County (overwhelmingly Democrat) would remain NYS.  All the counties north of Westchester (Republican/Conservative with a few exceptions) would become New Amsterdam.  The problem is NYC has the majority votes wise, and we'd need their votes to approve this.  As far as I know the movement is still alive, but going nowhere.

And any notion that liberal elitists will ever willingly relinquish control over others is ridiculous.  

[Al Czervik]

Not that it is going to happen, but any successful attempt at splitting a state that would likely add Republican members of the House and Senate, would be met with an onslaught of liberal states attempting the same, and the dominoes would not likely fall in our favor.  Be careful what you wish for.

[Citra47]

9 hours ago, G26S239 said:

Article 6 proclaims that the US Constitution is the supreme law of the land.

Article 4 Section 3 states that New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union;  but no new State shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.

No treaty or agreement supersedes the US Constitution. Reid vs Covert and other rulings confirm this. If Texas wants to split into 5, 6, 7 or more states it can do so only if it does so in accordance with Article 4 Section 3.

If a treaty or act of congress was all that is required to over rule any Article or Amendment than we would be up **** creek next time the Dems have the votes to **** can the 2nd Amendment.

Historically we are both correct; technically, you are correct - especially as things stand at our current time in history.  However, around 1845, things were much different politically in the U.S. than now. Then, major issues of Congress consisted of the industrial North vs. the agrarian South, westward expansion and tensions between slave and non slave states among others. I am pretty certain most all Congressional Representatives were quite nationalist in their political views and thoroughly believed in our Constitution and form of government.  Karl Marx did not write the Communist Manifesto until 1848 so Communism/Socialism/Fascism were not contenders in politics at the time as they were later and especially at the current time. 

Texas was indeed accepted by the U.S. Congress March 1, 1845 - agreeing in hand to accept the Texas terms. However, at that time in history, Texas was claiming a huge chunk of lands to the north and west of the boundaries in current use - including most of the area of present day New Mexico and Colorado. The Mexican - American War of 1846 was a direct result of the annexation of Texas which, however, also resulted in the U.S. acquiring California and California quickly petitioned the U.S. for statehood as a free (non slave) state (see Compromise of 1850 below).  Congress viewed The Republic of Texas as blocking westward expansion because of its size and if Texas was accepted into the Union, the blocking point would be removed all the way to California.  Many in Congress believed if Texas was allowed to retain all claimed areas, Southerners would push to create a new slave state to counter the free state of California. 

To help settle the matter, a number of Congressional bills were quickly passed that became known as The Compromise of 1850; California was admitted as a free state and Texas received 10 million dollars to give up land claims outside of what became their permanent border. In addition an interesting part of the Compromise of 1850, ended the slave trade in the District of Columbia, and Congress passed the Fugitive Slave Act to appease slaveholders. Congress also created a force of very powerful federal commissioners empowered with chasing down runaway slaves and returning them to their "rightful owners". In essence, everyone with a dog in the fight walked away with something from the Compromise of 1850.  

Too bad Congress can't seem to compromise on anything today. 

Edited February 2, 2019 by Citra47

[holyjohnson]

i think the idea of a state splitting legally and watching how it built itself would be interesting.

incentivizing people to move there,setting up tax guidelines for Business and infrastructure would be a fascinating thing to watch.