Thursday, April 27, 2017

Secession? Bad Idea.

(Source)
I've been meaning to comment for a while now on the topic of California seceding from the Union. The so-called "Cal-Exit." A hare-brained cockamamie scheme if you ask me. Someone tell the leftist loons out there that it's called "Balkanization." Yes, let's go ahead and break the country into smaller pieces. That way all of the snowflakes can have their own little fantasy land.

Until someone comes along and scoops up those bite-sized pieces.

Yes, I'm a Federalist at heart. I believe in a strong central government but I also know (and support) that the Constitution lays out what the Feds can and cannot do and indicates that the individual states have rights and duties which the Feds can't touch.

I do believe that in 1861 I would have been a staunch Union man, even if my own state had been one of those to secede. I swore an oath, as did many back then, not all stayed true to that oath.

All that aside, this is a great country, these here United States, and those states should stick together through thick and thin. Tear down one piece and the whole structure might eventually collapse. And wouldn't the Commies and jihadis love that? Easier pickings for them.

Anyhoo, I regard California as being part of the United States, while Californians should decide their own destiny, it has to be as part of the U.S.A. Perhaps the multi-state solution is best. But that's for Californians to decide.

Anyhoo, I haven't had any more sleep than I had the other day so I'm still a bit at sea as to providing you folks with a semi-coherent, well thought out post. (I know, I know, when did I start doing that?)

But there's a couple of interesting posts out there regarding the subject of Cal-Exit. I need to read up more on the subject, but apparently the ee-jit who really wants California to secede now lives in Russia. Anyone know that parts of California had been colonized by Russians back in the day? Well, 'tis true. Ya gotta know your history.

While I don't always read Chicago Boyz, this recent post caught my eye. (Hat tip to Keeper of the Flame Bill Brandt over at The Lexicans, he's the one who first drew my attention, indirectly, to this site.) Another article here looks at some of the curiousness of "Cal-exit."

While some conservatives might say "Buh-bye California, don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out." I say, you're all welcome to leave the U.S. we'll even pay your airfare to wherever it is you want to go. And no, you can't have the land. That stays with us.

My two cents. FWIW.

Sarge, out...




30 comments:

  1. It'll never happen as it's just a bunch of wackos raising the possibility, but the US as a whole would be stronger because of it! I've said many times, the worst part about my beloved San Diego is that it's in California. As much as I HATE the politics here, and the constant attacks on liberty and my bank account (taxes), I was born here, love the weather, and it's where my job is, so I don't see myself leaving anytime soon. As for Cali leaving? It would lose billions in defense dollars as the Navy and Corps would pull out. I really don't want to need a passport of visit relatives in Oregon so I wouldn't vote for it. Plenty of other reasons it won't happen and I wouldn't support it, but it gets us talking about how flipping crazy the Golden State really is.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Perhaps we could just quarantine Sacramento?

      (I never thought it would really happen either.)

      Delete
  2. I found it interesting that a couple of years ago when there was talk in Texas about seceding (which I didn't support, except as a last measure if the Bat Guano crazy left took over), the EXACT same people that are supporting CalExit were saying that Texas leaving there was no legal (there's that word again :-) ) basis that would allow that. Argumentatively, the treaty signed between Texas and the US allowing admission had clauses in it (I've been told, I try not to read diplomatic papers beyond a couple written in the late 1700s) that set conditions for exit. The counter to that is there was an episode in the early 1860's which may have changed that. But if the Civil War made it illegal for Texas to leave, that should make it illegal for California to leave also.

    That would, however, require logic. Which doesn't appear to be present in large amounts lately.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I knew Texas came into the Union as a sovereign country, as did my own home state, and often wondered if there had been clauses indicating how Texas could depart. Events from 1861 to 1865 may have voided that contract/treaty, I don't know.

      Full disclosure, I was against Texas secession as well.

      Delete
  3. Here's a kicker, same loonies want to separate Tex, out of the bunch also. As I put it, attsa nasty. They just don't get it, even Texas , damn, Sam would be dancing. My cousins would be howling like the Ulster Scots they were.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Together we stand, divided we fall. Our enemies would love to see the U.S. fall to pieces.

      Delete
  4. Wonder if the Cali secessionist have thought about how much of their drinking water originates outside the borders of California?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I doubt that thought ever crossed the minds of the snowflakes...

      Delete
    2. But OF COURSE everything would continue exactly as is, and we'd just not have to deal with that horrible Trump fellow and that pesky Constitution, and I can be whatever gender I fell like today. Right Bambi/Biff? BTW what do you want to go by today, zhear?

      Delete
    3. Yes, unicorns would be real and fairies would rule the Earth. Well, in California anyway.

      Delete
  5. An immodest proposal.

    1. Start a 10-year clock running. By the end of 10 years congress MAY NOT pass new legislation and MUST revise the entire US Code to eliminate superfluous, contradictory, conflicting, and unconstitutional laws; eliminate all non-constitutional agencies and regulation; balance the federal budget with a 10 percent per anum spending reduction to 1950 per-capita level in adjusted dollars.

    2. Offer a one time relocation program to every citizen AND illegal alien. Said program will pay relocation expenses AND $500,000 in exchange for renouncing citizenship.

    Actually, maybe we should run part 2 first. It would be a huge win all around, ridding the nation of those who hate their country while bolstering Europe's sagging population and countering mohammedan influence. As soon as they get off the plane they'll set about changing their new home as always, but I suspect they'll vigorously re-embrace Liberty once they're out from under the heel of American tyranny (and realize that their new government wants all their money because they are now the 1 percent).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's an interesting plan. I might tweak a thing or two, but it's a start.

      Delete
  6. Sorta off topic but looking at the photo I'm left wondering how those pyramids of stacked cannon balls survived? I'm suspecting they were the cause of the destruction and had been gathered after the event. Who knows?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That is interesting, now I'm wondering too.

      They look in too good a shape to have been actually fired (and Hit anything) but who knows?

      If that's the ruins of an arsenal, might be stacks of balls from the production line. Again, who knows?

      Good eye Flugelman!

      Delete
    2. That image is variously captioned as being ruins of the "Armory." See also here, and a good close-up here. I think all three photos depict the same general area, with the destroyed railway viaduct featuring prominently. Definitely a storage technique and not a field expedient measure (custom stone bases for proper stacking!).

      Compare with the more haphazard distribution seen elsewhere.

      Delete
    3. Oooh, the LoC is a jackpot. Stacks galore. They definitely weren't just arsen around when they stacked those.

      Delete
    4. I think it is the same place. Also, ammunition in the field was "packaged," shot with wooden sabot attached, to which a powder bag could be attached. Ammo was stored in a limber, not in piles next to the gun, all sorts of issues with that both tactically and safety wise. So if you see a stack of cannon balls, they were either manufactured nearby (like in these photos) or they were collected for reuse/disposal.

      Great links!

      Delete
    5. Library of Congress has lots of good stuff. I believe I saw some grape shot laying around (smaller balls with wooden disks between each layer, looks too large for canister).

      More excellent pics!

      Delete
    6. Yeah, the foreground of the last pic is definitely a pile of grape.

      Now I'm wondering why piles of the stuff was left lying around? I would have thought they'd be using it as fast as they made it. Maybe it was old stock for obsolete calibers? Grape was primarily (or entirely) a naval round at that point, maybe they didn't have the guns to fire it from?

      Delete
    7. Another possibility is that they had no way to transport it. I'd guess that most of the wagons and horses still around were with the Army of Northern Virginia. Maybe a powder shortage, shot without powder is pretty useless. At that point in the war the South was running out of everything.

      Delete
    8. It makes sense that any sort of logistical friction would result in an excess of something, at some location. Unless everything's working perfectly, things will pile up. Or maybe that's just what "normal" production looks like, building a stockpile until the train comes to take it away. I certainly don't know. Sorry if I've dragged things off topic. Politics make me too grumpy. :P

      (Also, there are LOTS of photos of this one specific "ammo dump" area. Those are some pretty big balls. And shells, and canister, and grape. The piles of intact, neatly-stacked, unmortared bricks kind of makes it look like those guys are taking a break from cleanup/salvage operations. As the child of a brick collector, I wonder how many of them got spread around and used in rebuilding Richmond, and how many are still out there?)

      Delete
    9. That's a lot of ordnance laying around!

      Delete
  7. There is a tradition - and USGOV could come in and remove all California executive branch leadership, the legislature and the courts for sedition. The CALEXIT could have some unforeseen benefits.

    ReplyDelete
  8. And when one actually looks at California itself, it splits further into San Francisco/LA/Sacramento/Eureka vs the rest of the state.

    L.J.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly, my kids live in the Central Valley which is far more conservative than the coast. (So they tell me.)

      Delete
  9. California is not the home of happy campers. Like clockwork, you'll hear plans to split the state in two, or six, or succeed from the Union. I think I have better odds of winning the lottery. Many problems.

    With a two state solution, one broke state becomes two broke states, except now we have to duplicate the infrastructure:
    Two Governors, Lt. Governors, two DMV's, twice the bureaucracy... not to mention an alteration in the Senate balance of power. Would a second state field two conservative senators? Most likely. Would the liberals really want to contribute two more conservative seats to a 102 seat Senate? Most likely not.

    Multiply those problems for a multiple state solution. Secession? My liberal brother says that California contributes more to the Feds than they get back in benefits. He believes a lot of funny things, but even if it's true, California would have to renegotiate with every business in every state and foreign country, and the trade deals might not be as favorable to a smaller country without the economic dynamo, or military might that is the US behind them. And desperation drives a hard bargain!

    Plus, there's that whole "standing Army, Navy and Air Force" thing. Would New California try to build their own from scratch? Or rent protection from the US? Plus what kind of deal would they have to make with existing federal bases? Uncle Sam will not just give them away tied up with a bow. Just look at Guantanamo.

    And what if Colorado (the US), didn't want to sell them any more water? Regime change would abrogate any existing contracts. Could get mighty thirsty real quick in the Golden Republic of California!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. All reasons as to why it's a bad idea.

      Great stuff Mike!

      Delete
  10. I have wondered why this stubborn belief of shielding those are illegal has such a foothold among some in my state.

    And one of the senators who is proposed exit has a sizable number of his family who are here illegally.

    My neighbor and I discuss this. I suspect that we are spending billions of dollars in aid for these people. Thus (if true) it is a magnet for those who come here illegally.


    Most of them are unskilled and getting a job in this state is hard enough with skills.

    I'm wondering also if they are thinking of potential votes down the road.

    Our taxes are among the highest in the nation but you would never know it living here as to the results. I5 by my house is full of potholes, yet our governor is fixated on building a high speed train (in the Central Valley of all places!) We have a trillion dollar pension obligation to our retired state employees.

    As far as the Russians being here as far as I know they were only had a little fort above Mendocino at Fort Ross. They used it as a trading center I believe.

    I am saddened by what has happened to my state. Up to the 1960s so much of it was the envy of not only the country but the world. Top public schools and roads. It's ironic that the father of our current governor, Edmond G Brown, was governor during so much of our growth.

    Can't Say that the son has taken after the father.

    This reminds me of a famous saying about how California was settled.

    The country was turned at the east coast and then everything loose fell down here.

    Of course that wackiness and independence has been responsible for so much innovation in the world. But these days it hasn't been used for good

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's right about the Russians, but with them, a foot in the door is all they need.

      The progressives are in the process of destroying one of the loveliest states in the Union. They're demonstrating what they want to do to the entire country. We had best pay attention.

      Wackiness and independence is okay, if it isn't fueled by socialist fantasies.

      Delete

Just be polite... that's all I ask. (For Buck)