Question for the rebel

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
of course, all are invited to play along.

With the universal condemnation that the San Francisco politicians have heaped upon our military & the general & specific breaking of rules they do...

Let's say that in a fit of magnificent leadership, our next President issues an executive order to stop all FEDERAL funding for the City of San Francisco. In light of their recent shenanigans (recent being a relative term) would you support the federal gov't actions or would you support SF-the rebel city? Other, more, ideas?
 
I think he would support SF's right to break away from the union... that's different than SF being a "rebel city" but still wanting that federal teat handy.
 
First off, I think the progression should begin with whether or not Sanny Fanny wants to dissolve from the State of California, as city government's next step up the pecking order is State government, and as I consistently preach, one of the purest tenets of the glorious Struggle for Southern Independence was and IS the staunch support of States' rights. Old lady Jefferson's boy wrote a right smart little treatise that addressed them. Called it the U.S. Constitution or some such. People oughta look into it sometime.

Supposing SF wished to do so, and by whatever means was able to in fact accomplish this, IMO the ball runs to the feds' court at that time.

I personally would not support an individual city's attempt to become sovereign. I say this because I cannot fathom a city being able to become self-sufficient economically. They could not hope to provide the infrastructure needed, plus the military force required, plus all the functions of a free and independent government all by themselves. Demographics notwithstanding...

Were the question one of a solitary State wishing to do so, then yes, by all means, I'm right there with them. Be it South Carolina, Massachusetts (who tried it themselves, how ironic), California, Texas, or Hawaii. With the following two caveats: 1 - it must be by the will of the people. 2 - it must be irrevocable, or at the very least irrevocable for a minimum period of 100 years.

Naturally, should a group of geographical neighbor States, each of like mind and with consent of their governed inhabitants, wish to, oh I dunno, maybe LEAVE A VOLUNTARY UNION AS THE CONSTITUTION AND ITS AUTHOR ADVOCATED WAS THEIR SOVEREIGN RIGHT FROM DAY FRIGGIN ONE after making reparations to the fed for the unremovable infrastructures located therein, in peaceful harmony as a friendly neighbor State, to coexist as an ally of said mother country yet independent from crippling tariffs, unholy nondistribution of national resources, skewed practices of governmental representation, and aggregious breach of contract/Constitution, I'd be right likely to jump all over that like stink on shit. Pick me up a squirrel rifle if need be to support it in fact. What time is the rally scheduled for Monday, I'll be there. But at the level of each municipal government...no. Answer to your State first, it's not a federal issue.

"It's not a federal issue"...God, how much better off we'd ALL be if we heard THAT a little more often. Providing your healthcare, raising your children, seeing to your retirement income...NONE of them should be a federal issue. Unless you're a Demonrat, then EVERYTHING should be handed to you on a platter by the nanny state government. "Give me a job, then take 85% of my salary and just provide me with what I need to live. Tell me where I can smoke, what restaurant to eat in (trans-fat policies), all that. Because I'm an idiot incapable of taking care of myself...I want Uncle Sam to do it." Disgusting.





See, this is why y'all oughtn't to ask me nothin'...




Deo vindice, my brothers. And hopefully that right soon.
 
*Upon further reflection*

The above diatribe should in no way be misconstrued by the various and sundry conclusion-jumpers among us to be an endorsement of the feds' hypothetical actions. Further, should such hypothetical actions occur, then the individual city, be it Sanny Fanny or Charleston or New Orleansd or New Haven or Billings Montana, would have every right to solicit support from neighboring counties in support of a petition to create a new State altogether. And in the event that should occur, and this new entity then desire to secede, then the above support would apply.

Splitting hairs, maybe, but such is the domain of most legal processes.

We now return you to "The View", already in progress...
 
Carpet bomb the bastards back into the Union
hell we are losing troops and spending billions
to conquer the middle-east how the fuc could
we let a city get away unscathed?
 
Back
Top