Marjorie Taylor Greene: National Divorce of Red States from Blue States
This article is an opinion piece from Bill Lockwood. Catch Patriotic Pulpit with Bill Lockwood weekly at 11 a.m. Saturdays on NewsTalk 1290.
Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) has proposed a "national divorce" of red states from blue states. According to an article from ABC News, this would be “splitting the country according to political ideology.” Further, the article touts that the “Supreme Court ruled it is unconstitutional for a state to secede, which would make it impossible for her plan to be implemented.”
Actually, Greene’s proposal is a solid rational one that many liberty-lovers have been counseling for years. The late great Walter Williams, for example, proposed the same in an article in September of 2000 entitled, “It’s Time to Part Company.” He cited “irreconcilable differences.”
Reflecting on the secession point a moment, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr., in his article from The Atlantic, "The Autocrat of the Breakfast-Table," published in 1857, made some pertinent observations regarding “the art of Conversation.”
He noted that that which spoils “more good talks than anything else” are “long arguments on special points between people who differ on the fundamental principles upon which these points depend. When people can’t agree on ultimate beliefs, there should at least be an agreement not to broach these topics in ordinary conversation, …(The Epoch Times, 2/15-21/23, p. B1)."
Precisely. The disagreements between right and left in this nation are so fundamental as to demand a divorce. There is really no conversation with the socialist/Democratic party. As one lady told me when confronted with the fact that the American “welfare system” is actually a system of the strong arm of government stealing from some and redistributing to others — “Yes, I know it. But that’s what I think we ought to be doing.”
Where do we go from there? The right and left in this nation are so far apart on basic fundamental principles - God versus atheism; whether rights come from God or government; limited government as opposed to ‘global government’; the role of government in the first place - to create a zone of order or to provide the bread on our tables at others’ expense, etc.
Marjorie Taylor Greene is exactly where a host of us "commoners" are. It’s time for an amicable divorce - go our separate ways. But the lefties in this nation do not want it, because those on the right are paying the bills.
ABC News hurries to point out that a “national divorce” is “unconstitutional.”
After the Civil War, the Supreme Court ruled it is unconstitutional for a state to secede, which would make it impossible for her plan to be implemented.
With this, ABC News evidently refers to the decision known as Texas v. White (1859).
How shallow have we become? The same "high court" in 1857 ruled that all black - slaves as well as free - were “property” and not afforded the same “rights” as the rest of us. They could never become citizens. Are we willing to live by this dictatorial decree? Ridiculous. There is a reason the Supreme Court gives “opinions.” Many of them are flat wrong and unconstitutional themselves.
If we are not able to assess what the “high court” rules against the standards of what we ourselves know of the Constitution, and adjudge it by the natural law encoded within each of us, we might as well place crowns on Supreme Court justices’ heads and bow before their scepters.
It is helpful also to recall that the unconstitutional welfare system upon which Americans have become dependent, like an addict to a drug, was initially ruled by all nine judges on the Supreme Bench as “unconstitutional.” It was only through the power-politics of FDR’s court-packing scheme that the court was finally made to heel and finally “decreed” the transfer of money from one pocket to the other as “constitutional.”
So, which time did the Supreme Court get it right? We know the answer, and so do you. And we have been living with the socialistic nightmare ever since.
Another objection was tweeted at by globalist Liz Cheney to Marjorie Taylor Greene.
Now hear this, Ms. Liz: how was this country founded to begin with? Secession. The colonies, asserting their God-given rights before the altar of human consciousness, seceded from Great Britain due to the England’s violation of its own constitution regarding the rights of freeborn Englishman. If Liz Cheney knew anything about the Constitution and its basis - the Declaration of Independence - she would recognize this. But alas, like so many goose-stepping globalist liberals, she cares little to nothing about the Constitution itself. Just what part of the Constitution makes self-government illegal? Mitt Romney chimed in with Cheney, showing his own ignorance.
I think Abraham Lincoln dealt with that kind of insanity. We’re not going to divide the country.
Well, if we don’t divide, we will all be slaves to an elitist government that demands an ungodly amount of our money to support their unconstitutional welfare state and globalist money-giveaways. By the way, Romney, how many American dollars does the Constitution authorize you to give to Ukraine? Right. Zero. Insanity is allowing you spendthrifts to drive us into everlasting debt.
Adam Kinzinger, a former “moderate” member of Congress, tweeted that a "national divorce is akin to a "civil war."
Civil War, Kinzinger? Really? The proposal is about an “amicable divorce.” No war need be fought at all. Besides, all your war machinery is overseas fighting for a “global government.”
The only problem one can see from the “amicable divorce” proposal, as one lady put it, “how much alimony would we have to pay?”