Saturday, January 12, 2013

White House Denies Secession Petitions, Cites Civil War Deaths

Activist Post

Director of Public Engagement for the White House, Jon Carson, finally responded to secession petitions on the White House website.

Instead of addressing each of the state petitions, of which there where several that met the 25,000 signature response level, he responded to an anti-secession petition titled "Deport Everyone That Signed A Petition To Withdraw Their State From The United States Of America."

Petitions for states to secede were denied citing that "more than 600,000 Americans died in a long and bloody civil war that vindicated the principle that the Constitution establishes a permanent union between the States."

The claim is that secession appears to not be allowed under the Constitution, and that the result of any such secession attempt would result in many dead Americans.

Here is the White House response in it's entirety:
In a nation of 300 million people -- each with their own set of deeply-held beliefs -- democracy can be noisy and controversial. And that's a good thing. Free and open debate is what makes this country work, and many people around the world risk their lives every day for the liberties we often take for granted. 
But as much as we value a healthy debate, we don't let that debate tear us apart. 
Our founding fathers established the Constitution of the United States 'in order to form a more perfect union' through the hard and frustrating but necessary work of self-government. They enshrined in that document the right to change our national government through the power of the ballot -- a right that generations of Americans have fought to secure for all. But they did not provide a right to walk away from it. As President Abraham Lincoln explained in his first inaugural address in 1861, 'in contemplation of universal law and of the Constitution the Union of these States is perpetual.' In the years that followed, more than 600,000 Americans died in a long and bloody civil war that vindicated the principle that the Constitution establishes a permanent union between the States. And shortly after the Civil War ended, the Supreme Court confirmed that '[t]he Constitution, in all its provisions, looks to an indestructible Union composed of indestructible States.' 
Although the founders established a perpetual union, they also provided for a government that is, as President Lincoln would later describe it, 'of the people, by the people, and for the people' -- all of the people. Participation in, and engagement with, government is the cornerstone of our democracy. And because every American who wants to participate deserves a government that is accessible and responsive, the Obama Administration has created a host of new tools and channels to connect concerned citizens with White House. In fact, one of the most exciting aspects of the We the People platform is a chance to engage directly with our most outspoken critics. 
So let's be clear: No one disputes that our country faces big challenges, and the recent election followed a vigorous debate about how they should be addressed. As President Obama said the night he won re-election, 'We may have battled fiercely, but it's only because we love this country deeply and we care so strongly about its future.'
Although the secession movement stirred notable support among those who feel disenfranchised by the federal government, it's unclear whether it would have been a positive exercise in sovereignty or used as a tool for divide-and-rule.

At any rate, it appears that the Obama Administration is not going to let states out of the Union, at least not without a fight.

Read other articles by Activist Post Here


BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW



BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW


If you enjoy our work, please donate to keep our website going.

26 comments:

Anonymous said...

Not many citizens actually want blood, or for this rising tide to 'come to blows'. I feel as though those in power seek this out, and provoke the populace with everything possible for a response. If it comes to a war, we are fulfilling their goals of mass depopulation, as well as this so called 'government' being able to get rid of dissenters in the population, leaving only sheep to be lead about. What is the problem with states governing themselves? We can still work together as a collective whole, allied with each other, to do business, trade, prosper, and come together when threatened. The only difference is that each state would have say over the laws of their land. If you don't like the laws in your state, gtfo and find a state more suitable for you and your family. There are bound to be states siding with our current 'fed. gov.', and states siding with a new comparable power opposing. And then their will be states who want to go it alone, govern themselves. As long as we can work together, everyone will prosper and thrive, except of course for the current system of government. This animal is soon to be extinct, new technology and the information age will make damn sure of that.

Anonymous said...

"they also provided for a government that is, as President Lincoln would later describe it, 'of the people, by the people, and for the people' -- all of the people."

So we're supposed to believe it is the PEOPLE who demand the right to be detained indefinitely, or killed for that matter, without the right of defense or the right to know why they are being detained; it is the PEOPLE who give the banks the right to commit wholesale fraud, throw families out onto the street and enrich the bankers with million dollar bonuses; it is the PEOPLE who demand to be spied on; it is the PEOPLE who are shredding the Constitution?

This White House statement is just more of George Bush's "you've got to repeat the propaganda over and over until the people believe it" crap.

The obvious truth is that the PEOPLE have nothing to do with what is being done to them in the name of the PEOPLE.

Anonymous said...

"And shortly after the Civil War ended, the Supreme Court confirmed that '[t]he Constitution, in all its provisions, looks to an indestructible Union composed of indestructible States.'"

What other ruling might we expect from the Supreme Court, which is appointed by government, works for government, paid by government (via theft)...no conflict of interest there, ha!
I doubt even the idea of the individual States regaining their "indestructible" nature will happen without a 'fight.' Perhaps if Liberty lovers start working to bring about Liberty in their own local towns, it would begin to percolate through the population of the States. Secede in spirit...work to make your own COUNTY the Land of the Free.

Anonymous said...

The overreaching power of the current administration is the primary reason so many Americans wish to withdraw from the union. I find it the ultimate hypocrisy that this White House would cite the constitution as their basis for denying secession petitions when they deliberately ignore that same document when it serves their purpose. Even now this president is planning on establishing new gun laws in violation of the clearly stated separations of power clause in the constitution as well as in violation of the very clearly stated 2nd amendment. He has already used so called executive authority, which is not defined to allow him to create laws, to defy the free exercise clause of the first amendment. It is the blatant attack on our constitution to push his obviously Marxist agenda that has prompted the hue and cry for secession. If he continues on the path he is taking this nation will not stand and he will find that his legacy is reduced to having precipitated the second American Revolution.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps the author of the White House reply should "Read" the Constitution of "These United States" and "Bill of Rights".....
Shit is getting deep in the propaganda universe.

Nemetron 2000 said...

Funny how these people start citing the Constitution when it suits their needs, but when it comes to preserving the liberties of the people of this nation, we start getting op-eds suggesting the Constitution be done away with.

So, which is it fellas?

Do you support the Constitution in order to keep you're little corrupt federal government game going, thus keeping your corporate and banking masters safe? Or, do you want to do away with the Constitution, at which point the union would be officially dissolved, and banker hunting season will have officially opened?

Anonymous said...

Hmmm, they fixed all the typo's of the actual email that went out. The whole email reeks of Big Brother and did not address any concerns - GMO's, drones, NDAA, we voted for none of this - So it is not a government "for the people" You basically stated 'we don't care what you think, we do as we please".

Anonymous said...

I seriously doubt anyone who signed those petitions to secede thought the White House would say, "Sure! See ya!" The WH petition page is silly and their silly response proves it.

What is being done to the Constitution and the American people is not silly however, and no one is fooled into thinking this is anything but another glove slapped in our face. The outcome of extreme haughtiness never ends well for the haughty.

Anonymous said...

There is nothing in our Constitution about a New World Order!!! Nor an Agenda 21. The FDA, CDC & USDA are not assuring that our foods & vaccines are safe!!! Monsanto's has a big friend in the White House or his GMOs would not be allowed!! Now one is looking out for the people!!! The president is tied to secret societies & even to Mr. Bildberberg & another of the groups members. This is not acceptable!!! We know the plan is to decrease the population by millions!!! The Elite does not have a God given right to own the whole world. The Founding Fathers are probably turning i their graves at who American is being ruined. Moreover, what about the prison camps for us in different locations, already staffed & have tankers. What about the underground homes for The Elite to live if earth is poisoned?? There are several of these & I resent like hell that tax payers have paid for that. I'm not proud of America anymore.

Anonymous said...

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America: When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. Do you think they have read this?

Anonymous said...

And the Obama administration dares quote the constitution to benefit themselves, yet fail to read it when it restricts them? Like; "The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"?
Hypocrites!!

Anonymous said...

Real simple..."Bullets or Ballots". Maybe if we had a democratic voting system that was HONEST!! and not canned by computers and pundits we all might feel a little better. Some none scripted MSM candidates would be nice too. NOT!!!

laverneisgold said...

Well said Nemetron 2000

Anonymous said...

Your Republic ceased to exist in February 1871 .;it was replaced with a demoncracy that used the two party system a sort of duopoly .Prior to this event you had several lobbying parties including the Whigs .A new constitution was drafted that mirrored the original one of 1789...except that your rights became pivileges that could be remouved by executive order ....someting that couldn't be done in a Republic !The bill refered to as the Act of 1871 was intended to give personhood to slaves was in fact mainly used to give personhood status to groups of people who formed corporations. In doing so , they were allowed to act as a person to by , sell , and exploit the masses without the resposability that comes along from being a person .. Thus capitalism was born and the free enterprise system was done away with thanks in large parts because of the enegy monopolies that ensued .......

Anonymous said...

Go get yourselves a copy of Saul Alinsky's Rules For Radicals,and find out what they are doing to you.
They are Gasighting.
They say it to manipulate perception for the brain dead.
They are very into persuasion and thought reform.Just like the corporations.Their partners.
Tell the big lie and go for the gusto.
Everything they say is BS
You give them the power they are projecting.
Your acceptance of the perceived "reality"and outrage is music to their ears.
This guy calls it "liberal"phoney outrage but we know the liberal conservative good cop bad thing is nonsense
but Greg Gutfeld puts this kind of crap in perspective.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SlkRyV0LlQ
As a former Chicago resident this is exactly how the oinker Mayor Daley pushed thru all his hateful murderous "laws".The whore media tells us whatever the White Whouse whores tell them to as if it's real.They are bluffing,they have no alternative but to pretend.If they address the issue as it is then they lose big.Expect more of this spew from the crew who claims they's gonna grab your guns if you believe he can before this person with a dodgy background is allegedly Inaugurated for 4 more years of fun and maybe more!Expect more of this type of response.It's what an unresponsive government does when it partnered with the media.Chicago media was just like this since the 90's.

Hide Behind said...

As far as the majority of peoples views before and furng Rev war it was Tory and all we want is peace to make a living which even those who fought on Rebs side wanted and when peace was declared hats what they thought they had and one other thing ; A new philosophy that stuck, Sovereignty of the Individial Man, and then Nation.
What was the reasoning behind the original Articles of Confederation and then the forming of a Constitutional Republic with its supposedly three coequal branches?
When on that day the cannon fire began at Ft Sumpter the second Republic died and along with it the ideas of mans sovereignty over the state or Nation.
One single issue that more than any other that proved it was the acceptance of the idea, Act of Conscription.
This surrendering of a citizens right to refuse, except for those who could afford to pay, to join the military took any and all Rights of before and surrendered them into the hands of a strong central government.
Everything that came after only further increased the powers of the financial and political personalities within the Federal and staye bureaucracy.
At state level they quickly assumed the very same financial political centralization of power to their capital cities but all recognized the power ofDC over them.
It behooved the central powers to pretend that this was a Representative REPUBLIC but in truth it became no more than a limited democracy.
A limited emocracy that only today is real beginning to show judt how limited are the peoples who live under the COrporatized Central Government.
A centralized government that for all practicle purposes and intents makes your state governments and its ocal populaces needs irrelevent.
The state goverents are but mere satelite offices of those who vontrol DC poltics.

Anonymous said...

Nice rebuttals...right on

Anonymous said...

DUH!!! The right to secession is imbedded in the constitution. The declaration itself demands the right to secede. This drivel actually came from the office who’s leader purports to be a “constitutional scholar”. You either defend the constitution or you don’t. This poser doesn’t. He is right on one thing though. Many people may die......r.p.

sorensen said...

The WH response was predictable. With the dumbing down of the population it becomes almost impossible to achieve anything intelligent through "Democracy"since the masses will always defer to their emotions.
Becoming easily controlled a dictatorship will eventually ensue since the government will simply ignore "the rule of law" by installing judges that support their actions.
Believing that one needs a Law Degree to take action is another dumbing down tactic by the establishment.
Just because people gain power through a government position does not imply that they are more knowledgeable/intelligent but rather that their thoughts and actions are less likely to be challenged by the population, regardless of their validity.
The WH reply is simply saying...."your move"!

Anonymous said...

Didn’t Obama favor NDAA, support the Patriot Act; doesn’t he condone torture, issue assassination orders?
And he claims the constitution is viable?!
What has this man been snorting?
The earth belongs to the living; not dead men who fashioned opinions without foundation. The Constitution is a dead instrument; it is a document of convenience: if it serves interests of criminal and useful-idiot classes, it will be strictly observed. If it subverts such interests, it will be ignored. I speak from research and EXPERIENCE (http://redressone.wordpress.com/about/).
The Declaration of Independence, ‘when governments become destructive of these rights, it is the right of the people to reform or abolish such governments… and setup new guards for their rights’ (approx).
If these words had not appeared in the Declaration, we would have to draft them ourselves; for, all men have the right of self-preservation, which is the basis of the right of petition, commonly known as the right of revolution; that is, the right of redress of grievance. But, curiously, it is not a right at all, nor is it singular: it is a complex of powers: the powers of speech (dissent), investigation, prosecution, judgment, and enforcement of that judgment.
This is the power available to Americans thru the First Amendment.
And who knows it? Who will tell it to you? Here is a short introduction (http://redressone.wordpress.com/); and, don’t hesitate to let your lawyer do his ‘devil’s advocate’ on it.

Anonymous said...

This secession craze is a sham to begin with, a dangerous and stupid sham. You want to secede? What guarantee do you have that your new sovereign nation won't be a clone of North Korea, or a fascist dictatorship? The fact is the secessionists don't have a clue on how to fix the economy or restore the USA to its former greatness. It is the corruption STUPID and that corruption is in my state just like it is in your state.

Anonymous said...

The Constitution is not the defining document of the U.S., just the defining document of the current government, as the Articles of Confederation was the defining document of our previous national government. The Declaration of Independence is the preeminent document of the country, and it duty binds the people to "alter or abolish" an unresponsive government. We've done it twice - both violently in establishing home rule, and peacefully in moving from Articles to Constitution, so it would seem there is precedent for both.

Of course, the government is a construct of the Constitution, and all members - congress, executive, and courts - take an oath to "preserve, protect, and defend" it. They can give no other answer to the question of secession without violating that oath.

Hide Behind said...

New Hampshire presented the first opinion that it could secceed from the Union and used a provision within its' States' Constitution that has always been a part of it since it became a state.
This was done under Bush II and of course the redmecks dismissed it as no more than crying liberal hippys.
It is a good idea but is making the same fatal mistake the Confederacy did they shot off their mouths before they were prepared to leave the union.
All these petitions are bitch notes nothing more and removed far from realty.
No state could stand alone but blocks of states with common borders forming a Republic in some instances could very well work as long as none of them bordered the original 13 colonys.

Anonymous said...

While California was stacked with plate full of oath breakers, The DHS was activated.

While our all our SHERIFF's came from questionable background.

Where the FBI does nothing but bad.

What we need is
1. for the DHS to be de-activated
2. The Sheriff not even being allowed to be on ballot as a sheriff if they have questionable background, or have broken their oath.
3. A constitutional police team (US MARSHAL?) who will crack down on oath breakers, and prevent by instant removal of "unconstitutional bills", re-dact, rollback, and restore the US Constitution to the point where we have a basic static law base, in this dynamic future realty.

Anonymous said...

If there is an attempt at gun confiscation, it would not STAND...THERE WOULD ONLY BE CIVIL WAR.

The right to bear arms is what we are naturally endowed with by our Creator. This right is not "given" by government nor provided for by the Constitution. The 2nd Amendment is not for the people...it is for the government TO KEEP FROM ABRIDGING THE RIGHTS OF THE PEOPLE TO BEAR ARMS.

Now if the gov't doesn't like this, they're going to have to amend the Constitution, THE HIGHEST LAW OF THE LAND; but if they instead try to take the weapons of We the People, they will be guilty of once again breaking the HIGHEST LAW OF THE LAND, except this time it will result in defiance, self-defense, and open rebellion.

The right to bear arms has nothing to do with hunting. It has to do with self-defense and the keeping of tyranny at bay.

Sincerely,
backto1776

Anonymous said...

The government may want to provoke a confrontation, but it is the people who will finish it.

Post a Comment