Vermonters Can Vote for Secessioni n November

wkmac

Well-Known Member
The most radical antiwar candidate in the US is not Dennis Kucinich or Rand or Ron Paul or any of the usual suspects. It’s a 42-year-old Vermonter named Dennis Steele, who is running for governor of his state as an open secessionist. From what I can tell, Steele is just an average dude. He wears Carhartts and a baseball cap and drives a pickup truck and lives with his wife and two kids in a little Vermont village called Kirby (pop. 500), off in the wild hills of Vermont’s Northeast Kingdom. On occasion, he feeds his family by hunting deer and butchering the meat himself. He served three years in the US Army – working for “the Empire,” as he puts it – and he tells me his main reason for running is that he doesn’t want his kids serving in the Army. Or any other branch of the Empire. He wants the Empire to drop dead. And he thinks the best way to start that process is by getting Vermont to secede from the union. Destroy the empire by undermining it from within. That’s the goal.
Steele is no Tea Partyer, not a Palinite, not a Paul drone, not a liberal or a conservative, not a Democrat or a Republican, is endorsed by no official party, has no corporate donors. He’s the kind of candidate who, spending his own money and taking time out from his work and family, drives around the state crashing gubernatorial debates to which he is clearly not invited. Last April, organizers for the Democratic Party in Barre, gathered in that town’s Old Labor Hall, called the state police after Steele repeatedly shouted out from the crowd to his fellow candidates on the rostrum: “$1.5 billion dollars – our pro-rata share of a failed foreign policy – the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan – what could be done with all that money right here in Vermont?” The cops grabbed him by the arms and hauled him away, amid fearful yells from the crowd that he might be tasered. He wasn’t, but instead was booked on disorderly conduct – for saying something no one among the Democrats wanted to hear.
So much for the vaunted political tolerance in granola-eating, tree-hugging, gay-marriage-condoning Vermont.

Rise of the Green Tea Party

And with secession also comes nullification.

Nullify Now

Posted by Thomas Woods on September 3, 2010 07:00 AM
You will not be surprised to learn that with a few honorable exceptions, high-profile TV and radio have so far shied away from the recent wave of interest in state nullification of unconstitutional federal laws. (Need I point out that Judge Andrew Napolitano has been his usual fearless self, even as others have run away from the topic?) But the idea has begun to trickle out anyway. Jeff Taylor, who describes himself as being more on the left than the right, managed to bring the topic of nullification to a Huffington Post audience. Gary Johnson, former governor of New Mexico, is speaking at a major nullification rally on October 10. Martha Dean, the GOP candidate for Attorney General in Connecticut, says (see 4:50) she supports legislative efforts to nullify unconstitutional federal laws. There are plenty more examples. State and local political candidates are beginning to discuss the forbidden subject. Everywhere I go around the country I’m hearing that nullification initiatives are going to be pushed seriously in upcoming state legislative sessions. The television hosts who have been AWOL so far can go on pretending this isn’t happening for only so long.
That’s why this weekend is so significant.
The Tenth Amendment Center, in tandem with WeRefuse.com and a bunch of local and national co-sponsors, is launching a tour of major cities beginning tomorrow in Fort Worth, with the aim of forcing state nullification – Thomas Jefferson’s doctrine that states must refuse to allow the enforcement of unconstitutional federal laws – into the political discussion by means of a series of high-profile events. I’ll be speaking at some of them myself.
There is a potentially huge audience for this idea.
What has impressed me about the smaller markets where I’ve been featured so far in promotion of my new book on nullification is how enthusiastically the idea has been received. I figured I had an uphill battle ahead of me, promoting an idea which, no matter its distinguished pedigree, lies well outside the so-called mainstream (i.e., neither Wolf Blitzer nor David Gergen supports it). Why, if it’s not mentioned on or endorsed by either MSNBC or the Weekly Standard, are you sure we’re even allowed to think it? Yet host after host has discussed the issue sympathetically and matter-of-factly, treating it as an interesting and promising new possibility.
When Michael Boldin, founder of the Tenth Amendment Center, spoke at a Tea Party rally on April 15 (part 1, part 2) he at first left the crowd confused. What, he wasn’t interested in lawsuits against the federal government, and he wasn’t so sure elections would fix things, either? Boldin then mentioned the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798, to complete silence. By the end, he has made his case so persuasively that the crowd is cheering like crazy. This is what I mean: once people who genuinely want to roll back the federal government hear about the idea, they embrace it. Now it’s just a matter of spreading the word.
When I was on a cable news program in June unrelated to nullification, the cover of my (at that time) not-yet-released book (called Nullification) was flashed on the screen for several seconds. Just flashing it on the screen, without even discussing its contents, was enough to catapult it to the Amazon Top 100 for two days. Now if only I’d had just five minutes to discuss it.
Stories like these are why I think we could be on the verge of something important.
We already know why the guardians of allowable opinion oppose nullification, and it isn’t because they’re actually losing sleep over what South Dakota might do. Even the worst emotional hypochondriac doesn’t seriously believe the biggest dangers of 2010 are coming from Salt Lake City and Boise. There are quite a few vested interests that would like to see the federal gravy train continue undisturbed, and uppity citizens with Jeffersonian ideas appropriately suppressed.
To be sure, it is doubtful that governments can stay limited over the long run; they have no interest in remaining limited and every incentive to expand. At the same time, not all regimes are equally oppressive, and some political structures give the tyrants a tougher go of it than others. Hence our recourse to Jefferson and nullification.
Meanwhile, the conservative establishment offers only pretty speeches and promises. No, scratch that – we don’t even get the pretty speeches anymore, and whether you believe the promises is a test of your IQ. The really cheeky, cutting-edge thinkers go so far as to suggest a balanced-budget amendment, the boilerplate conservative promise of the past 30 years. Even if such a thing were to pass, all such amendments include override clauses that permit three-fifths of Congress to go ahead with an unbalanced budget if sufficiently grave conditions make it seem necessary. Do you get the funny feeling they’d make liberal use of that provision?
Something significant is beginning this weekend. Lots of informed people will make a stand in the name of a doctrine that official Left and Right despise, and which until now has been known only in caricature where it has not been suppressed entirely. The idea is already reaching the general public even in the face of almost complete silence on the part of those who posture as relentless foes of Barack Obama and Washington, D.C. Also worth noting is that Tea Party groups, which the usual suspects are trying to neuter into insignificance, are defying their overlords and participating as co-sponsors.
We are not supposed to do this. We are doing it anyway. Be a part of it.

And so much for the idea that secession is an exclusive southern, redneck, racist right wingy-thingy!

What happens if more and more folks on both the right and the left abandon the 2 party construct and even find each other as a worthy ally in cutting out the heart of the massive central state in Washington DC? What if they realize each as brothers in arms in shifting political, social, economic and cultural power back home to the local level?

Don't look now but it is in fact happening!
 

diesel96

Well-Known Member
Here's a Gentleman in a neighboring New England State starting a New Part of his own, with a sort of Hybrid mix of ideas....

http://www.bernie.org/

FOREIGN POLICY: As one of the leaders in Congress in opposing the war in Iraq, I worry very much about the direction we appear to be going in Afghanistan. The last thing in the world we need is to get bogged down in Afghanistan in a never-ending war which causes the loss of more and more lives and more and more money. I will do my best to bring our troops home from both Iraq and Afghanistan as soon as possible.
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
Here's a Gentleman in a neighboring New England State starting a New Part of his own, with a sort of Hybrid mix of ideas....

http://www.bernie.org/

FOREIGN POLICY: As one of the leaders in Congress in opposing the war in Iraq, I worry very much about the direction we appear to be going in Afghanistan. The last thing in the world we need is to get bogged down in Afghanistan in a never-ending war which causes the loss of more and more lives and more and more money. I will do my best to bring our troops home from both Iraq and Afghanistan as soon as possible.

What I find most interesting about Michael Feldmann is found in the comments section. Seems his description of himself has one reader in a pickle in that they have no idea how to pigeon hole him!

I like that. :wink2:
 

Babagounj

Strength through joy
One thing I have always liked about Vermont's Switzerland-like reputation for cleanliness was their restrictions on signage.
 

diesel96

Well-Known Member
not to mention how anti military he is..... he may need one if they separate their ties


Tourist... Having an assinine foriegn policy stance dictated by our Civilian Leadership does not make Patriotic dissenters anti-Military. In fact, it proves they care alot more for our Military for demanding them out of harms way for the mis-useful purpose of Pre-emptive attacks under false pretenses. Patriotic Dissenters don't need Sean Hannity type "Freedom Concerts" with red, white, and blue light shows, washed up Country Music Icons and washed up rockers such as Ted Nugent waving machine guns on stage to get simple minded people, pumped up with superficial patriotism...

if not for the internent the nuts would have no one to promote their agenda. :happy2:

Leave the nuts alone, you guys have Fox News....a financial promoter and employer of the Republican Party...
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
Tourist... Having an assinine foriegn policy stance dictated by our Civilian Leadership does not make Patriotic dissenters anti-Military. In fact, it proves they care alot more for our Military for demanding them out of harms way for the mis-useful purpose of Pre-emptive attacks under false pretenses. Patriotic Dissenters don't need Sean Hannity type "Freedom Concerts" with red, white, and blue light shows, washed up Country Music Icons and washed up rockers such as Ted Nugent waving machine guns on stage to get simple minded people, pumped up with superficial patriotism...



Leave the nuts alone, you guys have Fox News....a financial promoter and employer of the Republican Party...
Could you and KoB please simplify your message so that those on the right can better understand? You know. Something like "don't retreat, reload" or "no victory mosque at ground zero" or "Obama's a socialist" or "no amnesty"? Nuance isn't something they seem big on.
 

Catatonic

Nine Lives
Could you and KoB please simplify your message so that those on the right can better understand? You know. Something like "don't retreat, reload" or "no victory mosque at ground zero" or "Obama's a socialist" or "no amnesty"? Nuance isn't something they seem big on.

and correct spelling would help too!
 
Top