Things aren't much better in your state of Missouri.
I mean, it's plain as day if one accounts for the level of polarization fed by the media, protest and counter-protest violence, and political violence enabled by federal authorities under the auspices of "sting" and "surveillance" operations, we...to a certain extent...already in one.
But that's just one person! You can't judge an entire party based on the actions of the crazies! proceeds to use Joe Biden and Dianne Feinstein to represent all Democrats
Secession is the natural end result when the centre will not hold. If regions of a country cannot live with each other, then like any dysfunctional union divorce is the only realistic step.
The interstate highway system. The children's health insurance program. Not giving Iran pallets of cash. You know, normal stuff.
To be clear, "getting rid of CPS" is some exaggeratory BS. It calls for reform of CPS, seemingly within the context of unfair treatment of father's in a separated family situation.Child protection services.
Child Protective Services (CPS) | Texas Law Help
CPS is responsible for investigating charges of abuse, neglect, or exploitation of children. All reports of child abuse must be investigated by CPS. Because a CPS investigation can have devastating outcomes for families, it's important to discuss questions or concerns with an attorney. The Texas...texaslawhelp.org
Just so we can all be sure they don't give a solitary fuck about "grooming"
Republicans want to shoot people who don't support Trump.
I was mocking people who compare the actions of Republicans to Democrats who then dismiss incidents like this using the same logic I posted. Hypocrites, in other words.
If you have to go back 75 years ago to find a single example, that's not a good sign.
en.wikipedia.org
CHIP was a bipartisan bill cosponsored by Senators Kennedy (D) & Hatch (R), passed by a Republican-controlled Congress, and signed into law by President Clinton (D). Its most significant opposition came from conservative Republicans.
en.wikipedia.org
You're right. It's much better to unconstitutionally sell Iran military weapons in order to fund terrorist death squads in South America instead...
en.wikipedia.org
Well, they are the one star state, they'll be just fine until winter or summer and their system fails again.
There are two more examples. You are aware of this. You responded to them.If you have to go back 75 years ago to find a single example, that's not a good sign.
Interstate Highway System - Wikipedia
And reauthorized a few years ago with nays from 6 Republicans and 144 Democrats.CHIP was a bipartisan bill cosponsored by Senators Kennedy (D) & Hatch (R), passed by a Republican-controlled Congress, and signed into law by President Clinton (D). Its most significant opposition came from conservative Republicans.
Children's Health Insurance Program - Wikipedia
Infrastructure is good for business, and where government spending is good for their corporate paymasters, the right wing is there to deliver.If you have to go back 75 years ago to find a single example, that's not a good sign.
Interstate Highway System - Wikipedia
Skipping over quite a lot of context there, aren't you? Namely that it was written by a Democrat (though co-sponsored by a Republican), and that Republicans only supported it as part of the Balanced Budget Act... which also cut $110 billion from Medicare.
The interstate happened before they went loopy, the chip program was bipartison and that was already Iran's money, we kinda just stole it from them then made a pretty good deal to prevent them from getting nukes if we gave it back.
Fairly certain the US Constitution does not allow States to secede from the Union. Entrapped by the very thing the Republicans do not want to change.
It's TEXAS. You want to know what the stereotype of a Republican voter to us outside of the US is? A Texan.
Very droll.
I'm not a Constitutional expert, but as far as I am aware there's nothing strict saying states can secede, but nothing strict saying they can't, either. Thus were such a case to be pursued "legality" is just whatever SCOTUS pull out of their nine arseholes as they see fit at the time. However, the point is more that what the Constitution, law and SCOTUS says is in reality a complete irrelevance.
I'm fairly sure that after the civil war we made it illegal to succeed. But, even if its not explicitly illegal, you have to look at things logically. If a state succeeds then the US can just come in and take it back, and it would. You might have a few pissed off idiots in the sticks but any government body that had a hand in succession is getting taken care of pretty damn quick unless they have nukes.
