Conservative Author Defends Confederacy, Wants South to Secede and Name New Country ‘Reagan’

Douglas-McKinnonFormer Reagan administration aide and conservative columnist Douglas MacKinnon recently came out with a new book titled The Secessionist States of America: The Blueprint for Creation a Traditional Values Country…Now. 


Now, I know you’re probably wondering why you should care about what this person has to say. Well, because a move to secede isn’t as “radical” as you might think. Take this recent poll that showed less than half of the people living in Mississippi would support the United States against the Confederacy if a second Civil War was fought.

Then there’s the League of the South which has put up billboards promoting secession. Or a group of rural Colorado conservative counties that voted to form their own state last year. And we can’t forget last year when a Texas lawmaker admitted that the state legislature has actually made plans “in case the United States falls apart.”

And as a Texas resident, I can promise you there are plenty of people in this state who would support secession.

So we can’t pretend that just because MacKinnon might be some extremely far-right radical, he can have no impact or influence on Republican policy. Especially when, despite the fact that this book is clearly outrageously radical, it does encompass the push by many conservatives to have a nation based on religious rule, “Christian values” and a staunch opposition to homosexuality. Which is apparently a large part of what this book is about.

Well, MacKinnon argues that during the Civil War it was the North which acted illegally and aggressively against a “peaceful” South that had legally seceded from the union. He argues that Lincoln “waged an illegal war that was in fact not declared against the South after the South basically did what we’re talking about in this book now in terms of peacefully, legally and constitutionally leaving the union.”


Yes, the South was very “peaceful” and “innocent” when they attempted to form their own nation so that these states could continue to own and treat other human beings like pieces of farm equipment instead of actual people. How thoughtful of them.

Though in this book he apparently cites the “gay rights agenda” as the main reason why conservative states should break away from the United States and form their own nation – named Reagan. 

Feel free to take as much time as you need to control your laughter.

It never ceases to amaze me how obsessed many conservatives are about homosexuals. It’s just comical. And the thing is, I’m willing to bet that not a single one of these ignorant bastards can cite one instance where gays gaining equal rights has directly impacted their lives. It’s all just some kind of sick mental obsession many conservatives seem to have about gays and their “lifestyle.” It’s just never made any sense why anyone would care. It’s all unbelievable ignorance and stupidity.

Which is clearly what MacKinnon’s book is full of.

It’s amazing to me how it’s perfectly acceptable among many conservatives for someone like MacKinnon to publicly support the Confederacy and the South’s actions during the Civil War. Meanwhile, these same conservatives insist that the Republican party doesn’t have an issue with racism.

I’m not sure how one supports a movement that was based on the desire to own African-Americans as property while claiming that they’re not racist. That doesn’t make any sense. It’s not at all uncommon to see someone in the South flying a Confederate flag and claiming “Southern pride.” Yet if we saw someone flying a Nazi flag, what would we think of them?

Yet MacKinnon, and the millions of conservatives who agree with his ideological stances on some of these issues, seem to have no qualms at all advocating for a repeat of the same tactics and ignorance we saw over 150 years ago. And somehow, in their warped minds, they’re “more patriotic” for wanting to secede from the United States because our Constitution doesn’t support their ignorance.



Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.

Comments

Facebook comments

  • disqus_nDZBoh4LcN

    Let them go the rest of the country would be a lot better off.

    • Jillz

      It would be interesting to see how it would be handled when the citizens of ‘Reagan’ started trickling up to the southern border of the new USA as refugees after maybe six months under GOP “traditional values”.

      • johnplil

        Nope…we would build a wall to keep the idiots out. Mexico may consider doing the same thing.

      • Eg Kbbs

        If they secede, they should be the ones to build the wall at their expense. Especially as some of the states likely to be part of “Reagan” are the ones that have been screaming about closing the border.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        Funny, even residents of New Hampshire are screaming to close the borders, both North & South.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        So the Democrat Party would be the defacto Government of El Norte? So does that mean you keep Debbie Wasserman Schultz as your Party leader still?
        Oh how I pity you.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        Did you forget Blue Dog Democrats?

    • Fustercluck

      Agreed. Let them go off and form their Kingdom of Durkastan and have a council of Christian clerics rule over them. Then the North could embark upon the greatest construction project in U.S. history in building a wall along the Mason Dixon line that would make the Great Wall of China look like a garden fence.

      In any event, the efforts in achieving succession in the South should be met with an equally enthusiastic effort at expulsion in the North and maybe we could get this thing done. Can you imagine that we actually fought a war to keep these dingleberries in the same Union after seeing how it turned out?

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        And you could anoint Billy ‘Guevara’ DeBlasio as your ruler of El Norte. How do you think that’s gonna work out for you?

    • youcantgetridofmethateasy

      The rest? And just how many ‘Northerners’ do you think would move to a southern state if it happened?

    • youcantgetridofmethateasy

      “If Kay Hagen is defeated by a Republican, blacks with get their necks stretched in North Carolina”???? Is it this kind of Nationalist-Socialist Race Baiting that Democrats think is covered under their ‘By any means necessary’ ethos? Why the overt racism? You’ve been subliminally suggesting a return to slavery for so long that you missed it when Hagen went public with your private dreams? Yet not one condemnation from Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi or even Rev. Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson. Why is that?

  • Robert Scalzi

    You are welcome to migrate Allen. This cannot happen soon enough as far as this Yankee is concerned.

    • WeNeedCommonSense

      Think the writer sees this as ridiculous also. “Feel free to take as much time as you need to control your laughter.”

    • youcantgetridofmethateasy

      And you get to keep Obama and Rev. Al. Good luck with that.

  • I’m sure he’d like to bring back slavery too.

    • TaxPaying American Voter

      Right after taking away women’s right to vote.

      • Richard Mcgee

        But think of the money they will make selling their 14 year old daughters to good Christian businessman

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        You mean like the Muslims who will naturally gravitate to El Norte? Remember, it’s the Liberals who don’t see Islam as a Threat.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        Do you really think that’s a possibility? If that were the case, wouldn’t Texas have already done it?

      • Just another of those little things on their agenda. Bring back slavery, take away the vote for women, turn America into a theocracy….the list goes on.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        You missed it Gary-boy. The 13th amendment assures that El Norte will not return to slavery. The 19th amendment assures Northern women will always be able to vote. And the 1st amendment insures that the federal Government will never establish a federal religion (beyond that which they’ve already implemented) and the list goes one.
        But with Obama’s wholesale destruction of the U.S. Constitution’s Enumerated limited powers of federal overlordship, you guys up north are screwed. BTW, you also keep Chuckie Schumer and Joe Biden. Good luck with that.

    • youcantgetridofmethateasy

      Why is that always your fall-back accusation?

      • It’s hardly a fall-back.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        Really? These are your Loyalists who are putting forth their best efforts.

      • Irrelevant side show.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        It is isn’t it. It’s like they are performing that ‘Texas SideStep’ that Charles Durning danced in the ‘Best Little Whorehouse in Texas’.

  • Dani Hale

    Best thing that could happen for the rest of us. I say let them form their new 3rd world country. Then we will have to watch our boarders for refugees from there so we can help them escape oppression and exploitation at the hands of their leaders.

    • youcantgetridofmethateasy

      Yet you’d have ISIS to contend with cause the South never declared War on Islam.

  • Teresa Groves

    Please let it happen. Please! Most teachers – from university professors to Kindergarten teachers – would migrate North. Book publishers – North. Major hospitals – North. Gun manufacturers – South. Perfect trade!

    • Teresa Groves

      And has he worked out how Reagan would be paid for? How would it be governed? Can’t have taxes. GOtP wouldn’t go for that. I so want this to happen. This is one border fence I’d love to see built!

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        a simple Consumption Tax would pretty much cover all associated costs. And since the Warrior Leftists would constantly be engaged in ‘Nation Building’ around the globe, the south will save on the ‘War Dividend’.

      • CoreyM

        I see the right call for military action far more then the left.. Every time a reduction in military spending is suggested it is republican that cry foul. They bitch that spending is below WWII levels. They are the war mongerers from what I’ve seen.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        Corey, who was the Admiral of the Ship of State for WW1 and WW2 and Korea and Viet Nam?
        Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy?
        Progressives (Bush and sons) perpetrated the Gulf War and now Obama has a war to which his name shall be permanently attached to.
        So what Republicans were you referencing?
        War on Women is a Liberal’s war. War on Drugs is a Liberal war, War on God is a Liberal war and the War on Coal is a liberal war.

      • Trey Johnson

        You should visit Southern Nationalist Network if a native Southerner and proud of Dixie.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        No thanks, I wear my Southern Pride on my sleeve and not on an Arm Band.

      • Trey Johnson

        Just thought I’d offer since you have your facts straight about The Southern War for Indpendence and politics in general.

    • youcantgetridofmethateasy

      And most other businesses, as well as Hollywood and most of the banking. The only people left in the North will be the Baldwins.

  • Jared Hoke

    Most people STILL don’t get it. The Civil War was not about slavery, or about economics. It was about preserving majority-rule self-government. If a significant minority (like these “Sons of the South”) will not go along with the majority, self-government fails. Why oh WHY won’t these screeching partisans realize that our safety lies in COMPROMISE???????? Compromise is not a dirty word; it is the foundation of our republic. Of course, rabid radicalism is much easier; decisions are made by who has the most guns. Like in the Middle East. You want that here?

    • Champ86

      Jared, if it was not about slavery, as you state, then why did so many of those states ( I think it’s 7 ) state that specifically ,in their articles of succession ? You can’t change their written words, if they stated slavery as a reason for their succession, it was..

      • Jared Hoke

        Because THEY didn’t understand it, either. They did not grasp that they were sowing the seeds of their own destruction. The Confederacy eventually fall apart for lack of a consensus; Jefferson Davis said it “failed over an idea”, that idea being “states rights” (read “unwilingness to compromise”)

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        So when the federal government dangles a big wad of cash in front of a state Governor in order to coerce said state to comply with federal wishes, that is a compromise?
        ——————————————————–
        And when did it get decided that ‘State’s Rights’ was an evil intent of the Constitution and Bill of Rights? Who cajoles a state through the Incorporation Doctrine to comply with federal authority? It’s called ‘These United States’ for a reason. When did the 10th Amendment become irrelevant? Oh, that’s right, when Obama found his pen and his phone.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        Actually, it was the objection to the Central Government imposing it’s will upon the Southern states which gave rise to the Confederacy. Ain’t history great?

      • Champ86

        I said ‘Articles’ of succession, it’s Ordinances of Succession, and what ? I should deny their own written words, and believe you , because you say, “Ain’t history great?” Not today Professor, and not likely tomorrow either.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        History ain’t great? Unless you’re Hillary Clinton under Sniper-Fire, History is great.

      • Trey Johnson

        Four of the Upper South states that joined only seceded after Lincoln ordered troops into The South. Therefore slavery major factor but just one of many factors. Like westward expansion, States Rights and Tarrifs. And the fact the The North actually would fully control the goverment scared the crap out of all Southerners, pro-slavery or not.

    • Pedro De Oliveira Verissimo

      Have you read the constitution of the Confederacy? FOUR Articles which enforce the legality of slavery, and it takes away the right of a single state to abolish slavery within its own borders. Heck, evenif the whole Confederacy ever changed its mind and wanted to abolish slavery, its constitution made that an impossibility!

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        Yet no one who signed it, was required to own slaves. And yet, the Dred Scott ruling bestowed the right to be counted in a national election, upon all slaves. Did you forget about that?

      • Pedro De Oliveira Verissimo

        A black page in the history of the USA, that later has been overturned. Making a similar change would have been a lot more difficult for a confederacy with this constitution.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        Actually, the additional 2/5’s were added to the 3/5’s that were already assigned. And the Confederacy wrote and issued their own Constitution. But that adds what to this argument?

    • Fustercluck

      What Lincoln really objected to was the spread of a landed aristocracy that relied upon slave labor because that kept all the workers poor. You couldn’t recognize the modern Republican party today from the one that made Lincoln its president because they’ve moved completely away from their founding principles.

      Lincoln objected to the ‘mudsill theory’ that an elite aristocracy should justifiably rest upon a platform of poor mudsills (workers) which is the very position that modern Republicans champion today.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        And yet the North, even after emancipation, held onto their slaves for some time.

    • youcantgetridofmethateasy

      When one side DEMANDS compromise of the other (as in Mr. Lincoln’s demand that Virginia raise 3 regiments to suppress the Southern rebellion), only war will result. There was no compromising. It was never Lincoln’s intention. Subjugation of the South was his intention.

      • Jared Hoke

        To quote the man himself: “If I could free all the slaves and save the Union, I would do that. If I could free none but save the Union, I would do that. If I could free just half and leave the other half in chains, and save the Union, I would do that.” As for subjugation, read his first Inaugural more carefully.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        Me? You’re assigning me reading homework? did you think I jumped into here unprepared? How about you read Virginia’s Articles of Secession.

      • Maszk

        You are correct, there was absolutely no compromise and that is a good thing when it comes to owning human beings as property. The problem happened because the south was so far behind the growing trend, if you can call it that, of abolishment that had been happening in the north for over 80 years. Of course not everyone in the north agreed but it was being discussed while the constitution wasn’t even written yet and just like today the southern states are just happy being ignorant and behind the times.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        and yet the Dred Scott decision actually served the purposes of assigning actual citizenship with regard to Vote tally, to slaves, and it continued the public debate over that continued practice. BTW, under what President did the practice of maintaining White House slaves get disillusioned? so in essence, Lincoln didn’t actually begin his War of Northern Aggression because of Slavery, it was the Southern Plantation Owners insistence that their slaves also be countered in the number of Representatives that could be sent to Washington. So Southerners weren’t stupid after all.
        Good for you for trying though.

      • Maszk

        I can’t personally say they were or weren’t dumb as they definitely portrayed in history and I can only speak for what I have witnessed and yes, yes there is a lot of fucking dumb people who live in the south. I’ll just go with 2 statistics that kind of are notoriously associated with the less educated and that is illiteracy and teenage pregnancy and you guessed it, the south leads the country in both!!! There’s dumb people everywhere but for some reason it just is a continuous epidemic is the south.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        Here’s two that are above the Mason-Dixon. Chris Christie and Andrew Cuomo. In this game of Poker, my hand beats your hand.

      • Maszk

        Do people actually use the Mason Dixon line as a reference point in this century? I’m not clear on what poker we are playing where I wouldn’t just fold a hand if those two were my top pair or that being able to read and understand how to use contriceptives aren’t really important. Yeah I play in some crazy ass poker games if contriceptives are a must have.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        “If contraceptives are a must”? Wow, remind me not to get drunk with you ! And yes, Carolinians constantly reference the ‘LINE’ as do Georgians. As far as who is playing what hand, we both bluff but we are not the dealer of the deck, that’s History in that seat.

  • Sara W

    Bye Bye! Agree–let them go–in fact, let’s all insist on it. Imagine how peaceful life would be.

    • youcantgetridofmethateasy

      In the south yes. You get to keep Rev. Al Sharpton and Rachel Maddow. Good luck with that.

  • Reinventing history, I see. I suppose the South never bombed Fort Sumter and never illegally seized Federal arsenals either.

    • youcantgetridofmethateasy

      Not one Southern state threatened any northern state with armed Occupation.

      • Except that it wasn’t a war between states, rather it was an illegal rebellion against the Federal Government, and Lincoln took no actions against the Confederacy until after the hotheads in SC fired on Fort Sumter, which was Federal property.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        Those hot heads captured the Fort. On April 15th 1861, Lincoln demanded that one state take up arms against another state. Virginia said they would not violate the sovereignty of South Carolina. If Washington D.C. demanded that troops from Maryland and New Jersey invade western Pennsylvania to stop the untaxed manufacture of Whisky, how would you feel?

      • You can rewrite history all you want because history is interpretive, but you can’t rewrite the facts. The “hotheads” who fired on Fort Sumter were did so with the full backing of the Confederate Secretary of War. This happened on April 12, 1861, three days before Lincoln issued his call for volunteers.

        Further, at the time that bombardment began, the Confederacy had some 60,000 men under arms, compared to the less than 16,000 of the regular United States Army, which had not been augmented yet as a result of the crisis. Those 60,000 men were armed heavily with arms illegally taken from Federal arsenals.

        But like I said, you can poetically call it “the war between the states,” all you want as though it was between South Carolina and New York or between Alabama and Maine, but it wasn’t. It was between the Federal Union and a secessionist movement bent on preserving slavery and the secessionists lost. Period.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        I can rewrite history? Your the one posting on a website titled after Communism & Nazism.

        And I call it the ‘War of Northern Aggression”. And since you brought it up, just how were those federal armories imposed upon North Carolina? Pick and chose your opinion points all you want but it doesn’t change Lincoln’s reasoning for the War.

        Who said the following?:

        “I declare that I have no purpose directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.”

        It appears after his first inaugural speech Lincoln found a “loophole” in American law which would allow him to justify the freedom of slaves. To Lincoln, the Constitution of the United States was the lawgiver which prevented this freedom. The loophole he found was the in United States Declaration of Independence, which would allow the freedom of slaves by stating that: “All men are created equal.”
        The mood and tone of his second Inaugural address would change greatly. Shorter, and more romantic, it would talk of, “God’s will” to remove slavery contending:

        “If we shall suppose that American slavery is one of those offenses which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through his appointed time, he now wills to remove, and that he gives to both North and South this terrible war, as the woe due to those by whom the offense came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a living God always ascribe to him?”

        ———————————————————–
        Think of Lincoln as the precursor to Obama who was first for DOMA and then as it suited his political ascendancy, his change of stance to anti-DOMA.
        ———————————————-
        You’re out of your league here. You want to get your big brother out here so I can beat him up too?

      • Call it what you want. Whistle Dixie if you like. The rebellion was illegal, the South lost, and its over. Deal with it.

        And you’re posting on the same website.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        I’m here only because it’s so much fun to drag you out of your cloistered life of Progressivism.

      • The only thing you’re dragging is your knuckles.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        That’s quite an adult post there Mr. Menten. But it still does nothing to defend your pathology. Is it because you’re at a loss for words?

      • Lack of interest.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        Sadly, you also lack the testicular fortitude to defend much less explain your Progressive Principals.

      • No, I simply don’t have the time to waste with dumb-asses.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        If I see any, I’ll let them know you’re unavailable and devoid of answers.

      • I’m far from being out of my league, but you’re definitely off your rocker.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        First he supports Secession and then he’s against secession? Did John Kerry channel Lincoln’s ghost?
        “Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better… Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can may revolutionize and make their own of so much of the territory as they inhabit.”
        ————————————————————–

        “We feel that our cause is just and holy; we protest solemnly in the face of mankind that we desire peace at any sacrifice save that of honour and independence; we ask no conquest, no aggrandizement, no concession of any kind from the States with which we were lately confederated; all we ask is to be let alone; that those who never held power over us shall not now attempt our subjugation by arms.” President Jefferson Davis – April 29, 1861

  • Can we keep Huntsville, AL? They have the US Space and Rocket Center.

  • TaxPaying American Voter

    What are christian values??

    • Richard Mcgee

      I was brought up to believe that we love one another take care of others when necessary and judge not lest ye be judged

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        And yet, it will only be the North where Taxpayer paid abortions as well as Gender-reassignment surgeries will be performed.

    • youcantgetridofmethateasy

      That’s what makes a Taxpayer upset when Sandra Fluke demands that all Americans pay for her Birth Control.

    • Trey Johnson

      Try The Bible or going to a Church.

      • TaxPaying American Voter

        Try reading a book.

  • robingee

    Later dumbasses!

  • Stephen Barlow

    They can have the South ,as long as we take up all the Roads, runways, rails, military bases, ports and stadiums.

    • youcantgetridofmethateasy

      Pretty much that’s what the Union Army did while defiling the southern states. James H. Lane, the Chieftain as he was known, was a butcher for the Union and would slaughter whole villages as he cut his swath through the south.

      • Stephen Barlow

        Many in the South have been known to say they were Sorry Roosevelt was such a great leader because he didn’t let the Germans finish.

        I kinda feel that way about the New South.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        Easy there Ace, reminiscing over the wholesale murder of millions of people simply because they were political pawns in a mad man’s vision of a ‘master’ race only goes to show that you see yourself the next man with his hand on the Zyklon B canisters.
        Do you really think that every man, woman and child below the Mason-Dixon line should have been slaughtered because they objected to Lincoln’s Statist policies?

      • Maszk

        Only somewhat OK statement you’ve made. Not sure how you got there but OK nevertheless.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        Thanks? In a back of the hand way?

  • Jim Bean

    I personally like the idea of splitting into two countries. One for liberals where their whole country can be run under the liberal model the way Detroit, Chicago, San Bernardino, and Stockton are run and one for conservatives that can be run like North Dakota and Texas.

    • Marilyn Olsen Scheffler

      I’d be much happier with the liberal model than the conservative, right wing, ultra radical religious leaders in Texas who cram their ideas down other peoples throats!!

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        Bill DeBlasio style of Liberal Government?

    • biloki

      The conservative country would be more like Iran.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        Would it? You sure about that? You’d be living in Andrew Cuomo country.

    • youcantgetridofmethateasy

      Nice.

  • Lunar Breeze

    Battle of Ft. Sumter in South Carolina was the Confederacy’s attack on Union troops.

    Lincoln couldn’t outright attack without risking alienating more of the populace , so this attack on a Union outpost by the Confederacy on the Union stronghold gave him justification to start what we know as the Civil War.

    So, the whole peaceful thing was complete bull and it was the Confederacy that actually started the hostilities.

    • youcantgetridofmethateasy

      Really? Or was it Mr. Lincoln’s demand that his Statist ideology be enforced upon those south of the Mason-Dixon Line?

      • Lunar Breeze

        Regardless of what other nuances there are, the South still attacked a Union stronghold that ultimately led to the Civil War.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        No, it was Lincoln’s demand that the south forsake their sovereignty and be subjugated to his federal demands that ultimately led to the War of Northern Aggression.

      • Lunar Breeze

        Whatever floats your boat. History will say that I’m correct, no matter how much you suggest otherwise.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        ‘History will say” ??? You mean it doesn’t all ready? So you’re writing it as you go along? Really?

      • Maszk

        Does a war actually occur when words are spoken or does there have to be shots fired. I’m almost positive, no I’m 100% positive any historian with a second grade education would say the civil war started at fort Sumter. Even the people from South Carolina say that. Not to mention every tour guide at Fort Sumter and every plaque with any words on it that is located there.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        Have you looked at the time lines of southern state secession votes and dates of ratifications?
        But truth be told, Emancipation was the only way to stop the South from obtaining overwhelming representation in the House. Was it a bad move? No, it was Lincoln’s only option. He just didn’t realize that ‘States Rights’ would get in his way. Lincoln was a Statist and slavery was not the primary reason for the War of Northern Aggression.
        Yet you already know all this, so why the discourse?

      • Maszk

        You a completely correct. I do know all this and he was the biggest Statist we have ever seen. His motivating goal was to keep all the states together and was quoted saying something along the lines of he would give up his own kids to keep the US one nation. His kids all basically died so I don’t really think it was much of a personal sacrifice.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        Nice. Sorry for being so heavy-handed. I’m only here at the insistence of Leftist Poster Steve Brains/Stephan Barlow. He was nice enough to ask me here so his co-conspirators could pummel me

      • Maszk

        Good for you I do the same with conservative websites. I love to argue/debating politics and I feel that defending you own believes is the best way build new ones. I will never have a legitimate problem with anyone who can defend and clearly express why they believe the way they do as opposed to just blindly following and regurgitating bullshit they’ve heard someone else say and take it as gospel.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        and to think, I gained most of this insight by watching MSNBC, CNN, reading DemocracyNow, The New Republic and my favorite, the cpusa’s People’s World.

      • Maszk

        Haha that would be Pulitzer winning journalism compared to fox news but yeah they fucking suck as well. If conservative media wasn’t so constantly wrong and just filled with hateful bullshit I would be forced to hate liberal media nearly as much.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        What is ‘conservative media’? You’re not referencing Murdoch’s Fox Cable News are you? May I assume we both agree that Fox is the most closely aligned to the Progressive ideology than say Alex Jones’ Prison Planet??

      • Maszk

        Aww yes, the bag of fermented shit that is Rupert. Aren’t you guys supposed to be defenders of the constitution? If that’s the case how is this man puppeteering your party? In terms of being innovative in terms of developing the genre of a misinforming need channel then sure I guess that could be considered some kind of gression but definitely not pro, more like massive digression but hey at least they aren’t just standing still. I can’t really say anything on Prison Planet, I’ve never heard of it.

      • Maszk

        BTW this website it fucking terrible. The writers are extremely poor, especially for a political site, but everyone seems to have political opinions and I guess you don’t need to actually understand politics to have one. The Allen Clifton writer and I guess one of the people who run this site has a vocabulary of a deaf 6 year old and apparently the only adjective he knows is absurd. I do applaud him for not adhering to the stereotype of a passionless liberal but would it kill a guy to take a sentence structure class and at the very least buy some “word of the day” toilet paper.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        Didn’t the title of the web site clue you in to what the discursive capabilities of the authors contained within possessed?

      • Trey Johnson

        I scroll through just to see the Yankees and scalawags arguments destroyed.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        King George III, at the Treaty of Paris, recognized the independence not of a single American nation, but of the thirteen “states”. We weren’t intending to be a monolithic ‘Nation’. Nationalists in the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 demanded a NATIONAL government instead of a federal government. What’s sad is that most north of the Mason-Dixon still think Lincoln was a benevolent man and not the tyrant Statist that he was.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        Missed this, sorry for the late response. Defending this Constitution? How? It’s been so bastardized since Wilson that Benny Franklin wouldn’t even recognize it if he were alive today. And the Bill of Rights has been rendered moot, what with Our Dear Leader’s Pen & Phone. The courts are the new legislature.
        Hit Alex Jones’ website for grins and giggles. Occasionally. his staff of reporters actually hit that preverbal nail on the head. Bookmark it.

      • Trey Johnson

        The Constituion was centralist from the start. Example is the Marbarry v Madison Supurme court case. Also the general welfare clause allows imperial goverment expansion.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        Thomas Paine’s ‘Common Sense’ was not centrist at all. The resultant ‘Articles of Confederation’ was a much better at enunciating that the centralized government MUST be small and limited, and the true power was to be local government. That is what is missing in present day’s U.S. Constitution.

      • Trey Johnson

        Such shame the articles weren’t tweaked instead of replaced by centralist yankee constitution.

      • Trey Johnson

        You mean statist like all National Republicians and Democrats?

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        RINO’s & DINO’s

  • proudvet

    The facts are the South actually won the Civil War. All the hard workers in the Northern states that are paying their fair share in federal taxes are now keeping the Red Southern states afloat. Let Mississippi be the first to secede as they now collect $3.18 for every $1.00 they pay in federal taxes. Take away the money from that state and they wouldn’t last a month. Residents might finally wake up and realize that voting for the Republican’s that own that state is actually a vote against their best interests.

    • Pedro De Oliveira Verissimo

      It was the pre-mature end of the Reconstruction, and before that Andrew Johnson’s leniency towards the South, that ensured that while the Confederacy lost the war, it won the peace.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        And which brought about the rise in the Democrat-supported KKK. Yes, northern Democrats were supporters of the Klan.

      • Pedro De Oliveira Verissimo

        True, just as true than now the Republicans support the KKK. Parties change over time; when the northern Democrats decided to support Civil Rights for Afro-Americans, the southern walked out and joined the Republicans, who by the way of the Southern Strategy still have their votes. There is a group of Republican voters who support the GOP even against their own interests, as long as the Republican party seems to keep the Others down…

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        Back up your allegation there Sir. You’re painting with an awful wide brush there. You opened this line, now lets see if you can close it. So today’s GOP fully supports the national Ku Klux Klan? Is that what you really believe or are you just throwing it out to see what it will stick to? I remind you of Kay Hagen’s ads where she swears that if she doesn’t get reelected, Blacks will swing from a rope? Is that kind of Race Baiting what you wholeheartedly approve of?
        ‘By any means necessary’?

      • Pedro De Oliveira Verissimo

        Oh please. See the wikipedia pages for “Southern Strategy” and “Tea Party”, and let us remember the “Put the white back in the white house” t-shirt, and all the “Go back to Kenya” bill boards during the last presidential election. The Republican party and groups like the KKK might not openly send each other Valentine cards, but they surely enable each other to thrive.

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        Funny, seems the only one’s backing away from Our Dear Leader are all the Progressives. Have a great Paganism All Hallows Eve.

    • youcantgetridofmethateasy

      Negative, Southern states are coerced into taking that $3.18 for every $1.00 they pay in federal taxes. If Southern states withheld the federal share of taxes, and only forwarded what they actually thought Washington was worth, how much would that be?

    • Trey Johnson

      It is the poor and welfare abusers is why that is a problem. It isn’t Southerners, it is the immigrants coming to get free healthcare and yankee dollars.

  • bryan w.

    Fuck ’em. Let them secessede! These idiots apparently do not realize that all their money in the banks will come back to the U.S. or the fact that they would have no military or form of defense other than the right wing gun nuts. Let them go. They’re just dead weight on this country. Let them become broke and defenseless. Lets go ahead and empty out Fort Knox, take their weapons, their money and let them deal with the immigration themselves. If they try to attack the U.S. with ground troops, which is all they would have, they’d be decimated by our Air Force and superior firepower. All the minorities would move here, giving us possibly a larger military and more consumers. Like I said, let ’em go. Fuck them.

    • youcantgetridofmethateasy

      Why would a standing Army be needed? Southerners have no “Nation Building” ideology to contend with. That’s all a Liberal-Progressive desire.

  • Fustercluck

    “Yet if we saw someone flying a Nazi flag, what would we think of them?”

    That they were from the South.

    • youcantgetridofmethateasy

      Actually Illinois. Skokie, located in Cook County to be exact.

  • OpenMinded

    Yet another reason I’m moving North after the New Year. Not all of the south is bat$hit crazy, but sadly, most of it is.

    • youcantgetridofmethateasy

      Joe Biden stands in your way.

      • OpenMinded

        How so?

      • youcantgetridofmethateasy

        Uncle Joe fits your descriptive to a ‘T’, so if bat$hit crazy is a disqualifier, you still get to keep him if this break up were to happen.

  • Nick Wride

    Call the new country DumbFuckistan. Then, we REAL Americans can close off all the roads, blockade the ports and let the Christian Taliban starve. The IQ of the American gene pool will go up quite a bit.

    • youcantgetridofmethateasy

      And since you’d willingly give total control over every aspect of your life from cradle to grave to Washington D.C., you couldn’t call your country “These United States” anymore.

  • fldpwrman

    That would be a border seriously worth defending

  • bigovernmentsocialconservative

    The more I think about it, the more I am convinced that RW nutjobs actually masturbate in Reagan’s name, and play dirty fantasies around Reagan in their mind, when they do so.

    • youcantgetridofmethateasy

      Wow, that’s adult of you. Have you no shame? Oh that’s right, the title of this web message board is ‘Forward Progressives’. You’re the very best they have to offer.

  • Jared Hoke

    It is disheartening to see, these days, how quickly any discussion of politics will devolve into intemperate name-calling (Fie, gentlemen!). Under such circumstances, it is well to remember: “never get into a wrestling match with a pig. You’ll only get dirty, and the pig likes it”.

  • Steve Brains

    That is a VERY astute observation. NOTHING any gay person would do could have ANY legitimate affect on any given Conservative person’s life.

    Gay teacher’s are NOT pedophiles. Gay Congressman don’t troll airport men’s rooms. Only closeted Republicans do. (Did that guy’s wife divorce him?)

    Gay people are less likely to bang their sister and have inbred children than Souther Freedom Secessionistublicans. That is FOR SURE!!!

    • youcantgetridofmethateasy

      Rabbi Barlow, why the overpowering verbiage of sexual relations? Is that some fantasy which you harbor deep down inside?
      And Barney Frank’s Boston Townhouse seemed to be the hot spot for Congressmen wishing to meet young lads with taste. Did you forget?

      • Steve Brains

        XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!

  • Terry

    The south has always been “Conservative”. My family is from there, and believe me, they are all Conservatives back to my great-grandpa who was a Democrat, while my grandpa was a Republican because of the FDR Liberals passing the “New Deal” laws.
    The racism in the south against the blacks is why they seceded in the 1860’s, and has continued throughout today.
    Modern day “disenfranchisement” with State Voter ID laws & modern-day “segregation” with gerrymandering voting districts has come into the 21st century with the same Conservative ideas of the 19th century.
    If Conservatives do secede again, America would be better off.

  • David Dodge

    I am a democratic socialist and a patriot, and I firmly believe the south should secede. Lincoln was right to fight the Civil War to end slavery, but he was wrong to try and put the country back together. But with all due respects to Mr. Lincoln, in the 1860s he had no way of knowing how totally different our two cultures were and are. The nation is divided by irreconcilable differences. The issues of God, homosexual rights, abortion and women’s rights, racism and just how the two cultures see themselves as citizens is argument enough for secession. Why stay together when it produces so much pain, antagonism, hate? The USA would do well and the new CSA would do well. The south has Texas and gulf oil, Carolina tobacco, Florida sugar cane and I’m sure there is active manufacturing going on down there. And as a new country, they could borrow from China and other nations. Why not follow logic? Why try to push two cultures that hate each other and don’t want to be with each other together? It’s like oil and water. We are so different now neither side wants to give an inch. If the south secedes, they can enjoy all the racism, Jesus, misogyny, homophobia, anti-science, ignorance and Victorian morality they want. Why not have Obama or Hillary order every southern legislature to start considering articles of secession and take a vote? Secession would benefit both sides. Why isn’t the south considering this seriously? Bumper stickers saying SECEDE are meaningless. Southerners need to put real energy into this.

  • Dave P

    Please, Oh please Southern Sates. Please do succeed and get out of this country. Go be the third world nation that you deserve to be, but FYI, we’re keeping the nukes.

  • Ole Man

    Hell no! I live in NC and I would fight against these tories!