Author Topic: Open letter for dividing the U.S. (Read 1957 times)

TribReady · « **on:** January 29, 2009, 06:39:37 AM »

Copied and pasted from an email I got:

Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists, and Obama supporters, et al:

We have stuck together since the late 1950's, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know, we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but, sadly, this relationship has run its course. Our two ideological sides of America cannot, and will not ever agree on what is right, so let's just end it on friendly terms. We can smile, chalk it up to irreconcilable differences, and go our own way.

Here is a model separation agreement:

Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes.

We don't like redistributive taxes so you can keep them. You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU. Since you hate guns and war, we'll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA, and the military. You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore, and Rosie O'Donnell (You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all three of them.)

We'll keep the capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wal-Mart, and Wall Street. You can have your beloved homeless, homeboys, hippies, and illegal aliens. We'll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, greedy CEO's, and rednecks. We'll keep the Bibles and give you NBC and Hollywood .

You can make nice with Iran and Palestine and we'll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us. You can have the peaceniks, and war protesters. When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we'll help provide them security. We'll keep our Judeo-Christian values. You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism, and Shirley McClain. You can also have the U.N. But we will no longer be paying the bill.

We'll keep the SUVs, pickup trucks, and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Subaru station wagon you can find. You can give everyone health care, if you can find any practicing doctors. We'll continue to believe health care is a luxury and not a right. We'll keep The Battle Hymn of the Republic and the National Anthem. I'm sure you'll be happy to substitute Imagine, I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing, Kum By Ya, or We Are the World.

We'll practice trickle down economics, and you can give trickle up poverty your best shot. Since it often so offends you we'll keep our history, our name, and our flag.

Would you agree to this? If so please pass it along to other like minded liberal and conservative patriots, and if you do not agree, just hit delete.

In the spirit of friendly parting, I'll bet you ANWAR which one of us will need whose help in 15 years.

Sincerely,
John J. Wall.
Law Student and an American

P.S. Also, please take Barbara Streisand & Jane Fonda

JimFromTN · « **Reply #1 on:** January 29, 2009, 07:22:03 AM »

The writer needs to learn a little more history. Communism in the US was popular in the 20's and 30's. Liberals were around long before the late 50's. I don't know when it got started but FDR's new deal was back in the 30's. It would also be stupid to seperate. The sides need to balance each other out. Its kind of the same principle as the different branches of government. If anything we need more than a 2 party system. In Countries that have more than a 2 party systems, voter turn out is much higher and politics is taken much more seriously by everyone. Perhaps thats not what you want. Sounds like you want a one party system. Isn't that unAmerican? Isn't that what our forefathers were trying to escape and created this system that we have so everyone can be represented? I would have to question the loyalty to this country and what it stands for of anyone who would agree with this.

TribReady · « **Reply #2 on:** January 29, 2009, 07:33:07 AM »

This "letter" I'm sure was written tongue in cheek....however, the debate on secession and dividing the US is being talked about alot on other threads here at Graybeards and definitely on other websites.

No one would "argue" for one party, that's exactly where we're headed, if not there already. We're losing our country slowly and alot of talk is being generated.

lrs · « **Reply #3 on:** January 29, 2009, 07:44:13 AM »

Quote from: JimFromTN on January 29, 2009, 07:22:03 AM

It would also be stupid to seperate. The sides need to balance each other out.

Fascinating. You were the one criticizing Limbaugh. Now you believe in balance.
It is your side of the aisle doing whatever it can, everything in it's power, to discredit any opposition.
Soon your side will push beyond attempting to discredit. Your side will attempt to silence, through legislation, those who do not fall in line with your socialist views.

JimFromTN · « **Reply #4 on:** January 29, 2009, 08:59:01 AM »

Whats Limbaugh got to do with balance?

Troyboy · « **Reply #5 on:** January 29, 2009, 10:02:57 AM »

I prefer a conservative over a communist every day of the week. By the way Mccarthy was right

Graybeard · « **Reply #6 on:** January 29, 2009, 01:23:07 PM »

What we really need is a NO PARTY system where folks have to run on their merit and come up with the bucks to do so on their own not with party or government provided funds.

mirage1988 · « **Reply #7 on:** January 29, 2009, 01:54:01 PM »

Now redneck jim want to border-hop?
I'm kinda dissapointed, i'm only ignored by one member since we can find out who is ignoring us.

williamlayton · « **Reply #8 on:** January 30, 2009, 02:31:02 AM »

Can I post on this since I have been asked not to involve myself in the Civil War disussions?
Bill

billy_56081 · « **Reply #9 on:** January 30, 2009, 02:40:23 AM »

I have to agree, I do not want to compromise with the liberal scum, their positions are wrong and nothing but wrong. I f we compromise with the liberal scum we are compromising wrong. I can see no redeeming qualities in a liberal what so ever. The liberal scum way of forcing their sickness onto the decent peoples of the world is compromise, each and every time we compromise what is right with just a little bit of wrong they are gaining. It is a slow incremental process they are using to destroy the decent peoples of the world.

Liberal scum and muslims are the worst things to ever infect our world, at least the muslims have one redeeming quality, muslims kill alot of other muslims, where liberal scum have absolutely none.

gypsyman · « **Reply #10 on:** January 30, 2009, 02:55:42 AM »

Limbaugh,Beck, Hannity represent the conservative side of the debate. It was on Hannity's show last night, I seen where the ''Democratic stimulis package'' included millions of dollars for playgrounds, golf corses, and a snow making machine,in Minnesota. This is no more a bi-partisian bill than I am an astronaut.
As far as the letter goes, whoever wrote it, just put into words, what alot of us are feeling. It's going to get worse, not better. gypsyman

Graybeard · « **Reply #11 on:** January 30, 2009, 04:57:52 AM »

Quote from: williamlayton on January 30, 2009, 02:31:02 AM

Can I post on this since I have been asked not to involve myself in the Civil War disussions?
Bill

This is the Pot Bellied Stove Forum NOT the Civil War Forum. So sure.

lrs · « **Reply #12 on:** January 30, 2009, 05:46:11 AM »

Quote from: billy_56081 on January 30, 2009, 02:40:23 AM

I have to agree, I do not want to compromise with the liberal scum, their positions are wrong and nothing but wrong. I f we compromise with the liberal scum we are compromising wrong. I can see no redeeming qualities in a liberal what so ever. The liberal scum way of forcing their sickness onto the decent peoples of the world is compromise, each and every time we compromise what is right with just a little bit of wrong they are gaining. It is a slow incremental process they are using to destroy the decent peoples of the world.

Liberal scum and muslims are the worst things to ever infect our world, at least the muslims have one redeeming quality, muslims kill alot of other muslims, where liberal scum have absolutely none.

Billy, I really like your position, and I feel the same as you do.
Here is my take.
There is a time for political disagreement and dissent, to be sure. Good honorable men can disagree and compromise, and great things can happen, such as when our founders were first building this nation.
In my opionion that is not what we have today.
It reminds me of the differences between Chamberlain and Churchill, and in the way they dealt with Hitler. Chamberlain was for compromising with Hitler, while Churchill saw Hitler for what he was.
I see similarities in today's fascist liberals, their leadership, the mainstream press with the early Nazi movement in the 30's's. To lay it on the line further, Obama could be today's Hitler.
This is not a time for compromise.

Graybeard · « **Reply #13 on:** January 30, 2009, 06:25:04 AM »

You can't compromise with them because they have nothing to offer you only what they want to take from you so to compromise means only that they take less of what you have than what they really want. Agree and the next day they are back asking for more and more and will continue to do so until they take all you have.

You either say no draw a line in the sand or give them all you have those are the only choices and only fools fail to see that.

billy_56081 · « **Reply #14 on:** January 30, 2009, 02:53:46 PM »

Quote from: Graybeard on January 29, 2009, 01:23:07 PM

What we really need is a NO PARTY system where folks have to run on their merit and come up with the bucks to do so on their own not with party or government provided funds.

Bill, can you imagine the confusion at the polls if there was no party affiliation listed next to the names on the ballot? The liberal scum had enough trouble in Florida filling out the ballots as they were. The liberal scum would have to have someone hold their hands if we took the party affiliation off the ballot.

williamlayton · « **Reply #15 on:** January 31, 2009, 11:15:28 PM »

There is a time to everything under the sun.
It is not a matter of liberal or conservative, IMO.
It is a time of power and control versus a Republic.
Hitler was a most conservative party leader--not liberal.
As a matter of fact parallels between he and Churchill are amazing.
Clashes of similarity.
Building infrastructure in a nation is not liberal but conservative. Building dependence on the government is liberal and socialistic. Lincoln was not socialistic and liberal, though, as did Nixon, he found what he considered loopholes in constitutional law.
Lincoln was for a Republic and a Republic takes strong men to live in it. Socialism is for those who are weak and need mothers milk too survive.
Obama seeks power and feels that he must appease those who stand against a Republic. He will sell his soul for power, and loose the power because of the same acts.
Blessings

bilmac · « **Reply #16 on:** February 01, 2009, 01:39:37 AM »

Look at the voting maps. The places that voted Republican have land and resources and people who work. The places that went Democrat are cities full of freeloaders and people who make money without working. I think we ought to divide the country exactly on the lines of the last election results and see how long each side lasts.

williamlayton · « **Reply #17 on:** February 02, 2009, 01:20:06 PM »

Bilmac
What do you mean and who are you referring too in the statement "people who make money without working" ??
Blessings

RaySendero · « **Reply #18 on:** February 02, 2009, 01:31:11 PM »

Quote from: JimFromTN on January 29, 2009, 07:22:03 AM

The writer needs to learn a little more history. Communism in the US was popular in the 20's and 30's. Liberals were around long before the late 50's. I don't know when it got started but FDR's new deal was back in the 30's. It would also be stupid to seperate. The sides need to balance each other out. Its kind of the same principle as the different branches of government. If anything we need more than a 2 party system. In Countries that have more than a 2 party systems, voter turn out is much higher and politics is taken much more seriously by everyone. Perhaps thats not what you want. Sounds like you want a one party system. Isn't that unAmerican? Isn't that what our forefathers were trying to escape and created this system that we have so everyone can be represented? I would have to question the loyalty to this country and what it stands for of anyone who would agree with this.

Whoooooosh! - Seems that letter went right over your head!

Guess you better start figuring about which side ya gonna pick!

mirage1988 · « **Reply #19 on:** February 02, 2009, 01:31:53 PM »

Wmlayton-
I think he meant (or I hope he meant) people that get a check in the mailbox for the color of their skin, and the number of kids they have out of wedlock. I would like to ask him though if he meant how a state voted, or how the states canvassing board (ran by a democrat) decided what the voters intent was.

bilmac · « **Reply #20 on:** February 02, 2009, 03:26:39 PM »

I don't mean to say that no one who lives in Democrat land works, there are tradesmen and other working people that keep the cities going, but they are sure becoming a minority. By people who make money without working I'm thinking of Lawyers politicians, wall streeters, entertainers, etc etc. What I mean is that they produce nothing of value. I'm thinking that folks who can't make something will be the first casualties in Obama's brave new world.

williamlayton · « **Reply #21 on:** February 03, 2009, 01:44:53 AM »

Based on that definition Bilmac I can't go along with you.
This is a Republic, Democratic Republic, but foremost a republic.
Some of the ones noted earn an honest dollar. You don't have too support the industry they work in, that is your privilege, however; they support people who work for them---and that is what a Republic is about.
Calluses are NOT the criteria, the brain, the guts, the will and the desire are the criteria. Calluses are asymptomatic of some of the above but not the defining criteria.
Blessings

beerbelly · « **Reply #22 on:** February 03, 2009, 02:00:44 AM »

Most of the people working in the larger cities don't live there. They commute to the city to work. Which is why the cities have an occupational tax. They have no tax base in the city, so they tax the people that work there but live else where.
Beerbelly

Heather · « **Reply #23 on:** February 03, 2009, 07:06:16 AM »

lol...cute letter....I've never wanted to see our country divided, but it will happen. Not as laid out above, but IMO those that are still free and those imprisoned or in hiding.

Heather

billy_56081 · « **Reply #24 on:** February 03, 2009, 01:28:53 PM »

I'd like to see some leadership come forward for dividing the country. We have compromised with the evil liberal scum for so long that the evil has over taken the good. When you compromise with what is wrong, even if it is just a little portion that is wrong, you are 100% wrong.

It is time once again for revolution. Our land that was once free, is now become an oppressive nanny state. Where are the great leaders in history? Will someone step forward and lead or will we fall under the yoke of tyrants?

lrs · « **Reply #25 on:** February 03, 2009, 01:50:16 PM »

Billy, I've heard many people say the same thing.

lrs · « **Reply #26 on:** February 04, 2009, 01:23:45 PM »

Quote from: williamlayton on January 31, 2009, 11:15:28 PM

Hitler was a most conservative party leader--not liberal.

I couldn't disagree more. I'm trying to understand how Hitler was a conservative, if you are talking about a modern American conservative.

At the heart of Nazi Germany was a VAST, powerfull central government. The image of Hitler was on everything, everywhere. The nation as a whole was under his complete unopposed control, subject to his every whim. He controlled money, industry, military, culture, social norms. I'm sure he was worshiped as a deity by many. There were no civil rights, no due process,, etc., etc.

There are numerous historical definitions of what constitutes conservative ideology.
You can google it if you like.

This is my interpretation of being conservatism in America today.
- we believe in God, and our human rights come from God
- we believe in a small government, with limited power and checks and balances
- we believe in capitalism
- we believe in individual responsibility
- we believe in fiscal responsibility
- we believe we are an exceptional country, our greatness has been b/c of the freedoms laid out in our constitution.

williamlayton · « **Reply #27 on:** February 05, 2009, 03:41:36 AM »

I will Maritain that history has labeled him to be conservative as in Totalitarian with no freedom for the masses, all powers reserved for the government.
Democracy is a very liberal thought.
Basicall we are the same, we just define the words liberal and conservative differently.
Blessings

rex6666 · « **Reply #28 on:** February 05, 2009, 07:23:18 AM »

Quote from: JimFromTN on January 29, 2009, 07:22:03 AM

The writer needs to learn a little more history. Communism in the US was popular in the 20's and 30's. Liberals were around long before the late 50's. I don't know when it got started but FDR's new deal was back in the 30's. It would also be stupid to seperate. The sides need to balance each other out. Its kind of the same principle as the different branches of government. If anything we need more than a 2 party system. In Countries that have more than a 2 party systems, voter turn out is much higher and politics is taken much more seriously by everyone. Perhaps thats not what you want. Sounds like you want a one party system. Isn't that unAmerican? Isn't that what our forefathers were trying to escape and created this system that we have so everyone can be represented? I would have to question the loyalty to this country and what it stands for of anyone who would agree with this.

Maybe the writer was born in the 50's and that is as long as he has been trying to get along

prairiedog555 · « **Reply #29 on:** February 05, 2009, 11:55:15 AM »

People in the Midwest, or South, or North or West do not think alike, have different values ect. That being said I am not so much in favor of dividing the country but rather in doing what the founding fathers had in mind which is States Rights.
If the majority of a state wants abortion or gun control, they should have it and if you live in a state that the majority wants those things and you don't agree, you should move to a state that the majority of people think like you.
Big government shoves us all into one mold. It does not work, as we are not all the same.