VT secessionists get serious

[LittleLightShining]

Press Conference - Vermont Secessionists Enter Statewide Race (http://vermontrepublic.org/latest_news/press_conference_vermont_secessionists_enter_state wide_race)


January 15, 2010
Capitol Plaza Hotel
Montpelier, VT

The gods of the Empire are not the gods of Vermont.

For the first time in over 150 years, secession, political independence from the United States of America, will be front and center in a statewide New England political campaign. On Friday, January 15, 2010, Vermont Independence Day, a slate of Vermont independence advocates will announce their candidacy for statewide office at 2:00 p.m. in Boardroom 335 in the Capitol Plaza Hotel in Downtown Montpelier, Vermont.

Heading the ticket of Vermont independents will be fifth generation Vermonter and Kirby businessman Dennis P. Steele, who is founder and CEO of the well known Internet radio station Free Vermont Radio. Mr. Steele, who is running for Governor, will be joined by Burlington businessman and political activist Peter Garritano, who will announce his candidacy for Lt. Governor. In addition, longtime political activist Dennis Morrisseau will introduce several independents who have agreed to be candidates for one of the thirty State Senate seats which will be open this year.

What these candidates have in common is a commitment to bring home the Vermont National Guard troops from Afghanistan and Iraq now as well as a commitment to return Vermont to its status as an independent republic as it was between January 15, 1777 and March 4, 1791.

Few Vermonters realize that secession represents a return to their early nineteenth century roots when New England secessionists led the opposition to the 1803 Louisiana Purchase, the national embargo of 1807, and the War of 1812. New England secessionists also expressed their opposition to a military draft at the Hartford Convention in 1814. Abolitionists in New England urged northern states to disengage from the Union.

The United States has lost its moral authority. The American Empire has become the largest, wealthiest, most powerful, most materialistic, most racist, most violent empire in history. Vermont patriots hope to regain the moral high ground by seceding from the Union.

In the words of Dennis Steele, “The gods of the Empire are not the gods of Vermont.”



More about Dennis' (VT C4L member) bid from Matt Cropp (also a VT C4L member and host of American Socialist for the Rich (http://asrblog.com/2009/12/23/why-im-supporting-dennis-steele-for-vermont-governor-in-2010/)):


Why I’m Supporting Dennis Steele for Vermont Governor in 2010 (http://asrblog.com/2009/12/23/why-im-supporting-dennis-steele-for-vermont-governor-in-2010/)



All of the candidates for Vermont Governor who still buy into “politics as usual,” whether they are Democrats or Republicans, are running on the same platform: “If I’m elected Governor, I’ll be the smoothest and most effective administrator of Federal money.” Because, in this day and age, that’s what’s expected of a Governor: that he act dutifully in his role of mid-level administrator of the Vermont arm of the Federal Government. The Congressional delegation carves out an nice fat chunk of pork, and the Governor’s job is to distribute the bacon.

This, however, is not what the Governor is supposed to be. Under the federation created by the Constitution, a State Governor is the executive of a sovereign State. In that role, the State Governor ’s relationship with his or her Federal counterparts should be half-cooperative and half-adversarial; making sure things that are in the interest of the State go smoothly, but also using his power to resist tyrannical Federal acts. Whether we talk about Jim Douglas or Howard Dean, the part that recent Vermont governors have played has been the administrative role; their main goal has been to grab the largest slice of the Federal appropriations pie, no matter how disastrous the long-term impact of such activities may be. It’s been a long time since this State has seen a Governor with true backbone.

The current crop of mainstream candidates holds no greater hope for the future; there are many interesting personalities, but not one of them will make the hard decision to buck the will of the Federal government should justice demand it. That, more than any other reason, is why I will be voting for Dennis Steele for Governor in 2010.

When the invasion of Iraq was deceptively foisted upon the American People by their self-serving elites, millions took to the street in protest. Which didn’t do a lick of good, because the American police state learned its lessons well in the 1960s-’70s. As long as the loyalty of the professional paramilitary police is maintained, straight civil disobedience rarely has the potential to seriously threaten the power structure. However, there’s a very old, very American form of protest that those of us who are outraged by what we’ve seen in the last decade can use to turn our dissent into action: the assertion of sovereignty.

As part of the “Compromise of 1850,” an extremely harsh fugitive-slave law was passed which allowed slave-catchers to ply their trade with virtual impunity in the free North, and even simplified the process of kidnapping free blacks and selling them back into slavery. To Vermonters, whose State had outlawed slavery in its Constitution in 1777, this act was perceived as an unjust outrage, and they reacted accordingly.

Their reaction, however, was different from the way in which 21st century Americans react to the Federal government does something atrocious, like, say, giving $700 billion to private banks or invading yet another third-world country. If really riled up, the contemporary American will sign an on-line petition, send an email to his or her legislator, or maybe even attend a carefully choreographed rally. When the Vermonters of 1850 knew that a law was morally unacceptable, on the other hand, they used the full power of their State sovereignty to keep it from achieving its purpose in the land between Lake Champlain and the Connecticut river. The effect was real; from 1850 until the Civil War, not a single escaped slave was returned to the South from Vermont, despite the fact that many were living openly on sympathetic farms (You can still tour one of those farms: Rokeby of Ferrisburg; they have a letter on display written by a slaveowner impotently begging for compensation for his human “property”).

Now, after years of wars, eroded civil liberties, and bailouts, we need a Governor who will stand up to Washington when it crosses the line. When they demand that yet another power or right be stripped from the People and handed to Federal bureaucrats, we need a leader who has the courage to answer with a resounding “NO”, and whose actions will match his rhetoric. A leader who will bring Vermont’s National Guard home from the Imperial wars with or without the blessing of the Washington elites. A leader who will vocally denounce unconstitutional Federal practices, whether they be the PATRIOT act or the bailouts, and will use the power of our sovereign Vermont to mitigate the effects of those atrocities here at home, just as our forbearers did in 1850. A Governor who, when Congress bumbles into its next ill-conceived war, will use every force at his disposal to end the cycle of violence and waste that’s consumed our economy and society since the Cold War.

Neither Vermont’s Democratic nor its Republican party has the courage to stand up for us, the People of Vermont; they care more about winning Pyrrhic short-term political victories than they do about securing a long-term future of liberty, justice, peace, and sustainability. Dennis Steele, on the other hand, will choose the hard right over the easy wrong, even if it means standing up to the skulking behemoth which occupies the banks of the Potomac River.

There is no doubt that Dennis has a hard road ahead of him, and that his chance of victory, barring a crisis that fundamentally alters the political calculus, is slim. However, there’s nothing to lose by voting for him; the cause of independence isn’t a partisan issue that will swing the election to the Republican or Democratic “Federal Flunky” candidate. Even if he doesn’t win, a strong showing for Steele in 2010 will send a powerful message that there are many Vermonters who are willing to resort to serious measures to resist Federal abuses; push us further, and we know what to do and have the will to get it done. Such a statement might force the Washington elite to think twice before blithely initiating the next bailout or war; it will certainly give the buyers of the Federal debt that will fund such projects pause before they commit their money to a government whose tax-base could very well abandon it. Washington has long ago learned to ignore the will of the voters; it cannot fail to listen the voices of its creditors. Voting for a Democrat or a Republican will not tilt the balance of power in this country in favor of the people; voting for Dennis Steele for Vermont Governor in 2010 will.

[james1906]

Good endorsement.

[LittleLightShining]

I think so, too.

[Anti Federalist]

When the invasion of Iraq was deceptively foisted upon the American People by their self-serving elites, millions took to the street in protest. Which didn’t do a lick of good, because the American police state learned its lessons well in the 1960s-’70s. As long as the loyalty of the professional paramilitary police is maintained, straight civil disobedience rarely has the potential to seriously threaten the power structure. However, there’s a very old, very American form of protest that those of us who are outraged by what we’ve seen in the last decade can use to turn our dissent into action: the assertion of sovereignty.


http://dropular.net/content/_fixed/lkzyz89efm_clap.gif

[South Park Fan]

I'm guessing that Dennis Steele is running as an independent. I could see a scenario where he has a good chance of winning if the shit hits the fan (which it probably will sooner or later). Then it will all be a domino effect after Vermont secedes.

[Badger Paul]

Long live a Free Vermont!

[Grimnir Wotansvolk]

YouTube - Shit just got real - High Definition (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUH3JQjcweM)

[pahs1994]

hmmm if this works out i might be moving to this state soon. I hope they don't close the border before i get there. :D

[PreDeadMan]

if Vermont secedes from the union will lincoln come back from the dead and try to make them go back to the union? lol will the free state project people move to vermont if there really is secession?

[Kotin]

if Vermont secedes from the union will lincoln come back from the dead and try to make them go back to the union? lol will the free state project people move to vermont if there really is secession?

to put it simply.. yes.

[Dianne]

Like I once said on this board, first state that secedes is where I am moving. I will kiss North Carolina goodbye, and hope to head to freedom.

[Anti Federalist]

Like I once said on this board, first state that secedes is where I am moving. I will kiss North Carolina goodbye, and hope to head to freedom.

Move now and make it happen.

;)

[Southron]

I support any state that wants to secede. I have no intention of moving to Vermont but I hope they are well armed. I can see Obama getting visions of being the reincarnation of Lincoln and trying to "save" the Union.

At least I would never join a fight to stop Vermont-draft or no draft.

[Anti Federalist]

I support any state that wants to secede. I have no intention of moving to Vermont but I hope they are well armed. I can see Obama getting visions of being the reincarnation of Lincoln and trying to "save" the Union.

At least I would never join a fight to stop Vermont-draft or no draft.

A move to use military force against a state, under such conditions, would be the best thing that could happen.

What was left of the system would shred itself to pieces, much like it came very close to doing in the 19th century.

[Southron]

A move to use military force against a state, under such conditions, would be the best thing that could happen.

What was left of the system would shred itself to pieces, much like it came very close to doing in the 19th century.

I agree that would be a good thing but it may be a high cost to pay. Can you imagine a strategic bombing campaign on Montpelier?

Maybe the house of cards would finally collapse.

[Anti Federalist]

I agree that would be a good thing but it may be a high cost to pay. Can you imagine a strategic bombing campaign on Montpelier?

Maybe the house of cards would finally collapse.

A very high cost indeed.

An out of control, enraged, system may commit any manner of atrocity.

I'd be willing to take that gamble.

Bombing back to the stone age doesn't work, just look at Afghanistan.

[HOLLYWOOD]

But Vermont's Socialist Bernie Sanders just got the State $610 Million in Health Care Welfare. Stolen from the other 49 states.


What a Bargain! Buying Votes in Burlington!


Someone needs to light the fuse on this Tea Party Powder Cage

[South Park Fan]

I support any state that wants to secede. I have no intention of moving to Vermont but I hope they are well armed. I can see Obama getting visions of being the reincarnation of Lincoln and trying to "save" the Union.

At least I would never join a fight to stop Vermont-draft or no draft.

I'm more optimistic as to the results of such a move on Obama's part. I feel that Vermont would be favored in such a conflict for several reasons:
1. Vermont has one of the laxest gun laws in the nation, and the U.S. military has had a tough time successfully defeating an armed populace (e.g. Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Vietnam, etc.)
2. A military response to Vermont's peaceful secession would prompt other states to secede (likely New Hampshire and/or other Western states)
3. Killing other Americans would guarantee an end to Obama's rule. Liberals would disapprove of him attacking a blue state and conservatives would disapprove of him making war on states' rights. If Obama isn't deposed by an election, he would certainly be overthrown.
4. Many people in the military would be more reluctant to kill their fellow Americans than Hajjis or Gooks.
5. A major secession in the United States would leave the United States' creditors more reluctant to loan the US money, meaning that Obama might not even be able to afford to attack Vermont and/or other secessionist states.
6. Almost forgot, with >1-2 million pro-liberty Americans, a fraction of them are bound to support Vermont and/or other secessionist states if such a conflict were to occur.

[carbonpenguin]

http://www.governorsteele.com

The official announcement is on Friday; keep your eyes out for some MSM coverage...

[torchbearer]

http://www.governorsteele.com

The official announcement is on Friday; keep your eyes out for some MSM coverage...

music sucks on the site. could have done without it.

[LittleLightShining]

music sucks on the site. could have done without it.

Says the metal head. It's a song about VT.

Dennis also runs Free Vermont Radio which plays 99% VT made music.

[torchbearer]

Says the metal head. It's a song about VT.

Dennis also runs Free Vermont Radio which plays 99% VT made music.

:p
YouTube - YOU ARE MY SUNSHINE, BY GOV. JIMMIE DAVIS (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pj0GPTEU198)

Leave music to the south. :D

[LittleLightShining]

:p
YouTube - YOU ARE MY SUNSHINE, BY GOV. JIMMIE DAVIS (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pj0GPTEU198)

Leave music to the south. :D

Them's fightin' words ;)

[torchbearer]

Them's fightin' words ;)

Jimmie Davis actually built the Sunshine bridge to no where.

[ItsTime]

Vermont will free itself just to quickly enslave itself. The power structure of the entire state is corrupt to the core with so many kangaroo courts it would make your head spin.

[RideTheDirt]

I agree that would be a good thing but it may be a high cost to pay. Can you imagine a strategic bombing campaign on Montpelier?

Maybe the house of cards would finally collapse.
Maybe?? Dude If the federal gov THREATENED to bomb a state they would be so fucked. Talk about a final straw.

[TNforPaul45]

If Texas or Vermont Secedes, Tennessee will follow suit. (would be my dream anyway)

[TNforPaul45]

I'm more optimistic as to the results of such a move on Obama's part. I feel that Vermont would be favored in such a conflict for several reasons:
1. Vermont has one of the laxest gun laws in the nation, and the U.S. military has had a tough time successfully defeating an armed populace (e.g. Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Vietnam, etc.)
2. A military response to Vermont's peaceful secession would prompt other states to secede (likely New Hampshire and/or other Western states)
3. Killing other Americans would guarantee an end to Obama's rule. Liberals would disapprove of him attacking a blue state and conservatives would disapprove of him making war on states' rights. If Obama isn't deposed by an election, he would certainly be overthrown.
4. Many people in the military would be more reluctant to kill their fellow Americans than Hajjis or Gooks.
5. A major secession in the United States would leave the United States' creditors more reluctant to loan the US money, meaning that Obama might not even be able to afford to attack Vermont and/or other secessionist states.
6. Almost forgot, with >1-2 million pro-liberty Americans, a fraction of them are bound to support Vermont and/or other secessionist states if such a conflict were to occur.

1. No. The only reason why they have had trouble subduing an armed populace is because they have not yet waged Total War. If were the people fighting the Federal Government, then Obama would have NO QUALMS about waging total war. Remember Sherman?
2. I doubt it. Fear will keep the outlying systems in line. They would just seize legislatures in any state in which a whisper of secession came up (See Missouri, 1871ish)
3. No. Have you ever read Democratic Underground? Look at some of the hateful, soulless, heartless comments in there at people they label as right wing fasicsts or tea baggers. All Obama would have to do is label them the enemy, and 100+ years of the left right paradigm would take care of the rest of the ideological massacre. If a republican president moves against a seceeding populace, it would be the same way. The people who support the "next lincoln" will BLINDLY get behind who ever does it. They will say "F**k em! the less of them the more of us!" and "Let the idiot tea baggers die!" I mean a few months ago when Gov. Perry of Texas mentioned secession, did you read the Daily Kos and Think Progress comments? They fell right in line with the above.
4. This may be the most reasonable argument. The millitary would most definitely split, but I fear that the split of pro-citizen to pro-Federal would be 20%/80%.
5. I don't think so. A splitting of the union would mean that the US would be LESS likely to pay back what it owes to the world. The world, in response, would yield paramillitary help to the Federal Government to help QUICKLY put down any split/rebellion to bring economic stability back to the US as fast as possible.
6. Maybe.

[Southron]

Maybe?? Dude If the federal gov THREATENED to bomb a state they would be so fucked. Talk about a final straw.

I'm not so sure. Most people think the War of Northern Aggression was a just war.

Hell. They burned Atlanta to the ground.

[xd9fan]

There is no GodDamn way the Federal Govt will let a state secede.

There is no way the beast will be denied its food (taxes) with out of fight.

IMHO secession (or the serious mass threat of it) is the only to stop the Feds.

Just know your in for a hell of a fight........(which is long long long overdue)

[AmericaFyeah92]

1. No. The only reason why they have had trouble subduing an armed populace is because they have not yet waged Total War. If were the people fighting the Federal Government, then Obama would have NO QUALMS about waging total war. Remember Sherman?
2. I doubt it. Fear will keep the outlying systems in line. They would just seize legislatures in any state in which a whisper of secession came up (See Missouri, 1871ish)
3. No. Have you ever read Democratic Underground? Look at some of the hateful, soulless, heartless comments in there at people they label as right wing fasicsts or tea baggers. All Obama would have to do is label them the enemy, and 100+ years of the left right paradigm would take care of the rest of the ideological massacre. If a republican president moves against a seceeding populace, it would be the same way. The people who support the "next lincoln" will BLINDLY get behind who ever does it. They will say "F**k em! the less of them the more of us!" and "Let the idiot tea baggers die!" I mean a few months ago when Gov. Perry of Texas mentioned secession, did you read the Daily Kos and Think Progress comments? They fell right in line with the above.
4. This may be the most reasonable argument. The millitary would most definitely split, but I fear that the split of pro-citizen to pro-Federal would be 20%/80%.
5. I don't think so. A splitting of the union would mean that the US would be LESS likely to pay back what it owes to the world. The world, in response, would yield paramillitary help to the Federal Government to help QUICKLY put down any split/rebellion to bring economic stability back to the US as fast as possible.
6. Maybe.

you have too much confidence in the power of the feds. That is all what they WANT you to think. And I can't see Republicans getting behind Obama on something so controversial when their current strategy is to simply oppose everything he does.

And you think the USA's international rivals would want to ensure the strength of the feds?!

[South Park Fan]

Is there any way we could get a money bomb organized for this guy?

http://governorsteele.com/?page_id=150

[South Park Fan]

Bump

[Dianne]

It seems to me the Feds would take care of this without firing one shot, and that would be to seal the borders between Vermont and neighboring states, stop air travel into Vermont; and basically refuse the entry of food and materials. Either way it would be a PR nightmare for the Feds, around the entire globe (that is, if the news media covered it).

[LittleLightShining]

It seems to me the Feds would take care of this without firing one shot, and that would be to seal the borders between Vermont and neighboring states, stop air travel into Vermont; and basically refuse the entry of food and materials. Either way it would be a PR nightmare for the Feds, around the entire globe (that is, if the news media covered it).
It would be very easy to do this. Indeed they have already begun, blowing up a major crossing over Lake Champlain between VT and NY just a couple of weeks ago. YouTube - Watch Champlain Bridge Explosion (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPNRm4UVRbw)The good thing is that we have a border with Canada.

[Dianne]

It would be very easy to do this. Indeed they have already begun, blowing up a major crossing over Lake Champlain between VT and NY just a couple of weeks ago. YouTube - Watch Champlain Bridge Explosion (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPNRm4UVRbw)The good thing is that we have a border with Canada.

Is it just me? No video on that link, just audio. Canada being bh buddies with Feds, I wouldn't expect help from them. But I would absolutely love to see a state grow some (you know whats), and take on the Fed.

[LittleLightShining]

Is it just me? No video on that link, just audio. Canada being bh buddies with Feds, I wouldn't expect help from them. But I would absolutely love to see a state grow some (you know whats), and take on the Fed.

It worked for me :confused:

At any rate, after spending well over a million dollars to clean up Lake Champlain, after harassing farmers and composters because of the runoff from their operations polluting Lake Champlain, the governor decided the best thing to do was blow up this bridge and drop it all in the lake. Someone's benefiting from this, the speed at which this all went down (condemnation to destruction) was lightning fast. Ultimately it is not the people of NY and VT who rely on that bridge to commute to work (some folks have as much as 3 hours added on to their commute now), it is not the taxpayer who was swindled out of money to clean our fair Lake... definitely makes you wonder.

[carbonpenguin]

The story just got picked up by the AP... w00T!

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_VERMONT_SECESSION_CANDIDATES?SITE=NEYOR&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

[Andrew-Austin]

if Vermont secedes from the union will lincoln come back from the dead and try to make them go back to the union?

Not literally, but yes. He and the civil war will come back as a discussion topic in the mainstream, accompanied of course by a lot of propaganda/disinfo.

[rp08orbust]

Better hope the "gods of the empire" don't resurrect Lincoln.

[rp08orbust]

if Vermont secedes from the union will lincoln come back from the dead and try to make them go back to the union? lol

Argh, you beat me!


will the free state project people move to vermont if there really is secession?

It wouldn't be too hard. As George Utley once said in Newhart, "I can see New Hampshire from here!"

[carbonpenguin]

In Montpelier... http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=272929543372&index=1

[carbonpenguin]

Check it out here: http://www.vtcommons.org/blog/2010/01/15/daily-maul-video-2010-vermont-independence-campaign-january-15-press-conference

If you want to support Dennis' run, head over to http://www.governorsteele.com and drop a few electronic federal reserve notes in to jar ;).

[carbonpenguin]

An article about Steele's candidacy just went up on TIME magazine: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1957743,00.html

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

If Vermot seceedes I think NH would. I don't see Free-Market libertarians heading over to Socialist-Libertarian VT. :p My take. I can just see Ian and the Keeniacs in VT hahaha. That would go over, really well. lol.

[LittleLightShining]

The Secessionist Campaign for the Republic of Vermont

(http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1957743,00.html?artId=1957743?contType=arti cle?chn=us)



The President on Wednesday may have reassured Americans that the state of the Union is "strong," but, just the week before, a group of Vermont secessionists declared their intention to seek political power in a quest to get their state to quit the Union altogether. On Jan. 15, in the state capital of Montpelier, nine candidates for statewide office gathered in a tiny room at the Capitol Plaza Hotel, to announce they wanted a divorce from the United States of America. "For the first time in over 150 years, secession and political independence from the U.S. will be front and center in a statewide New England political campaign," said Thomas Naylor, 73, one of the leaders of the campaign.

A former Duke University economics professor, Naylor heads up the Second Vermont Republic, which he describes as "left-libertarian, anti-big government, anti-empire, antiwar, with small is beautiful as our guiding philosophy." The group not only advocates the peaceful secession of Vermont but has minted its own silver "token" — valued at $25 — and, as part of a publishing venture with another secessionist group, runs a monthly newspaper called Vermont Commons, with a circulation of 10,000. According to a 2007 poll, they have support from at least 13% of state voters. The campaign slogan, Naylor told me, is "Imagine Free Vermont." In his fondest imaginings, Naylor said, Vermonters would not be "forced to participate in killing women and children in the Middle East." (See how the Beans of Egypt, Maine sprouted a militia.)

Second Vermont Republic's gubernatorial candidate is Dennis Steele, 42, a hulking Carhartt-clad fifth generation Vermonter and entrepreneur. He owns Radio Free Vermont, an Internet radio station, and honchos an online venture called ChessManiac.com. Steele says that, if elected, his first act in office would be to bring home Vermont's National Guard from overseas deployments. "I see my kids going off to fight in wars for empire 10, 15, 20 years from now," said Steele, who served three years in the U.S. Army. "People in Vermont in general are very antiwar, and all their faith was in Obama to end the wars. I ask people, 'Did you get the change you wanted?' They can't even look you in the eyes. We live in a nation that is asleep at the wheel and where the hearts are growing cold like ice." (See Michael Grunwald's opinion of Vermont and its politics.)

Steele and the secessionists have nothing but contempt for Vermont Senators Bernie Sanders and Patrick Leahy, who are otherwise considered among the most liberal members of Congress. "They've done nothing to stop the wars," says Steele flatly. Thomas Naylor was more pointed: "Every time a Vermonter serving in the National Guard gets deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, likely to be hurt or killed, Bernie and Patrick are there to commemorate the departure and have pictures taken."

With 20 or so mostly middle-aged attendees looking on, the candidates each stood at the podium to deliver a remarkably unified message: The U.S. government, they said, was an immoral enterprise — engaged in imperial wars, propping up corrupt bankers and supersized corporations, crushing small businessmen, plundering the tax-base for corporate welfare, snooping on the private lives of citizens — and they wanted no more part of it. "The gods of the empire," Steele told the room, "are not the gods of Vermont."

"It's an abusive relationship we have with the central government," says Peter Garritano, a square-jawed 54-year-old Subaru sales manager who is running for lieutenant governor. "We know it's scary to leave the abusive nest. It's a comfort zone in its own way. But we think we'll do better leaving."

An independent Vermont, the group believes, would expolit its already highly developed local small-scale agriculture, its "locavore" farm exchanges, with a tax structure reformed to incentivize small business and industry (and to make life difficult for large out-of-state corporations). By 2020, they foresee Vermont producing at least 75% of its own electricity and heat, using wind-, solar-, biomass- and hydro-power. They want to establish a Bank of Vermont owned by the people of Vermont — freed from the arbitrary controls of central bankers — as well as a local alternative currency, with Vermont pension and operating funds invested not in Wall Street but in locally owned financial institutions. "We favor devolution of political power from the state back to local communities, making the governing structure for towns, schools, hospitals and social services much like that of small, decentralized states like Switzerland," declares the group's "21st Century Statement of Principles."

Seven secessionist candidates declared for seats in the state senate. Among them is Robert Wagner, 46, an economist who is also a computing consultant with Oracle Inc. Wagner, who homesteads with his wife and six-year-old son in the Green Mountains, says that current U.S. law enables multinational corporations to abuse Vermont as a "resource colony." Citing a 2008 study by the University of Vermont, Wagner says the state stands to gain over $1 billion a year in revenue by taxing equitably the corporate behemoths that exploit Vermont's "commons," which includes everything from the state's groundwater, surface water, wildlife and forests, to the public spectrum of the airwaves. According to the UVM study, for example, Coca-Cola, Nestle and Perrier and other refreshment manufacturers avoid $671 million in taxes for the environmental damage incurred by their siphoning of state groundwater.

But what about that comfort zone of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and food stamps, plus the infrastructure currently funded by the federal government, including bridges, roads and particularly the interstate highways? One analysis by a researcher at the University of Vermont found that the state only gets 75 cents back for every dollar it hands over to the federal center. The secessionists say they'd prefer to save their money and keep it at home. "Not only would an independent Vermont survive," says Naylor, "It would thrive, because it would free up entrepreneurial forces heretofore held in abeyance. We're not preaching economic isolationism. We want to confront the empire, and that doesn't mean just owning a Prius and keeping a root garden."

[JeNNiF00F00]

I support any state that wants to secede. I have no intention of moving to Vermont but I hope they are well armed. I can see Obama getting visions of being the reincarnation of Lincoln and trying to "save" the Union.

At least I would never join a fight to stop Vermont-draft or no draft.

He already thinks hes Lincoln.

[carbonpenguin]

...trying to go toe to toe with the U.S. Army if the Feds decide to not let us leave; to do so would be suicide. Our hope lies in soldiers who respect the oaths they've taken and refuse to prevent Americans from exercising their right to self-determination. As a professor of mine once put it, an rebellion becomes a revolution when the Army switches sides. IMHO, American soldiers would have a lot of trouble turning their guns inward in order to deny the rights of their peaceable fellow citizens. And if they do, then the idea that the Federal Government exists by the consent of the governed will be exposed to all as a hollow shell...as a great poet once put it:

General, your tank
is a powerful vehicle
it smashes down forests
& crushes a hundred men.
but it has one defect:
it needs a driver.

General, your bomber is powerful
it flies faster than a storm
& carries more than an elephant.
but it has one defect:
it needs a mechanic.

General, man is very useful.
He can fly & he can kill.
but he has one defect:
He can think.

Bertolt Brecht (February 10, 1898 – August 14, 1956)

[Aratus]

LLS... vermont often has
these gilded moments
and vermont can be
historic! i wish thee
the best of luck!!!

[kahless]

If they act sooner rather than later I doubt the federal government would use the military to keep Vermont inline. Down the road this could be a problem if Obama succeeds in putting the National Guard under federal control as discussed in the other thread here.

Although I believe they should be allowed to secede the state governments are more intrusive and Socialist than the federal government. However with the federal government out of the picture the people in a free state would finally pay more attention to state - republic level politics and elections. Hopefully that would move things in the direction of a more Libertarian form of government at the state - new republic.

[tmosley]

...trying to go toe to toe with the U.S. Army if the Feds decide to not let us leave; to do so would be suicide. Our hope lies in soldiers who respect the oaths they've taken and refuse to prevent Americans from exercising their right to self-determination. As a professor of mine once put it, an rebellion becomes a revolution when the Army switches sides. IMHO, American soldiers would have a lot of trouble turning their guns inward in order to deny the rights of their peaceable fellow citizens. And if they do, then the idea that the Federal Government exists by the consent of the governed will be exposed to all as a hollow shell...as a great poet once put it:

General, your tank
is a powerful vehicle
it smashes down forests
& crushes a hundred men.
but it has one defect:
it needs a driver.

General, your bomber is powerful
it flies faster than a storm
& carries more than an elephant.
but it has one defect:
it needs a mechanic.

General, man is very useful.
He can fly & he can kill.
but he has one defect:
He can think.

Bertolt Brecht (February 10, 1898 – August 14, 1956)

While you do have that working in your favor, seizing control of a nuclear deterrent would be the best way to effect secession. Either a missile installation, or a nuclear-armed submarine would do just fine. Hell, even a cruise missile destroyer parked off the coast of VA would make a fine deterrent, if you could launch before being destroyed.

[Uriel999]

Ummmm secession is seriously putting the cart before the horse ya'll. Slow down a bit. How about we start with getting HR 1207 passed? I do support the theory of secession, but our movement is now going mainstream and we can't be so impatient. How about instead of trying to destroy this nation we try to rebuild this nation? We need a revolution but mine is a peaceful revolution first. This peaceful revolution is starting to work. Let it it run it's course.

[Anti Federalist]

While you do have that working in your favor, seizing control of a nuclear deterrent would be the best way to effect secession. Either a missile installation, or a nuclear-armed submarine would do just fine. Hell, even a cruise missile destroyer parked off the coast of VA would make a fine deterrent, if you could launch before being destroyed.

Bingo.

Been saying that for 20 years now.

It was how the Eastern European republics were able to break away peacefully when the USSR was coming apart.

[carbonpenguin]

Ummmm secession is seriously putting the cart before the horse ya'll. Slow down a bit. How about we start with getting HR 1207 passed? I do support the theory of secession, but our movement is now going mainstream and we can't be so impatient. How about instead of trying to destroy this nation we try to rebuild this nation? We need a revolution but mine is a peaceful revolution first. This peaceful revolution is starting to work. Let it it run it's course.

I absolutely agree that HR 1207 and the other work we've been doing is vitally important and must be continued; I see the secession movement as complimentary rather than working at cross purposes. As long as the Feds see there are virtually no consequences for acts against the public interest and our rights, they can pay lip service to "reform" while going on with "business as usual". With the second front of secession, we can bargain from a position of strength, e.g. "enact these reforms or we'll leave; and we hope you enjoy trying to pay off the debt without us..." Once the possibility is on the table, Washington politicians will *have* to sit up and take notice; otherwise, they'll be left high as power re-centers in the sovereign States.

Also, I'd argue that secession has the potential to play a role in "rebuilding this nation", as you put it. I think we can all agree that, at the root, the problem we face is that we've become too centralized as a result of the breakdown of the Constitutional order. Once a bureaucracy has been established, it will fight for its survival and won't dissolve voluntarily. For instance, take the M/I Complex. Defense spending was supposed to contract at the end of the Cold War, as we were now "safe" and could return to a humble, small "r" republican foreign policy. Except it didn't; we now are spending almost $1 T/year on "defense"... perhaps we might have more success by having newly independent states call a Second Constitutional Convention at which we might re-federate under a constitution in which all of the loop-holes which have been exploited to expand the power of the Federal Gov't over the last 240-odd years are nicely stitched shut...

As for the talk of nukes; honestly, I think such a strategy would almost certainly backfire in so many ways. Any American secession movement which initiates violence will be dead on arrival as it will be labeled "terroristic", socially marginalized, and its supporters will be rounded up by the police state as "enemy combatants". The road to success, from my perspective, lies in discipline, commitment, and aggressive non-violence direct action when necessary, which will create an environment in which any attempted Federal repression will only lead to the degradation of the Federal Government's moral authority and legitimacy in the eyes of the American people and the world.

[libertarian4321]

It would be very easy to do this. Indeed they have already begun, blowing up a major crossing over Lake Champlain between VT and NY just a couple of weeks ago.

I swear, some of you folks see a conspiracy in everything.

That bridge was more than 80 years old. It had been repaired many times in the past.

Years ago, it had been scheduled to be demolished and replaced in 2012.

However, a routine inspection last year found dangerous faults in the bridge, so it was shut down.

It was determined that repairing the bridge would be cost ineffective, so the replacement schedule was moved up a couple of years, and the bridge was demolished.

Take your tin foil hats off people, this was only a drill.

As to Vermont "secession"- you've got to be kidding. Vermont is probably the most socialist state in the USA (any of you hear of a guy named Bernie Sanders?).

Even in a state like Texas, this "secession" stuff is going nowhere fast- the one candidate for governor who advocated secession (who was as obscure as this "Steele" guy) dropped out of the race. It sure as Hell ain't going to happen in Vermont.

As you may have guessed, I do NOT side with the secessionist bomb throwers- we have problems in this country, but starting an internal war is not the answer- it sounds "cool" when you are drinking with your buddies, but if you think rationally, it's a really bad idea.

I'm a Texan, but I'm also an American, and I have no desire to destroy this country or leave it, I choose to make it better!

After the Texas governor's debate this week, I sent a donation to Debra Medina because she CLEARLY STATED THAT SHE DOES NOT SUPPORT SECESSION!

[libertarian4321]

The story just got picked up by the AP... w00T!

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_VERMONT_SECESSION_CANDIDATES?SITE=NEYOR&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Link doesn't work.

[Southron]

While you do have that working in your favor, seizing control of a nuclear deterrent would be the best way to effect secession. Either a missile installation, or a nuclear-armed submarine would do just fine. Hell, even a cruise missile destroyer parked off the coast of VA would make a fine deterrent, if you could launch before being destroyed.

Nukes are definitely key. Why do you think we don't want Iran to get nukes? Because then we can't have another Iraq style invasion.

We must fight(figuratively) Leviathan with the states. The threat of secession is absolutely necessary.

I have no fondness for this forced "Union".
Personally, I don't consider myself and American but a North Carolinian.

If any state wants to leave I say go for it. I'm sure I will still trade and visit with you!

[tpreitzel]

Personally, I don't consider myself and American but a North Carolinian.

If any state wants to leave I say go for it. I'm sure I will still trade and visit with you!

The flag is a powerful symbol of identification. Hopefully, more Americans will return to identifying themselves with local and state flags instead of the Stars & Stripes.

[LittleLightShining]

Ummmm secession is seriously putting the cart before the horse ya'll. Slow down a bit. How about we start with getting HR 1207 passed? I do support the theory of secession, but our movement is now going mainstream and we can't be so impatient. How about instead of trying to destroy this nation we try to rebuild this nation? We need a revolution but mine is a peaceful revolution first. This peaceful revolution is starting to work. Let it it run it's course.
If you look into Naylor at all you'll see he's not a libertarian.

That said, I enjoy seeing more views in the political arena. I hope these guys do well even if I find that I, myself, may only be able to vote for one of them.

I swear, some of you folks see a conspiracy in everything.

That bridge was more than 80 years old. It had been repaired many times in the past.

Years ago, it had been scheduled to be demolished and replaced in 2012.

However, a routine inspection last year found dangerous faults in the bridge, so it was shut down.

It was determined that repairing the bridge would be cost ineffective, so the replacement schedule was moved up a couple of years, and the bridge was demolished.

Take your tin foil hats off people, this was only a drill.

As to Vermont "secession"- you've got to be kidding. Vermont is probably the most socialist state in the USA (any of you hear of a guy named Bernie Sanders?).

Even in a state like Texas, this "secession" stuff is going nowhere fast- the one candidate for governor who advocated secession (who was as obscure as this "Steele" guy) dropped out of the race. It sure as Hell ain't going to happen in Vermont.

As you may have guessed, I do NOT side with the secessionist bomb throwers- we have problems in this country, but starting an internal war is not the answer- it sounds "cool" when you are drinking with your buddies, but if you think rationally, it's a really bad idea.

I'm a Texan, but I'm also an American, and I have no desire to destroy this country or leave it, I choose to make it better!

After the Texas governor's debate this week, I sent a donation to Debra Medina because she CLEARLY STATED THAT SHE DOES NOT SUPPORT SECESSION!
I'm not a secessionist. I do sympathize, though.

That said, the claim was made that the supporting columns were compromised. Interestingly, those columns were still intact after the demolition. Makes you wonder.

[Anti Federalist]

#VerExit Now

[Anti Federalist]

As to Vermont "secession"- you've got to be kidding. Vermont is probably the most socialist state in the USA (any of you hear of a guy named Bernie Sanders?)

And that is precisely why it will work.

Secession based on outdated and dangerous ideas of freedom and liberty, which are nothing more than lies propagated by the running dog cis-male, white supremacist patriarchy, are going nowhere.

But secession based on egalitarian democracy and self determination for everybody, including and especially those people of color, the differently able and the LGBTQQIP2SAA community is the wave of the future, and the only way to truly have a safe space of inclusiveness for oppressed peoples and system based on economic and social justice and not the twin evils of profit and greed.