I Am a Thinker

@SW-User Fox News didn't report that. It correctly reported that the Cali Sec of State is putting the secession question on the November ballot. Stop drinking the CNN Kool-Aid.

@lamppost California is not "planning to secede". That implies it's going to happen. It hasn't even come up for a vote. Last time it was proposed and defeated.

@lamppost Really? I just got curious and checked out FOX reporting. Want to know the first words out of Tucker Carlson's mouth? "The United States may be losing a star from its flag for the first time ever." And then he went on to be the lying, manipulative, bitch he is.

@Ynotisay New York Times

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/21/us/yes-california-calexit-marinelli-russia.html

@beckyromero Yeah. He dumped Yes California when he moved. That's why I was really surprised to see that he was the co-author of the current initiative. He's not trusted. For good reason.

@Ynotisay Makes you wonder why the state would even accept a ballot measure authored by someone not even living in the country.

@beckyromero He's back in California now. But as a Californian I can say that any signatures this thing gets will be much more of a statement against the Trump administration policies than an actual move towards secession. Just like the other one out there seeking to break up the state is driven by emotion (and a dude with a whole lot of money looking to maximize investments).

@lamppost FUCK FOX NEWS

@Ynotisay No secession moves in Massachusetts that I'm aware of - and that state is about as anti-Trump as California. You guys sure have some wacky laws to allow something that is unconstitutional to be placed on a state ballot.

@beckyromero But something unconstitutional isn't being put on the ballot. That's not what this is about. It's a long way off. It also won't happen.

@Ynotisay
The relationship between a state and the United States is "indissoluble."

Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1868), United States Supreme Court

@beckyromero You're not hearing what I'm saying. This is nothing more than gathering enough signatures to move towards a ballot initiative. It's symbolic.
BTW...what you just quoted has nothing to do with the Constitution. Secession isn't mentioned in the Constitution so it can't be unconstitutional. There actually is a legal path to secession. Doesn't mean it will take place.

@Ynotisay


Please stop being disingenuous. That's how California PUTS measures on the ballot, by having enough valid voter signatures. It's far from "symbolic." It's how it's DONE.

April 20, 2018
Initiative 18-0001

The Attorney General of California has prepared the following title and summary of the chief purpose and points of the proposed measure:

REQUIRES A VOTE IN 2021 ON WHETHER CALIFORNIA SHOULD BECOME AN INDEPENDENT COUNTRY. INITIATIVE STATUTE. Requires a special election in May 2021 to ask voters whether California should become an independent country, in the form of a republic. If approved by a majority of voters, requires the Legislature to declare California's independence from the United States.

And by the way, anyone reading this doesn't have to take my word for it. They can read the title and summary that the California Attorney General prepared right on the AG's official website:

https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/initiatives/pdfs/Title%20and%20Summary%20%2818-0001%29.pdf


You DO understand who arbitrates constitutional disputes and who rules something as UNCONSTITUTIONAL?

The relationship between a state and the United States is "indissoluble."

Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1868), United States Supreme Court

@beckyromero Did you even read what you shared? It's what I said. And arguing that something not in the Constitution is unconstitutional? I don't get that. Either way I think I'm done now. I'm starting to smell a non-Californian offering up a less-than-knowledgeable opinion about California. Thanks.

@Ynotisay you're talking to a rock

@Fernie I don't mean to be rude but at a certain point...you know?

@Ynotisay Oh, I know

The right for a state to deny a woman to have an abortion isn't explicitly written into the Constitution either. But the United States Supreme Court ruled it was UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Roe v Wade.

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the relationship between a state and the United States is "indissoluble."

Read the freaking decision!

We spend all this money supposedly for our educational system and this is the result?

People . . . Educate yourself on what the United States Supreme Court does.

Your responses make me think I am talking to a bunch of ignorant RUSSIANS!

@beckyromero Well, you're just a bit emotional, huh? I won't take the time to explain how silly your example was. And wrong. It's clearly pointless. (Here's a clue though. There's a difference between affirming something as being constitutional and saying it isn't).
I think you just have an overwhelming need to be right. And as I have no interest in that mindset...I'll just quietly exit stage left. Won't respond to whatever name you'll call me now either. So have at it.

No matter how often others here may call me "emotional", have a "need to be right", resort to name-calling or whatever...

FACTS ARE FACTS.

And the FACT is that the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the relationship between a state and the United States is "indissoluble."

Anyone who is genuinely interested doesn't have to take my word for it.

They can read the decision for themselves.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/74/700