Comments on: Rick Perry: Curiously Similar to Michele Bachmann on Science

By: Perry Doesn’t Believe Much in Science, But He Sure Believes in His Campaign’s Social Science “Eggheads” | The Intersection | Discover Magazine

Wed, 24 Aug 2011 20:46:38 +0000

[...] Perry leaves a lot to be desired on science policy. But paradoxically, his political campaign uses the scientific method more than any other campaign. [...]

By: WATCH: Rick Perry Consults the Big Guy in the Sky [Cartoon] | Internet News World

Wed, 17 Aug 2011 09:05:39 +0000

[...] Unproveable One Who I Can Use as Validation for Doing or Saying Anything I Want, I promise to make schools teach Intelligent Design as a legitimate scientific alternative to [...]

By: Daniel Murphy

Daniel Murphy — Sat, 13 Aug 2011 20:38:22 +0000

Was Texas ever granted a special right to secede? Perry may say yes, but the Texas State Library says no:

http://www.tsl.state.tx.us/exhibits/annexation/part5/question11.html

By: WVhybrid

WVhybrid — Sat, 13 Aug 2011 17:38:19 +0000

>The Intersection Says:
>August 12th, 2011 at 7:39 am

>I think Romney will do what it takes to get nominated, and then turn out his base in the general >election. And basically that means not talking about the subject, and even talking it down (as he did >in that clip I linked to above).

Would that put him in the category of “Compassionate Conservative” ?

By: Incredulous

Incredulous — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 19:56:42 +0000

16. Jody

Bah, that’s no fun. It is more enlightening to go to the original documents. I am really interested in finding the source for the idea of Texas having the right to secede. Having gone to school in Texas, we had it in all of our textbooks. It had to come from somewhere. Even though it is a meaningless piece of trivia, it is an interesting insight into the history. Much like reading the Federalist and such.

By: Jody

Jody — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 19:46:40 +0000

@all. Dudes. Seriously? Snopes and Wikipedia both have articles on the “Texas has the right to secede ” myth. It’s called Google, use it.

By: Incredulous

Incredulous — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:16:26 +0000

14. Vision Engineer

Actually a presidential proclamation (or Executive Orders) does carry weight of law… as far as the Congress and Supreme Court allow it to.

I can’t say how it would play out in action though. The President could send out the troops as Commander in Chief and I can’t say that the Congress or Courts could immediately take action. and I wonder if the War Powers Act would apply in the case of Insurrection.

It is an interesting question but the legality would most likely be decided by the winning force rather than law. Of course it would not be the first time for Texas to have it’s troops lined up on the border.

Now, if they went the other way and started an amendment expressly allowing it, or sued the government for the right and then let it go through the courts would probably be the only mechanisms to pull it off. Mainly, it would just be theatrics.

By: Vision Engineer

Vision Engineer — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 17:55:14 +0000

A presidential proclamation does not settle the issue legally at all. A presidential proclamation is simply that: a presidential proclamation. It does not carry the same weight as law nor can it override the constitution. It also does not address whether a state retains the right of secession constitutionally or not until that proclamation is actually brought before the Supreme Court and a decision is rendered. Until such time, it is still an open question. The fourteenth amendment does provide some rationale against secession, but because it is in conflict with the ninth and tenth amendments, and it was ratified under duress during a military occupation of the southern states, it is still an open question. It is doubtful that justices would side with secession simply because they themselves derive their power from the very institution that secession would most likely destroy.

By: Incredulous

Incredulous — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 17:07:31 +0000

#12 Vision Engieer

Well, if a presidential proclamation by Andrew Johnson that has not been found unconstitutional by the Supreme Court doesn’t decide the current status of the idea, I don’t know what would. :

“And did further declare in the same proclamation that it is the manifest determination of the American people that no State, of its own will, has a right or power to go out of or separate itself from, or be separated from the American Union; and that, therefore, each State ought to remain and constitute an integral part of the United States”

Now, as to the myth or reality of an original condition allowing secession, I don’t know beyond what I was taught in school. It’s a fun thought but the legality of doing it now has been decided in many ways.

By: Vision Engineer

Vision Engineer — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 16:17:44 +0000

This isn’t the main point in the original post, but secession was never decided. A war was fought and won by the non-secessionists. The legal question was never sought nor been answered. I remember reading (and am looking for a source) that Lincoln wanted to prosecute the seceding states legally but was advised not to because there was a good chance that he would lose. Secession had been discussed many times in the decades prior to the civil war with little consensus. Imagine that we fought a war today amongst the states over the individual health care mandate without any legal process occurring. Would winning the war really “decide” the issue? No, the winner would tell the loser how it is going to be. While there is no explicit right for any state to secede in the constitution, there is no prohibition. Also, the constitution makes it clear that any rights not specifically given to the federal government were reserved to the people or the states. A good legal argument can be made for secession. It would probably be the most interesting and important (and scary) case to ever come before the Supreme Court. I would imagine it would be very hard for any justice that came to the legal conclusion that the states have a right to secede to remain objective and write that opinion given the inevitable consequences should secession be decided legal. It would almost certainly mean the end of the United States as we know it.