Rush Limbaugh Says Conservative States Are 'Trending Toward Secession' From U.S.
Rush Limbaugh reacts as First Lady Melania Trump and his wife Kathryn applaud as President Donald Trump delivers his State of the Union address last February. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)
Source: Rush Limbaugh Says Conservative States Are 'Trending Toward Secession' From U.S.
As a friend of mine, who posted a Washington Post article on the subject, put it, "Told ya. Gaining momentum." The secession movement, that is.
"Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh has suggested that some American states could soon breakaway from the United States and declare independence.
"Speaking on his program, The Rush Limbaugh Show, on Wednesday, Limbaugh claimed that 'there cannot be a peaceful coexistence' between liberal and conservative America, which he said had increasingly different cultures.
"Some states are 'trending toward secession' as a result, he said, adding that there was 'sizable and growing sentiment' for declaring independence from the U.S. in those which have a majority of conservative or right-wing voters."
It might be easy to say, "Oh, well, but that's Rush. Of course he's going to say something like that." And he has reportedly backtracked or "clarified" that he was not advocating secession himself, but “simply referenced what I have seen other people say about how we are incompatible, as currently divided, and that secession is something that people are speculating about."
Be that as it may, there really is a "sizable and growing sentiment" in that direction. It's not just Limbaugh-esque hyperbole.
The latest of the big guns to open up – albeit is a more discreet and less-confrontational fashion than Rush – is Col. Allen West, who posted a statement responding to the Supreme Court's decision not to hear a lawsuit in which Texas was joined by nearly 20 additional states and numerous other amicus curiae briefs in challenging the vote-counting practices of Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Here's his statement, as Business Insider reports:
“The Supreme Court, in tossing the Texas lawsuit that was joined by seventeen states and 106 US congressman, have decreed that a state can take unconstitutional actions and violate its own election law. Resulting in damaging effects on other states that abide by the law, while the guilty state suffers no consequences. This decision establishes a precedent that says states can violate the US constitution and not be held accountable. This decision will have far reaching ramifications for the future of our constitutional republic. Perhaps law-abiding states should bond together and form a Union of states that will abide by the constitution.”
BI further notes, "West is a retired U.S. Army lieutenant colonel and was a U.S. congressman in Florida from 2011 to 2013. He was elected as chairman of the Texas GOP on July 20, 2020, unseating former chairman James Dickey." Given the overall situation, I would strongly support this proposed Union!
Then there is the Texas lawmaker who, as also reported by Business Insider, "says he will propose a referendum on seceding from the US because the 'federal government is out of control'." It's hard to disagree with that assessment! They are. And I would support Texas (and possibly even consider relocating there – I have friends who would like me to move down, anyway) if they did. But I also find a lot to agree with in a further Allen West comment that "America needs Texas to lead, not secede."
In any case, State Representative Kyle Biederman, a Republican representing the greater San Antonio area since 2017, has indicated that he would use Article 1 Section 2 of the state's constitution to support his proposal, which reads:
"The faith of the people of Texas stands pledged to the preservation of a republican form of government, and, subject to this limitation only, they have at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think expedient."
At present, he's not getting a whole lot of support even from the GOP side of the aisle, but that could change, especially if a Biden-Harris administration takes office and starts to crack down in areas ranging from First and Second Amendment Rights, economic issues, immigration, and the so-called "Green New Deal." Such an administration could be the greatest friend secessionism has had since the 1860s.
My own sense of the situation, for whatever that may be worth, is that we are facing some very uncomfortable developments, and some very uncomfortable choices.
It is looking increasingly like the election of Joe Biden to the Presidency will stand; although I continue to hope that President Trump will somehow manage to pull a rabbit out of the hat. But if it does, I fear greatly that that will be a victory for extreme Left-wing policies and possibly the end of our already staggering system of Constitutional government. And I am not alone in that.
That is why there is talk of possible secession is in the air and growing louder, something I certainly never expected to see or hear in my time, much less seriously consider, myself. I recently read the novel Gods and Generals, authored by Jeff Shaara and published in 1996, and the description of events in the years 1858-1860 bear a striking – and unsettling – resemblance to what is going on today, in many quarters.
It appears that there are three basic futures facing us, all of them unpalatable in various degrees, but some significantly more so than others, if things continue as they are going: acquiescence to a Leftist takeover of the United States, descent into civil chaos / war / revolution, or secession.
None of them involve the continuation of the American experiment as it has been, for the last nearly 250 years, thus my statement that all are unpalatable. But the first two are clearly not at all acceptable, in my view. That leaves what could be, and I hope and pray would be, a relatively peaceful (if not exactly amicable) and orderly separation.
While deeply saddening – and highly challenging to work out in practice, since the regional differences, which do exist, are not nearly as clear-cut as in 1860 (the bigger divisions are urban-rural, and to a degree coastal-heartland), and there are complications (what do we do about our nuclear deterrence?) that did not exist in the 1960s – it is at least distinctly preferable to the alternatives!
As I have commented elsewhere, it seems to me that the best venue to hammer out such considerations would be at a Convention of States – an idea which has been floating around for quite several years, now, albeit for other purposes. Certainly it would be better to sort out our differences, and/or come to a parting of ways, in a peaceful and orderly fashion, rather than in the midst of civil strife and chaos.
But no one in a position of power or influence has asked me, so that opinion and $1.50 will get you a cup of coffee... *wry smile* In any case, may God help us! We are, once again, in "times that try men's souls."