It's more like a map of net tax moochers (literally, "in the red") versus net tax donors.

Seems like those signing these petitions are committing treason. Thought that was decided around 1861.

Next thing you know it'll be secession movements funded by Citizens United.

Not sure which started first the "Obama won by Fraud" or secession re-talks.

Straight from nut-country these folks are also claiming Obama won by fraud: there are 52 Dems that were arrested for voter fraud, Cuyahoga county, Ohio didn't register any votes for Romney (tip: Ohio's election commission doesn't support that contention, but we are talking conspiracy theory), nor were any votes cast for Romney in Philly (again, nothing to support the contention). Nut-country peeps are also saying that any business owner that fires people because they are afraid to see their taxes go up under Obama care are very American, and those that say otherwise are, well, should leave the country.

I mean, do we have a rubber room big enough to hold all these people?

I'm sure this map will be refined in coming weeks but it gives a good idea where the reds are. Does the term "red menace" ring abell?

(link...)

.

When in reality, America is "Old Europe". Pains me to say it, but what's the alternative? What does regaining a status of an industrial giant look like in a global economy?

Do we put children back to work so we can compete with India? Do we want 60 hr minimum work weeks at $2 an hour so we can compete with China's Foxconn workers? Do we want to pollute our environment the way those countries do so we can reduce costs?

Part of the problem is the view many Southerners have of "Old Europe". Decaying, socialist regimes seems to be the first image of many, most of whom have never been, or know little beyond "freedom fries" talking points. The Right loves to point to European debt, but minus Greece, debt to GDP is worse here than anywhere there. Our saving grace is the dollar.

From my perspective, "Old Europe" seems to strive for better, not cheaper. Something America would be wise to embrace, not run from.

If you look on the petition site, there are also petitions for states like New York, Pennsylvania, Deleware, and Alaska to secede. So it's not just the South.

(link...)

There are also two petitions supporting exiling everyone who signed a petition to secede.

OK, I live in Tennessee, own property in Tennessee, pay taxes in Tennessee and I am NOT willing to secede. So where is the Anti-Secession Petition as opposed to the exile petition? If there isn't one, I'd be willing to start one.

While it is correct to say that a bunch of states have petitioned for succession, let's be very clear that these are citizens/activists/crazies. It's not like the actual state or elected leaders are doing this.'

Maybe it's just people who saw Lincoln and didn't like it. Of course Lincoln wasn't playing here to I saw Seven Psychopaths, which may be just as pertinent. Or more so.

I hear ya, Mike, and I would not really expect to find your own signature on the Tennessee petition.

The mister, whom I believe I've mentioned is also a Repub, just rolled his eyes when I told him last night about this flurry of petition-signing.

(KNS reported this morn, tho, that Texas now has nearly 60,000 sigs on theirs and Louisiana has also surpassed that 25,000 sig threshold that requires the White House to respond.)

...to start a linguistic pissing match, but this keeps coming up in this thread, and it's driving me crazy.

secession : formal withdrawal from an organization

succession : the order in which or the conditions under which one person after another succeeds to a property, dignity, title, or throne

You're going to have to start wearing a dashiki. You know what a dashiki is?
Some special kind of moustache?!
Sure, whatever scares you the most.

Most of these dumbass successionists nuts are just frustrated WASPS that cannot stand the thought of losing control after hundreds of years of dominating American politics.They vote against their own interests and try to maintain the nostalgia of old. Those days are almost over .. so they better get used to it. Texas & Florida will soon be controlled by Dems......which will make the top 4 most populous states Democratic. Arizona and Georgia are not far behind. I see the current Republican party becoming irrelevant. The Republican "Immoral Minority" will soon lose its influence and become too weak to block progressive legislation at the national level. Of course, Tennessee Republicans and Republicans in other red states are still going to do as much as they can to damage public education and take away our constitutional voting rights before they eventually lose their power.

There are probably many of the secessionists petitioners from Knox County. There were approximately 30,000 Knoxville city voters that voted for the President and 27,000 for Romney. Romney received about 63% of Knox County vote & Obama 34%. I don't have a calculator handy, but that puts the voters that live outside city and voted for Romney at probably over 70%. Not to mention the voters in Knox county that put Republicans back in the state legislature. Teachers & others that voted for the state Republicans deserve what they get.The ignorant Republicans screwed all of us.

mld

Haslam takes a bold stand against secession...

That Bill Haslam's a pretty smart cookie.

On April 26, 2012, the House approved a $31.4 billion FY2013 state budget by a vote of 66-30. The House budget follows the governor's proposed budget closely, but leaves out several pet projects that appear in the Republican-authored Senate version. House legislators authorized the state to issue up to $381.9 million in bonds.

The next day, April 27, 2012, the Senate approved its $31.1 billion version of the FY2013. The Senate budget cuts millions of dollars in funding for programs and projects in what is seen as a retaliatory move against the House for cutting some Senate projects.

Federal funding will account for $12.3 billion, or about 39.6 percent of the state’s budget.

And in 2010, federal Medicaid (TennCare) funding was $6.4 billion, which was 76% of the program spending, and about 22% of the entire state budget.

Will he push Medicaid back onto the Feds? Can he? I'd love to see an Ad in the Rubio/Haslam 2016 campaign that says "Haslam shrunk the TN State Budget by 22 percent and rejected Obamacare."

And Rick Perry's IQ is also slightly higher than his shoe size.

Texas gets 37.3% of its state budget from the feds.

According to The New Civil Rights Movement, the only states that are not interested in seceding are those with gay marriage, but I've also read that there is at least a smattering of these nutters in all fifty.

One of my fellow Rottie rescue volunteers (in Texas, of course) was sporting a makeshift bumper sticker combo on her Escalade before the election that consisted of one that read 'Women for Romney/Ryan' followed by a hand painted 'or' and another sticker that simply said 'Secession'. I told her I thought it would be good riddance.

Linguistic Pissing Match you say?

H/T to Juanita Jean.

...we use to call that kind of talk treason. Personally, I think we still should.

From a progressive point of view, secession makes some sense. I can't imagine Tennessee waging war on Iran, paying foreign aid to Israel, or continuing the embargo of our neighbor Cuba. We have a developed automobile industry, plentiful coal, wood and sun for energy, fertile farmland for food production, the know-how to make clothing, and access to the sea via the Mississippi -- ingredients for what might be a sustainable economy. If Lithuania can do it, why not Tennessee?

As far as political protests go this petition business will garner some attention. But not nearly the attention of a nation of people working 30 hour work weeks. That is the protest that will cripple this country. Unintended Consequences=Obamacare.

How would you like to work two or even three jobs then get fined by the IRS for not having medical insurance? Those are the future Republicans or Independent voters. Many of them will be Hispanic.

Enjoy your "success". It will be brief.

KNS links this pretty funny data analysis of the "Secessionist Movement's" petition signers (current as of this morning).

Per the analyst, a professor of sociology at UNC-Chapel Hill:

In total, we collected data on 798,453 signatures. Of these, we identified 281,780 unique combinations of names and places, suggesting that a large number of people were signing more than one petition.

Whatta buncha wienies! Wonder how many times they voted???

But there's more:

We also looked at the distribution of petition signers by gender. While petition signers did not list their gender, we attempted to match first names with Social Security data on the relative frequency of names by sex. Of the 242,823 respondents with gendered names, 62% had male names and 38% had female names. This 24 point gender gap is twice the size of the gender gap for voters in the 2012 Presidential election.

Can you say "lame?!"

Tennessee borders seven other states. We would be overrun by the invading hordes in no time.

Eight states, actually.

Seven states and one commonwealth.

Smarty pants :-)

Actually, the fact that TN borders more states (and a commonwealth) than any other state in the U.S. is an important piece of trivia: It contributes greatly to our problem with "sales tax leakage," i.e., shopping across TN's borders to avoid the nation's highest average combined state and local sales tax rate.

It's just that we so seldom get the chance with you, S.

Didn't mean to beat you about the head and shoulders, tho!

(Edit: Rachel and Andy, I just glanced at Somebody's "correction" and it looks like he's still too fast for us to catch :-)

As far as political protests go this petition business will garner some attention. But not nearly the attention of a nation of people working 30 hour work weeks. That is the protest that will cripple this country. Unintended Consequences=Obamacare.

How would you like to work two or even three jobs then get fined by the IRS for not having medical insurance? Those are the future Republicans or Independent voters. Many of them will be Hispanic.

If you're fretting for Papa John, JCB, you need to explain why it is that he can't raise his prices three or four cents per pie (per the correction performed by Forbes magazine of Papa's erroneous math citing a price increase triple that amount) OR why cutting his payroll costs are his only option to avoid raising his prices.

Why can't he cut his facilities costs or his equipment costs?

Since he produces a product and not a service, why can't he cut his costs of good sold, in this case his ingredients used in pizza making?

Cash registers and electronics? Uniforms? Pizza boxes and paper products?

What about his tax and accounting costs or his advertising and promotion costs?

He can boost the price he charges for a franchise or reduce executive salaries (or just reduce executives), too.

If all else fails, he can also cut the dividend paid to investors.

So why is your first thought that Papa John or poor Mr. Metz or any restaurant chain owner should balance his budget on the backs of his minimum wage employees (or in the case of his tipped employees, people making as little as $2.13 per hour)???

This Papa John asshole has a freakin' 22 car garage and gave away 2 million pizzas during the NFL season.

So it's like Randy quoted recently on another thread: If you don't know who the mark is, you're the mark.

And you are the mark. Get a flippin' clue.

P.S.--We're educating Hispanic voters as to "how to identify the mark" now. It's easy enough, since they're already in the fold.

Clue. Get one.

Obamacare Will Cost Papa John's Pizza Far Less Than Free Pizza Giveaways

Remember, your sons and daughters run a 50-50 chance of graduating from a state university owing $25K in student loans and working for $2.13 an hour for assholes like this one.

Consider carefully where your loyalities should lie.

I don't have the time or the desire to educate you people

Bwa Ha Ha Ha Has Ha!

I thought it was funny, Michael.

Like diamonds.

One of the issues in the Supreme Court case of Texas v. White was whether or not Texas had the right to unilaterally leave the union. Writing for the court, Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase wrote,

But the court left open the possibility of secession by revolution “or through consent of the States.” Leaving aside the fact that a successful revolution would see Texas leave the United States, the court does leave it open for secession provided it was done with the consent of all the states and presumably the consent of the federal government. But the chances of that happening are extremely unlikely.

I believe he's saying that all business owners are Republicans, so we Democrats can't possibly understand their woes.

(Rolling eyes.)

Ding ding ding ding.

Also saying business owners are The Job Creators.

In my line of work years ago we used to tell people, just before feeding them a line of horse manure, that the basis for our reasoning was sound but classified.

"You people just have to trust me."

And, if an old Navy man looks at you and says, "Now, this ain't no sh*t.", expect a load of cobblers.

"However, only 200,000 small businesses will be affected by these changes because over 96 percent of small businesses fall below the 50-employee threshold."

Headline: Obama puts 200,000 small businesses out of business

Someone has to take the hit for the rest of us so you can get free healthcare? You put that many businesses under we all go under. What would it be like if 500 small businesses went under in Knoxville? I doubt that many businesses went under in Knoxville during the Depression. The ripple effect would cripple this town.

That Forbes article is Pro Obamacare. This four percent stuff sounds good unless you are one of that four percent or you do business with them. That is the middle class. Not the one percenters.

JCB, you do know that the restaurant and hospitality industries have always tried to keep the majority of their employees part-time in order to avoid paying any benefit costs for them?

During that seven year period I worked in the industry, I and most every self-supporting adult I worked with was employed as an hourly employee and was routinely scheduled for 37 hours per week. No health insurance, no paid vacation, no nothing.

In one restaurant where I worked for three years, I actually quit my job once a year--by agreement with my supervisor--so that I could take a week-long (unpaid) vacation. Some of my co-workers with a few years on the job did the same thing.

So I absolutely agree with you that some employers in these industries will try to continue doing what they've always done, namely skimp on the very people who have made them wealthy.

I absolutely disagree with you, though, that finangling with the PPACA to make it applicable only to employees working some number of hours weekly greater than 30 will somehow alleviate the poor treatment of employees in these industries.

That approach didn't work over the last several decades, when that threshold was set at 40 hours, and it won't work going forward.

All that will work--short of a single-payer system of the sort I doubt you'd approve--is simply to call out employers in these industries for the behaviors they've long exhibited.

So we are.

Join us anytime...

"I absolutely disagree with you, though, that finangling with the PPACA to make it applicable only to employees working some number of hours weekly greater than 30 will somehow alleviate the poor treatment of employees in these industries."

Obamacare has to be changed. Or the people that will suffer are the employees. And employers. It won't work. No plan that puts that much burden on that many businesses can work. 200,000 businesses? Really?

If Obamacare isn't changed, small business will do what it has to do to survive. You would do the same.

Even Obama has said the law is not perfect, and that he will work with Congress to make ongoing modifications. That will undoubtedly entail fixes that might be necessary to help small businesses participate, and also fixes that will put the hammer down on those operators who are simply seeking to shift the costs of doing business on others.

You and JCB seem to characterize all small businesses as all the same sort of angelic, noble job creators. They are not.

Many small businesses (most, I would venture) operate with business plans designed to make a profit while accounting for the costs of doing business. If they generate waste, they dispose of it legally and properly. If they interact with customers, they hire and train staff to do so in a friendly and knowledgeable manner. They manage equipment properly, so that employees have the the proper tools to do their jobs, and those tools are safe and operable. They seek to hire great employees by paying a decent wage and offering competitive benefits so that those employees will want to continue working there. These businesses operate in a way that provides value to customers and rewards the people who help provide that value.

These businesses may face some challenges meeting the requirements under the new healthcare law, but many may actually find that it's helpful, because they're already trying to provide employees with health insurance. Now, instead of facing exorbitant rates that are based on their small number of employees forming a "group," they will find that they can purchase insurance through state exchanges that base rates on a much larger "group."

On the other hand, there are some business operators who use a business model that seeks to maximize the bottom line based on short-term gains and minimizing costs every way possible, including treating employees like disposable commodities. These businesses are the ones that will have problems with Obamacare, because they don't value their employees enough to try to retain them. To be honest, I'm less sympathetic about those sorts of businesses, because they usually produce inferior goods and services, and while they will undoubtedly blame Obamacare for going out of business, they were headed for failure anyway.

Think about restaurants as small businesses. My favorite restaurants are local small businesses that employ people I know by name, because they've been there for years. You know those servers aren't being nickeled-and-dimed by the owner. They aren't being fired and replaced because they had to take a few sick days. Those small businesses will likely be helped by Obamacare, because they aren't suddenly faced with putting a number in their budget on a line where there was a zero. Many of those may end up putting a smaller number on that line than they have right now.

Obamacare has to be changed.

No, employers in these industries have to be changed.

Stop trying to defend the indefensible.

What he doesn't seem to realize, Biz, is that until the PPACA goes into full effect, no "group" exists in which most of these folks now uninsured may participate.

The suggestion that someone earning $2.13 per hour in wages could purchase an individual policy is ludicrous.

Other of his frustrations might have been answered by a single-payer system, of course, but maybe you've noticed that he remains mute on that subject every time it comes up.

He just wants to bitch.

If the government forces people to buy insurance what to say they want force you to become healthier.

And you lost this argument over and over until you can't lose it again. You lost.

Now, tell me: Shall I interpret your comments here as a preview of how you and your buddies intend to deliver more "competitive" (privatized) public education?

"We can't teach eeeeverybody! It costs too muuuuch! Can't we just teach sooooome of them???"

For the good of the collective, you can't have a big gulp in New York City because we are in in the same insurance pool and if you get fat then I have to pay more for insurance.

Right now, prior to full implementation of the PPACA, I am in a United Healthcare group rife with smokers and fat people, yet United Healthcare has not petitioned the federal government to somehow penalize all these hapless fools "for the good of the collective."

Following full implementation of the PPACA, United Healthcare will presumably enroll more high risk people of various types (particularly among those now uninsured due to their pre-existing conditions) AND will presumably enroll more low risk people of various types, too (particularly among those now uninsured because they are younger and/or especially healthy).

Given that the larger pool of insureds United Healthcare is to soon enroll isn't expected to change much in terms of the new group's relative health, why might full implementation of the PPACA motivate United Healthcare to make this appeal to governement that you expect?

And even if United Healthcare should make such an appeal to government, why might government chose to get involved in helping United Healthcare improve its profit margin?

United Healthcare ain't exactly Chryslar, you know.

Derrick Belcher (what an apt name) started the petition in Alabama, pissed as he was about the fact that the state, not the federal, government shut down his topless car wash.