#10: Perry Appears to Think the Union Is an Optional Club

Perry soared to the top of the Republican polls when he entered the race, but I am one Texas Republican who believes that – if Perry becomes the party’s nominee – he simply will not be able to appeal to enough swing voters and independent voters to win in a general election.

Here’s the beginning of my list…

10. Perry is running to be President of the Union, but he appears to think the Union is an optional club.

According to the Huffington Post, in spite of the fact that the Civil War ended the attempt to secede from the Union, Perry claimed that when Texas joined the Union, it retained the option of withdrawing. (Unfortunately for Perry, his claim failed the fact checking test by the Texas State Library and Archives Commission).

Perry was quoted as saying:

There’s a lot of different scenarios. We’ve got a great union. There’s absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, you know, who knows what might come out of that. But Texas is a very unique place, and we’re a pretty independent lot to boot.

The idea of secession still being an option seems like too much of a fringe view to be supported by a successful national candidate.


2 thoughts on “#10: Perry Appears to Think the Union Is an Optional Club”

  1. The title oversimplifies a serious constitutional principle. When the feds overreach, i.e. usurp 10th Amendment powers reserved to the states, the sovereignty of the states and the people are thus violated. In so doing, the “supremacy clause” has been violated, meaning that the Constitution, the supreme law of the land, has been violated. If peaceful redress is made impossible, then, like our founders who seceded from an overreaching Britain, the several states are duty-bound to 1) nullify or 2) secede. The Supremacy Clause means EVERY element of the federal system of government–top to bottom–is subject to the Constitution and it is based upon that understanding and agreement that the union must necessarily function. If the feds violate the Contract entered into between the feds and the states, a sacred contract which forms the basis of the union itself, then that contract has been violated and the states may and ought to nullify or secede. The Contract imposes responsibilities on BOTH parties, not just one of the parties to that contract. As Jefferson said, “nullfiication is the rightful remedy”, failing which only secession or rebellion can effectively checkmate tyranny. Not at all a difficult concept to grasp.

    1. Clearly stated, though I do disagree. In my opinion, the mainstream view is that our republic has successfully achieved a rule of law and that – however imperfect our Republic may be – most voters vastly prefer working within our existing legal framework to resurrecting the specter of secession. As a result, I think Perry’s discussion of secession – even if he acknowledges that “there’s absolutely no reason to dissolve [the union]” – is likely to make voters nervous in a general election.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s