![\"Hippie\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/angry.net\/blog2\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/10\/3804_picture_of_a_beatnik_or_hippie_with_bongo_drums.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n
There are some serious people asking if it isn\u2019t time for California to say goodbye and fall into the Pacific<\/i><\/span> leave the union. They like to claim that the California economy is the 8th<\/sup> largest in the world, and that they are to different from all us wingnuts in Flyover Country. Is it possible for California to leave? Here are a few reasons and details from the Los Angeles Times<\/a>:<\/p>\n <\/a> N<\/b>ot since 2010<\/a> has California felt itself politically so out of step with the times. That year the state resisted the nationwide wave of anti-incumbent, anti-regulation and anti-big government voting to elect Jerry Brown<\/a> as governor, ease the passage of big-money state budgets and turn away a challenge to its pioneering greenhouse gas regulations. <\/b><\/p>\n <\/a> This election day, California voters tightened gun control, extended taxes on the rich, hiked cigarette taxes, legalized marijuana, boosted multilingual education \u2014 and of course provided Hillary Clinton<\/a> with all of her winning margin of 2 million popular votes, and then some, in her losing campaign for president. <\/b><\/p>\n No wonder the election has inspired talk of California\u2019s seceding from the United States. The nascent campaign, organized under the banner of the Yes California Independence Campaign and heralded by the Twitter hashtag #Calexit, has been energized by remarks by Brown, and others, that a Trump<\/a> election would necessitate \u201cbuilding a wall around California\u201d to preserve its forward-looking policies against a reactionary federal regime. And why not, the argument goes. After all, with a gross domestic product of $2.5 trillion, the state\u2019s economy ranks sixth in the world<\/a>, sandwiched between Britain and France. <\/b><\/p>\n So now California is claiming they are the 6th<\/sup> largest economy? I guess a few people started smoking grass before they legalized it. California\u2019s economy is sinking into a sea of red ink. Cities are going bankrupt all over the state and the financial liabilities of the state government are in the $1 trillion dollar area. But don\u2019t let fact get in the way of California\u2019s fantasies.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s impossible to look at the Trump campaign and not see a direct threat to the civil liberties and dignity of California citizens,\u201d says Tom Steyer, the progressive billionaire who in recent years has focused his energy on combating climate change via his organization NextGen Climate<\/a>.<\/b><\/p>\n This from someone who makes Stalin look like a true civil libertarian? Steyer has been trying to ram through what amounts to a totalitarian state in pursuit of promoting his religion of Man Made Climate change.<\/p>\n To dispense with the prospect of California\u2019s seceding from the union: On the gonna-happen scale, it\u2019s a Not. <\/b><\/p>\n Hey, don\u2019t give up just yet!<\/p>\n \u201cWe\u2019d either have to win the ensuing civil war or have Congress kiss us goodbye,\u201d says Joel D. Aberbach, director of the Center for American Politics and Public Policy at UCLA. \u201cThere isn\u2019t a procedure for seceding\u201d in the Constitution. The very notion of the U.S. as a divisible entity was settled by the Civil War.<\/b><\/p>\n Actually, it wasn\u2019t. Besides, there might just be a possibility of the rest of the United States saying \u201cFine, leave. Get out and don’t let the door hit you on the ass as you exit the Union.\u201d As to a civil war? I can see why you would think that would be a non-starter. Thanks to the California state government, the only weapons you have are dildo\u2019s and bongs.<\/p>\n The conflicts between state and federal policy will be serious. Here\u2019s a look at what may be some of the most important.<\/strong><\/p>\n Climate change:<\/i><\/strong> California has been among the national leaders in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and as recently as September strengthened its policies with a law mandating the reduction of climatologically harmful emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030. Its auto emission rules traditionally have set a benchmark for the auto industry and federal regulators. <\/b><\/p>\n And there is a very good chance that those rules will be dumped in the next year or so. The only way California can hope to drop those emission levels is to regulate cattle flatulence. Oh wait, they are<\/a>! The other way they are planning on reaching these goals is to drive pretty much all business out of the state, and they have been working on that for a couple of decades now.<\/p>\n During his campaign, Trump dismissed climate change as a Chinese hoax and pledged to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which already has been ratified by 113<\/a> of the 197 signatory countries. The U.S. ratified the agreement by presidential order on Sept. 3.<\/strong><\/p>\n Ok, a small problem here and one that is rather typical of the Progressive Moonbats. A president can NOT ratify any treaties. Only the United States Senate can do that, and they haven\u2019t, and they won\u2019t. Basically, the Paris agreement isn\u2019t worth the paper it\u2019s written on as far as the United States is concerned.<\/p>\n \u201cThe single biggest achievement of the Obama administration in energy and climate was to get those countries to agree,\u201d Steyer said. \u201cIt was an example of the best kind of American leadership \u2014 moral, technical, financial.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n Oh yes, the biggest part of this was the plan to loot the taxpayers to pay for this load of crap. I don\u2019t need to go into just how devastating to the American economy that agreement would be. If you think the economy sucks now, if Felonia had won and somehow flipped the Senate, the United States would be looking at total economic collapse. Next we have immigration.<\/p>\n Immigration:<\/b><\/i><\/strong> <\/b>Trump campaigned on a pledge to cut off federal funding to \u201csanctuary cities\u201d as part of his crackdown on illegal immigration. His chief of staff-designate, Reince Priebus, reiterated the policy in an interview after the election. <\/b><\/p>\n Basically, Trump plans on enforcing already existing laws, and first deporting\u00a0 convicted felons who are here illegally, then looking at all the rest. The Loons on the Left are aghast that they will lose their maids and gardeners, so they are saying they will not comply with the laws.<\/p>\n Leaders of those cities have pledged to keep protecting immigrants and fight Trump\u2019s proposed cuts in federal funding cuts, which would require congressional action. The stakes are high: Los Angeles receives about $500 million a year<\/a> in federal funding for such municipal services as port security and homeless shelters. But there are practical as well as moral reasons for cities to steer clear of immigration enforcement. Complicity with immigration agents shatters trust in police in immigrant-rich communities, complicating street-level patrolling. And with undocumented immigrants part of the fabric of diverse communities, rigorous enforcement can have bad economic consequences. <\/b><\/p>\n First, we are talking about ILLEGAL ALIENS here, not lawful resident aliens. There is a major difference. Second, as to those \u201cEconomic consequences\u201d? Yeah, there will be since you wont\u2019 be able to hire Pablo the illegal alien at $2 an hour to repair your roof. Nope, you\u2019ll have to pay Union scale for professional, legal roofers. Oh we can\u2019t have that now, can we?<\/p>\n Trump\u2019s anti-immigrant stance has spurred calls to action to protect potential deportees. The Los Angeles Unified School District says it will rebuff any federal request for students\u2019 immigration status.<\/b><\/p>\n Cal State University Chancellor Timothy P. White, whose system includes as many as 10,000 students without legal documentation, has said that campus police won’t honor federal requests<\/a> for deportation holds. Last week University of California President Janet Napolitano stated<\/a> that UC campus police departments would not involve themselves in investigations of the immigration status of individuals on campus and ruled out \u201cjoint efforts\u201d on immigration with federal, state, or local law enforcement agencies. She said the university aimed to \u201cvigorously protect the privacy and civil rights of the undocumented members of the UC community.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n Janet Incompetano was the former head of the Department of Homeland Security. She, allegedly, knows better. Still, if these people want to break the law, there are plenty of prison cells for them, and they won’t be the country club versions. And if one of these criminals that they are \u201cprotecting\u201d should commit a rape or murder? Guess what? You also become accessories to the crimes. So what else does California think is so great that the rest of the Country hates? How about Healthcare<\/p>\n Healthcare:<\/i><\/strong> Few states gave the Affordable Care Act<\/a>, which Trump and congressional Republicans pledge to repeal, support as full-throated as California. The state has enrolled about 1.4 million people in Obamacare health plans via its statewide individual insurance exchange, Covered California, and added about 3 million low-income residents to Medicaid<\/a> rolls via the law\u2019s Medicaid expansion, the cost of which has been 100% paid by the federal government. <\/b><\/p>\n And a fair number of those people are in the country illegally. Here\u2019s the thing. What Obama and the Democrats did was set the country up for financial collapse. Obamacare has been a complete failure. As to the Federal Government paying for Medicaid? The levels now are unsustainable fiscally, the reimbursement rates are so low that doctors and hospitals are refusing to take Medicaid patients, so while all these people think they\u2019re getting free medical care, what they are finding out is that they can\u2019t find a doctor when they need one.<\/p>\n Next we have Drugs and Guns.<\/p>\n Gun control and marijuana:<\/i><\/strong> Voters on election day flouted federal policy in both areas. Proposition 63 mandates background checks for ammunition sales and outlaws high-capacity ammo magazines.<\/b><\/p>\n Trump established himself as an ally of the National Rifle Assn.<\/a> during the campaign, but White House policy may not be the biggest problem for the state\u2019s firearms policy: the courts would be<\/a>. In rulings in 2008 and 2010, the Supreme Court extended the reach of the 2nd Amendment\u2019s protection of the right to bear arms. Within a day of the election, the NRA was talking about challenging Proposition 63 and related state laws before the courts. <\/b><\/p>\n California is well known as a state that denies the existence of the Second Amendment. In the view of the moonbats running the state, only the \u201cSpecial People\u201d, (the ruling elite, their security guards and criminals), have the right to keep and bear arms. They refuse to acknowledge the Heller decision, and were hoping that with Hillary Clinton winning the election, the general roundup and confiscation of all privately held firearms would begin next year.<\/p>\n Now, with Donald Trump as our next president, the next supreme court justice, along with a few other probable replacements, the odds are very good that California\u2019s, along with other Blue, Anti-gun states will find their local laws thrown out.<\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n