![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/angry.net\/blog2\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/shocked-face.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Oregon is controlled by leftists from the city areas such as Portland. The problem with this is that most of the counties in the state are far more conservative then the urban areas. The rural counties have seen the Progressives run roughshod over their rights and finally, a few years ago, had enough.<\/p>\n
People started looking at a way to secede from the State. At first, they looked into creating a new state, (Number 51), but soon realized that was all but impossible. They they came up with a new idea. Instead of forming a new state, they decided they wanted to join with another state that culturally was more in tune with them. Thus was born the idea of Greater Idaho.<\/p>\n
It started with counties in Western Oregon holding elections asking the residents if they wanted to begin the process of joining with Idaho. It\u2019s now grown in size that most of the western counties want to leave the State of Decay<\/i><\/span> Oregon and join with the State of Idaho. Now the next phase of this is starting to take shape, asking the legislatures of the two states to begin formal talks to shift the state borders. Here are the details from Fox News<\/b><\/a>:<\/p>\n A campaign to have rural eastern Oregon secede <\/a>from the blue state and join more conservative Idaho has “virtually no chance” of becoming a reality, according to Idaho’s top state Senate Democrat. <\/b><\/p>\n I believe that Fox meant to say Western Oregon.<\/p>\n “I’m very pleased this measure has virtually no chance of advancing into reality,” Idaho Senate Minority Leader Melissa Wintrow, D, told Fox News Digital. “It would be bad for all involved and bad for the country, and I am opposed to it at all levels.” <\/b><\/p>\n Wintrow was referring to a resolution making its way through<\/a> the Idaho Legislature that wouldn’t move the Idaho-Oregon border but rather call for formal talks between the states’ legislatures about relocating the boundary line.<\/b><\/p>\n Idaho, politically, is mostly a Republican state. The Republicans control the State Legislature fairly solidly and the Democrats are, well I get the impression that \u201cTolerated\u201d would be correct.<\/p>\n Last month, Idaho’s House of Representatives passed the bill, which will now be debated in the state Senate. It’s unclear if the bill will pass the Idaho Senate, but the chamber is, like the state’s House, dominated by Republicans. <\/b><\/p>\n From what little I can tell, if western Oregon is absorbed by Idaho, it will benefit Idaho. I think they would pick up one or two seats in the House of Representatives, and of course, the Republican party would probably gain more seats in the state legislature. (Gee, could that be why the Democrats are opposed to the idea?)<\/p>\n Backers of the resolution support the so-called Greater Idaho movement, which seeks to incorporate about 13 Oregon counties, or 63% of the state’s landmass and 9% of its population, within Idaho’s borders. <\/b><\/p>\n That would take a major bite of of Oregon, however, most of the population of the state is more towards the coastal urban areas.<\/p>\n Proponents of the idea argue it’s about maintaining more traditional values<\/a>, preserving a certain way of life, and being properly represented by the state’s lawmakers. <\/b><\/p>\n “Yes, I am supportive of the Greater Idaho idea,” Idaho Rep. Judy Boyle, R, told Fox News Digital. “I have lived along the Oregon border my entire life, so have many east Oregon friends. They have been quite frustrated with the liberal I-5 western Oregon corridor running their state and completely ignoring their values and needs. They have finally come down to asking the voters, county by county, if they want to join Idaho. Currently, 11 counties have said YES [sic]!” <\/b><\/p>\n That is the primary reason the rural counties want to move from Oregon to Idaho. To be blunt, the Progressives aren\u2019t just ignoring the wishes of the red counties, they are actively suppressing them. By this I mean the progressives are moving to suppress the 2nd<\/sup> Amendment rights of people, their religious beliefs as well as their property rights. Obviously, I\u2019m not out in that region, and if I made any errors, please comment and if\/where needed, corrections will be made.<\/p>\n Proponents of Greater Idaho note that 11 counties in eastern Oregon have voted for ballot measures to explore the move and that, according to some polling, Idahoans would welcome expanding<\/a> the state boundary. In Oregon, meanwhile, polling has shown a roughly equal number of voters support and oppose the idea, with about one-fifth of the population undecided. <\/b><\/p>\n This is going to be interesting. I can see why many on the right are supportive of the border change, and honestly, I can see why many on the left are as well. It boils down to Conservatives saying \u201cWe want a divorce!\u201d and the progressives saying \u201cGoodbye and good riddance to you fascists!\u201d Then you have the Democrat office holders in Idaho who know what will happen to them if the borders are shifted.<\/p>\n However, some of Boyle’s colleagues counter that Idaho lawmakers should be focusing on the residents of their own state<\/a>.\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n “I oppose wasting a single minute of our very short time in the Idaho Legislature working to solve the problems of a minority of Oregon’s population instead of focusing our energy on the very real problems that we need to solve in Idaho,” Rep. Ned Burns, D, told Fox News Digital. “The proposal to move state boundaries is virtually impossible to execute. In each state it would take a concurrent resolution passed by two-thirds of each body, then a vote of the citizens, then an amendment to the state constitutions, and finally an act of Congress signed by the president. The idea that this would happen is laughable.” <\/b><\/p>\n Excuse me while I laugh at you Representative.<\/p>\n While it isn\u2019t easy to adjust state borders, it has happened in the past and there is a process to do so. This is different from creating a new state, which is what some would like to have happen with Puerto Rico and Washington D.C. (The later will not happen for a number of reasons) Currently, the measure to begin discussions has passed the Idaho House and is now in the Senate.<\/p>\n But now the measure is through the House and in the hands of the Senate. While the Senate vote may not fall entirely along party lines, don’t expect the support of Wintrow, who echoed some of Burns’ concerns. <\/b><\/p>\n While there are vast political differences in our region, Greater Idaho is not the proper remedy for those differences,” said Wintrow. “Our democratic republic depends on level heads coming together to find solutions to the issues that impact our citizens. Dividing state borders to create enclaves of politically like-minded people is the opposite of a healthy America.” <\/b><\/p>\n The problem with that idea, that level heads come together and discuss the issues, is that there are generally no level heads on the Democrat side of the fence. The level headed Democrats have either died, retired or gotten so fed up with the Democrat Party\u2019s race to the hard left that they\u2019ve left the party. (See Tulsi Gabbard) We\u2019re seeing just how bad the political divide has become these days. If you aren\u2019t supportive of the Progressive narrative, you are the enemy and must be not just destroyed, but utterly annihilated. (Up to and including murdered)<\/p>\n Despite such criticism, proponents of the Greater Idaho movement believe they’ve gained momentum. Matt McCaw, a spokesperson for the Greater Idaho group, has said he’s confident the measure under consideration will pass the legislature. <\/b><\/p>\n Most of this has been in regards to the Idaho side of the border. Obviously, there are about 16 counties in Oregon that have voted to approve the border shift, but what about all the rest in Oregon?<\/p>\n Meanwhile, former Oregon House Speaker Mark Simmons recently penned an op-ed in the Idaho Statesman, a daily newspaper, to explain why he supports a Greater Idaho, saying if they’re successful they’ll be “freeing rural, conservative communities from progressive blue-state law.”<\/b><\/p>\n One of the causes of the Greater Idaho movement was the antics of former Govno Kate Brown. She was another of the Hard Left blue state governors who used the Great Panicdemic of 2020 as a means to centralize power into her own hands. I\u2019ve written about her in the past<\/a>. She is a classic AWFUL. (Angry White Female Urban Liberal) As I recall, she flat out didn\u2019t care what happened to the conservative parts of the state.<\/p>\n Now the next question is, will the borders be redrawn? There is no way to know of course. Currently, the motions in the Idaho legislature are simply to just open discussions and look into redrawing the borders. I consider this to be a healthy idea, and probably should be done. This is definitely a much better way to deal with these issues then the alternative.<\/p>\n Thatisall<\/p>\n ~The Angry Webmaster~<\/b><\/i><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n (3<\/strong> votes, average: 5.00<\/strong> out of 5)
<\/span><\/span>Loading...<\/span>\n