WTF?!? WTH? California Governor Newsom Continues to Describe California as a "Nation-State" in Interviews

Jonas Parker

Hooligan

WTH? California Governor Newsom Continues to Describe California as a "Nation-State" in Interviews
By Jim Hoft Published April 9, 2020 at 5:57pm


In several recent interviews Governor Gavin Newsome continues to describe California as a nation-state.
This is a typical tactic of the left when their is a successful Republican in charge.

This is the same state that declared itself a sanctuary state for illegal aliens not long ago.
Newsome described California a nation-state back on March 28.

Interesting. #California governor Newsom:
“California is a nation state!” pic.twitter.com/mbuDuWt1pg
— Dr. Ali Demirdas (@DemirdasPhd) March 28, 2020

Newsom again called California a nation-state in a recent CBS interview.
California is an enterprising, modernizing, nation-state. 40 million strong. Together, we will get through this. pic.twitter.com/PBTc7ukmak
— Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) April 1, 2020

And then this week Gavin Newsome described California as a nation-state on MSNBC.
Via liberal hack Francis Wilkinson at Bloomberg:
California this week declared its independence from the federal government’s feeble efforts to fight Covid-19 — and perhaps from a bit more. The consequences for the fight against the pandemic are almost certainly positive. The implications for the brewing civil war between Trumpism and America’s budding 21st-century majority, embodied by California’s multiracial liberal electorate, are less clear.

Speaking on MSNBC, Governor Gavin Newsom said that he would use the bulk purchasing power of California “as a nation-state” to acquire the hospital supplies that the federal government has failed to provide. If all goes according to plan, Newsom said, California might even “export some of those supplies to states in need.”
“Nation-state.” “Export.”
 

Dobbin

Faithful Steed
Actually, in so referencing, Newsome may be closer to the thoughts of the nation's Founders than we moderns ordinarily think.

We as a nation have gone far away from the concept of "states rights."

And given that California economically is larger than 90 percent of the world's nations, he may have solid basis for the claim.

I can see Cali as a separate national entity - but I'm tall (17 hands) and look over most human's heads.

California this week declared its independence from the federal government’s feeble efforts to fight Covid-19

K - now tell Trump you don't need him - just like Trump told you to shelter the Illegals yourself and don't expect any Federal help.

I'm good with that.

Dobbin
 

WTH? California Governor Newsom Continues to Describe California as a "Nation-State" in Interviews
By Jim Hoft Published April 9, 2020 at 5:57pm


In several recent interviews Governor Gavin Newsome continues to describe California as a nation-state.
This is a typical tactic of the left when their is a successful Republican in charge.

This is the same state that declared itself a sanctuary state for illegal aliens not long ago.
Newsome described California a nation-state back on March 28.



Newsom again called California a nation-state in a recent CBS interview.


And then this week Gavin Newsome described California as a nation-state on MSNBC.
Via liberal hack Francis Wilkinson at Bloomberg:
More likley with all of the illegals and their anchor babies, he (and his commie handlers) are trying to program the soft brains into the thought that CA is separate from the USA.

What they would do with that would be a BIG problem
 

night driver

ESFP adrift in INTJ sea
He has done this several times.

He tried to get Cali included in the Paris Accords as a legit peer signer.

THAT bounced a LOT higher than expected.

I'd have thought that the broken ass bones would have STILL not healed.
 

cleobc

Veteran Member
I'd be fine with California leaving the US but ONLY if they take Las Vegas with them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rbt

night driver

ESFP adrift in INTJ sea
I mean cutting them loose COULD be done, though it'd be rough, with all the .mil "Schtuff" in Cali but it COULD be done.

And I would LOVE to see them told, "OK you WANT TO BE A NATION STATE, YOU ARE ONE!! NOW you get to live within YOUR MEANS!!!"
Talk about PANIC!!

================================================================================


Nah, Vegas ain't part of the deal. Gives 'em WAY too much help on the "Live within YOUR means!!" deal.
 

Bps1691

Veteran Member
The Constitution has no provisions for a state leaving the Union. In the case of California I think a simple "Bye!" would be sufficient.
And since they would no longer be part of the USA, that watersharing compact goes out the window right?

Since the vast amount of the watershed isn't in California, they could kiss that 5.2 million acre feet of water they take from it good bye right?

ColoradoRiverBasin_from_BasinStudy_by_US_Bureau_of_Reclamation.jpg


... not to mention that ALL of the military bases that would remain USA territory, having to have a visa to enter the actual United States and the loss of all federal services (mail, FBI, etc).
 
I mean cutting them loose COULD be done, though it'd be rough, with all the .mil "Schtuff" in Cali but it COULD be done.

And I would LOVE to see them told, "OK you WANT TO BE A NATION STATE, YOU ARE ONE!! NOW you get to live within YOUR MEANS!!!"
Talk about PANIC!!
They don’t send the feds the fed taxes, they don’t get highways and other such stuff. And they keep the anti-missile stuff. Remember when USSR broke up and some countries still had ICBMs on their turf?
 
And since they would no longer be part of the USA, that watersharing compact goes out the window right?

Since the vast amount of the watershed isn't in California, they could kiss that 5.2 million acre feet of water they take from it good bye right?

ColoradoRiverBasin_from_BasinStudy_by_US_Bureau_of_Reclamation.jpg


... not to mention that ALL of the military bases that would remain USA territory, having to have a visa to enter the actual United States and the loss of all federal services (mail, FBI, etc).
International stamps.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Actually, in so referencing, Newsome may be closer to the thoughts of the nation's Founders than we moderns ordinarily think.

We as a nation have gone far away from the concept of "states rights."

And given that California economically is larger than 90 percent of the world's nations, he may have solid basis for the claim.

I can see Cali as a separate national entity - but I'm tall (17 hands) and look over most human's heads.



K - now tell Trump you don't need him - just like Trump told you to shelter the Illegals yourself and don't expect any Federal help.

I'm good with that.

Dobbin

The amount of infrastructure and industrial capability this state would need to bring back, even if the environmental regs were loosened, is huge if they were to reshape the state in any fashion into a sovereign nation.
 

Squib

Veteran Member
Well, there’s a lot I like about the idea, but...

Seems to me my ancestors tried that some generations ago and seems Lincoln and the North didn’t much agree!
As someone already posted, they don’t get the bases, nukes, or assets.
Also, the water might be a bit of a problem for them.
Add to that the US would have to help northern Cali break away, as you know they would!
And the border is closed, immigration is immigration.
And, they have to keep HollyWeird and it’s nuts.
And, no foreign bases or powers will be tolerated on North American soil. Monroe Doctrine and all that!
 

MinnesotaSmith

Membership Revoked
The Constitution has no provisions for a state leaving the Union. In the case of California I think a simple "Bye!" would be sufficient.

No. The ports, metal ores, diatom beds, oil fields, forests, croplands, rail lines, highways, aqueducts, etc., all have major value, and we'd want to keep those. Californians leaving the union would be just peachy. They'd need to leave with just the clothes on their backs, though.
 
Last edited:

marsh

On TB every waking moment
He has always referred to California as a "nation-state." Delusions of grandeaur and power prohibited to it and never delegated by the sovereign people..
 

Melodi

Disaster Cat
It was briefly a nation for a year and Dobbin is right about this probably being closer to what the Founding Fathers were envisioning before the War Between the States supposedly "settled" the matter.

But California (and all the issues aside) no one though the USSR could break up either but they did, and I think that the US needs to be very careful the same thing doesn't happen there.

Enough stress on the system (such as is currently having) over a long enough period of time and it will be every region (if not State) for themselves - declarations of Statehood being a one-way street (except for Texas) or not.

There are a lot of practical details but I'm old enough to remember Russian soldiers having to WALK home from far-flung places when the Soviet Empire fell - in fact, I was ironing right here in my house when I heard the reports start to come in over the radio.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
When the Revolutionary War ended, England signed a treaty separately with each colony recognizing each of them as a separate nation. They came together under the Articles of Confederation as the United States of America, retaining their separate sovereignties. It didn't work out.

They did a redesign, creating one federal government and the 13 states. Since the American people have no king to whom they are subjects, the sovereignty rests with the people. It is said they took power from each state and vested it in the new federal government by way of the written Constitution. The powers were limited and specific, covering the national functions of one country - the United States. The states were delegated the so-called police powers or the power to regulate to prevent substantial injury to general public health and safety and to promote the public interests in such things as roads and other public works.

If you look up President Adam's Jubilee Speech, about half way through, he talks about the process by which the ratification of the Constitution was obtained. The state legislatures did not approve the document. Special elections for delegates to attend a special convention were called in each state. The conventions in each state did the ratification. The people of each geographic state were the sovereigns who delegated the power and authority to the federal government and to the states.

E pluribus unum - out of many, one

One nation, and California isn't it.
 

raven

TB Fanatic
Actually, in so referencing, Newsome may be closer to the thoughts of the nation's Founders than we moderns ordinarily think.

We as a nation have gone far away from the concept of "states rights."

And given that California economically is larger than 90 percent of the world's nations, he may have solid basis for the claim.

I can see Cali as a separate national entity - but I'm tall (17 hands) and look over most human's heads.



K - now tell Trump you don't need him - just like Trump told you to shelter the Illegals yourself and don't expect any Federal help.

I'm good with that.

Dobbin
I agree that the concept of "nation state" is closer to the concept the founders envisioned. This can be observed in several legacy concepts which continue. The most obvious is the Drivers License. Each state has their own licensing laws and regulations. Less obvious is the Drivers License document you carry in your pocket which also doubles as your personal identification which is regulated by the state - we do not carry any other form of national identification normally.
Auto and Health Insurance is regulated by state. Voting is regulated by the state. During Primaries, candidates must file in each state. And while you vote, your votes are "translated" into Electoral College votes cast by the state.
And interestingly, you are actually a citizen of the state you were born which is recorded in the county of your birth. For example, when you request a US Passport, you must present a long form birth certificate which does not come from Washington DC Bureau of Citizenship comrade, it comes from your county.

In one regard, Democrats still hold true to their Confederate roots. They believe the state has the right to define who is a citizen . . . they believe they they have every right to choose to make an undocumented illegal alien a citizen.
Well, that and the idea everyone should own one.
 

MinnesotaSmith

Membership Revoked

State Of California Votes To Officially Secede From Reality

article-1678-1.jpg


SACRAMENTO, CA—"In a move that puts into ink what most Americans have known for decades now, Governor Gavin Newsom announced Wednesday that the State of California has voted to officially secede from reality.

“This is just a formality, really. We’ve been in our own little world for some time now, as everybody knows,” he said at an afternoon press conference announcing the decision. “I mean, we’re fighting to jail restaurant workers who give customers plastic straws, for crying out loud! Hahahaahahoooo boy!”

“In any event, let it be known henceforth that the State of California categorically renounces all ties to so-called ‘reality,’ and will continue governing our people without any regard for objective facts, morality, or sanity.”
At publishing time, rumors were swirling of a new motion to rename California “La La Land.”"
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Newsom Announces California as a “Nation/State”
April 8, 2020 By Stephen Frank

Like Jerry Brown before him, Gavin Newsom does not consider himself the Governor of the State of California. He is the head, as he calls it, “the Nation State of California”. He is the same governor creating trade agreements with foreign nations, trading “carbon credits” with other nations, suing the Federal government to create his own energy, water, immigration and environmental policies, separate from the other 49 States.
  • ““We’re confident we can supply the needs of the state of California, potentially the needs of other Western states. … We decided enough is enough, let’s use the purchasing power of the state of California as a nation-state. We did just that.”
How much purchasing power, exactly? According to a California Department of Finance letter, the state will make a down payment of $495 million, with a projected total cost of $990 million.”

Any wonder Newson is trying to close down the agriculture industry in California by limiting water, use AB 5 to kill jobs for the young, unskilled and inexperienced. The only question left is when will Newsom demand membership in the United Nations—expect it.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment

Gavin Newsom Declares California a ‘Nation-State’
The state is at odds with the federal government over coronavirus plans and much else.
By
Francis Wilkinson

April 9, 2020, 9:00 AM PDT
Going his own way.

Going his own way.
Photographer: Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images North America

California this week declared its independence from the federal government’s feeble efforts to fight Covid-19 — and perhaps from a bit more. The consequences for the fight against the pandemic are almost certainly positive.

The implications for the brewing civil war between Trumpism and America’s budding 21st-century majority, embodied by California’s multiracial liberal electorate, are less clear.

Speaking on MSNBC, Governor Gavin Newsom said that he would use the bulk purchasing power of California “as a nation-state” to acquire the hospital supplies that the federal government has failed to provide. If all goes according to plan, Newsom said, California might even “export some of those supplies to states in need.”

“Nation-state.” “Export.”

Newsom is accomplishing a few things here, with what can only be a deliberate lack of subtlety. First and foremost, he is trying to relieve the shortage of personal protective equipment — a crisis the White House has proved incapable of remedying. Details are a little fuzzy, but Newsom, according to news reports, has organized multiple suppliers to deliver roughly 200 million masks monthly.

Second, Newsom is kicking sand in the face of President Donald Trump after Newsom’s previous flattery — the coin of the White House realm — failed to produce results. If Trump can’t manage to deliver supplies, there’s no point in Newsom continuing the charade.

Third, and this may be the most enduring effect, Newsom is sending a powerful message to both political parties. So far, the Republican Party’s war on democratic values, institutions and laws has been a largely one-sided affair, with the GOP assaulting and the Democratic Party defending. The lethal ruling this week by the U.S. Supreme Court’s Republican bloc, which required Wisconsin residents to vote in person during a pandemic that shut down polling stations, is a preview of the fall campaign. The GOP intends to restrict vote-by-mail and other legitimate enfranchisement to suppress turnout amid fear, uncertainty and disease.

At some point this civil war by other means, with the goal of enshrining GOP minority rule, will provoke a Democratic counteroffensive. Newsom, leader of the nation’s largest state, is perhaps accelerating that response, shaking Democrats out of denial and putting Republicans on notice. California, an economic behemoth whose taxpayers account for 15% of individual contributions to the U.S. Treasury, is now toning up at muscle beach.

What that means, of course, is left to the imagination. But not much is required to envision what might evolve.

Newsom, a former lieutenant governor who won the top job in 2018, has used the “nation-state” phrase before. It’s a very odd thing to say. California, like its 49 smaller siblings, qualifies only as the second half. But it’s obviously no slip of the tongue. Democratic state Senator Scott Wiener, a leader in California’s cumbersome efforts to produce more housing, said soon after Newsom took office in 2019 that reorienting the state’s relationship to Washington is a necessity, not a choice.

“The federal government is no longer a reliable partner in delivering health care, in supporting immigrants, supporting LGBT people, in protecting the environment, so we need to forge our own path,” Wiener said. “We can do everything in our power to protect our state, but we need a reliable federal partner. And right now we don’t have that.”

The statement appears prescient in light of the Trump administration’s failure to protect against a pandemic. Newsom was the first governor to issue a stay-at-home order, on March 19. Though his state is chock-full of cosmopolitan centers, and rural threats loom as well, California is weathering the virus in far better shape than New York, which has many fewer people and many more deaths.

Federalism has always had rough spots, but conflict is rising and resolutions are not. California is a sanctuary state while the Trump administration is fond of immigration dragnets. Marijuana is grown, marketed and used in abundance in the state while the White House conjures more restrictions. The Trump administration endorses extreme gun rights; California has other ideas. Most of all, Trump’s failure to act, or even take responsibility for acting, in the face of pandemic has required California, like other states, to look out for itself.

One conflict, however, encompasses all others, and could galvanize Californians into new ways of thinking about their state and its relationship to Washington. The GOP war on democracy is inspired by a drive for racial and cultural supremacy that jeopardizes the democratic aspirations and human rights of California’s multiracial citizenry.

From Fort Sumter to Little Rock to Montgomery, the blueprint for states opposing federal control has a recurring theme. But there is no reason that states can’t adopt a racist playbook for other ends. If California and other 21st-century polities withhold revenue, or otherwise distance themselves from Washington’s control, legal and political battles will escalate. Republicans will have a legitimate constitutional argument — but it will be a morally tainted and politically illegitimate one so long as they continue to subvert majority rule.

The experience of states battling Covid-19 while the White House devotes its energy to winning the news cycle may be instructive. What is the difference, conceptually, between a state deploying its power to protect its population’s health and a state using it to protect its population’s democratic rights?

John C. Calhoun, who used the theory of states’ rights to defend the institution of slavery, is not generally a philosophical lodestar for liberal Democrats such as Newsom. But if Republicans (or foreign friends) succeed in sabotaging democracy in November, Calhoun’s theory of nullification, which posited that states have the power to defy federal law, could be ripe for a comeback on the left coast. With the heirs of the Confederacy now reigning in Washington, turnabout might be very fair play.
 

MountainBiker

Veteran Member
It is very strange that CA thinks they have all the right answers simply because they have 40 million people. When I compare my low population (600,000) State to CA I see our poverty and homeless rates are much lower, our income inequality ratios are far less, our violent and non-violent crime rates are far less, and our schools are better. Why would we ever look to CA for leadership when they fail on every measure that means anything in the quality of life of its residents? They have nothing to teach us.
 
Top