Hilarious!

"when these liberals say the words "under God," their brains freeze up."

What brains?

Wayward Sisters, Part in Peace!
We don't desire any government or Union pinned together by bayonets.
--Horace Greeley, New York Tribune, 1860

Oops, that was the the northern urbanites; who promptly changed their minds when faced with the economic realities, and initiated America's bloodiest war. Disenfranchisement? How about a president elected who wasn't even listed on the ballot in 1/3 of the states?

Civil war? No, let the dhimmicrats make it a lawful, legal, and peaceful separation.

...although I was born in Switzerland and have only lived six months in the American South, my view is substantially Lee's. As an American constitutional problem, that question remains unsolved: solution by arms is hardly testimony to the rule of law.
Thus the War between the States was a disaster for America, for all the obvious reasons, but also, not least, because it created a very dangerous precedent: had I lived at the time, I would fervently have wished that Lee's honor might have found any other way out of its dilemma. Lee's tragedy, and ours as Americans, was that he held firmly and correctly to Duty, Honor, Country — when "Country", thru a failure of the framers of our Constitution, had not been defined. --Bill Thayer

As a believer in self-determination, if the current dhimm-blue areas want independence, it should be granted to them. A few caveats:
1)I'd recommend a gradual approach, creeping individualism, allowing more states' rights. It also allows a graceful re-union in the possibility that independence might well not be what they truly want.
2a) It's a material world. The dhimm-blue areas don't produce much food or material.
2b) It'd be a foolish nation that allows it's business, legal, and financial centers to remain fully in another nation. It was this --economic fact-- that changed Greeley's mind to advocating war 140 years ago; and the underlying premise is still valid.
3) Self determination extends to all. NY state voted for Bush; so did Pennsylvania, Maryland, Illinois, California, Oregon, and Washington state. If cities and some urban areas want to secede that's one thing, but the legal and logical conclusion is that counties and parishes can un-secede or unite with existing federalist states. (Except for WV, all current state boundaries are colonial leftovers anyway)

Wish 'em all the luck in the world. A secession movement would actually do a lot to bring back the balance(s) of governance.

Yeah! Let them secede and pay reparations to Jesse Jackson while they're at it! For food, well, they've got Starbucks. Unfortunately, their Social Security system won't last long, what with the Roe Effect. Oh, I'm feeling nasty. But this stupidity begs ridicule. And two more things: how I'd love my regained freedom to drive without seatbelt and smoke without censure when they're gone!

It seems at least one Canadian is proposing another alternative.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/americas/11/15/canadian.welcome.ap/index.html

Nice thing freedom - you can always leave.