Ron Paul's Freedom Report

Every month we get Ron Paul's Freedom Report - his newsletter to update people on his current legislature and his opinions on upcoming issues, etc. Today, one of his articles covered Governor Perry's statements alluding to secession.
If you recall, the media and several of the general public were entirely up in arms, even calling for an impeachment due to treason.
I don't quite follow this. I definitely understand distaste for our fair Governor. In the 1990 election, he promised to reduce property taxes, but backed down after getting in office (and why he doesn't see it as renting land from the government is beyond me). Go read wikipedia to see more about this and his wonderful "aid" through the lottery (excuse me while I go mourn the memory of our freedom), and my personal favorite, his support of the (now vanquished, thank God) sodomy laws in Texas (GOOD GOSH MAN, are you insane?!) - the next time you and your spouse play a little fun "tie me to the bedpost", expect to get a rude intrusion from Governor Perry. The sodomy laws also included homosexuality; he wasn't just trying to strictly define marriage, he was trying to outlaw a particular event that ocurred in the home. Whether or not one agrees with the morality of homosexuality, it is not the purpose of the government to tell us what is right and wrong, and when we can and can't do things we want to do with a consenting adult. And if you bring up suicide, I'll fight back.
Anyway, I'm not Perry's biggest fan.
But it is complete ridiculousness to suggest that it is treason to secede - much less bloody talk about it! That's my favorite, actually - the fact that so many thought that it was treason to talk about secession. Goes to show how little people care about freedom of speech.
But the idea of secession is necessary, I argue. As does Ron Paul :) He brings up two excellent points: the first is our very nature as a country. Whether we like it or not, America is a government born of secession. We seceded from Britain because (and here's the kicker) they promised something that we didn't get. You do the math for today. His second point is equally poignant: If we have a contract with someone, and they don't hold up their end of the bargain, then the contract is broken and you are not bound to it any longer.
The argument should be, "Perry, why is it that you think the government has not held up their end of the deal to states?" Although, I feel as though anyone who didn't know the answer to that question probably hasn't thought it through very much.