I can point out post after nauseating post from you where you have flatly stated that it wasn't legal for the South to secede in 1860 even though the legality of secession had never been argued in the courts until the White vs Texas case in 1869, and we all know what a farce that was.
In addition, your test for secession is virtually impossible to meet and has the de facto effect of trapping the states together ad infinitum.
Also, you have stated, again, post after nauseating post, that YOU would rather remain in the union, even if you have to live in a communist state because you would rather work from within (like the people have any say in our current government much less one that will soon be completely run by the soc/comms) than, so called, cutting and running.
We've all experienced your sophomoric taunts, calling us cowards and losers like our forefathers for preferring to cut our losses from this increasingly socialist, all powerful federal government, but I say, The Hell With You and your Obama butt kissing comrades (which is what you and the rest of the yankees will be calling each other very soon) for I'd rather be free of you than stuck with a bunch of idealistic, deranged, union-preservationist-at-all-cost nut jobs, holding hands on the deck of the Titanic and singing Hail to the Chief, than going down with you in the swiftly sinking socialist ship.
BTW, if you want me to STFU, why don't you just come and give it a go for yourself, you lying sack of buzzard puke.
But in none of your maggot-gagging posts have you identified where I said secession of any kind was illegal. I have always maintained that secession is permitted with the consent of the states. Positions supported by both James Madison and the Supreme Court
... and we all know what a farce that was.
Because you say it is? Thanks for clearing that up for us.</sarcasm>
In addition, your test for secession is virtually impossible to meet and has the de facto effect of trapping the states together ad infinitum.
How would you know?
Also, you have stated, again, post after nauseating post, that YOU would rather remain in the union, even if you have to live in a communist state because you would rather work from within (like the people have any say in our current government much less one that will soon be completely run by the soc/comms) than, so called, cutting and running.
I'm still waiting for you to identify which of those nauseating posts I stated secession was not allowed. But of course you can't do that because it didn't happen. So you lied...again. Lying is very much the cowboy way.
We've all experienced your sophomoric taunts, calling us cowards and losers...
As opposed to your adult behavior of calling people fags and telling them to shut the f*ck up? Sophomoric would be several steps above your usual level. Moronic would be a better description.
We've all experienced your sophomoric taunts, calling us cowards and losers like our forefathers for preferring to cut our losses from this increasingly socialist, all powerful federal government...
That's because all you are is talk. Or, more accurately, all you are is one continuous whine. You'll never rebel because you don't have the balls. You lack the backbone to put your money where your over-sized mouth is. You'll sit and bitch and moan and complain and babble on about what it'll be like in your new confederate police state, but when push comes to shove talk is all you're about.
BTW, if you want me to STFU, why don't you just come and give it a go for yourself, you lying sack of buzzard puke.
I suppose if you did shut up then we'd all lose a source of comedic relief.
We've all experienced your sophomoric taunts, calling us cowards and losers like our forefathers for preferring to cut our losses from this increasingly socialist, all powerful federal government, but I say, The Hell With You and your Obama butt kissing comrades (which is what you and the rest of the yankees will be calling each other very soon) for I'd rather be free of you than stuck with a bunch of idealistic, deranged, union-preservationist-at-all-cost nut jobs, holding hands on the deck of the Titanic and singing Hail to the Chief, than going down with you in the swiftly sinking socialist ship.
I couldn't have said it better myself. The only thing I would add is that the concept that a state or states having to fight their way out of this abysmal/absurd Union is ridiculous. Why anyone PAST OR PRESENT would take up arms against the leaving state(s) is SICK AND PERVERTED. I cannot understand why it happened 140 years ago, and I cannot understand why it could happen again.
Try 1795.
As long as she [the state of New Hampshire] continued to be one of the federal states, it must have been on equal terms. If she would not submit to the exercise of the act of sovereignty contended for by Congress, and the other states, she should have withdrawn herself from the confederacy.
Justice William Paterson, Penhallow, et al. v. Doane's Administrators, 3 Dall. 54, 82 (1795).
Two principles appear to me to be clear. 1. The authority was not possessed by Congress, unless given by all the states. 2. If once given, no state could, by any act of its own, disavow and recall the authority previously given, without withdrawing from the confederation.
Justice James Iredell, Ibid., at 95.
[I]t was said that New Hampshire had a right to revoke any authority she may have consented to give to Congress, and that by her acts of assembly she did in fact revoke it, if it were ever given. To this a very satisfactory answer was made: if she had such a right, there was but one way of exercising it, that is, by withdrawing herself from the confederacy.
Justice John Blair, Ibid., at 112-113.
3 of the 4 justices held that unilateral secession was legal.