As a matter of fact, I was educationally abused by progressives, like you – mostly in graduate school. But, fortunately my parents instilled in me the desire to learn and to seek the truth; so I grew out of it.
****************
>>BroJoeK wrote: "For example, consider our Founders' debates over "internal improvements" -- out of power Jefferson opposed Federalist plans on grounds of "strict construction" and then President Jefferson's own plans were opposed by Federalists on those same grounds."
There is no doubt Jefferson usurped power. For that reason, Joey apparently believes the federal government should have unlimited to do as it pleases under the banner of, "Jefferson usurped power: why can't we." Joey is one sick (minded) puppy.
****************
>>BroJoeK wrote: "Most people would shrug & say: "that's politics for you", but Kalamata uses this debate to label one particular Jeffersonian Democrat (later Whig) a "tyrant" among other things, for proposing, in effect, to make America great by putting Americans first."
Joey's posts are always deceptive. I was referring to Henry Clay, the slick usurper who was Lincoln's most admired. In this statement, Clay not only admits that the 1824 tariff bill he push through Congress set a legislative precedence (that is, power WAS usurped from the states and people,) but the power usurped was still not up to the level his friends desired:
"The Tariff of 1824 provided a general level of protection at about 35 percent ad valorem. It was not an especially high tariff, but it did hike duties on iron, woolens, cottons, hemp, and wool and cotton bagging. Clay was naturally pleased with his handiwork, although he expressed reservations. "The measure of protection which it extends to Domestic industry is short of what it should have been," he told George W. Featherstonhaugh, an Englishman who had settled in New York. "But we have succeeded in establishing the principle, and hereafter I apprehend less difficulty will be encountered in giving to it a more comprehensive & vigorous application." James Madison wrote to Clay and indicated his own exceptions to the general principle of protection, but on the whole, replied the Speaker, "my opinions were not widely different from yours." Government ought not to interfere between capital and labor or between different classes of society, he agreed, but "it ought to interfere, in behalf of our own people, against the policy and the measures of Foreign Governments." Once again Clay admitted that the measure fell "short of what many of its friends wished," but considering the "sensibilities" awakened by it, perhaps the wiser course dictated "that we should advance slowly."
[Robert Vincent Remini, "Henry Clay: Statesman for the Union." W. W. Norton & Company, 1997, p.232]
As you can see, Clay was a whiny, privileged little weasel -- a precursor to Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, and even Obama.
The last clause by Clay was given to us as a warning by Madison, when he explained we would more likely lose our liberty by "gradual and silent encroachments," than by "sudden and violent usurpations." Of course, Madison never envisioned that a psychopath would become president in 1861.
****************
>>BroJoeK wrote: "As President Trump often says, Democrats are vicious and horrible. I think it's because they were abused as children politically."
I had a wonderful childhood, Joey. However, if President Trump is right, and I believe he is, that explains why you are so messed up.
****************
>>Kalamata wrote: "Obviously those legislators, who had sworn an oath to the U.S. Constitution, were not aware it had been superseded by the new Lincoln Constitution, written by the devil himself. Did Joey mention that U.S. Congressman Henry May was also arrested? How about the mayor of Baltimore? How about newspaper editors and publishers?"
>>BroJoeK wrote: "The truth is that after Confederates formally declared war on the United States, May 6, 1861, any Union citizens who "adhered" to Confederates, "giving them aid and comfort", were guilty of treason and properly arrested for it."
The enemy of the United States was Abraham Lincoln, Joey, as well as those who gave aid and comfort to him. He is the one who appointed himself dictatorial powers, and then ran roughshod over the rights of countless Northern citizens.
****************
>>Kalamata wrote: "Joey's numbers are always deceptive."
>>BroJoeK wrote: "My numbers are always as accurate as I can make them. By "deceptive" Dan-bo only means he doesn't like what they imply."
Let me rephrase that in Dan Ratherese: "Joey's numbers are deceptive, but accurate." LOL!
****************
>>Kalamata wrote: "Maryland supported the right of the secessionists; and if Maryland had been allowed to exercise their natural and Constitutional right to secede, rather than being oppressed by Lincoln's thuggery, those numbers would have been reversed, and moreso, providing Joey's numbers are accurate in the first place, which is always in doubt."
>>BroJoeK wrote: "Here are the numbers for Maryland Confederate soldiers: . . . "
Those numbers became meaningless after Lincoln declared martial law, suspended habeas corpus, harassed and arrested Maryland's legislators, and shut down some newspapers. Who knows how many would have fought for Lincoln if he didn't force them to at the point of a bayonet, and threaten their property and liberty?
****************
>>Kalamata wrote: "Like all devout progressives, Joey treats the Constitution like a McDonald's Menu, when he is not using it for toilet paper."
>>BroJoeK wrote: "Like all Democrat propagandists, our Dan-child hyperbolizes his feeeeeeeeeeelings until there's no connection between his words and actual reality. Politically abused children become abusive adults."
Like all progressive democrats, Joey accuses me of what he is guilty of.
****************
>>Kalamata wrote: "Madison: "The compact can only be dissolved by the consent of the other parties, or by usurpations or abuses of power justly having that effect. Madison states that usurpations or abuses of power JUSTLY have the same effect as the consent of the other parties."
>>BroJoeK wrote: "Right, I have posted that quote innumerable times on these threads, always with the note that neither mutual consent nor abuses & usurpations existed in 1860."
Joey's posts are always deceptive. The seceding States certainly thought there were substantial abuses by the North. That is all it matters, from a constitutional perspective.
Progressives, like Joey, believe the Constitution had "evolved" by 1860 to give the federal government all powers once reserved to the states.
****************
>>Kalamata wrote: "Neither Madison nor any other Founder ever said that Federal tariff rates were matters that could justify unilateral secession."
Of course they did. They, via the Constitution, restricted the general government to uniform rates, which were abused over and over again.
Now that you mentioned it, you can find reasons for the secession in the Confederate Constitution. These are the Revenue Clauses of both Constitutions, with the differences highlighted:
"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States." ["Constitution of the United States and Amendments." 1787, Article I.8]
"[The Congress shall have power] To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises for revenue, necessary to pay the debts, provide for the common defense, and carry on the Government of the Confederate States; but no bounties shall be granted from the Treasury; nor shall any duties or taxes on importations from foreign nations be laid to promote or foster any branch of industry; and all duties, imposts, and excises shall be uniform throughout the Confederate States." ["Constitution of the Confederate States." Avalon Project, March 11, 1861, Article I, Sec. 8.1]
As you can see, the Confederate Congress eliminated the ability of slick crony-capitalists, like Henry Clay, to squeeze corporate welfare for their supporters out of the Confederate Constitution. That, in itself, was enough for a devout crony-capitalist, like Lincoln, to invade the Confederacy.
But in all fairness to Joey (he needs all the help we can give him,) it is likely the Founders may not have realized how severely the Revenue Clause could be abused. Hamilton himself explained how it would be "self-correcting," in a manner of speaking:
"Imposts, excises, and, in general, all duties upon articles of consumption, may be compared to a fluid, which will, in time, find its level with the means of paying them. The amount to be contributed by each citizen will in a degree be at his own option, and can be regulated by an attention to his resources. The rich may be extravagant, the poor can be frugal; and private oppression may always be avoided by a judicious selection of objects proper for such impositions. If inequalities should arise in some States from duties on particular objects, these will, in all probability, be counterbalanced by proportional inequalities in other States, from the duties on other objects. In the course of time and things, an equilibrium, as far as it is attainable in so complicated a subject, will be established everywhere. Or, if inequalities should still exist, they would neither be so great in their degree, so uniform in their operation, nor so odious in their appearance, as those which would necessarily spring from quotas, upon any scale that can possibly be devised."
[Alexander Hamiltion, Federalist No. 21, "Other Defects of the Present Confederation," Dec 12, 1787, in Bill Bailey, "The Complete Federalist Papers." The New Federalist Papers Project, p.102]
But now we know that Hamilton was a deceitful crook, who had figured out ways to bypass the barriers to usurpation, even before the ink was dry on the Constitution.
****************
>>Kalamata wrote: "Therefore, when Lincoln usurped powers from the states, he effectively gave consent to secession by those whose powers were being usurped."
>>BroJoeK wrote: "Lincoln held no public office when seven states unilaterally declared secession & Confederacy, at pleasure. After Fort Sumter, four more states used Lincoln's actions as their excuse to declare secession, Confederacy and war against the United States."
So, you agree that Lincoln's usurpations caused some of the states to secede. You forgot to mention that Maryland was forced to stay in the Union at the gunpoint.
****************
>>BroJoeK wrote: "Every other state, including slave-states remained in the Union and helped defeat the military forces attempting to destroy the United States."
You are living in La-La Land, Joey. Lincoln invaded the Confederacy, not the other way around.
****************
>>Kalamata wrote: "So much for crazy-Lincoln's "Union of the whole people" deception."
>>BroJoeK wrote: "In his post #1,512 OIFVeteran quotes a 1787 letter from George Washington to the president of congress explaining that his new Constitution did indeed seek to consolidate the states into a nation. So obviously, there is a range of interpretations of our Founders' Original Intent possible."
That is more of Joey's deception. In Washington's Farewell Address he warned against consolidation:
"It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those intrusted with its administration to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just estimate of that love of power and proneness to abuse it which predominates in the human heart is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position. The necessity of reciprocal checks in the exercise of political power, by dividing and distributing it into different depositories, and constituting each the guardian of the public weal against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern, some of them in our country and under our own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them."
[George Washington, "Farewell Address." 1796]
If you examine Washington's Convention 1787 speech carefully, you will see it promoted the same theme as all other Founding Fathers: a sharing of powers between the states by distributing some of them to their agent (the general government) via a compact (the Constitution.) Expressed in general terms, Washington stated:
"Individuals entering into society, must give up a share of liberty to preserve the rest."
It is not rocket science, Joey.
****************
>>Kalamata wrote: "A quarter-century of one-sided protective tariffs that transferred vast amounts of wealth from the South to the North, which was then used for corrupt, crony-capitalist infrastructure projects – IN THE NORTH – could not be considered by any sane person as a light and transient cause! So, what was the remedy?"
>>BroJoeK wrote: "As a typical Democrat, our Dan-child hyperbolizes minor differences in tariff rates into some grandiose justification for secession."
Joey, like all Far-Left Democrats, accuses others of his own crimes. And, as usual, Joey's statement is deceptive, in this case, amazingly so! From 1824 onward (as soon as Clay weaseled protective tariffs into federal legislative "precedent",) the South was plagued with moderate to heaven financial burdens from the tariffs.
****************
>>BroJoeK wrote: "Of course tariffs were a "light and transient cause" and the proof of that is most Southerners were happy with the tariff rates of 1857, and even of the higher rates of 1846. The rest of that nonsense about "transferring vast wealth from South to North" is sheer political fantasy."
Only a historically-challenged fool would say that, or Joey, but I repeat myself.
****************
>>Kalamata wrote: "Like I said, it was not only the right of the states to secede, but their DUTY! It is not rocket science, Joey, but a concept difficult to grasp by those wired to be bullies."
>>BroJoeK wrote: "Says our own Dan-bo, who was trained from childhood to mock & bully the truth with ludicrous Democrat propaganda."
Joey knows I am a counterpuncher, but he is also a liar, so don't take his word for it. In his very first few posts to me on this forum he came across as his typical know-it-all, jackass self (and, of course I was the dummy, according to him.) Naturally, things went downhill from there. LOL!
I had been following Joey's posts with others, before posting, so I knew beforehand he was an arrogant, scientifically-challenged blowhard. I didn't realize he was also a historically-challenged blowhard until I joined this thread. Perhaps he was emotionally abused as a child. A lot of bullies were.
****************
>>BroJoeK wrote: "Here's the real truth: in 1856 Southern Fire Eaters threatened secession if "Black Republican" John C. Fremont were elected president -- not because of tariffs or any other alleged nonsensical reason, but because of the threat Republicans represented to slavery. In 1856 Fremont lost, Democrat Buchanan won. In 1860 Fire Eaters again threatened secession if "Black Republican" Lincoln was elected, not because of tariffs or anything else, but because of the threat Republican Lincoln represented to slavery."
Actually, there were many causes; but the tariff issue was by far the most significant one. The secessionists didn't give a rat's behind about Lincoln's attempts to enshrine slavery into the Constitution as the 13th Amendment. They simply didn't want to be ruled by that disgusting crony-capitalist. Seventy years of Hamiltonian shenanigans were enough.
****************
>>BroJoeK wrote: "The day after Lincoln's election in November 1860, Fire Eaters began organizing secession, Confederacy, rebellion and war against the United States -- mainly because, they said, of Republicans' threat to slavery. "
That is partly true. War was off the table, until Lincoln put it there. The South simply wanted to be left alone to live their own lives and run their own economy.
Joey's posts are always deceptive.
Mr. Kalamata
Please remove me from your “To:” list. TIA