Posted on 08/30/2012 2:40:56 PM PDT by PeaRidge
On 6 November 1860, the six-year-old Republican Party elected its first president. During the tense crisis months that followed – the “secession winter” of 1860–61 – practically all observers believed that Lincoln and the Republicans would begin attacking slavery as soon as they took power.
Democrats in the North blamed the Republican Party for the entire sectional crisis. They accused Republicans of plotting to circumvent the Constitutional prohibition against direct federal attacks on slavery. Republicans would instead allegedly try to squeeze slavery to death indirectly, by abolishing it in the territories and in Washington DC, suppressing it in the high seas, and refusing federal enforcement of the Slave Laws. The first to succumb to the Republican program of “ultimate extinction,” Democrats charged, would be the border states where slavery was most vulnerable. For Northern Democrats, this is what caused the crisis; the Republicans were to blame for trying to get around the Constitution.
Southern secessionists said almost exactly the same thing. The Republicans supposedly intended to bypass the Constitution’s protections for slavery by surrounding the South with free states, free territories, and free waters. What Republicans called a “cordon of freedom,” secessionists denounced as an inflammatory circle of fire.
Continued...............
you back on here, the poster who made a big fool of himself defending a troll thinking you were defending a woman.
Oh the name is Beckett08, so go and look back to your past posts around the occupy protest time
having said that, I’m telling you what Lincon said, you want to understand what he thought and was thinking then go and read what he wrote and said.
BTW
I think Lincoln was trying to have it both ways and was being what elected officials are and they are liars
Also I actually agree with you for the most part
Then why do you persist in perpetuating Lost Cause Loser mythology?
in your opinion and why do you persist in making yourself look like a fool.
Have you remembered yet Beckett08, the occupy troll you jumped on to protect from the evil me only to find she was a troll ?
See you were s quick to follow me as usual on here that you saw I was having an argument and you being you felt you had ot take her side against me, bit like now again.
ARF
What’s this “arf” crap? Are you a dog?
Hey - on the internet, remember, “No one knows you’re a dog!”
Let’s keep it that way, eh?
;-)
why do I have to explain everything to you, can you not do a search if you do not know something?
Why would you want the UN to have that kind of power?
Forget I asked - it's probably dimwitted anyway.
you can’t even understand that last post, WOW.
Beckett08 LOL
Declaration of Independence: Breaking political bonds because the sovereign is making war and inflicting taxes without representation: Good.
Illegal secession at pleasure to support and further a pretended right to enslave, kidnap and rape: Bad.
that’s your views and you are entitled to them I disagree.
You didn’t correct me.
Declaration of Independence: Breaking political bonds because the sovereign is making war and inflicting taxes without representation: Good.
Illegal secession at pleasure to support and further a pretended right to enslave, kidnap and rape: Bad.
that was your last post, why should I correct you?
You think the south was wrong and I think they were right.
Hell I odnt even tink it was illegal for them to break away unless you can state to me ion the constitution that they’re forced to stay with the north and in your case the west coast.
Keep it clean? LOL
He didn’t bark at you either...LOL
They are not forced to stay. They stay until they follow correct legal process to leave, or by successful revolution use an illegal process. Legal processes would be by federal constitutional amendment certainly, by federal legislation probably, and by successful supreme court case. Illegal processes would be by successful revolution. Failed insurrection does not meet the necessary criteria
Controversy between the states, or between the states and the federal government are required by the constitution to be resolved at the Supreme court. Of course once an insurrection starts, the federal government has to put down the insurrection so that courts may be in session and decisions enforced.
In the case of the Great Rebellion, the insurrection was put down, and the controversy was constitutionally settled in Texas v. White.
You can call it great rebellion though it;s the first time I’ve ever heard it called that though I have never been out in CA and had your CA education but we call it many things and we here sitting here by the pool , having a few drinks, quite a few and having a laugh call it war for southern independance .
Asked already but you have not stated it yet.
Can you show me please where it states in the constitution a state has ot be forced to stay within the union please and also where the feds have a right to raise and army and invade those states.
Thank you.
BTW What do you do for fun out in CA at this time on a Saturday night?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.