President Lincoln Was A Terrorist, History Just Won’t Admit It

Randys Right ^ | Randy's Right

[Who is John Galt?]

Your response is no suprise [sic]. Mixing in as many insults as you can. I guess your heroes are Beevus and Butthead or Howard Stern.

Actually, that's a better fit with you, since your posts include no historical documentation whatsoever...

;>)

You have not refuted one single point I have made but instead insist on ignoring the parts of the Constitution that you want gone.

Actually, in the real world, you have yet to cite any part of the United States Constitution that prohibited State secession. Feel free to do so, any time you come up for air...

You simply want to insist that the first line of the Tenth Amendment is meaningless to you.

Quite the contrary - I agree with Mr. Jefferson:

"I consider the foundation of the Constitution as laid on this ground: That 'all powers not delegated to the United States, by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States or to the people.' To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specially drawn around the powers of Congress, is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition."

You obviously do not...

Powers delegated to the U.S. are irrelevant to you.

Sorry to say it, but you have yet to cite any "delegated" power actually specified by the Constitution that would have prohibited State secession.

"Learn to read you moron."

;>)

You give no reason at all for ignoring parts of the Constitution...

Here is my reason - everything you cite is completely irrelevant. You remind me of the dipsh!t who claimed a few years back that State secession was unconstitutional, because it might theoretically interfere with the delivery of the mail.

You're both complete idiots...

Powers delegated to the United States by the Constitution are not to be usurped by left-wing confederate hacks. Get it yet moron?

The Constitution means precisely what it says - not what you want it to say.

"Get it yet moron?"

;>)

...but instead just start to call names and make insults to try and cover up your hackery and repeat your same old talking points.

When you can cite specific portions of the US Constitution that actually relate to your idiotic arguments (which are in fact century-old liberal "talking points" ;>), I'll stop referring to you as the purblind idiot that you quite obviously are.

Until then, go pound sand, you totalitarian SOB...

;>)

[Who is John Galt?]

Now if you had a half a brain at all you would also realize that the Tenth Amendment also reveals the process for a legal secession as well.
“Powers DELEGATED to the United States by the Constitution”

Actually, if "you had half a brain at all," you would realize that the several States reserved the right of secession, when they ratified the Constitution. You can find links to the ratification documents of the States of New York, Rhode Island, and Virginia on my FR home page - all of which implicitly reserve the right of secession to the subject States. If that reservation was not in keeping with the Constitution itself, their ratifications would not have been valid. Because those ratifications were considered valid, the reservations of rights (including the right of secession) were also valid. In other words, you're wrong again - as usual...

Legally the power to secession could have been DELEGATED back to the States through a Constitutional Amendment or even other possible legal means but...

Read the Tenth Amendment, sport - the right of secession was reserved to the States, and their people. No other amendment was required.

"Learn to read you moron."

The traitors of the democrat party chose differently. The democrats chose treason.

In my opinion, you're more the traitor than the secessionists - you refuse to recognize the rule of written, constitutional law...