Replies

Well there it is. Bubba's managed to evade all the serious issues, but by calling out my typo, he's shown all my points to be pure fallacy!

I'm merely pointing out your carelessness, which extends to other aspects of your arguments as well.

Other than that, thanks for yet another mind-blowing, eye-opening analogy!

Your argument was a minimization of the importance of the shelling of Sumter on the basis that no one was hurt.

Ignoring (as you have once again) the fact that secession had been brought to votes in 1812 (which would count as a "legal attempt" though never executed thanks to the ending of the war), I must say I'm very proud of you...

You really don't know what you're talking about, do you? The Hartford Convention wasn't "a vote" or "a legal attempt" at secession. It was a conference of four New England states. There had been some muttering about secession beforehand, but it never appeared in the final report of the Convention, which was just a document that they published, not some official act of government. And that was it. For you to claim that it was a legal attempt at secession is simply incorrect.

Your argument was a minimization of the importance of the shelling of Sumter on the basis that no one was hurt.

Nope, I merely pointed out your "hyperbole" was false when you said:

Lincoln went to war...after the south shelled US forces at Ft. Sumter
, and

they didn't simply announce themselves independent and start shelling Swedish troops(like the South did)

Did you forget your exaggerations (which were of course exaggerations worthy of a declaration of war), or was that simply "carelessness" on your part?

As for Hartford, keep reading (or whatever it is you do to gain your "knowledge"). Ever hear of the "flag of five stripes"? I'm sure that was a purely "Union" thing and had nothing to do with those 5 states wanting secession and actually designing a new flag. Convention records weren't kept, but there resolutions were written since they were prepared to deliver them to Madison.

The resolutions included such radical ideas as a State's right of "interposition" against the Federal government, and "Were so framed as to justify seceding, or not seceding, as events turned out." (That is, if you believe Teddy Roosevelt as much as you do Lincoln.) But you got me again with the general "final report" issued years after the war ended that didn't have the word secession in it.

Anyone not trying to deceive themselves and others (like you so passionately are) knew that secession was the agenda if they couldn't toss Madison.