This bit of classic idiocy, however, needs to be addressed. Once again, it is an indication of the willingness of birthers to try to claim anything, anything at all, supports their idea.
And here Jeff shows his ignorance again. Dr. David Ramsey was not a sore loser. He was simply against Pro-Slavery Smith winning the seat. Anti-Slavery Ramsey came in third in the contest in South Carolina, and had he convinced the House of Representatives to eject Smith, The person who would have taken the seat would have been Commodore Alexander Gillon. Securing the seat for Alexander Gillion is not in the self Interest of Dr. Ramsey, it is a very good example of a selfless act.
So. Your claim is that David Ramsay really wasn't a sore loser. He was doing the world a great and noble favor by selflessly pushing his ineligibility nonsense, so that Commodore Alexander Gillon, a far, far better man than the pro-slavery Smith, could be installed into the House of Representatives instead of that rascally rascal Smith.
Hmm. Would this be the same Alexander Gillon of Orangeburg County, South Carolina who owned 106 slaves?
Might this be the same Alexander Gillon who seems first to have supported a ban on the further importation of slaves, on the grounds that it would cause "negroes" to "rise in value," and allow debtors with slaves to sell enough of them to get out of debt... but who the very NEXT year LED THE ATTEMPT TO REPEAL THE PROHIBITION ON IMPORTING SLAVES?
By the way, the same Alexander Gillon left to his wife, under certain conditions, "all my Negroes thereon or now with me, or in Charleston, or absent from me in this State, and all and Singular my Negroes to the Northward formerly under the Management of Philip Van Horn near Bound Brook in the Jerseys, with the future issue and increase of all my aforesaid Negroes as are females.
Oh, and did you know that the same Alexander Gillon directed that if his wife didn't qualify, all of his "Negroes" should go to his daughter, and further specified: "I hereby direct that the annual Profits of the said Premises... be appropriated first to the decent maintenance, cloathing and Educatlon of my said Daughter, and that the surplus be made an encreasing fund for the Purchasing of Negroes and improving the Premises for the benefit of my said Daughter.
So Gillon specified in his will that the profits of his estate should be used to purchase MORE "NEGROES!"
Yeah, Alexander Gillon was a real anti-slavery champion and humanitarian.
The whole thing shows just how despicable you are, and how you're not the slightest bit interested in promoting the truth based on the evidence.
I pegged David Ramsay as a sore loser, and that's exactly what he was. And I have you pegged as someone for whom the actual TRUTH means nothing. It is all about pushing your FALSE THEORY, no matter what the FACTS are.
And that's exactly what you are, too.
Goody for you.
Odd how you pick out that single snippet concerning an obscure state election to harangue over while failing to refute or even acknowledge anything concerning the actual subject of the thread.
-----
And don't get me started how you 'evidence' was a publication from 2009 titled "Deliver Us From Evil"....and you couldn't even access enough to see the footnotes to know where the quotes actually came from.
Guess it's another "take your word for it" kinda thing.
Now you have sprinted down the non-sequitur of arguing that Ramsey couldn't have been motivated by good intentions because the other guy was just as bad as William Smith in regards to his support for slavery. This is a false conflating of one thing with another, and is pretty much what I have come to expect from you.
Given that both candidates were Pro-Slavery, it must have been some OTHER reason why Ramsey wanted to torpedo William Smith. Now you were given the history in that link I provided, and you know full well that Smith's Brother was a Loyalist, and that Smith himself used his legal skills to advocate to win cases for the British, yet you DISHONESTLY try to dismiss the point by your foray into how Alexander Gillion was ALSO a Slave holder.
This is a classic Tuo quoque Argument. It is, in fact, the most CHILDISH of arguments, ("He did it too!!!") and it is exactly the kind of crap that you are best at.
Ramsey was Captured by the British and was, for nearly a year, a Prisoner of War. William Smith was pretty much a rat fink who's every move, and that of his family was seen as favoring the British and the Loyalists, yet you argue that Ramsey was out to get him because Ramsey got third place in an election?
Again, you are a turd who is intentionally misconstruing Ramsey's Actions to suit your own need to rebuke his writings. You are doing to him exactly what you accused me of doing to Rawle, (And which you had to walk back because you were WRONG about Rawle, and *I* was completely correct.) You are, among other things, a Hypocrite.
The whole thing shows just how despicable you are, and how you're not the slightest bit interested in promoting the truth based on the evidence.
And the Pot calls the Kettle black.