[rustbucket]

The pattern I see is that supporters of the Supreme Court would get outvoted by opponents.

So far you have failed to provide any evidence that Davis was against creating the Supreme Court. You claim he was, but there is documented evidence Davis called for its passage. Care to try your case in front of a jury?

I know you must be tired of trying to defend all the unconstitutional things Lincoln did, but if your only defense is to create a diversion by making unsupported accusations against Davis, then you must have a pretty weak case for defending Lincoln.

[GOPcapitalist]

I know you must be tired of trying to defend all the unconstitutional things Lincoln did, but if your only defense is to create a diversion by making unsupported accusations against Davis, then you must have a pretty weak case for defending Lincoln.

That seems to be his modus operandi: If Lincoln did something wrong, turn to the tu quoque and shout "Davis/Lee/Jackson did it too!" - even if Davis, Lee, or Jackson did not "do it too," as is certainly the case in this court thing.

[Non-Sequitur]

So far you have failed to provide any evidence that Davis was against creating the Supreme Court.

And you have failed to provide any evidence that Davis fought for one.

Care to try your case in front of a jury?

Sure. Would you?

I know you must be tired of trying to defend all the unconstitutional things Lincoln did, but if your only defense is to create a diversion by making unsupported accusations against Davis, then you must have a pretty weak case for defending Lincoln.

Are you trying to deflect attention from the unconstitutional and criminal actions of the Davis regime by bringing in Lincoln? Better try and support your claim that Davis supported the court, other than a single throw-away line in one of the last sentences of a speech.