[billbears]

Unless I'm mistaken, you're making a reference to the Civil War,

And who says Republicans are thick?

where the core issue was the 'state right' to impose the institution of slavery within its state borders,

Well you were doing so good. The right of the separate and sovereign states to determine their destinies and not be overtaxed to prop up northern industries. Republican/Whig industrial protectionism was a cause, perhaps the most important cause. But victors do write the history don't they?

This is the stance of conservative libertarians. An understanding that laws do need to be implemented at some level of government, if the majority of the citizenry agree to such laws. But nowhere in the Constitution was it intended to be at the federal level. And if all the Republican party has to offer is implementation of moral or other laws that were intended at the state level, they can rot for all I care.

[Rembrandt_fan]

You wrote, "Republican/Whig industrial protectionism was a cause, perhaps the most important cause [of the Civil War]."

Sorry, that particular argument is a feel-good rationalization, but it is not the truth. For Heaven's sake, Czarist Russia freed the serfs before American slaves were freed--and then only after bloody and sustained conflict. What does that say about your beloved Confederacy? About the vision of the men guiding succession?

And whenever I see the word 'sovereign' pop up in an argument concerning the balance of state and federal power, I know I'm dealing with a representative of the neo-confederate fringe. Hey, I know, why don't you declare yourself a 'sovereign citizen', declare your bunker a 'sovereign state', print your own money, elect your own officials, refuse to recognize state and federal authority, and then withdraw altogether from anything approaching the mainstream political life of this country? That way, your vote won't affect the outcome in legitimate elections--you're happy, I'm happy.

And don't forget to watch out for those black helicopters.