Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: WhiskeyPapa
WIJG: Actually, if one were to refer to the original post, one would note that I was not 'quoting' the amendment. I am quite careful about such things. Once again (and as usual), Walt got it wrong...

WP: I saved it:

To: donmeaker
Under the terms of the 10th Amendment, powers not delegated or prohibited by the Constitution are reserved to the States or the people of the States - and the Constitution nowhere delegates or prohibits secession. 'So: there. No legal foundation to oppose secession. End of story.' As Harvard history professor William Gienapp recently noted, "the proponents of secession had a strong constitutional argument, probably a stronger argument than the nationalists advanced"...;>)
57 posted on 12/24/01 2:36 PM Pacific by Who is John Galt?

Don't try and weasel out.

Me? “Weasel out?” Now, that is quite humorous coming from Mr.-I-Won’t-Discuss-The-Secession-Of-The-Ratifying-States-Or-The-Alien-&-Sedition-Acts! You are a comedian! But I will nevertheless be happy to discuss the subject. A few points:

1) I was not “quoting” the amendment.

2) My statement (that the Tenth Amendment refers to the people of the States) was both rational and consistent with the historical documents of the era...

;>)

513 posted on 01/08/2002 3:43:24 PM PST by Who is John Galt?
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 496 | View Replies ]


To: Who is John Galt?
I was not “quoting” the amendment.

It walks like a duck.

It is a duck.

Walt

515 posted on 01/08/2002 4:03:38 PM PST by WhiskeyPapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 513 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson