Nullification and Liberty

Lew Rockwell ^ | 12/10/02 | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

[Dixie republican]

See my reply to Jason b (58). you and I see this thing almost exactly the same.

[Protagoras]

That's a cheap shot with no revelance.

One needs a sense of history to make that determination.

In any case, I'm only guessing at the meaning of the word revelance. What are we reveling in? :-)

[WhiskeyPapa]

True Federalism isn't. We as a people have let the process fail.

Absolutely right.

Walt

[Dixie republican]

;-). Spelling is not my strong suit. Anyway, when I read that guy's bio, I don't think he was putting extra emphasis on being white, nor did he mean anything in the order. Sounded like a regular bio to me.

[Protagoras]

And perhaps it was. Perhaps.

And perhaps he gives himself away. But either way it doesn't mean a thing. He is, you see, quite insane.

But in order to know why that is so sure, you need to know the history.

[Dixie republican]

If by history, you mean "posting history" instead of "personal history" I'm not sure a judgement can be made on insanity. It's real tough to judge, for me and most folks I know, tone or sanity by reading text posted on a Board.

[Protagoras]

Try to have a meaningful exchange with him when you have a difference with his posts. One need not be a mental health professional to tell when someone is out of their mind. Draw your own conclusions. Carry on.

[justshutupandtakeit]

That is standard fare for TJ. He also raves about medications that he believes I should be taking. Since he cannot deal with reality I forgive him.

[Protagoras]

Don't forget to take your medicine, you know the pretty nurse in the white cap will scold you if you don't.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Pretty nurses never scold me. Like most pretty women hey can't get enough of me.

[justshutupandtakeit]

they

[Protagoras]

Like most pretty women hey can't get enough of me.

Delusions of adequacy.

[justshutupandtakeit]

TJ's projecting his own mental condition upon others. I am proud to be subject to his scorn since he is an ideological idiot at best.

He can't respond rationally so tries to get under my skin by posting irrelevencies. Don't expect a reasonable response from such as he. Immature babbling is his strong suit and crackpot theories.

[justshutupandtakeit]

It is completely false that secession has any Constitutional justification and that there is any thing in the writings of the founders that would justify it. All the founders expressed horror at the concept. All knew it would destroy the Union even Jefferson. Read Washington's Farewell Address for his view of secession (disunion). That was the main concern of the Address not foreign affairs.

Secession is just the ultimate expression of nullification since it could only be done by the act of a state legislature or convention. Neither of which would have any bearing upon federal law.

If secession were meant to be an alternative there would have been a mechanism for allowing it placed within the Constitution. Just as Congress was given the power to admit new states it would have been give the power to allow states to leave. It wasn't nor was there any discussion of such a procedure at the CC.

It is also false that there was ANY discussion of secession at the Constitutional Convention.

Secession cannot be squared with the perpetual Union declared in the Confederation and made more perfect under the Constitution.

[justshutupandtakeit]

How does a deluded one recognize delusions?

Oh, and does the excess of bile you possess back up and affect your mental capabilities? It appears to.

[Libertarianize the GOP]

Maybe if you reread the section on admitting States you would recognize that all the powers necessary for a mutually agreed secession are there and if a negotiated agreement can’t be reached it would be pointless to include such provisions in the Constitution.

[justshutupandtakeit]

There is nothing in Article IV, Section 3 of the constitution of the UNITED STATES which applies to secession. Not a line, not a word.

You must have it confused with the constitution of the Confederate States.

[Protagoras]

Are all these females (the ones you fantasize desire you) white?

[GOPcapitalist]

No, that is the point.

So you hold that The Lincoln was not bound to follow the procedures of the court system?

We take the idea of precedent for granted; in the 1860's they did not.

First off, centuries of common law says otherwise. Second, even if your claim were true it is rendered irrelevant by the fact that there was a pending case on the matter pertaining to The Lincoln. He didn't like its outcome so, instead of appealing it as procedure said, he ignored it.

You're blasting Lincoln over this, is a modern day judgement using modern day standards.

No Walt. I'm blasting The Lincoln over the simple fact that he ignored a court order without appeal or merit because he didn't like the outcome of the case. He had no right to do that then and would have no right to do it today.

Professor Neely says that it was a truism in Lincoln's day that he saved Maryland for the Union.

And so it may have been, but that is not the issue. The issue is whether he acted unconstitutionally in doing so, and by suspending habeas corpus and ignoring the ruling of the court on that matter, he did exactly that.

Lincoln was not condemned the way you do --at the time--

Really? Cause Justice Taney says otherwise and in fact condemned him just as I do with a court ruling. You're grasping at straws, Walt. Give it up. Your false god The Lincoln was fallable...very fallable.

[Libertarianize the GOP]

The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.

That very clearly empowers the Government to negotiate all territorial and property issues that would occur within a mutually agreed upon secession.