Replies

>> I see you have swallowed the historic disinformation line of the Democratic Party, hook line and sinker. Don't let them pull on it too much, it will be uncomfortable.

Nonsense. The northern states refused (some by legislation) to enforce the fugitive slave law -- a clear constitutional requirement. In his inaugural address Lincoln made it clear that he believed the current amount of enforcement (or lack thereof) was sufficient. Further, there was no power given to the general government authorizing force against a state, nor any prohibition against a state from seceding. Lincoln completely ignored this. I repost the following from another thread:

In 1787, during the Constitutional Convention, there was a proposal for a clause "authorizing an exertion of the force of the whole against a delinquent state". James Madison, in opposition, stated, "The use of force against a state would look more like a declaration of war than an infliction of punishment, and would probably be considered by the party attacked as a dissolution of all previous compacts by which it might be bound". The clause was not adopted for inclusion in the constitution. Therefore, though it was considered, there is no constitutional power authorized to the general government to use force against a state.

The disinformation has come from the rewriting of history to label Lincoln as something other than the usurper he was.