Quote:
Originally Posted by mensaguy
Not true. There's nothing conservative or liberal about it. There's also no ignoring the law. The Supreme Court has said it can't be done,...
|
And the Supreme has been saying since the 1950s that it could be done.
Last-in-Time Rule. Extra-Constitutionality gives the States the right to secede,
since they have always had that right.
If the North had lost, do you think the Supreme Court would have ruled the same?
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamencoFreak
The Anti-Federalists argued against the Union, but Hamilton....
|
...was a monarchist. If Hamilton had his way, you'd have a king instead of a president.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamencoFreak
If states were allowed to secede, they would have to have their own armies,.....
|
Wrong....but keep flailing away at nonsense, because it's really amusing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamencoFreak
... their own foreign policy,...
|
Yeah, so?
Um, didn't Senators appointed by States prior to the 17th Amendment confirm cabinet members,
like the Secretary of State? Did they not ratify or reject treaties?
So, you're saying, what, that there is some special Kool-Aid® that federal employees, appointed and elected officials drink that imbues them with the power of diplomacy and foreign policy?
Freak:
I'll have Kingdoms for $400, Alex.
Alex Trebek: And it's the Daily Double.....how much will you wager, Freak?
Freak:
I'll risk it all.
Alex Trebek: It has 200,000
fewer people than Cook County located in the State of Illinois.....
....time is running out......boop-boop-boop.....oh, sorry, Freak, the answer we were looking for is "
What is the Kingdom of Norway"....the Kingdom of Norway....if only you had been intelligent enough to understand that foreign States with populations smaller than itty-bitty US counties can conduct foreign policy, you might have gotten it right, and not be at -$8,000 and in third place as a loser.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamencoFreak
This wouldn't work very well,...
|
You mean
you wouldn't know how to do it.
It's not cool to impose your short-comings and weaknesses on others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by legalsea
Years ago I read an essay that Abraham Lincoln wrote in which he, with his very logical, legal and precise mind, carefully set forth the principles and legal basis denying the rights of the several States to leave the Union.
|
And yet Lincoln violated the Constitution....he violated the 1st Amendment right to free speech, he violated the 1st Amendment right to freedom of the press, he violated the 1st Amendment right of freedom to peaceably assemble, he violated
habeas corpus, he violated the 4th Amendment, the 5th Amendment, 6th Amendment, 8th Amendment, 9th Amendment and 10th Amendment.
Are you denying that Lincoln used federal troops against anti-slavery demonstrators in New York City, Cincinnati, Philadelphia and other cities?
I sure hope not.....because that would be really stupid, as well as factually incorrect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by legalsea
Lincoln said that if each State were able, on its own, to depart the Union, what of the debt?
|
Then I guess the federal government had best start running a balanced budget so there is no debt, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by geofra
Debts must be settled. Those owed by the tax payers of the seceding state to the tax payers of the nation and vice versa
|
No, debts do not have to be settled.
It's a matter of international law.
If Texas seceded tomorrow, Texas is not obligated to pay anything. Texas may do so voluntarily, but no international court or forum will force Texas to pay any debts owed. The successor State is always responsible for debts.
Also, you're apparently not aware that States (and counties and cities) are holders of federal debt.
Eisenhower murdered King Faisal of Iraq in cold blood, because he wanted to nationalize Iraqi oil fields, and then the hypocritical tyrant Eisenhower turns around and nationalizes all of the disability programs run by all 50 States and Commonwealths, and in doing so, dicks over all Americans.
But before Eisenhower did that, he murdered Faisal's successor General Qasim in cold blood for also attempting to nationalize Iraqi oil....'cause you know, that's the rule, 100% of all the wealth and resources of other [foreign] States are justly owed to the US simply because the US exists.
The point being that any federal debt incurred due to the federal government's violation of the Constitution or usurpation of State powers is owed solely by the federal government and not the States.
If you have to seize the assets of current and former congresspersons and presidents and cabinet members, and current and former appointees or federal employees, or seize their pension plans for payment, then that's just a damn shame.
Legally...
Mircea