“Southern States v. Lincoln”

Catholicgauze has it right.

There is no Texan right to succession.

There is madness in that kind of talk. I want no part of a political movement that seems okay with its “leaders” suggesting that sort of thing.

The matter was settled a long time ago.

The Union Forever.


9 Responses

  1. It has been observed, to coerce the states is one of the maddest projects that was ever devised. A failure of compliance will never be confined to a single state This being the case, can we suppose it wise to hazard a civil war? Suppose Massachusetts, or any large state, should refuse, and Congress should attempt to compel them, would they not have influence to procure assistance, especially from those states which are in the same situation as themselves? What picture does this idea present to our view? A complying state at war with a non-complying state; Congress marching the troops of one state into the bosom of another; this state collecting auxiliaries, and forming, perhaps, a majority against its federal head. Here is a nation at war with itself. Can any reasonable man be well disposed towards a government which makes war and carnage the only means of supporting itself — a government that can exist only by the sword? — Alexander Hamilton, 1788

  2. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

  3. Words vs. facts on the ground written in the blood of 600,000+.

    “The position of Prussia in Germany will not be determined by its liberalism but by its power … Prussia must concentrate its strength and hold it for the favorable moment, which has already come and gone several times. Since the treaties of Vienna, our frontiers have been ill-designed for a healthy body politic. Not through speeches and majority decisions will the great questions of the day be decided – that was the great mistake of 1848 and 1849 – but by iron and blood.”

    -Otto von Bismarck

    Facts on the ground. No contest.

  4. The Civil War settled it and made it law. No succession.

  5. If the War of Northern Aggression settled it, why is it not settled?

    A link to the law, please.

    Laws made by the Federal Congress while half the States were unrepresented are legitimate how?

  6. “If the War of Northern Aggression settled it, why is it not settled?”

    Some folks don’t know it when they have been beat. That plus a 100year low-level anti-USA/anti-black insurgency by the south.

    Here’s are some links:


  7. Refusal to accept defeat is valued when the stubborn are on your side.

    Y’all won ugly. Might don’t make right.

    Considered therefore as transactions under the Constitution, the ordinance of secession, adopted by the convention and ratified by a majority of the citizens of Texas, and all the acts of her legislature intended to give effect to that ordinance, were absolutely null. They were utterly without operation in law. The obligations of the State, as a member of the Union, and of every citizen of the State, as a citizen of the United States, remained perfect and unimpaired. It certainly follows that the State did not cease to be a State, nor her citizens to be citizens of the Union. If this were otherwise, the State must have become foreign, and her citizens foreigners. The war must have ceased to be a war for the suppression of rebellion, and must have become a war for conquest and subjugation.— Texas vs. White

    Yet States that had supposedly never left had to be readmitted

    It WAS a war for conquest and subjugation!

    The primacy of the central government in Washington City over the States and the People was established by fire and sword. Swear loyalty or be killed. Y’all have been justifying what you did ever since.

  8. The Union wasn’t run by Democrats back then. Now it is.

    See the difference?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: