Partisan62 wrote:Crock, you ran like a coward when I caught you in a big lie on the GoUpstate forum....
You've NEVER caught me in a lie. ... Get that BS out of your head.. .
Partisan62 wrote:If the Ordinances of Secession are the grand total of your knowledge on the cause of the Civil War and secession, you truly are as ignorant as we always thought.
Sounds like you are claiming that those responsible for the Ordinances of Secession were as adamant about lying as are you.. ... ..
They made it clear... . Their right to own humans was at the core of their traitorousness ...
You've made it clear that you will continue as you've always done to ignore reality..
Partisan62 wrote:You might have heard of a little crisis over nullification in 1832, which almost led to secession. The overreaching and increasing power of the federal government and reduction of the rights of the states would have driven the sections apart in time.
South Carolina had been adversely affected by the national economic decline of the 1820s..... Then the state was devastated by the Panic of 1819. The depression that followed was more severe than in almost any other state of the Union. Moreover, competition from the newer cotton producing areas along the Gulf Coast, blessed with fertile lands that produced a higher crop-yield per acre, made recovery painfully slow. To make matters worse, in large areas of South Carolina slaves vastly outnumbered whites, and there existed both considerable fear of slave rebellion and a growing sensitivity to even the smallest criticism of “the peculiar institution.”
[...] South Carolina’s first effort at nullification occurred in 1822. It was believed that free black sailors had assisted Denmark Vesey in his planned slave rebellion. South Carolina passed a Negro Seamen Act, which required that all black foreign seamen be imprisoned while their ships were docked in Charleston. Supreme Court Justice William Johnson, in his capacity as a circuit judge, declared this law as unconstitutional since it violated United States treaties with Great Britain. The South Carolina Senate announced that the judge’s ruling was invalid and that the Act would be enforced.
[...]
Since the Nullification Crisis, the doctrine of states rights been asserted again by opponents of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850...
[...]
In the 1950s, southern states attempted to use nullification and interposition to prevent desegregation of their schools. These attempts failed when the Supreme Court again rejected nullification in Cooper v. Aaron, explicitly holding that the states may not nullify federal law.
Your claim is pure BS. The Supreme court showed that it was South Carolina that overstepped its authority, leading to the Nullification Crisis. And slavery was central to the issue.
Partisan62 wrote:You quoted items from the article that were not directly related to the crisis of 1832.
You cherry-picked a specific moment in the on-going nullification crisis that was about manufacturing vs agricultural tariffs. But the nullification crisis started with slavery, and went back to being about slavery.
Partisan62 wrote:The problem is that the Supreme Court has no RIGHT to rule on anything that the constitution does not delegate to the federal government.
If believing that helps you get through the day, go right ahead. But don't expect others to believe it.
It's very understandable that the neo-Confederates try to downplay the main role
that slavery played in the Civil War. Even they realize that in 2012 defending slavery
is a non-starter. That's why they have tried to find other reasons for the war's origins.
That's turning out to be a non-starter too.
