It is unusual Mental gymnastics, along with some serious Legal Word Salad to get things done....
It all starts and Ends with one thing, a Semicolon, which is the exact same problem we have with Gun Control, a Semicolon....
As for Congress approving the Statehood, it was Lincoln who approved it First, unconstitutionally, and Congress approved it later, AFTER WV had fully claimed to be a State....
Believe it or don't, I actually have ALL of this info DL'ed onto my Computer, as an FB file, but like hell if I can figure out HOW to access it, and I have tried every trick I can fin for Linux....
The ""Rebellion"", which only existed in the Minds of the Freemasons, wasn't really much of one....
Almost everywhere they went to preach about the ills f Secession, they were meat with lots of pushback, these people were Virginians First, Southerners Second, and didn't want to lose their Heritage, had they pushed harder, who knows....
Congrats on your two Masters Degrees in Propaganda, I hopefully, still have my sharper points of History, in order to impress....
As for Congress approving the Statehood, it was Lincoln who approved it First, unconstitutionally, and Congress approved it later, AFTER WV had fully claimed to be a State....
That's just not correct. Senate Bill 365 to approve West Virginia statehood was passed by Congress and then signed by Linoln on Dec 31, 1862... happy birthday West Virginia! Perhaps where you are confused, is the recognition of the restored government of Virginia, which was first acknowledged by the President and then Congress seated the new members to the body.
Interesting thing about WV being approved, was that it technically entered as a slave state, at least slavery was legal. However, it included a provision mandating gradual emancipation. Of course the bulk of slaves in VA were in the eastern, primarily coastal region.
The ""Rebellion"", which only existed in the Minds of the Freemasons, wasn't really much of one...
So the seizure of federal military installations never happened? The Army of Northern Virginia was a phantom? All of the masses of battles between federal and rebel forces in VA were just false flags invented by newspapers?
Congrats on your two Masters Degrees in Propaganda,
Backhanded compliments as means to levy ad hominem are quite the tell tale sign of you admitting you've lost this debate. The only propaganda being pushed here is by you and the Lost Cause apologist Aspie.
.
hopefully, still have my sharper points of History, in order to impress....
Whatever works for you man. If the delusional world you live in makes you happy, then by all means stay in it
Who specifically would they be ""Rebelling"" against???
The States, began as Individual Colonies, not as a Group, but Strictly as Individuals, and were recognized as such, as Individual Colonies that Upgraded themselves each alone to the Status of Individual Sovereign Nations....
The Founders made a huge Mistake when they named the United States, instead of the Current misnomer, they really should have named the Federal Conglomeration something bold, like the United Nations of America, and then it would be much clearer, and people would not believe that States are inferior to the U.S. Federation....
IF the States have Rights, and IF they are Sovereign, then the Question becomes Who the Hell were they ""Rebeling"" Against???
Sovereigns cannot rebel against themselves, so Who was this hidden ""SOVEREIGN"" that they were in ""Rebellion"" against???
"Secession" = sophistry. Rebellion, waa rebellion. In fact, in many states, organized and state sanctioned acts of insurrection and rebellion occurred even before any purported "legal" secession ordinances existed.
Contrary to Calhounian nonsense, there is no constitutional right for a state to "secede" or more accurately put the theory, to unilaterally withdraw from the USA because they were sore losers over who won the presidency... despite their best efforts to rig the election, to boot. Lost Cause apologists did quite the impressive gaslighting job after their rebellion was crushed. Just sad so many people still believe such lies.
The States, began as Individual Colonies, not as a Group, but Strictly as Individuals, and were recognized as such, as Individual Colonies that Upgraded themselves each alone to the Status of Individual Sovereign Nations....
Actually, the Crown gave them all independence, albeit likely unintentionally, via the Prohibitory Act. Yes, after this action, the colonies all became separate states. However, they in turn bound themselves into a new confederated nation via the Declaration of Independence (articles of incorporation), and immediately produced the Articles of Confederation (operating bylaws) to govern this new nation. Of course, the Union itself predates the country, the USA, by 2 years, having been established by the Articles of Association in 1774.
The Founders made a huge Mistake when they named the United States, instead of the Current misnomer, they really should have named the Federal Conglomeration something bold, like the United Nations of America, and then it would be much clearer, and people would not believe that States are inferior to the U.S. Federation....
United States of America. An experiment in republican government. The confusion isn't the fault of the Founders. The words they used actually described what they envisioned. The problem is future audiences lacking reading comprehension skills and being historically illiterate, lacking context necessary for understanding original intent.
IF the States have Rights, and IF they are Sovereign, then the Question becomes Who the Hell were they ""Rebeling"" Against???
The USA, under the Constitution, operates under a system of federalism rooted in the principle of dual sovereignty. This was quite the revolutionary system when it was devised. In some matters, the states hold sovereignty while in others the federal (national) government holds sovereignty. The states do retain certain rights, some explicitly enumerated in the Constitution and countless others not detailed but covered by the 10th Amendment (such as a state's right to let counties within its jurisdiction secede from the state and form a new state, as what happened with VA/WV). But the Constitution also prohibits the states from certain actions, and furthermore vests certain powers in the federal government that give it sovereignty. And ultimately, the supremacy clause of the Constitution is binding.
You can debate whether aspects of the Constitution are bad or not, but it doesn't negate the reality that it says what it says, and the formation of this nation was approved by the Founders, by the states, by the people. The Constitution is the law. If people don't like it, work through the system to improve it.
In 1860, fireeating shitheads pissed off that the other guy won the presidential election, a guy from a party that they fearmongered would end slavery and make black people Americans, threw a temper tantrum and devolved into insurrection and rebellion. Apostles of Disunion had been planning it all for decades. The lost election just gave them the excuse they needed to rile up the masses and dupe hundreds of thousands of useful idiots to join them. These states and people rebelled against the right rule of law, against the Constitution, against the USA.
Sovereigns cannot rebel against themselves, so Who was this hidden ""SOVEREIGN"" that they were in ""Rebellion"" against???
Again, federalism and dual sovereignty. The federal government, the states, the people. All were bound by the Constitution which all parties had agreed to support, a system which ensured checks and balances and opportunity for political recourse, such as elections. The people are the sovereign. They agreed to the Constitution. And in 1860, some of the people decided that they didn't want to live by the Constitution anymore so they rebelled against their duly elected local officials, their state governments and the federal government, against the Constitution and laws governing this country.
The sophistry employed to defend the indefensible, the most unjust of causes, of what actually happened in 1860, is appalling. Though, I suppose Calhoun, along with the Lost Cause Apostles, are all celebrating from their graves. The Disunion conspiracy has never really been fully defeated and sadly continues today.
And again I ask, exactly WHO is this Hidden ""Sovereign"" that the States were Rebelling against??
The States, BEFORE making the UNION, were Individual Sovereign Nations, each with a National Constitution of its own, and they chose to Make a BABY, and AGENT, for their own Betterment, the Creation cannot be BIGGER nor more Powerful that its Creator, and they CREATED the Union, they OWN IT, and it is supposed to be subordinate to the States, if NOT, then the states are OWNED by the Federal Government, and have no reason to have Constitutions, Borders, names, their own Laws, Police Forces, or even Governments....
IF it is True, that we have a ""CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC"", then what we have is a CONTRACT, where all States are Equals, it is a Mutual Union, a Club of States, kind of like a Country Club, Join Voluntarily, Leave Voluntarily, Freedom, but if you come back AFTER leaving, you're stuck....
If Everyone is Equal, then it MUST exist as a Voluntary Union, you are saying that the Union is NOT VOLUNTARY, and that makes it into a FORCED UNION, which is tantamount to Slavery, in terms of States under an all powerful Sovereign, where they are not allowed to Voluntarily Leave, is called a Feudal System, which makes the People into SERFS and Slaves Servants, who by any Measure, are NOT FREE, and in truth, have No Rights, just privileges....
Or is it that you think the States were Conquered by the United States in the American Revolution??
I'm trying to find WHERE you think the States are OWNED by the Federation, just explain that one little part....
Unusual Legal Gymnastics??? o.0
It is unusual Mental gymnastics, along with some serious Legal Word Salad to get things done....
It all starts and Ends with one thing, a Semicolon, which is the exact same problem we have with Gun Control, a Semicolon....
As for Congress approving the Statehood, it was Lincoln who approved it First, unconstitutionally, and Congress approved it later, AFTER WV had fully claimed to be a State....
Believe it or don't, I actually have ALL of this info DL'ed onto my Computer, as an FB file, but like hell if I can figure out HOW to access it, and I have tried every trick I can fin for Linux....
The ""Rebellion"", which only existed in the Minds of the Freemasons, wasn't really much of one....
Almost everywhere they went to preach about the ills f Secession, they were meat with lots of pushback, these people were Virginians First, Southerners Second, and didn't want to lose their Heritage, had they pushed harder, who knows....
Congrats on your two Masters Degrees in Propaganda, I hopefully, still have my sharper points of History, in order to impress....
That's just not correct. Senate Bill 365 to approve West Virginia statehood was passed by Congress and then signed by Linoln on Dec 31, 1862... happy birthday West Virginia! Perhaps where you are confused, is the recognition of the restored government of Virginia, which was first acknowledged by the President and then Congress seated the new members to the body.
Interesting thing about WV being approved, was that it technically entered as a slave state, at least slavery was legal. However, it included a provision mandating gradual emancipation. Of course the bulk of slaves in VA were in the eastern, primarily coastal region.
So the seizure of federal military installations never happened? The Army of Northern Virginia was a phantom? All of the masses of battles between federal and rebel forces in VA were just false flags invented by newspapers?
Backhanded compliments as means to levy ad hominem are quite the tell tale sign of you admitting you've lost this debate. The only propaganda being pushed here is by you and the Lost Cause apologist Aspie. .
Whatever works for you man. If the delusional world you live in makes you happy, then by all means stay in it
States Seceding is NOT Rebellion....
Who specifically would they be ""Rebelling"" against???
The States, began as Individual Colonies, not as a Group, but Strictly as Individuals, and were recognized as such, as Individual Colonies that Upgraded themselves each alone to the Status of Individual Sovereign Nations....
The Founders made a huge Mistake when they named the United States, instead of the Current misnomer, they really should have named the Federal Conglomeration something bold, like the United Nations of America, and then it would be much clearer, and people would not believe that States are inferior to the U.S. Federation....
IF the States have Rights, and IF they are Sovereign, then the Question becomes Who the Hell were they ""Rebeling"" Against???
Sovereigns cannot rebel against themselves, so Who was this hidden ""SOVEREIGN"" that they were in ""Rebellion"" against???
"Secession" = sophistry. Rebellion, waa rebellion. In fact, in many states, organized and state sanctioned acts of insurrection and rebellion occurred even before any purported "legal" secession ordinances existed.
Contrary to Calhounian nonsense, there is no constitutional right for a state to "secede" or more accurately put the theory, to unilaterally withdraw from the USA because they were sore losers over who won the presidency... despite their best efforts to rig the election, to boot. Lost Cause apologists did quite the impressive gaslighting job after their rebellion was crushed. Just sad so many people still believe such lies.
Actually, the Crown gave them all independence, albeit likely unintentionally, via the Prohibitory Act. Yes, after this action, the colonies all became separate states. However, they in turn bound themselves into a new confederated nation via the Declaration of Independence (articles of incorporation), and immediately produced the Articles of Confederation (operating bylaws) to govern this new nation. Of course, the Union itself predates the country, the USA, by 2 years, having been established by the Articles of Association in 1774.
United States of America. An experiment in republican government. The confusion isn't the fault of the Founders. The words they used actually described what they envisioned. The problem is future audiences lacking reading comprehension skills and being historically illiterate, lacking context necessary for understanding original intent.
The USA, under the Constitution, operates under a system of federalism rooted in the principle of dual sovereignty. This was quite the revolutionary system when it was devised. In some matters, the states hold sovereignty while in others the federal (national) government holds sovereignty. The states do retain certain rights, some explicitly enumerated in the Constitution and countless others not detailed but covered by the 10th Amendment (such as a state's right to let counties within its jurisdiction secede from the state and form a new state, as what happened with VA/WV). But the Constitution also prohibits the states from certain actions, and furthermore vests certain powers in the federal government that give it sovereignty. And ultimately, the supremacy clause of the Constitution is binding.
You can debate whether aspects of the Constitution are bad or not, but it doesn't negate the reality that it says what it says, and the formation of this nation was approved by the Founders, by the states, by the people. The Constitution is the law. If people don't like it, work through the system to improve it.
In 1860, fireeating shitheads pissed off that the other guy won the presidential election, a guy from a party that they fearmongered would end slavery and make black people Americans, threw a temper tantrum and devolved into insurrection and rebellion. Apostles of Disunion had been planning it all for decades. The lost election just gave them the excuse they needed to rile up the masses and dupe hundreds of thousands of useful idiots to join them. These states and people rebelled against the right rule of law, against the Constitution, against the USA.
Again, federalism and dual sovereignty. The federal government, the states, the people. All were bound by the Constitution which all parties had agreed to support, a system which ensured checks and balances and opportunity for political recourse, such as elections. The people are the sovereign. They agreed to the Constitution. And in 1860, some of the people decided that they didn't want to live by the Constitution anymore so they rebelled against their duly elected local officials, their state governments and the federal government, against the Constitution and laws governing this country.
The sophistry employed to defend the indefensible, the most unjust of causes, of what actually happened in 1860, is appalling. Though, I suppose Calhoun, along with the Lost Cause Apostles, are all celebrating from their graves. The Disunion conspiracy has never really been fully defeated and sadly continues today.
"""Secession" = sophistry. Rebellion, waa rebellion.""
And again I ask, exactly WHO is this Hidden ""Sovereign"" that the States were Rebelling against??
The States, BEFORE making the UNION, were Individual Sovereign Nations, each with a National Constitution of its own, and they chose to Make a BABY, and AGENT, for their own Betterment, the Creation cannot be BIGGER nor more Powerful that its Creator, and they CREATED the Union, they OWN IT, and it is supposed to be subordinate to the States, if NOT, then the states are OWNED by the Federal Government, and have no reason to have Constitutions, Borders, names, their own Laws, Police Forces, or even Governments....
IF it is True, that we have a ""CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC"", then what we have is a CONTRACT, where all States are Equals, it is a Mutual Union, a Club of States, kind of like a Country Club, Join Voluntarily, Leave Voluntarily, Freedom, but if you come back AFTER leaving, you're stuck....
If Everyone is Equal, then it MUST exist as a Voluntary Union, you are saying that the Union is NOT VOLUNTARY, and that makes it into a FORCED UNION, which is tantamount to Slavery, in terms of States under an all powerful Sovereign, where they are not allowed to Voluntarily Leave, is called a Feudal System, which makes the People into SERFS and Slaves Servants, who by any Measure, are NOT FREE, and in truth, have No Rights, just privileges....
Or is it that you think the States were Conquered by the United States in the American Revolution??
I'm trying to find WHERE you think the States are OWNED by the Federation, just explain that one little part....