The Fair Vote

Texas vs White 1869 was after the civil war and the south surrendered. If the south won that case never would existed.

 

if my aunt had a ****, she'd be my uncle.

 

That doesn't make sense, once again you quoting Texas vs White 1869 after the civil war ended, the argument is invalid.

 

You said if the south won then the court case wouldn't have existed. I said if my aunt had a ****, she'd be my uncle. Neither statement is reality. The reality is the south lost. They were never officially their own country, because states can't secede. You can whine and claim a supreme court ruling is invalid, but that doesn't change reality. The case is valid, and binding legal precedent. No state can secede from the union, without the approval of congress.

 

Yes the south where there own country cite a case before 1861 where states cant leave?

 

I don't need to. No case went before the court before Texas v White. Reality remains the same. States can not secede from the union without congressional approval. That's why texas is a state, and not it's own country.

 

And if the South won the war that case wouldn't of came up

 

You've got blinders on.

Moving right along ...

 

What language?

 

SHOOT YOURSELF IN THE FOOT

PS: It is the right-of-secession not succession - but that's irrelevant. Secession would require a vote of state-residents and that would never pass. The only reason the "south" succeeded in leaving was because it was a Single Industry economy. Cotton produced by the hard-work of slaves and enjoyed lavishly by the wealthy.

Some might say, "Not much has changed since". And certainly not for the developed country with the highest-ever Income Disparity:


So read that graphic on the left rightly - 20% of Total National Income in America goes to only the top 1% of families.

Note that the above is the 2014 data. Actual data from this year is even higher - here:

How did that come about? JFK started the downtrend in Upper-income Taxation and LBJ signed the law reducing it to around 70%.Then Reckless Ronnie chopped upper-incomes from the 70% level to the below 30% level. And individual negotiations with the IRS reduced them even further. (See historical graphic of rates here.)

Suggested message for next year to voters: Yeah, right! Shoot yourself in the foot yet again and vote Replicant ... !

 

They States that seceded in the ACW did so because their State Legislatures did so. None of them held plebiscites and I don't think the idea even existed at the time. The legislatures were locked up tight to the Planter class, the individual Southron had little if any say in that matter or any other. Mind, he still supported Slavery implicitly for social reasons, even though he very seldom owned any slaves at all.

 

and if my aunt had a dick, she'd be my uncle. Neither happened so it's irrelevant.

 

Already cited the specific language, which was cited by the Supreme Court. It’s why Texas isn’t its own country.

 

In which of the seven articles do you claim this language to be?

 

Irevlant , once again the south lost the war and that case came about years later.

 

Texas was it's own country, it agreed be admitted into the Union

 

Proven false.

 

Already cited the specific language, which was cited by the Supreme Court. It’s why Texas isn’t its own country.

 

right. the constitution precludes a state from leaving the union without congress. Texas v White.

 

And when it tried to leave, the constitution precluded it.

 

yes, I've proven you claim false. Texas v White. States can not secede. The ruling cites the specific language in the constitution precluding secession by the states.

 

No losing the civil war prevented it.

 

The language you cited says no such thing.

 

I've shown you otherwise

 

of course it does. It's why texas is a state, and not it's own country.