alt.war.civil.usa

"Mike Griffith" < @ > wrote in message
news: @ ...
> On Aug 25, 12:36 pm, "Ray O'Hara" < ...@ > wrote:
> > "Mike Griffith" < ...@ > wrote in message
> >
> > news: @ ...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Aug 25, 9:37 am, "Bert" wrote:
> > > > "Mike Griffith" < ...@ > wrote in message
> >
> > > >news: @ ...
> >
> > > > >Even Ulysses S. Grant admitted,
> > > > > after the war, that the founding fathers would not have sanctioned
> > > > > using force to drag the Southern states back into the Union.
> >
> > > > Most of what you wrote is special pleading nonsense. But this one
makes
> > me
> > > > curious. Do you have a quote to share on this one, preferably not a
> > > > truncated one taken out of context? :-)
> >
> > > Well, if the past is any indicator, you folks will label any quote you
> > > don't like as "out of context." But, here's what Grant said:
> >
> > > If there had been a desire on the part of any single State
> > > to withdraw from the compact at any time while the number of States
> > > was limited to the original thirteen, I do not suppose there would
> > > have been any to contest the right, no matter how much the
> > > determination might have been regretted. . . .
> >
> > funny how you left out the rest of Grant's statement.
> > the part where he says once other states were added the right to leave
went
> > away. but that is just opinion
>
> The point is that he said that the founding fathers would have allowed
> the South to leave in peace rather than have war between brothers.
> That's what he said. He also said that no one would have contested
> secession among the original 13 states. That's what he also said.
> Yes, then he went on to opine that somehow the right to secede
> vanished just because more states were added. Odd logic. Anyway,
> that doesn't change what he said about how the founding fathers would
> have responded to Southern secession.
>
> >
> > article VI is fact. and it forbids secession.
>
> You can repeat that myth till the sun goes down, but it'll still be a
> myth. Article VI, like all other articles, applies to states that are
> in the Union. It says nothing about states not being able to rescind
> their ratification.
>
> > but, as always mike , the myths are the crap you spout in your biennial
> > postings.
>
> You're the one who posts myths over and over again. You just feel
> secure in them because a majority of people believe them, so perhaps
> that's why you just ignore facts that contradict them.
>
> > every six months you show up. post the same discredited "facts"{lies}
get
> > spanked and run away.
> > come back when you have a new song. we've heard this one and it doesn't
> > play.
>
> No, it's just that I don't waste my time arguing with people who have
> proven themselves absolutely immune to persuasion. You poeple won't
> admit anything, no matter how clearly proven it is, if it disrupts
> your version.
>
> Mike Griffith
>
>

we are willing to admit you haven't a clue.
that every six months you post the same stuff, it was wrong the other times.
its wrong now.