Posted on 03/10/2013 8:19:44 AM PDT by BroJoeK
“Virginia waged war on the United States starting on April 16/17 (moving to attack before the final secession vote at the convention, BTW), attacking Union forces at Harper’s Ferry and Norfolk.”
Last I checked Norfolk and Harper’s Ferry both resided in the state of Virginia.
Did Virginia invade the North? No. Did Lincoln invade the South? Yes. Virginia had every right as a state to defend herself from Federal incursion.
“First of all, Democrats won in 1856 without winning Ohio or New York.”
And did I parse it that way? No. I said PA, NY and Ohio. For a reason.
But I'm not doing anything mathematically sophisticated here, just counting up how many combined votes Northern and Southern Democrats received in each state.
Doing that shows: in addition to the 84 electoral votes Democrats won, a combined ticket would have won another 46 (California, Kentucky, Oregon, Tennessee & Virginia) giving them 130 -- only 22 short of victory.
Indiana and Illinois had 24 votes between them, and only 11,000 voters switching from Republican to Democrat would give Dems the victory, and the presidency.
And, I'm saying those 11,000 represents the "enthusiasm gap" Democrats suffered from their split.
The same was true in Ohio and Pennsylvania.
So the 1860 election didn't even have to be close.
“Confederacy’s military assault on the US Army in Fort Sumter was its first major act of war against the United States.”
Was Ft. Sumter located in Union territory?
“only 22 short of victory.”
And that’s my point - even when unified the South was still short.
Nice try, genius.
The fact that the Confederacy, including Virginia, formally declared war on the United States, and had forces operating in Union states (i.e., Missouri) did not make it any less a Rebellion in Lincoln's eyes.
US Federal law covering Rebellions is the 1792 Militia Act, first used by President Washington in 1794 against the Whiskey Rebellion.
The fact is Democrats won the presidency in 1856, carrying Pennsylvania, but not New York or Ohio.
They could have done the same in 1860, and didn't even need Pennsylvania, since the votes in Illinois, Indiana and Ohio were all much closer that PA.
If Dems took Ohio, they didn't need PA, and if they took both Illinois and Indiana, then they didn't need either Ohio or Pennsylvania, to say nothing of New York.
You can check it out yourself -- the numbers for that 1860 election are all right here.
And if you're curious about 1856, they're right here.
It was Federal property, just like dozens of other properties illegally seized by Confederate forces, some before even declaring their secession.
Those seizures were at least acts of rebellion and insurrection.
The Confederacy's military assault on US Army troops in Fort Sumter was a clear act of war and/or rebellion.
By the way, let me request, can you do a little research of your own, and find for us the law -- any law -- which says that just because you and your buddy's sitting around with nothing better to do declare your "secession", that suddenly, magically, all US Government property within your area belongs to you?
Sorry, but nobody north of the Confederacy has ever seen such a law.
What do you think?
Democrats came close enough to winning in Illinois, Indiana, Ohio and Pennsylvania that a united ticket would have generated enough enthusiasm to carry them to victory in 1860.
Again, not so, unless we’re playing fantasy politics.
“It was Federal property, just like dozens of other properties illegally seized by Confederate forces, some before even declaring their secession.”
Last I checked the South paid taxes too. Were they compensated for their fair share of Federal property?
“They could have done the same in 1860, and didn’t even need Pennsylvania, since the votes in Illinois, Indiana and Ohio were all much closer that PA.”
And like I said, you couldn’t win back then without one of PA, NY or OH. All the nominees save WJB (born Illinois), were from one of these states for over 40 years. Wilson and Coolidge were the only exceptions until after the war.
No, the confeds only laid claim to anything they could steal.
You cannot understand, hating the Yankeeland isn't something we write down. It is just understood from birth. Like breathing.
As insurrectionists they weren’t entitled to anything except the edge of the sword.
I’m not sure that BroJoeK gets your point but I do. It is rare that we can get a candid revelation from the lost causers just how deep and irrational their hatred of other Americans really runs.
A point that I have made - and will continue to make - is that southroners, run by the democrat slavrocracy, weren’t hones in their commitment to the union as the north was. It was as though they were crossing their fingers behind their backs. As democrats they only honored commitments as long as they derived a preferential benefit and double-crossed the north when it was perceived things might change.
Nothing so well explains the suicidal unilateral “secession” and sprint to war as the regional bigotry that the slavers showed and goobers like cva display even today.
You're a funny guy. If you want to consider federal property to be the property of all the states then I won't disagree. But it was held by the federal government and Congress alone had the power to dispose of it. Virginia had no more right to claim possession of the federal arsenal at Harpers Ferry than New York had to claim ownership of a fort within its borders. Its actions were illegal and demonstrated that Virginia had joined the armed rebellion that the other Southern states had initiated by firing on Sumter. So logic of your claim that Lincoln invaded first is hazy at best. Yes, Lincoln may have sent troops into Virginia to occupy Arlington. But that didn't happen for over a month after Virginia had seized the federal arsenal.
Did they ever receive compensation from the North?
Did the federal government receive compensation for all the property that the South seized?
“You’re a funny guy. If you want to consider federal property to be the property of all the states then I won’t disagree.”
If it’s the property of all the states, then the Union claiming that all the federal institutions in confederate states are ‘theirs’ is simply theft. Either provide compensation to the Confederacy for these installations, or let the Confederacy take them over.
“Virginia had no more right to claim possession of the federal arsenal at Harpers Ferry than New York had to claim ownership of a fort within its borders.”
Lincoln had no right to seize all the federal property and deprive to the South what their tax dollars had helped in building. Not without just compensation thereof. Of course Lincoln could turn around and say that not only were they responsible for their share of the liabilities too. And the South would have accepted.
Peaceful secession was constitutional and permitted. The states did nothing wrong in exercising their constitutional right to leave the United States. Freely entered, freely leave.
“Did the federal government receive compensation for all the property that the South seized?”
Did they seize property outside of their state? No. Did the Union? Absolutely.
The April “invasion of Virginia” to your mind apparently consisted of Union troops guarding federal installations, as they had done for decades. I’m unclear why you think this qualifies as an incursion or attacking them constitutes self-defense.
Were these federal troops attacking Virginia state property or Virginia citizens? No, they were guarding what was indisputably federal property, which in its infinite wisdom the state of Virginia decided was its legal right to take over by acts of war and use for further attacks on the United States.
Virginia chose war, and they got it. Good and hard.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.