Re: Help design the ideal Presidential candidate

Aaron Denney <wnoise@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On 2008-05-10, William December Starr <wdstarr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > David Friedman <ddfr@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> said:
> > I'm not sure that analogy holds, because I'm far from certain that
> > either (a) when the Constitution was ratified in 1789 or even (b)
> > when the secession issue became "hot" decades later the relationship
> > between the individual States and the Union was -- except for areas
> > of federal superiority explicitly created by the Constitution --
> > anywhere nearly as hierarchical, as servant-and-master if you will,
> > as that between a town and the state _under_ whose laws it had any
> > official existence at all.  The Union may have _admitted_ states but
> > they did not, before or after joining it, depend upon it for their
> > legal existence as sovereign entities, if you follow me.
>
> The original argument was about the morality of secession, not the
> legality.

Which original argument?  My original complaint was with *how* the
seceding
states went about enacting secession, not either the morality or legality
of
secession as a general concept. 

-- 
Nate Edel                               http://www.cubiclehermit.com/
 preferred email  | 
 is "nate" at the | "I do have a cause, though. It is obscenity.
 posting domain   |  I'm for it." - prologue to "Smut" by Tom Lehrer