The Daily Paul is a community website with no official affiliation with Ron Paul. The content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original posters, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise representative of the opinions of the Daily Paul, its owner, site moderators or Ron Paul. This site may contain adult language and adult concepts. If you are offended by such content, or feel you may be offended by such content, point your browser to a different site immediately. For more, read the Full Disclaimer
© 2007 - 2013 by The Daily Paul. Not paid for by, nor officially affiliated in any way with Ron Paul.
General Site Disclaimer | DMCA Disclaimer | Advertise here


Comment: Quickly
Quickly
"those States, have done nothing to change it."
States cannot do anything.
In fact a Dictator named Washington conscripted an Army in 1794 and then invaded Pennsilvania to collect on a tax, which was to enforce a money monopoly.
Washington did something. A State did nothing, it can't, a State is a fictitious legal being, so it is merely a convenience to employ one name, State, instead of listing all the names of all the people who do things in that State.
I don't have time for this, so if you want to competitively offer viewpoints then address your understanding of what Washington did during what became known as The Whiskey Rebellion.
Shays's Rebellion occurred under The Articles of Confederation, in one State, Massachusetts.
Those events that became known as Shays's Rebellion exemplify how The Articles of Confederation Limited what "The President" could or could not do, and that can be compared to what was done by "The President" after The Articles of Confederation were replaced as the excuse, or "rationale" (or argument) for what Washington did in Pennsylvania.
Joe
Replies to this comment: