"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."
Did you not post that Joe? You also said that Washington was a Dictator, certainly if he was then the insurrectionists of the Whiskey Rebellion would have either been made an example of or imprisoned, yet not a single one was killed, not a single one was imprisoned.
Why do you distort? When confronted you simply tuck your head between your legs and say "I won't read the rest of your response past that quote above". How typical of people of your stripe, people who would rather do a little hit and run rather than have an actual debate. You have never been clear about anything you say Joe, there is an intentional vagueness to your comments, you dodge and curve your comments. Believe me Joe, you are not the first of your kind to hit the DP with such tactics and I'm quite sure you won't be the last. We have seen your type come and go, but people like you never add anything to the conversation or debate.
"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun
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 m