A sense sheep. She rattles and battles and battles and rattles to envision the outcome. To no vain. She is ignored and later overridden. Who then gains control? The first who like the roast.

Jackson’s remarks about Clay and Calhoun remind me of a similar claim made by a Navy admiral in the direction of a Taxachusetts useful idiot [aka 'Democrat'] named Kerry. Some things don’t change. I wouldn’t be surprised if we’d get a better class of people in Congress and the W H if we still had ‘politicians’ who were willing to take part in duels.
Now, instead of standing toe-to-toe with a scummer, we ship people off to foreign wars or accuse the of being insensitive to b s issues. At least people in the 18th century were HONEST about their beliefs. How many politicians have ANY real beliefs today?

There’s a fundamental question here: how much authority do individual States surrender to the Federal government when they become states – or, in the case of the original 13 colonies-which-became-states, when they ratified the constitution? Do they have the right to secede from the Union?
In the case of the Bank of the United States, this was applied to government finances and the national economy. Some background may be in order here: before the Constitution was adopted, there was no national currency; each state minted its own coins and printed its own money. You could work at a job in New York, get paid in New York money, and live in another state – New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, etc. – but then you would have to pay your landlord (if you rented your dwelling) or the bank (if you had a mortgage) in the currency of that state, which would mean going through the exchange rate. Depending on how much gold – or possibly silver – a state had on hand, its currency would be worth more or less. Interstate commerce was a nightmare.
Furthermore, the federal government had to pay its employees in the money of the state where they worked; imagine trying to figure out a federal budget when you have to depend so heavily on the exchange rates between the money of the 13 different states, over which the Federal government had no control. (By “no control” here, I mean that the Federal government could not regulate the fiscal policy of the individual states, and therefore they could not depend – to pick on New York and Pennsylvania – on the exchange rate between New York money and Pennsylvania money tomorrow being the same as it is today. Any state could spend state money on something foolish, and the value of their currency would go down suddenly.)
This was one cause of the Civil War: the Southern states maintained that they had the right to run their lives, and their state governments, as they saw fit. (The other cause of the Civil War was, of course, slavery – but this immediately comes back to the states’ rights issue: does the federal government have the authority to dictate things like whether or not slavery should be legal? Personally, I think that slavery, especially as practiced in the Southern U.S., was, and still would be today if it were still in force, immoral, very bad, and just plain not right, and did I mention “bad”? But the issue here is whether or not the federal government has the power to say so and make individual states straighten up and fly right.)
Obviously, with the victory of the Union in 1865, the decision was that the federal government does have such authority, at least to some degree.
Other nations around the world have dealt with the question, and some of them have done so much more peacefully.
Moldavia is a very small country which split off from Romania; it has its own (Slavic) language and its own culture. (Romanian, as you might guess by its name, is a Romance language, deriving from Latin; it is most closely related to French, Italian, etc.) A proposal was written up, and voted on in both Romania and Moldavia; it was approved by a majority in Romania, and by a majority in Moldavia. Moldavia is located on the shore of the Black Sea, between Romania and Ukraine.
Czechoslovakia was created at the end of World War Two. Although it had a history going back centuries, it was never very well organized, which is why it doesn’t get much mention in history books outside of what is now the Czech republic and Slovakia. Again, it became apparent that, while the two groups of people were friendly with each other, they did have two distinct cultures and languages, although both languages were (and still are) Slavic. Again, a proposal was written up in Czech and in Slovakian, voted on and approved by a majority in what is now the Czech Republic and Slovakia.

Jackson was no friend of state’s righters and Libertarians.

“At the April 13, 1830, Jefferson Day dinner, involving after-dinner toasts. Robert Hayne began by toasting to “The Union of the States, and the Sovereignty of the States.” Jackson then rose, and in a booming voice added “Our federal Union: It must be preserved!” – a clear challenge to Calhoun. Calhoun clarified his position by responding “The Union: Next to our Liberty, the most dear!”

“In response to South Carolina’s nullification claim, Jackson vowed to send troops to South Carolina to enforce the laws. In December, 1832, he issued a resounding proclamation against the “nullifiers”, stating that he considered “the power to annul a law of the United States, assumed by one State, incompatible with the existence of the Union, contradicted expressly by the letter of the Constitution, unauthorized by its spirit, inconsistent with every principle on which it was founded, and destructive of the great object for which it was formed.”

“South Carolina, the President declared, stood on “the brink of insurrection and treason,” and he appealed to the people of the state to reassert their allegiance to that Union for which their ancestors had fought. Jackson also denied the right of secession: “The Constitution… forms a government not a league… To say that any State may at pleasure secede from the Union is to say that the United States is not a nation.”