1913 Gettysburg Reunion of Blue and Gray

Huntington News ^ | June 14, 2013 | Calvin E. Johnson, Jr.

[0.E.O]

Hmmm. I am shocked. ... SHOCKED that there is nothing in your convenient abridgement of the facts about States rights.

State's right to do what?

You have made up your mind that the South was wrong to opt for Secession...I, on the other hand, believe they were well within their rights.

The difference is that the Supreme Court ruled that one of us is right and the other is wrong.

And, no, it was not all about slavery, but, yes, it was in large part about slavery. I am not thrilled to admit that part, but I do.

So how can you possibly equate the Confederate cause with that of the Founding Fathers?

Nonetheless: Slavery or no, the South was within its rights to opt for secession.

Well you know what they say about opinions.

Else the Declaration and Constitution were rather odd in permitting secession only one time (i.e., from England), but after that, mandatory inclusion in a union voluntarily entered in the first place.

The colonists rebelled, they did not secede. And with the exception of the first 13, none of the state joined anything voluntarily. They were allowed to join only after a majority of the existing states decided to permit them to.

[man_in_tx]

Different kind of men. Different kind of motivations.
/////////////////////

You are entitled to your smug, small-hearted, and — I would assert — ahistorical view of outstanding men such as Robert E. Lee, Thomas Jonathan “Stonewall” Jackson, and James Longstreet, to name a few.

[man_in_tx]

I don’t think that anyone here said that no one could secede - just that they way the slavers tried to do it wasn’t jake.

//////////////////////

Interesting thought.

What — in your view — would have made their attempt at secession “jake?”

[central_va]

No, I don't give them credit for jack.

Nice.

[man_in_tx]

The difference is that the Supreme Court ruled that one of us is right and the other is wrong.

//////////////////

The Supreme Court has ruled many things incorrectly. You have to do better than that.

[man_in_tx]

State’s right to do what?

////////////////////

Oh, I could start with managing the emissions level of their factories, for one.

Yep. We lost that one at Appomattox Court House

[0.E.O]

You are entitled to your smug, small-hearted, and — I would assert — ahistorical view of outstanding men such as Robert E. Lee, Thomas Jonathan “Stonewall” Jackson, and James Longstreet, to name a few.

And you're entitled to blow anything you want out of proportion.

[central_va]

No, I don't give them credit for jack. Their cause was not noble. Their courage was wasted.

You should be congratulated, you pulled the hate and bile out of one of the Lincoln Coven for the whole world to see. The honesty of his remarks are refreshing.

[rockrr]

Had they sought mutuality within their brother states.

[0.E.O]

The Supreme Court has ruled many things incorrectly. You have to do better than that.

And it's wrong in this case because you say they are? You will have to do better than that.

[man_in_tx]

You are entitled to your smug, small-hearted, and — I would assert — ahistorical view of outstanding men such as Robert E. Lee, Thomas Jonathan “Stonewall” Jackson, and James Longstreet, to name a few.

And you’re entitled to blow anything you want out of proportion.

/////////////

Thank you. (Whatever you meant to imply by your ambiguous statement.)

[0.E.O]

Oh, I could start with managing the emissions level of their factories, for one....Yep. We lost that one at Appomattox Court House.

Or you could just admit that you can't answer the question.

[man_in_tx]

You should be congratulated, you pulled the hate and bile out of one of the Lincoln Coven for the whole world to see. The honesty of his remarks are refreshing.

/////////////////

Thank you for that insight!

[0.E.O]

You should be congratulated, you pulled the hate and bile out of one of the Lincoln Coven for the whole world to see. The honesty of his remarks are refreshing.

And your hypocrisy is on display for the world to see.

[man_in_tx]

Or you could just admit that you can’t answer the question.

//////////////

Or you could admit that you know I am correct. On this issue there is little disagreement: Following the Civil War, the Feds have cramped the States’ rights to self-government in numerous ways.

Or, do you support the egregious overreach the IRS, EPA, etc? As YOU said, IIRC, winning (or losing) wars has consequences. Not all of them matured overnight, either.

[rockrr]

On this thread alone you get all giddy talking about shooting your fellow countrymen and you get your panties in a bunch over that?

Hyperbole much?

[central_va]

You’re having a bad day, like Grant at Cold Harbor....

[man_in_tx]

The Supreme Court has ruled many things incorrectly. You have to do better than that.

And it’s wrong in this case because you say they are? You will have to do better than that.

///////////////////
No — I do not. I never based my arguments on a Supreme Court decision, in the first place.

[central_va]

I have always been honest and up front about my opinions of the long past "unpleasantness". I have never held back or tried to be deceptive.

The honesty displayed by 0.E.M (N-s) in that post is actually appreciated.

[0.E.O]

Or you could admit that you know I am correct.

How can you be correct when you didn't answer the question. What state's right was being trampled on by the federal behemoth to such an extent that rebellion was justified?

Or, do you support the egregious overreach the IRS, EPA, etc? As YOU said, IIRC, winning (or losing) wars has consequences. Not all of them matured overnight, either.

The popular Democrat refrain: It's all Bush's Lincoln's fault.