The Untold Story of the Civil War

Jackson Jambalaya ^ | December 2, 2008 | Kingfish

[Non-Sequitur]

If an battleship of an hostile foreign power(say Venzuela) enters New York harbor, should the Port Authority send flowers or send for the navy to blow it out of the water?

And if Cuba tomorrow decided to shell Guantanamo Bay into surrender then you would support it?

[Non-Sequitur]

And Lincoln's convictions were so strong that by his unconstitutional edict he freed slaves over which had no power to free (the slaves in the Confederacy) and yet left slaves in bondage within the Union where he did had dominion.

Several errors in that statement. First, there was nothing unconstitutional in Lincoln's actions. Second, he had all the power necessary to order those slaves being used to support the rebellion freed.

The Emancipation Proclamation freed not one slave but was an political attempt to "shine the turd " of Lincoln's war.

Quite the contrary, it led to freedom for hundreds of thousands of slaves as federal forces liberated territory from the forces of the rebellion.

Bill Clinton had nothing on ole"Slick" Abe Lincoln.

Southron Desperation Act #673: When in doubt compare Lincoln with Clinton. Or Carter.

[Non-Sequitur]

no the biggest were in NY by union soldiers who did not like seeing blacks taking their jobs. Why do you constantly ignore facts?

Because I'm coming to the conclusion that you don't know any facts. Details on this New York riot by Union troops, please.

I’ve already told you why the war started way back so either you forgot or you just ignored it.

The war started when the South fired on Sumter.

hey it is liberals who try and change history and never let the facts get in the way of their good myths(Clinton being a prime example) but I wasn’t on about you but hey if you think I was so be

Southron Desperation Act #297: When in doubt accuse your opponent of being a liberal.

If you think it is tiring why do you spend all day and I mean all day on here reading it?

Because the alternative is to leave the forum free to people like you who spout any crap that fits their agenda, regardless of how ridiculous it is.

[Non-Sequitur]

Actually, the southern states believed they were constitutionally in the right, and that the radical Republicans under Fremont and Lincoln were the rebels...and they have a valid argument....

There is no doubt that they may have believed that, but that doesn't mean they had a valid arguement.

[Non-Sequitur]

Nice cut and paste. Now what rights of the Southern states were being trampled?

[slnk_rules]

Now what rights of the Southern states were being trampled?

The right to sovereign self determination by each state in matters not specified by the Constitution. It is called "the 10th amendment." Read it sometime.

[Non-Sequitur]

Of all the states in the Union, California is the least associated with that war. Not one battle was fought there and few men went east to fight.

But California raised several regiments of cavalry and 8 regiments of infantry. Some fought with Canby in Arizona and New Mexico.

Reagan went West and became a man of the West. He damn sure left the liberal yankee states behind him. Those with the rotting politics, and rust belt industry.

And at a time when the South was solidly Democratic. Probably why he didn't go there.

If Reagan was a yankee because he was born there, then you get both Bush 41 and 43.

Regan was born and raised there. His values were acquired there. In that case you get Bush junior. As well as Clinton, Carter, and LBJ.

PLEASE stay there, and call home some of the a$$holes that have come down here.

Oh I've got no plans to move down South because I can't think of any reason why I should. I can't speak for those who do move there since I don't understand the attraction.

[Non-Sequitur]

Which "loser" wrote about Lincoln Lincoln writing the Gettysburg Address on the back of an envelope...or that young Abraham Lincoln wrote his homework with a lump of coal on the back of a shovel.....

That was Carl Sandburg. His biography of Lincoln was...colorful to say the least. Not quite as colorful as a lot of the myths out there about Lee or Jackson or Forrest, but close.

[Non-Sequitur]

Now, now, Monkey Man -- that's an "illegitimate question", lol. The kind Non-Sequitur doesn't answer.

Well damn, start a War of the Rebellion thread and it's amazing who slithers out of the bushes. How the heck are ya'? I wonder if the Monkey Man's definition of just war is as off-the-wall as your's is?

[Non-Sequitur]

The right to sovereign self determination by each state in matters not specified by the Constitution. It is called "the 10th amendment." Read it sometime.

I have. So how were the Southern states rights being trampled?

[slnk_rules]

You claim that the States had the right to sovereign self-determination?

[Non-Sequitur]

You claim that the States had the right to sovereign self-determination?

No. Not without the consent of all the parties involved.

[Colonel Kangaroo]

Sound familiar? It's the U.S. Declaration of Independence and states very clearly the reasons and rights of a free people and a free state to secede.

It says no such thing. The word secession is not in the Declaration. The Declaration proclaims a right to revolution, a right Lincoln himself upheld. But the right to revolution presupposes a people and a cause worthy to sustain it. In the trial of fire your Confederacy proved itself to be no good. Too bad, but that's not our fault and no need to cry over the losing cause.

[Colonel Kangaroo]

Sound familiar? It's the U.S. Declaration of Independence and states very clearly the reasons and rights of a free people and a free state to secede.

It says no such thing. The word secession is not in the Declaration. The Declaration proclaims a right to revolution, a right Lincoln himself upheld. But the right to revolution presupposes a people and a cause worthy to sustain it. In the trial of fire your Confederacy proved itself to be no good. Too bad, but that's not our fault and no need to cry over the losing cause.

[slnk_rules]

ME:You claim that the States had the right to sovereign self-determination?
YOU:No. Not without the consent of all the parties involved.

Then you answered your own question, which was, how were the rights of individual states trampled?

[Non-Sequitur]

Then you answered your own question, which was, how were the rights of individual states trampled?

States had no right to leave the Union unilaterally. You cannot trample a right which does not exist.

[slnk_rules]

States had no right to leave the Union unilaterally. You cannot trample a right which does not exist.

Since ALL rights not expressly given to the Congress are RESERVED TO THE STATES AND TO THE PEOPLE, then by definition states DO have a right to leave the union unilaterally. Please show me where in the Constitution it says that a state may not leave the Union. The fact that you have a bigger gun does not make a clause mean what it does not mean.

[slnk_rules]

In the trial of fire your Confederacy proved itself to be no good

Now THERE is perfect moral reasoning for ya. If I mug you in the alley, and have the force necessary to take your money, it just proves I had a right to it all along.

Bravo!

[Lee'sGhost]

Don’t confuse Non-Sensical with facts. He’s been peddling this tripe for years. He has his @ss handed to him every time but will NEVER reconsider his points or his position...just like a liberal.

[Non-Sequitur]

Since ALL rights not expressly given to the Congress are RESERVED TO THE STATES AND TO THE PEOPLE, then by definition states DO have a right to leave the union unilaterally. Please show me where in the Constitution it says that a state may not leave the Union.

Sure. Just as soon as you show me where the word 'expressly' occurs in the 10th Amendment.

Never mind, because you can't. That word is nowhere to be found in the Constitution, for good reason. Having legislated them into a bind under the Articles of Confederation, the Founders were not going to make the same mistake twice. As Chief Justice Marshall wrote: "...there is no phrase in the instrument which, like the articles of confederation, excludes incidental or implied powers; and which requires that everything granted shall be expressly and minutely described. Even the 10th amendment, which was framed for the purpose of quieting the excessive jealousies which had been excited, omits the word 'expressly,' and declares only, that the powers 'not delegated to the United States, nor prohibited to the states, are reserved to the states or to the people;' thus leaving the question, whether the particular power which may become the subject of contest, has been delegated to the one government, or prohibited to the other, to depend on a fair construction of the whole instrument."

States need the permission of the other states to join the Union to begin with. Once in, they cannot split up or combine or change their borders a fraction of an inch without the approval of the other states as expressed through a vote in Congress. By implication that approval is needed to leave as well. The Supreme Court thought so. James Madison thought so. Who am I to disagree with them?