Posted on 09/07/2010 12:43:35 PM PDT by gjmerits
You don’t want to answer because you know the truth, that there was never any real negotiation offered, only a choice between “take what we offer” and “get nothing.”
What lies and myths are you referring to? Would Mr. Jefferson adhere to this same curriculum of myths? If so, then consider me/us mythical as all hell. Now, excuse me while I go tend to Puff. You know the Magic Dragon
Thomas Jefferson to governor William Giles 1825: “Take together the decisions of the federal court, the doctrines of the President, and the misconstructions of the constitutional compact acted on by the legislature of the federal branch, and it is but too evident, that the three ruling branches of that department are in combination to strip their colleagues, the State authorities, of the powers reserved by them, and to exercise themselves all functions foreign and domestic. Under the power to regulate commerce, they assume indefinitely that also over agriculture and manufactures, and call it regulation to take the earnings of one of these branches of industry, and that too the most depressed, and put them into the pockets of the other, the most flourishing of all. Under the authority to establish post roads, they claim that of cutting down mountains for the construction of roads, of digging canals, and aided by a little sophistry on the words “general welfare,” a right to do, not only the acts to effect that, which are specifically enumerated and permitted, but whatsoever they shall think, or pretend will be for the general welfare. And what is our resource for the preservation of the constitution? Reason and argument? You might as well reason and argue with the marble columns encircling them. The representatives chosen by ourselves? They are joined in the combination, some from incorrect views of government, some from corrupt ones, sufficient voting together to out-number the sound parts; and with majorities only of one, two, or three, bold enough to go forward in defiance. Are we then to stand to our arms, with the hot-headed Georgian? No. That must be the last resource, not to be thought of until much longer and greater sufferings. If every infraction of a compact of so many parties is to be resisted at once, as a dissolution of it, none can ever be formed which would last one year. We must have patience and longer endurance then with our brethren while under delusion; give them time for reflection and experience of consequences; keep ourselves in a situation to profit by the chapter of accidents; and separate from our companions only when the sole alternatives left, are the dissolution of our Union with them, or submission to a government without limitation of powers. Between these two evils, when we must make a choice, there can be no hesitation. But in the meanwhile, the States should be watchful to note every material usurpation on their rights; to denounce them as they occur in the most peremptory terms; to protest against them as wrongs to which our present submission shall be considered, not as acknowledgments or precedents of right, but as a temporary yielding to the lesser evil, until their accumulation shall overweigh that of separation. I would go still further, and give to the federal member, by a regular amendment of the constitution, a right to make roads and canals of intercommunication between the States, providing sufficiently against corrupt practices in Congress, (log-rolling, &c.,) by declaring that the federal proportion of each State of the moneys so employed, shall be in works within the State, or elsewhere with its consent, and with a due salvo of jurisdiction. This is the course which I think safest and best as yet.”
Ah, so you're stoned. Now it all makes sense.
No matter how hard y'all try.
Perfect.
Formulate a cohesive question.
NS's worst nightmare: limited government.
BTW, did you notice how he ducked my question about who he would side with between the South and obama? His non-answer let's us all know exactly where he stands: with the ruling class statists.
I always knew that he was a low down POS but I didn't know that he was that low.
You’ll only evade the question again, but I’ll try. What would the south have done if the United States refused to sell it’s forts, etc. for a price that was agreeable to the south?
You in turn have reminded me of a warning by the Anti-Federalist, "Federal Farmer," that I ran across the other day. It was originally published in the "Letters from the Federal Farmer" in 1787-1788 in the Poughkeepsie Country Journal. The identity of Federal Farmer is unknown. Some have suggested Federal Farmer was Richard Henry Lee or Melancton Smith.
It is natural for men, who want to hasten the adoption of a measure, to tell us, now is the crisis -- now is the critical moment which must be seized, or all will be lost; and to shut the door against free enquiry whenever conscious the thing presented has defects in it, which time an investigation will probably discover. This has been the custom of tyrants and their dependants in all ages.
I wonder what man and/or woman that prescient warning would apply to in the present day? (Psst, I know the answer.)
More than it was worth.
time an investigation = time and investigation
Assuming that the north was will to negotiate? Continue negotiations, of course.
The real question is, what would the north have done with a offer to purchase that was too good to be true? I'll answer that for you: disHonest Abe wouldn't have sold at any price. The outcome was predestined by a president (lincoln) determined to wage war.
LMAO! Your childish answer told us exactly what we already knew: that you would rather side with obama that with us Rebs.
[cowboy]Assuming that the north was will to negotiate? Continue negotiations, of course.
IW Hayne, the Attorney General of the State of South Carolina...... saw the matter clearly and distinctly:
You say that the fort was garrisoned for our protection, and is held for the same purposes for which it has ever been held since its construction. Are you not aware, that to hold, in the territory of a foreign power, a fortress against her will, avowedly for the purpose of protecting her citizens, is perhaps the highest insult which one government can offer to another? But Fort Sumter was never garrisoned at all until South Carolina had dissolved her connection with your government. This garrison entered it in the night, with every circumstance of secrecy, after spiking the guns and burning the gun-carriages and cutting down the flag-staff of an adjacent fort, which was then abandoned. South Carolina had not taken Fort Sumter into her own possession, only because of her misplaced confidence in a government which deceived her.
Which doesn't answer the question at all. A negotiation is only a negotiation if either side can walk away as they came. Anything else is simply extortion.
Was the US walking away from a negotiation and saying "No thanks, we'll just keep our forts" an option?
The outcome was predestined by a president (lincoln) determined to wage war.
The outcome was predestined by a southern government that was going to get what it wanted whether the US wanted to let them have it or not.
What would you know about limited government? Your precious confederacy was a statist monster and your new confederacy would certainly be the same.
BTW, did you notice how he ducked my question about who he would side with between the South and obama? His non-answer let's us all know exactly where he stands: with the ruling class statists.
Not only did I answer it in reply 763, you replied to my reply. But then again the easiest way to tell if a Southerner is lying has always been to see if their lips move. Or, in this case, if the post of from you.
I always knew that he was a low down POS but I didn't know that he was that low.
But not as low as you. Never that low.
Your lumping all southerners in with leftist fools like pokie diminishes your point. Just sayin...
Perhaps I'm painting with too broad of a brush. How about "...the easiest way to tell if a Lost Causer is lying has always been to see if their lips move." Better?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.