Lincoln And The Death Of The Constitution

Wolves of Liberty ^ | 9/7/2010 | gjmerits

[gjmerits]

The Gettysburg speech was at once the shortest and the most famous oration in American history...the highest emotion reduced to a few poetical phrases. Lincoln himself never even remotely approached it. It is genuinely stupendous. But let us not forget that it is poetry, not logic; beauty, not sense. Think of the argument in it. Put it into the cold words of everyday. The doctrine is simply this: that the Union soldiers who died at Gettysburg sacrificed their lives to the cause of self-determination - that government of the people, by the people, for the people, should not perish from the earth. It is difficult to imagine anything more untrue. The Union soldiers in the battle actually fought against self-determination; it was the Confederates who fought for the right of their people to govern themselves.

[Non-Sequitur]

You federals received the evicted notice by the landlord, the States.

Delivered at the point of a gun by a 'landlord' who didn't own the property to begin with.

Your services were no longer needed, those forts were now on Sovereign soil and waterways. Once they re-assumed their delegated authority, your government was the tenant refusing to leave.

The forts, arsenals, etc. were the propert of the U.S. and South Carolina had no legal claim to them.

Theft, as I said. Nothing more and nothing less.

[Non-Sequitur]

The follow up to that non-answer in post 763 was post #768, which you refused to respond to but, essentially did and, what we all know now is that you, the bottom dwelling non-sequitur, would side with obama against us Rebs.

And you and yours would align yourself with bin Laden or Adolf Hitler or Josef Stalin if it would bring about the ressurection of your confederate police state.

You're the definitive embodiment of low bred, low class, low life, boy.

Boy? You are aware that I'm not Black aren't you?

[Idabilly]

Delivered at the point of a gun by a 'landlord' who didn't own the property to begin with.

Sumter was abandoned by federal authorities, it was after South Carolina left...you suddenly discovered it's usefulness = Harassment.

The forts, arsenals, etc. were the propert of the U.S. and South Carolina had no legal claim to them.

Oooo my, they offered in good faith to pay for these forts. They shouldn't have - you forget the federal government is but a mere agent. We know, you prefer the people to be the agents, but it ain't so. So, what right does Connecticut have to property in the South? Wouldn't that leave South Carolina grounds to demand refunds for tariff's paid? What about all that Southern blood that soaked the soil - while - Your friends in New England crawled back into Big England's nurturing arms.

We leave, and y'all conspire. Just to add insult to injury.. when we finally had our fill of your shady behavior, and leave - You use the sword to rewrite the history.

[Lee'sGhost]

I didn’t realize you were racist.

Only a racist would presume that the word “boy” would be used as a pejorative term for blacks only.

[Non-Sequitur]

Sumter was abandoned by federal authorities, it was after South Carolina left...you suddenly discovered it's usefulness = Harassment.

Sumter was never abandoned by the federal authorities. It was built on land deeded to the federal government free and clear by an act of the South Carolina legislature. The state had no legal claim to it. Not that legality mattered much to the confederate leadership.

Oooo my, they offered in good faith to pay for these forts.

So? Did they pay for them? Did Congress transfer ownership to South Carolina or the confederacy?

They shouldn't have - you forget the federal government is but a mere agent.

The federal government was the owner.

So, what right does Connecticut have to property in the South?

If you want to consider all federal property to be jointly owned by all the states, then the same right as every other state, north or south, had.

Wouldn't that leave South Carolina grounds to demand refunds for tariff's paid?

I imagine that legally South Carolina could demand a refund of the small percentage of the total cost of Sumter she provided. But that's a long way from claiming ownership over the whole thing.

What about all that Southern blood that soaked the soil - while - Your friends in New England crawled back into Big England's nurturing arms.

What nonsense are you blathering about now?

We leave, and y'all conspire. Just to add insult to injury.. when we finally had our fill of your shady behavior, and leave - You use the sword to rewrite the history

And you use the Southron myth machine to rewrite it. Where are you any different?

[Non-Sequitur]

I didn’t realize you were racist.

Well, well, well look who's back.

Only a racist would presume that the word “boy” would be used as a pejorative term for blacks only.

Not when you consider the source. The Southron source.

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

You mean independence? Yes, that is a terrible thing, isn't it. /sarc

Was it negotiable? Then it wasn't a negotiation, was it?

[Lee'sGhost]

I did consider the source. I didn’t know you were from the south. In that case, shame on you! We don’t want your kind around here.

[cowboyway]

And you and yours would align yourself with bin Laden or Adolf Hitler or Josef Stalin if it would bring about the ressurection of your confederate police state.

That is more of the typical ns bs red herring crap that these threads have long been infested with.

Are you going to man up and openly admit that you'd side with obama rather than us Rebs?

Boy? You are aware that I'm not Black aren't you?

The only color I have assigned to you is commie red, boy.

[Non-Sequitur]

I did consider the source. I didn’t know you were from the south. In that case, shame on you! We don’t want your kind around here.

You're such a funny, funny guy.

[cowboyway]

Was it negotiable?

Are you serious? Only a damn yankee would ever consider freedom to be an object of negotiation.

Probably because you heathens don't believe in God.....

You guys are sick.

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

Perhaps the letter referred to in the article is not representative of the whole South or what was really going on.

I wonder if part of the reason this doesn't jibe with the usual impression is that the letter is dated Dec. 25, just five days after South Carolina's secession and a couple of weeks before any other state followed suit. I've often seen the southern secession likened to a fever (and by southern writers, don't get on some high horse accusing me of calling secession a sickness). It may be that the opinion of this writer and those he cites was entirely different a few weeks later as the fever spread.

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

What about all that Southern blood that soaked the soil - while - Your friends in New England crawled back into Big England's nurturing arms.

Are you talking about the War of 1812?

[Non-Sequitur]

That is more of the typical ns bs red herring crap that these threads have long been infested with.

Truth hurts huh?

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

Thanks for confirming that the southern delegations weren’t in Washington to negotiate. It’s nice when we can all agree on something.

[mstar]

Rust Bucket; "Those historians may have simply generalized that major slaveholders were virtually unanimous in supporting secession and the war. It is easy to see how some historians might have come to that conclusion. Certainly, the majority of secession convention members were often slaveholders. I think all of those in the South Carolina convention were. I haven't researched whether all convention members in other states were or were not. However, many convention members were also politicians, and they may have simply reflected popular sentiment."

Coven; "I've often seen the southern secession likened to a fever (and by southern writers, don't get on some high horse accusing me of calling secession a sickness). It may be that the opinion of this writer and those he cites was entirely different a few weeks later as the fever spread."

From letters, speeches, and the oral traditions passed down by my family (a source the coven does not respect but I consider valid), it was not a wild out of control "fever" stirred up by greedy planters and politicians motivated by some sick desire to keep a human being in bondage. It was a last resort effort to protect themselves from an overreaching federal government.

Kinda like today.

If people prefer to believe the descendants of Patriots had become, within a few generations, a region ruled by Simon Legrees, then go for it.

[Idabilly]

Sumter was never abandoned by the federal authorities.

Yes it was.

"The fort was still unfinished when Major Robert Anderson moved his 85-man garrison into it on December 26, 1860, setting in motion events that would tear the nation asunder four months later".

If you want to consider all federal property to be jointly owned by all the states, then the same right as every other state, north or south, had.

Fine. Then.. those Northern forts were mutually owned by the Southern States. It does equal a better deal for you, unless you prefer Confederate troops protecting D.C.

And you use the Southron myth machine to rewrite it. Where are you any different?

Better than your communist manifesto...

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

If people prefer to believe the descendants of Patriots had become, within a few generations, a region ruled by Simon Legrees, then go for it.

Why not? You have no trouble believing that, within a few generations, the region that started the Revolution at Lexington, Concord and Bunker HIll was ruled by greedy, grasping slave-trading abolitionists and immigrant labor-exploiting mill owners bent on tyrannically ruling the south and using tariff policy to oppress them.

[Non-Sequitur]

Yes it was.

No it wasn't. Unfinished is not the same as abandoned. There was a crew working on it under the supervision of an army officer when Major Anderson moved his men there.

Fine. Then.. those Northern forts were mutually owned by the Southern States. It does equal a better deal for you, unless you prefer Confederate troops protecting D.C.

In a manner of speaking yes. And New York had no more legal claim to a fort in its territory than South Carolina had to one in her's.

Better than your communist manifesto...

Not as good as your "Mein Kampf Y'all".

[Non-Sequitur]

From letters, speeches, and the oral traditions passed down by my family (a source the coven does not respect but I consider valid), it was not a wild out of control "fever" stirred up by greedy planters and politicians motivated by some sick desire to keep a human being in bondage. It was a last resort effort to protect themselves from an overreaching federal government.

Actually if you look at the writings and the speeches of the leaders of the rebellion in its early days, it most certainly was about slavery. It was always the most important reason, and usually the only reason, given. As for your family's oral traditions, well I'm sure they're quite...imaginative.