Posted on 08/06/2010 9:54:52 AM PDT by Michael Zak
Grand Old Partisan salutes John Bingham, principal author of the 14th Amendment and a great REPUBLICAN.
Writing yesterday in The Washington Monthly, Steve Benen accused the GOP of going "From the Party of Bush to the Party of Jefferson Davis." His point, it seems, is that questioning whether the 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to children born in the USA of people here illegally is akin to advocating slavery. Such absurdity is not worth refuting. I will, however, point out a fact that Benen overlooks -- the Party of Jefferson Davis is the DEMOCRATIC PARTY.
Indeed, the Democratic Party was the Party of Slavery, and Democrats were known as "Slave-ocrats" by the GOP. Yes, Jefferson Davis was a Democrat, as were all the Confederates. Not one Republican fought against the Union during the Civil War.
In yesterday's Washington Post, E.J. Dionne accused the GOP of shedding a birthright. Like Benen, he argued that the framers of the 14th Amendment -- all Republicans, by the way -- had in mind what Dionne and Benen and so many other Democrats say they intended back in the 1860s.
The Democrats opposed the 14th Amendment yet now assert that they know best what Rep. John Bingham (R-OH) meant when he wrote it.
By ignoring the heritage of our Grand Old Party, Republicans place themselves on the defensive and make themselves vulnerable to Democrat demagoguery, such as the latest from Benen and Dionne.
(Excerpt) Read more at grandoldpartisan.typepad.com ...
He is writing a book? LOL. What a joke.
In case you are wondering why the Republican Party often finds itself FUBAR ...
by William Buppert
"Good Morning, Governor, how might we…"
"Mr. President, I realize you are a busy man so let’s get down to brass tacks…we are calling the ball and withdrawing our support of your Administration and the Federal government in DC. Effective immediately, we have coordinated to place all outgoing receipts to the IRS in a caged account here in Boise…"
"Governor, you can’t do that…"
"Please don’t interrupt while I am speaking as we are from this point onward peers in the family of nations. I hope you have reviewed the diplomatic instruments we sent by courier last night to Department of State which delineates the terms of our divorce."
"I did receive those and you have no earthly idea the can of whoop-…"
"Please, sir, maintain the decorum of these proceedings so we can move forward to an amicable separation. I give you my personal assurance on the safety and well-being of all Federal personnel we have detained for immediate repatriation to the remainder of these United States. Any non-law enforcement Federal personnel who wish to remain behind will be permitted to do so."
"I hope you have thought through the consequences of what you are embarking on."
"Mr. President, we have had over two hundred years to give the rulers on the Potomac a chance but that time has expired. Effective immediately, all so-called Federal lands now belong to the nation of Idaho and we will dispose of these lands at our leisure. In the interest of burying the hatchet, we will not seek compensation for the seizure, abuse and tenure of Federal practices on the aforementioned land and call the balance even."
"Those are my lands, Governor…"
"In actuality, they belong to neither of us, sir. On to other business, I have alerted my National Guard forces to establish checkpoints at all the main arterials in and out of Idaho. All National Guard forces deployed overseas will return home in the next 48 hours. I would also caution you on the use of military force to convince Idaho and its citizens to forcibly return to the yoke of the Union. Idaho has a well-deserved reputation as a rather well-equipped state in firearms possession and use. As Yamamoto said, you may find a rifle behind every blade of grass."
"Are you threatening the president of the United States?"
"No, sir, I am simply making an observation about the hazards of one country invading another."
"You are land-locked, Governor and wholly dependent on federal subsidy for a great deal of employment and infrastructure in Idaho."
"No longer, the tremendous tax burden across the spectrum formally imposed in our nation as a subject State in your country is now effectively terminated and we are going to unleash the free market to address all of our former shortcomings as a result of the overarching government supremacism practiced here before. In telephone conversations with my neighboring governors, we are on the verge of Confederation negotiations that will pave the way for Idaho embassies in British Columbia, Montana, Utah and Wyoming. We do intend on opening a consular office in DC as soon as we can ensure the diplomatic baggage containing sufficient weapons assures our safety in the greater DC metropolitan area for our diplomatic personnel."
"Governor, what Constitutional right do you have to secede from the US?"
"Mr. President, the behavior you have exhibited toward the Constitution has been at best characterized by active neglect and abhorrence for the restraint on governance in the Bill of Rights. I am rather surprised you would resort to assuming the document in any way has weight in Washington, DC. I would suggest my rights extend as far as our ability to throw off what has become a government of occupation instead of cooperation. We resign, sir and wish to go in peace."
"I will use every measure in my arsenal to force you back into the fold."
"Mr. President, thank you for the heads-up but we have taken certain precautions to ensure that any rash measures on your part have a disproportionate impact in the DC/Virginia corridor. Please don’t press us on the issue. I would like to offer one more rather moderate important proposal to our future business. These United States as administered by DC are now essentially bankrupt. War on the world, out of control spending and borrowing, debt and deficit, non-funded future liabilities in the tens of trillions and a banking infrastructure rotten at every level has pushed the US to an economic abyss from which it cannot shrink. We will provide you a demonstration project of tiny government, free banking and a formerly enslaved citizenry unleashed to realize their potential with no government interference. We simply wish to go our own way untethered from the Remora Nation DC came to symbolize."
"Governor, this conversation is over."
"Good day, Mr. President."
Yeah, that’s it. /s
William C. Davis’s book http://www.amazon.com/Look-History-Confederate-States-America/dp/0743234995/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1281229729&sr=1-1 is the definitive history of the Confederacy. He explains how Jefferson Davis and his CSA government lorded it over the rebel states. It is a myth that the Confederacy was a libertarianm, limited government, states-rights wonderland.
-----------------------------------------------------
Rebel States ? First, there was no 'rebellion'. There was secession, and then the illegal subjugation of the Southern people that followed.
“He explains how Jefferson Davis and his CSA government lorded it over the rebel states.”
I wish I could use the rather descriptive suggestions I have for both you and your “book” sir, but I would not be banned ... and therefore, not here in the future to keep the deeply disturbed, like yourself, in touch with some semblance of reality. Since you have chosen to do nothing to respond to any of the thought provoking posts, I can only assume you are devoid of that which could be provoked.
William C. Davis’s book http://www.amazon.com/Look-History-Confederate-States-America/dp/0743234995/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1281230925&sr=1-1 is the definitive history of the Confederacy. He explains how Jefferson Davis and the CSA government lorded it over the rebel states. It is a myth that the Confederacy was a libertarian, limited government, states rights wonderland.
William C. Davis, a Virginian, is one of the nation’s most respected historians. Your dispute is with him.
“He explains how Jefferson Davis and his CSA government lorded it over the rebel states. It is a myth that the Confederacy was a libertarianm, limited government, states-rights wonderland.”
The men of the South, then, ran headlong into battle and endured all of the savagery and privation of the war, even though 90% of them neither owned or knew any who owned slaves, because they were what ... lorded over? They secretly hated their leaders, do you think? Or were they just simple minded rednecks, to under educated to understand why they fought?
You get more preposterous as you go. Sadly, none of these weak thoughts are even your own. You are carrying water for idiots. Why, you must have someone “lording over you.”
To talk this way about such brave men will surely land you in a very warm afterlife. I am sure you believe what you are saying and that you either thin that afterlife doesn’t exist, or that you might enjoy it, but I doubt you will.
As you can see, their dimwitted natures in no way diminishes their enthusiasm. ;-)
“William C. Davis, a Virginian, is one of the nation’s most respected historians. Your dispute is with him.”
I’ll be sure to tell him you send his regards. By the way, Timothy Geithner is a respected financial man.
Perfect example of why the Tea Parties exist. They are our last hope.
During the War for our Independence, did the Colonies act independently or in unison ? Didn't different Colonies offer different war bonds ? Didn't they become "free and sovereign states (plural)?" Didn't they, the now "free and sovereign states (plural)" form the Constitution and likewise the United States (plural) Government to be their agent? Are not the States the delegating authority ?
St. George Tucker:
.......And since the seceding states, by establishing a new constitution and form of federal government among themselves, without the consent of the rest, have shown that they consider the right to do so whenever the occasion may, in their opinion require it, as unquestionable, we may infer that that right has not been diminished by any new compact which they may since have entered into, since none could be more solemn or explicit than the first, nor more binding upon the contracting parties. Their obligation, therefore, to preserve the present constitution, is not greater than their former obligations were, to adhere to the articles of confederation; each state possessing the same right of withdrawing itself from the confederacy without the consent of the rest, as any number of them do, or ever did, possess.
There is no one definitive history book on any subject. I believe the above claim entertains a penchant for "group think". Not something I encourage. Reading a wide variety of sources enables the individual to arrive at their own conclusion.
“Perfect example of why the Tea Parties exist. They are our last hope.”
Yes. I’m afraid so.
Yet these are the very people who are so vocal about SOUTHERN slavery. They never seem to have the desire to pursue the issue of NORTHERN slavery. Nor have I known any to jump on the band wagon to address free persons of color being disenfranchised and treated as less than a child of God.
Equally telling; only crickets from these individuals about the history of the American Indian, Irish, Catholics, Orientals, etc. Hypocrisy at it's finest.
---------------------------------------------------
These should get you started
Thomas E. Woods Jr... The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History
Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century
And for the diverse lurkers...
First, although the draft law nominally permitted few exemptions, over 50 percent of Northern draftees exploited the exemption categories that did exist and thereby escaped service.
Second, it was possible for a man to pay $300 (a year's wages for a worker) and avoid being drafted in any given callup.
Third, a man could also gain permanent exemption by hiring a substitute to serve in his place.
Both the $300 commutation fee and the hiring of substitutes fueled bitter complaints that it was “a rich man's war and a poor man's fight.”
The biggest problem the CSA had was that they couldn't keep the men from fighting, from boys to elderly men; so many were wounded and voluntarily returned to battle that they had a high mortality rate from previous wounds.
91% of Confederate soldiers were native born and only 9% were foreign-born, Irish being the largest group.
Sounds like the tragically oppressed Southern soldiers were far more loyal and more determined and more dedicated to me. Just a guess, by looking at the numbers.
"I take a just pride as an American citizen, a descendant on both sides of my parentage of English stock, who came to this country about 1640, that the Southern army, composed almost entirely of Americans, were able, under the ablest American chieftains, to defeat so often the overwhelming hosts of the North, which were composed largely of foreigners to our soil; in fact, the majority were mercenaries whom large bounties induced to enlist, while the stay-at-home patriots, whose money bought them, body and boots, 'to go off and get killed, instead of their own precious selves, said let the war go on.'"
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.