Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: lentulusgracchus
"You really persist in seeing exactly what you want to profess to see, don't you?"

You catch on quickly lol

The "heighten the drama" effect works! You always draft a responding speech which goes on, and on, and on, similar to old Hubert Humphrey's endless speeches used to, Pilgrim.

Why are you emulating the worst propagandists the world has ever seen? Thank you for the compliment but I'd rather you continue holding that title.

..."the responsible officers of the State of Tennessee." Oh, yes, I of course I recall the irresponsible, brutal Confederate officers which arrested or gunned down pro-Unionist Eastern Tennessee citizens.

Do you want to hold your own little "plebiscite to leave the Union?" Just purchase an overseas airline ticket, one way, it's not complicated.

If you really would like to leave the Union please take along the hippie, lesbo, commies from Vermont, still screaming wacko Dean is not President.....will you?

I love the numeric method you issued, makes for easier readability and quick responses.

Okay, we are addressing #3 I take it.

"States may join or leave the Union" once congress approves petition for statehood, but once in, no chickening out :)

Moving right along. #4 "The Unionists who took arms against their State were breaking 'the law' -- which the Confederates were not doing -- and needed to be stopped and brought to justice. They were hurting their home State and their neighbors. They had no other State, and no other neighbors. They hadn't the right to take arms against them because the majority took Tennessee out of the Union, any more than someone else would have had a right to take arms against their state government because Texas, say, had joined the Union.

I reprinted your statement in its entirety so you could review it for required alterations, as in "The Unionists who took arms against their State were breaking the law"

Whose law? Do mean "the law" as in the so-called 'law' of Confederate traitors who seized control by armed force? That 'law'? Similar to the 'laws' of Nazi Germany, or maybe Saddam's (former)'laws', or how about the mullah's Islamic 'laws'?

You are the one who knowing IS embarrassed with your mob rule 'laws'.

You stated you are no a 'neo-confederate, so what's the beef with the following statement? "Today's Neo-Confederate hidden agenda is dedicated to turning the clock back some 150 years."

4,498 posted on 04/07/2005 9:24:25 AM PDT by M. Espinola (Freedom is never free!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4485 | View Replies ]


To: M. Espinola; lentulusgracchus
Whose law? Do mean "the law" as in the so-called 'law' of Confederate traitors who seized control by armed force?

Now that's funny. The last time I checked, Texas left the union by way of a popular referendum of the voters as called through their elected representatives in the legislature and their elected delegates to the state convention. The only attempt to "seize control by armed force" of course was Abe Lincoln's offer to Sam Houston of sending troops to overthrow the convention. Houston, as we all know, tossed Lincoln's letter into his fireplace in disgust.

4,499 posted on 04/07/2005 9:29:43 AM PDT by GOPcapitalist ("Marxism finds it easy to ally with Islamic zealotism" - Ludwig von Mises)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4498 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson