Posted on 05/09/2006 8:33:28 PM PDT by stainlessbanner
WASHINGTON -- Back in the 2004 presidential primaries, when Howard Dean, former governor of Vermont, suggested that Democrats should be competing for the votes of young men with Confederate flags on their pickups, politicians from both parties rushed to accuse him of repeating a vile Southern stereotype: the redneck with antiquated views on race. < SNIP >
''Howard Dean knows about as much about the South as a hog knows about Sunday," quipped Georgia Senator Zell Miller, the conservative Democrat who supported President Bush. ''Sure, we drive pickups, but on the back of those pickups, you see a lot of American flags. It's the most patriotic region in the country. And you see hard-working individuals that want to instill values in their children, and you see a very, very strong work ethic in the South. He doesn't understand the South." < SNIP >
Many Southerners express outrage at Northern depictions of Confederate-loving Southerners, even as they accede to the idea that the flag has a place in their regional heritage. Only those inside the Southern family circle can truly understand the region's complicated relationship with its own history.< SNIP >
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
Do you know what the words 'A nation of laws, not of men' means?
and what if anything does that have to do with the democrats'plan to:
A)portray every republican as the worst sort of racist because those republicans that do think we have a right to our heritage.
B)destroy southern heritage and symbols for the purpose of completely rewriting the history books to hide their crimes
Before you start in on the whole states rights debate, consider this, arguing that old dead horse is about as dumb as arguing the physical properties of the cannon ball that just plowed through your ranks.
It's better to go and find the gunner that shot the cannon ball in the first place and raise your argument with him to a whole new level.
Truth be told, the North saw their sugar daddy starting to slip away and fought tooth an nail to keep it from happening, creating the greatest constitutional crisis this country has ever seen. The end result being a federal government that bears little to resemblance to the one envisioned by the framers.
You are avoiding my question.
Your entire argument consists of 'those damn Democrats' and 'the south was/is evil'.
----------
Think about this:
Slavery was legal in the colonies.
Slavery was legal when the revolutionary War was fought.
Slavery was legal when the Constitution was signed.
The right to have escaped slaves returned was put in the Constitution. (Article 4, Section 2, Clause 3 )
So I ask you again-
Do you know what the words 'a Nation of laws, not of men' means?
Do you believe the Constitution is the 'law of the land'?
Because of that ploy,the south had to sell their cotton to the North at the prices the northerners set. Of course by the time Civil War was over Europe had found other sources of cotton, and The southern cotton fields had been ruined.
Most here won't admit it but the whole Civil War had more to do with the tariffs our government placed upon the south to fund it's expenses.
Precisely, hence my "sugar daddy" comment.
I not avoiding the question, states rights debate is a dead horse I can whip at any time.
The republicans were in the process of abolishing slavery within the laws of the land and eventualy would have amended the constitution to that effect with or without a civil war.
The southern democrats decided to secede to protect their right to own slaves claiming the constitution gave them the right to do so.
Only they weren't willing to ask to be allowed to secede in the halls of congress.
Just as new States are voted upon in congress so should the secession of states have been voted upon in congress. They chose to circumvent a legal process they could not win.
The southern democrats choose to ignore the constitution and the laws of the land by doing so.
As has been pointed out time and time again by those that argue for states rights The southern democrats believed that the constitutions of the individual states had more legal authority over them then the US constitution, and yet the first thing they love to point out is that the US constitution guarentees states right.
So which has more legal power, the individual state constitutions or the US constitution, if you say that The US constitution does because it guarentees states rights then clearly The Southern democrats by not arguing for their secession in the halls of congress ignored the constitution to suit their needs.
virtually NOBODY (including the abolitionists AND "radical republicans") wanted EQUALITY (or even anything that vaguely resembled equality) for Blacks, Browns, Asians, Jews, AmerIndians or any other "person of colour"!
thus the "pass through but tarry not" laws in virtually every northern state AND the "voter qualification laws" that were INTENDED to DISqualify any "person of colour", who might WANT to settle down in "lily white" areas & VOTE!
in other words, as is usual with DAMNyankee elitists, it was ALL a KNOWING LIE, intended to make "the KNOWING, racist,LIARS" look "better" in the eyes of "the easily deceived". it was nothing more or less than that.
OBVIOUSLY, you are one of the "easily deceived" OR you HOPE your readers are. which is it???
free dixie,sw
"copperheads" were & ARE loved & cherished by ALL true southewrners, then & NOW!
free dixie,sw
otoh, there's "the BLIND to the TRUTH" sort from dixie, who become SCALAWAGS/turncoats to their native southland/state.
face it, cobra, you "know NOT & know NOT that you know NOT".
free dixie,sw
BUT as i said before, N-S is a PROPAGANDIST for the radical unionist cause & the hate-FILLED, arrogant, REVISIONIST,freedom-HATING, STATISTS of DAMNyankeeland. PROPAGANDA is his JOB!
expect NOTHING more than that & you won't be disappointed!
otoh, as i said earlier, N-S is the ONLY one of the DY coven that has a BRAIN/EDUCATION. after him the group goes "downhill" in the "IQ department", really fast.
i NEVER said anything of the sort AND i HOPE you aren't DUMB ENOUGH to believe the BILGE you posted in #193.
are you THAT dense/deluded/ignorant OR are you INTENTIONALLY LYING about me??
free dixie,sw
fwiw, he is a SCALAWAG & TURNCOAT both to his native STATE & to his native SOUTH.
expect nothing but evasions, hate-FILLED nonsense,personal (ad hominum) attacks,meaningless BILGE, UNfounded/ignorant personal opinion & invective from him & you won't be disappointed!
free dixie,sw
No, you ARE avoiding the question......repeatedly
-------------
The southern democrats decided to secede to protect their right to own slaves claiming the constitution gave them the right to do so.
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a4_2_3s10.html
Article 4, Section 2, Clause 3
Document 10
House of Representatives, Fugitives from Justice
Mr. Mason, of Massachusetts, delivered at length his motives for approving the bill. The Constitution, formed in the spirit of compromise, had guarantied this kind of property to the Southern States, and as it appeared from the insufficiency of the existing laws, that the proposed bill was necessary to secure this right, he was willing to adopt the measure, as he was always willing to approve any measure to effect what the Constitution sanctioned.
The question on the passage of the bill was then taken, and decided in the affirmative--yeas 84, nays 69.
The bill passed and became part of the law of the land.
***
Can you show me the part of the Constitution that gave the government the authority to tell the People what property they could or could not own?
Can you show me the part of the Constitution that gave the President the authority to cause the deaths of almost a million Americans because he has an attack of *Enlightenment*?
-------------
So which has more legal power, the individual state constitutions or the US constitution
Depends on the venue. Are you talking civil legal power or statutory legal power?
Power over what? The People or the States?
-------------
if you say that The US constitution does because it guarentees states rights
The US Constitution does guarantee States rights because the States created the federal/national government. Thus the legal axiom 'that which you create, you have the right to control'.
Do you think the Founders pledged their 'lives, fortunes and sacred honor' to construct a behemoth that had legal control over every aspect of their lives?
-------------
The Southern democrats by not arguing for their secession in the halls of congress ignored the constitution to suit their needs.
The south didn't have the legal onerous to 'argue' for federal permission to exercise a right they already possessed.
-------------
The north broke the compact by not returning the slaves.
The south wasn't legally obliged to argue, acknowledge or obey a contract that no longer existed.
free dixie,sw
the WAR was ONLY about dixie LIBERTY & our "tattered, barefooted, frequently hungry lads in gray rags" couldn't have CARED LESS about "some rich guy's right to trade in human flesh", as they could NOT have afforded a slave, had they wanted to buy one. over 95% of the soldiers/sailors/marines of the CSA military forces had GROSS assets of TWENTY-FIVE USD ($ 25.oo) at the outbreak of the war. most of their families had COMBINED assets of less than ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS! (ours was a PEASANT REVOLT, led by a handful of professionals like LEE & JACKSON.)
they fought for FREEDOM from a faraway government (which they believed was abrogating their GOD-given right to be LEFT ALONE), fighting against a cruel IMPERIALIST invader, for their states/county/parish/town & for HONOR & each other.
free dixie,sw
STATES have POWERS, which in FREE societies, are granted to them by the voters (those powers may be WITHDRAWN/modified at any time that the citizens CHOOSE to revoke those powers, in FREE states).
only FREE PERSONS/CITIZENS have RIGHTS.
didn't they teach you that relatively simple but IMPORTANT concept in your "gubmint apruved pubic screwl sistim"???
free dixie,sw
it's that you are SO PROGRAMMED by the ARROGANT elitists out of DAMNyankeeland (who wouldn't SPIT on you if you were on fire & LOL at anybody who believes their KNOWING lies!)that you AUTOMATICLY & UNthinkingly respond NEGATIVELY to everything/everybody who is southern. you believe the worst of their LIES, UNthinkingly.
it's so BOVINE of you.
free dixie,sw
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.