Posted on 03/21/2009 6:26:13 AM PDT by cowboyway
ATLANTA — In a cultural war that has pitted Old South against new, defenders of the Confederate legacy have opened a fresh front in their campaign to polish an image tarnished, they said, by people who do not respect Southern values.
With the 150th anniversary of the War Between the States in 2011, efforts are under way in statehouses, small towns and counties across the South to push for proclamations or legislation promoting Confederate history.
(Excerpt) Read more at courant.com ...
Add comma, between “off and “he” to my last post. The mental midget (N-S) loves to pick up on typos. Hey N-S, how’s your buddy Wlat doing. You two still making those du meetings regularly?
Still not as good as Yardstick’s anti Catholic smears. If you are going to try for a cheap attack, put some effort into it.
Yes.
"The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress;"
If you have 15 votes against an amendment then it would take 46 votes to ratify it. Three-quarters plus one. Sixty one states. That's why slavery couldn't be ended prior to the rebellion as central-va suggested in reply 361. Not enough votes.
Where's the fun in that?
hat really ticks him off. he thrives on this conflict.
I find Southron fairy tales to be amusing for the most part, and as long as there are people like you promoting them then I'll never lack for entertainment, response or no. Case in point, your tired old Southron whine that anyone who disagrees with the rebel cause has got to be a liberal. Hard to take you people seriously when you're that wrong.
I see where you’re coming from,
but it seems like a weird way to look at it.
If we had 86 states today... we could ???
(Like an “if frogs had wings” type of thing...)
“ROTFLMAO!!!!!! This from the person who resorted to the “that thar Linkum, he be a stone racist” argument in your reply 344? Clean up the racists in your own camp first before pointing your finger towards Lincoln.”
Y’all have been throwing stones for some time!!
Your Lincoln makes GENERAL N.B. FORREST a NAACP President
Things are said to have been “settled” by Lincoln’s war, as if being shelled, blockaded,occupied, and reconstructed, would in the nature of things produce genuine intellectual conversion in the South
More re-education is necessary?
If one accepts that slavery was protected by the Constitution then the only way to do away with it was by amendment. If there were 15 slave states then the chances of accomplishing that in 1860, or even today, would be nil. That's why central-va's suggestion that is slavery was the issue then pass a law to do away with it was unworkable, and that was the point I was trying to make to him.
Sure he does. The only thing Forrest had to say about blacks prior to the rebellion was something along the lines of "Sold! To the gentleman in the blue suit."
Things are said to have been “settled” by Lincoln’s war, as if being shelled, blockaded,occupied, and reconstructed, would in the nature of things produce genuine intellectual conversion in the South
And I'll repeat. Had the confederacy not started the war then they wouldn't have been shelled, blockaded, occupied or reconstructed. All the pain, all the suffering, all the misery that you keep whining about was entirely self-inflicted.
More re-education is necessary?
In your case I'd say that basic education is necessary.
A strict constitutionalist might indeed say that the constitution died in 1861
Lincoln overruled the opinion of Chief Justice Taney that suspension of habeas corpus was unconstitutional, and in consequence the mode of the State was, until 1865, a monocratic military despotism.
Not only does Lincoln ignore the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, he simply replaces them with an amendment of his own: states have no rights that are not expressly stated in the Constitution. It was precisely the point of those amendments, however, to ensure that no serious lawyer would ever make such an argument.
Truth is that the old American Republic the founders bequeathed to us died with the advent of the Lincoln administration in 1861 and with the later ‘reconstruction’ first of the South, and, as that seemed to prove successful, then the rest of the country. The conclusion of the War of Northern Aggression showed that we were no longer a nation of sovereign states that delegated certain specified powers to the federal government while retaining the rest.
This is easy, to do otherwise would be immoral. I don't want to force any state to form an involuntary Union with my state. Any other situation is a form of empire, which has it's merits; bit not my cup of tea. You are a statist, I am not. It's fairly clear.
Your analogy needs bit of work, I join the Moose lodge and the members vote me in. True. I leave anytime I want, the Moose brethren can vote me out but I reserve the right of disassociation at any time I choose. See the difference.
So fun though
“And I’ll repeat. Had the confederacy not started the war then they wouldn’t have been shelled, blockaded, occupied or reconstructed. All the pain, all the suffering, all the misery that you keep whining about was entirely self-inflicted.”
Yankees, invading the South, were monsters, killing, raping and destroying civilian property.Some two thousand Southern women and children were shipped north to labor as slaves. Didn’t you learn that in school?
In retrospect, it appears that because nothing like this had ever happened here, Lee and Jackson did not fully comprehend what they were fighting. Had this really been a “Civil” War, rather than a secession, they would and could easily have seized Washington after Manassas and hanged our first Communist President and the other war criminals.
The presumptuous Yankee overstepped his place. Raping human property was the proper job of the slave owner.
What is moral about claiming only one side of the issue has any rights in the situation?
Your analogy needs bit of work, I join the Moose lodge and the members vote me in. True. I leave anytime I want, the Moose brethren can vote me out but I reserve the right of disassociation at any time I choose. See the difference.
No. If you walk away from responsibility for your share of the debt you helped the Moose lodge run up, take every bit of lodge property you can get your hands on, leave the Moose lodge to handle obligations it entered into when you were a member, then your analogy comes closer. Add to that the possibility that you could, at any time you chose, block access coming and going to the Moose lodge by any person you wanted to. So where is that fair?
What gives me the creeps about the "mic" and "nonsensical" is that it seems like we are dealing with a habitual wife-beater type of psychological profile to wit: neo-Yankee socialist-federalist top down government type (in reality I know isn't true but gives me pause) and it makes me feel dirty. They are numerous which is scary.
Either that they are pulling a fast one and they really don't believe the BS they profess?
And? Chief Justice Taney could not on his own rule that Lincoln's actions were unconstitutional. Only the full court could do that and by the time the 1861 session started Lincoln's original suspension had lapsed.
Not only does Lincoln ignore the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, he simply replaces them with an amendment of his own: states have no rights that are not expressly stated in the Constitution. It was precisely the point of those amendments, however, to ensure that no serious lawyer would ever make such an argument.
Now you're just being silly.
I pay my bills unlike the North who so graciously rebuilt everything they knocked over in their clumsy naked power grab. That property you referred to was paid for with taxes already levied. Don't start a war, instead send out peace delegations and act civilized, presto chango borders open, See not that hard. Out numbered 3 to 1 the south was just itching for a fight. LOL.
The South, by initiating the war, was solely responsible for keeping that war from coming home to them. They failed in that.
Some two thousand Southern women and children were shipped north to labor as slaves. Didn’t you learn that in school?
No. The schools I went to dealt in facts, not fairy tales.
In retrospect, it appears that because nothing like this had ever happened here, Lee and Jackson did not fully comprehend what they were fighting.
Considering that both had participated in the Mexico campaign then it was pretty naive of them.
Had this really been a “Civil” War, rather than a secession...
It would be more accurate to call it a rebellion, though Civil War is also acceptable.
....they would and could easily have seized Washington after Manassas and hanged our first Communist President and the other war criminals.
No they couldn't, as both General Johnston and Beauregard made clear to Davis. Following Bull Run the confederate army in victory was as disorganized as the federal army was in defeat.
And if they were out to hang our first Communist president then they would have had to go to Richmond.
“Either that they are pulling a fast one and they really don’t believe the BS they profess?”
Jefferson was right and the proof is evidenced in its obverse. If a properly-educated populace is the people’s greatest defense against tyranny, then an improperly-educated populace is the tyrant’s greatest tool for promoting it.
“habitual wife-beater type”
Yep! Slap the Wife and then hold her against her will by gun-point
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.