Posted on 05/10/2010 3:17:06 PM PDT by Davy Buck
"If Lee was a traitor (and I don't believe he was), he would be the only traitor for which a ship in the United States Navy was ever named. He would be the only traitor in Statuary Hall at the U.S. Capitol. He would be the only traitor whose image was used in a positive way to recruit military personnel to fight and win WWII. Quite an accomplishment for a "traitor", wouldn't you say. . ."
(Excerpt) Read more at oldvirginiablog.blogspot.com ...
I stand corrected.
You seem well versed in a Nation's history that IYO never existed. Fascinates you, the audacity of those black hating rednecks, thinking all uppity that they could secede. Can't get enough can you?
The “real judges” as you refer to them were in the minority in that case — which supports my point.
That's exactly the way obama and his regime think: they only believe that We The People are the ones that agree with them.
Calm down, wipe the foam off your mourh, and take a few deep breaths. Your blood pressure must be through the ceiling.
Ah, appeal to force .... in lieu of argument.
Been a while since we've seen that one .... thanks for the memories, it's almost like "Wlat" was still here.
<gently wipes tear from misty eye>
;)
Wrong. I was educated in Catholic schools K to 12 in Orlando, then got a history degree from Tulane University in New Orleans.
Secession put the issues between North and South to the test of military force — which is why it was such a foolish course of action for the South.
He can neither deny that he is pro-abortion or unequivocally state that he is a conservative.
If your point was that Lincoln kept sending up Supreme Court justices from his own political crowd without gainsay for four years, yeah.
A war-fighting cabinet officer, sitting in judgment of the legality of the war he'd just fought? Come on.
--------------------------------------------------
Your quoting the Federalist papers. Justifying the creation of the States - turning and declaring war upon them? OK
Didn't Mr. Madison talk against such acts? Hmmm. I think he did:
"A Union of the States containing such an ingredient seemed to provide for its own destruction. The use of force against a State, would look more like a declaration of war, than an infliction of punishment, and would probably be considered by the party attacked as a dissolution of all previous compacts by which it might be bound."
The whole issue, as I've shown you many times, was ultra vires the Supreme Court.
Imagine Chase pretending to rule that Ohio couldn't ratify the Fifteenth Amendment. Sez who?
Again, this supports my point that the federal courts simply would not have declared secession legal.
It's part of the damn yankee coven denial and mythology courses that he took in schrewl.
The ns strategy of dealing with the Confederacy:
First off your knowledge of The US Constitutions appears to be sadly lacking.
Obama cannot sign any treaty that has not been ratified by the Congress.
Remember it is your contention that we are talking about the consent of the governed.
I have no doubt that treaties shave been signed that one or more states did not agree with, however all states had a say in weather or not the treaties were ratified, and as such cannot just say “F” that just because they were in the losing side of the argument.
Every vote ever cast for a member of congress is the consent of the people to accept the “federal” government responsibility to follow the US constitution, having said that please show me where the southern states refused to vote in the general election of 1860 because they refused to consent to the Federal Government.
It was what it was. If anyone feels like that, it's due to the corrosive effects of a politically-charged, anti-American educracy teaching students to be ashamed of who they are ..... unless they have an ethnic "get out of jail card".
Yes we've all seen your opinion on the matter time and time again.
Imagine Chase pretending to rule that Ohio couldn't ratify the Fifteenth Amendment. Sez who?
Chase alone couldn't rule that. That's why they have nine justices.
No, I mean just what I wrote, and you know it, too.
Why are you in bed with Bill Clinton and all those "red-diaper" Marxist historians who've been pushing that stuff? That's what I'd like to know. You a Columbia grad? Occidental College?
And if I did either why should I care whether you agreed or disagreed? Considering that I can think of absolutely nothing I have less respect for than the opinion of you or MJ on any subject at all?
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.