Posted on 06/02/2021 5:09:54 PM PDT by Saint Athanasius
It was appropriate that news of the Democrats’ plans to pack the Supreme Court broke in April, just a couple days after the 160th anniversary of the Confederate attack on Fort Sumter, the shots that began the Civil War.
Unlike President James Buchanan, who dithered in responding to obvious Confederate aggression, the newly inaugurated Abraham Lincoln acted decisively upon taking office. He informed South Carolina Governor Francis Pickens that he would be resupplying the fort, forcing South Carolina’s hand. Lincoln’s actions did not start the war—they made it clear that war was already underway. From that point on, Americans, even those who had previously wished to ignore what was staring them in the face, were awakened to the reality of their situation.
The dispute between Lincoln and Pickens that led to the attack on Fort Sumter was not simply a political struggle over who should control the regime but a larger political struggle over which regime it would be. Ultimately, it was a question of whether we would be a nation for free citizens or one that held men and women in bondage.
Today’s Republicans, like Lincoln, find themselves in a regime-level conflict with the Democrats. The Democrats are firing again and again on our Constitutional order, our history, and our traditions—our metaphorical Fort Sumter, if you will—but unlike our forebear Lincoln, our elected leadership seems either to be aiding the insurgent Left or, at best, feebly invoking constitutional provisions and principles, as if our opponents have shown that their behavior can be in any way constrained by these things. We need to channel the spirit of Lincoln rather than Buchanan to win this struggle.
(Excerpt) Read more at amgreatness.com ...
You might want to take a look at this and also this from Michael Anton. I don’t agree with everything that Mr. Anton says - but it has something to think about. Mr. Carl’s article above is much more level headed in my opinion. But both articles need to be considered.
https://amgreatness.com/2021/06/01/red-lines/
The Democrats are firing again and again on our Constitutional order, our history, and our traditions—our metaphorical Fort Sumter, if you will—but unlike our forebear Lincoln, our elected leadership seems either to be aiding the insurgent Left
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thank you Nikki Haley
“Ultimately, it was a question of whether we would be a nation for free citizens or one that held men and women in bondage.”
Yes, the Confederate States had a constitution that enshrined human bondage.
Yes, the United States had a constitution that enshrined human bondage.
Yes, the Confederate president took an oath to protect and defend his nation’s pro-slavery constitution.
Yes, the United States president took an oath to protect and defend his nation’s pro-slavery constitution. Twice.
Yes, all the Confederate States had slaves.
Yes, the United States had as many slave states as they could keep their hands on.
After the Emancipation Proclamation, one of these nations added a slave state.
Do you know which one?
bump
Good articles.
But I know this group, American Greatness, mainly due to Sebastian Gorka and yesterday on his show he stated Biden is a 100% legitimate president and it’s crazy and stupid and pointless to think anything else.
So, I’m not seeing any internal consistency. Unless American Greatness addresses Gorka’s explicit endorsement of Biden’s presidency.
I will wait and see.
The Declaration of Independence STARTS by pointing out that people have the right dissolve political bands when necessary. I’ve never understood...
If the South was such an evil place, why did the North want to associate with it at all? It makes no sense unless it was about one thing and one thing only... power.
Without looking, I am going to guess the Federal’s. The state - West Virginia. Now, I am going to check if I am right.
I don’t really listen to Sebastian Gorka. I know the name, but I am not sure how much I know about him. I definitely don’t support his understanding of the election of 2020. I think it crazy and stupid if don’t think that was the most fraudulent election in our history.
I was turned on to American Greatness because of Victor Davis Hanson... but I think some writers go a little too far on Big Government solutions to our economic problems.
Here we go again.
This was one of Lincoln's "supply" ships.
There were five warships in that fleet and one large troop carrier. The mission was belligerent, and their orders were to attack if the Confederates resisted.
But the lying media called it a "supply" mission because their liberal president told them to call it a "supply" mission.
Years ago I started realizing that much of what I had been told about the civil war was misleading if not outright wrong. The more I looked into it, the more I started to understand what was really going on.
Washington DC was under the control of the corrupt wealthy on the Northeastern seaboard, just as it is today. New York wealth and power controlled Washington DC same then as now.
The threat the confederates posed was two fold. Firstly, their export production was about 200 million dollars per year in 1860, and this represented 73% of the total export value for the entire United States.
Because of laws passed in Washington DC, such as the "Navigation act of 1817", all of Southern export shipping was controlled and handled by New York. Yes, it's odd to realize this, but New York wealthy men controlled almost all Southern cotton and tobacco production and shipping.
The Confederates going their own way would stop that 200 million per year from going through New York and Washington DC.
But the greater threat still was the intent by the confederates to import European goods for domestic sale without placing high tariffs on these imported goods. These goods were of better quality than goods produced in the Northern factories of the United States, and without the tariffs they would be far cheaper to purchase than were the existing domestic goods.
The Confederates intended to ship these goods all through the midwest by way of the Mississippi watershed. They also intended to flow these goods into the border states through the long porous borders.
What this would have done was displace the markets for those northern manufactured goods, and this would wreck the fortunes of the powerful industrialists of the Northeast.
The confederate states would become a severe financial threat to the wealthy and the powerful men of the North, and *THIS* is the primary reason why they could not let the South be independent. It would ruin them, and they weren't going to allow that to happen.
There can be NO “peaceful” resolution with the left. Unfortunately, the TRUE “villains” sit back and snicker at that dichotomy. They find it humorous because they NEVER die in such conflicts
They were written by the late great Walter Williams 21 years ago.
Links are to the Jewish World Review that keeps a complete set of Dr. Williams opinion pieces.
Biden is the LEGAL President of the United States, once Congress certified the results of the Electoral College. That is the only legal requirement for him to take office.
I think of legitimacy as more of a fairness question. Would he (or any other candidate) have been elected President if major irregularities had not occurred?
For example the structure of the democrat primaries with super-delegates means that their nominee is illegitimate as the party members at large do not get an equal say in who becomes the nominee.
President Obama's second term was illegitimate because CNN conspired to shut down Romney in the debate.
Biden is illegitimate due to wide spread irregularities in vote counting and refusal of the courts to take up the grievance and rule on the evidence. In PA for example rulings by state officials that were contrary to the law and the state constitution. Making that state vote illegitimate.
Legitimacy is in the eye of the beholder to some extent. Just as the democrats kept calling President Trump illegitimate, even though he was 100% the LEGAL President of the United States.
Gorka is usually pretty good. I won't speculate what he meant to say. He got this one wrong though.
Jeremy has everything backwards in his analogy.
“Biden is the LEGAL President of the United States, once Congress certified the results of the Electoral College. That is the only legal requirement for him to take office.”
If so he is legitimate, which you later say he is not.
The situation has made things irrational.
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.