Posted on 10/25/2010 7:28:30 AM PDT by Michael Zak
On this day in 1859, Senator William Seward (R-NY) said:
"The Democratic party is inextricably committed to the designs of the slaveholders... The history of the Democratic Party commits it to the policy of slavery. It has been the Democratic Party, and no other agency, which has carried that policy up to its present alarming culmination... Such is the Democratic Party... The government of the United States, under the conduct of the Democratic Party, has been all that time surrendering one plain and castle after another to slavery."
The more things change...
Who's calling who 'dearie'?
I'm crushed. Here I take the time to share a family moment with you and you disrespect me. Actually it isn't so much that you disrespect me as you disrespect a member of my family. I made no similar presumptive remarks about your daughter, whom I imagine is a very fine person.
So what "Liberal Projection" do you claim I or my family is making, and towards whom?
Careful, rockrr. Don't quote her. She hates it when you quote her.
I’m just taking pains not to “sugar coat” it...;-)
However, if you read further, you see that the United States Congress at first postponed, and then rejected that notion. That was the last word then on the topic. How could it be otherwise 71 years later?
Thanks for the reply. It is fun to go back to the old records.
The action proposed by Washington and Knox was to send a message to the Cherokees that basically said given the present state of affairs the US couldn't do anything. (The present state of affairs being that the Cherokees were in North Carolina, and North Carolina was not a member of the Union.) The proposed message to the Cherokees continued that "as soon as the difficulties which are at present opposed to the measures shall be removed [rb: i.e., North Carolina becomes a member of the Union assuming it does in the future], the Government will then do full justice to the Cherokees."
The question posed to the Congress was: "In the present state of affairs between North Carolina and the United States, will it be proper to take any other measures for redressing the injuries than the one herein suggested?"
Congress answered in the negative, meaning that Washington's proposed message to the Cherokees that the US couldn't do anything given the present state of affairs with North Carolina was approved. By voting in the negative, Congress indicated they did not think any other measures were necessary/appropriate. If they had voted yes, they would have been saying something more than what Washington proposed was needed.
That's how I read it anyway.
Our dearie’s life revolves around finding a CW or southern thread on FR and finding people to fight with. If you stop and think about it, it’s really sad. 10 years, Christmas eves, Christmas Days, Thanksgivings, Easters, etc...... here dearie is, re-fighting the civil war and spewing his or her vile hatred towards Southerners and the South. I often wonder why a someone from Chicago and now in Kansas is so obsessed with this. There must be a reason. It’s not like his side lost. Weird, very weird. I can tell you one thing for sure, he/she is no conservative and admitted that he/she came to FR because he/she was kicked off other forums for CW name calling and fighting.
You’re the one without a clue when Thanksgiving is and I’m the loser?
____________________
WTF are you talking about....more typical non-sequiturs. 2001 Thanksgiving you were here, fighting. End of story. So the incorrect link was with the sentence which I corrected. Now stfu and think of how you can berate Southerners tomorrow and decide how many FReepers you can get into a fight with. God you lead a miserable life. It must be horrible to spend every day of your life fighting on the internet. What the hell happened to you that made you that way? You must have some skin in the game.
Check that photo you claim to have.
______________________________
How many times are you going to effing ask me to post the photo? I’ve done it at least 20 times. All 3 of them. You said none of them were you. Read my lips dearie, go back and find them. I’m sure you can figure out how to do that. I’m not your errand boy because you can’t recall them being posted at least 20 times.
You came to FR on day one, around 9/11 and defended Muslims and bashed Israel and pissed a lot of people off. Then you moved on to the CW and South bashing and continue to pick fights daily. Such anger. You must have had some life changing events that screwed you up.
I'd would guess he was hatched that way....
As many times as I can get away with it because I can't believe you were so effing stupid as to believe all three pictures were of the same person. I love watching you prove it over and over again. So come on, mo-joe. Once more. For old time's sake?
Such anger. You must have had some life changing events that screwed you up.
This from the guy who calls other guys 'dearie'? What the heck does that say about you?
So what do you figure mo-joe's excuse is?
You forgot to mention his passionate defense of Obama on every eligibility thread ever posted on Freerepublic.
Two words: Robert Byrd
You just hate it when people point out what a doofus your heroine, Queen Orly of Taitz, is. We must be hitting a little too close to home when we do that.
No doubt you consider LTC Terrence Lakin a “doofus” too. You are nothing but a subversive marxist troll.
You know the answer to that. I believe Lakin is guilty of the charges filed against him and will pay the penalty for his folly. Only someone like you can consider facts subversive marxism.
You are nothing but a subversive marxist troll.
OK, now the question is were you calling me a troll back in 2001? Because mo-joe claims I was being called a troll way back then - and that I was accusing other people of being stalkers in 2002, but that's another story - and if you can come up with a post showing you called me a troll 9 years ago then I'm sure he'd be forever in your debt. Just post a link to it or FReepmail him.
But then you would have to argue that it was necessary for Lincoln to order a military fleet to Charleston; to ask Seward to secretly take $10,000 from his safe to pay Fox to rent civilian ships to sneak soldiers to Charleston; to paint out the name of his ships; to task a civilian with the responsibility of a decision that would bring war; to authorize those people to fight their way into a port.
In view of that, the Confederate Command chose self defense, which was not only necessary but courageous.
The U.S. Navy does not enforce the Constitution.
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.