Virginia County secretly removes Confederate flag from official seal

The Daily Press, Hampton Roads, VA ^ | March 2, 2006 | Associated Press

[Rebeleye]

The removal of the Confederate flag from Amherst County's official seal has upset Southern heritage groups, who contend residents weren't told of the change. County officials acknowledge the image was quietly removed in August 2004 to avoid an uproar.

[lentulusgracchus]

And where's the part about "betrayal"?

What I saw in there can work the opposite point, too.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Last I saw of any of your "discussing the history of the period" it was obvious you were clueless wrt any facts. Posting semi-insane rants is what you do best. Carry on.

[justshutupandtakeit]

He is like a crazy uncle the family has to put up with on a holiday. Any resemblence between his delusions and reality is total coincidence.

[justshutupandtakeit]

The power to change the Constitutional Union always rested with the American people. That never change. Unfortunately the Slavers never tried to change it in the prescribed way. Hence every one of their actions to withdraw had no legal significance. Nor did the preconditions for a justifiable reformation of government exist. There was no tyranny over the South unless it can be accused of tyrannizing itself through its almost total control of the federal government since the Founding.

None of those quotes imply that the Constitution could be changed by a state or any number of states short of the three/fourths required for amendment. And as pointed our above most of the seceding states were not ratifiers but total creations of the federal government. North Carolina and Rhode Island were not part of the initial Congress under the new constitution but no one really believed they would not both be on board when the anomalies preventing it were resolved. Rhode Island's governor even wrote Washington a letter begging that his state not be treated as a foreign country.

As regards the Marshall quote no less a political dreamer than James Madison toyed with the idea of breaking down the states into administrative units.

But the "undifferentiated people" is a straw man in any case since the Constitution was the expression of the National Will of the American people. And that people had expressed itself for a decade before the Revolutionary War.

We considered ourselves Americans only later did the blindness develop which caused some Southerners to think of their state ahead of their nation in all matters.

The first and MOST important power delegated was the power to form a Union. This was done and the means of unmaking it established - the amendment process. Any other attempts were unconstitutional and would not have been allowed by ANY president. State resolutions or enactments to the contrary have no bearing.

By These Presents in no way means that "the state could resume the powers the convention was delegating." It has absolutely nothing to do with such a thing being a mere technical term in a great variety of legal documents. As you said it only means "this document" or a variation of that concept. It adds nothing to the meaning of a document which is just as valid with or without this stock phrase at the top.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Magnificent quote from Marshall which totally destroys the pretensions of the Slavers and their modern day defense team. It is typical that placing the quotes which allegedly support their position within the complete context of the source completely contradicts the claims argued by the defense team. This has happened time after time and yet some still wonder why we consider most of the defense team to be either deceitful, demented or dense.

[justshutupandtakeit]

If that were the case then he would not also have said in that letter that once in the Union always in the Union. It was specifically to put the specter of secession permanently in its grave that he wrote the letter since that was what conditional ratification meant. Hamilton was weakening and almost ready to allow NY to put forth a conditional ratification having been worn down by his titanic struggle against the Clintonians. Madison bucked him up with this letter which destroys any contention that there was a right to withdraw without an amendment.

[justshutupandtakeit]

The USA does not include the CSA since the latter was destroyed once and for all in 1865 after failing in its attempt to destroy the Union.

Did I miss an attack by Wyoming upon the constitutional government of the US? If so I condemn it as well.

Slander of Clinton or FDR is reprehensible but unnecessary since the truth is sufficient to criticize them. Truth only makes Lincoln look even greater.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Citizenship is granted by the federal government. There is only ONE way of becoming an American citizen and states have NOTHING to do with it. We are one People and have been since about 1770 or a couple of years earlier.

[brazzaville]

Good morning.
Amazing what a good night's sleep can do for you, eh.

The excerpts you posted look like something from one of Frank Epperson's web pages.

This particular one was a series of carefully selected documents that dealt with slavery and the Civil War. Nothing else is addressed but slavery so it would seem to support your argument.

The irony is that it supports mine as well.

Cotton was king in the South and abolition would have destroyed the economies of the southern states. The North, as I said had a larger, population and a larger industrial base. They also had their own agricultural base and the South knew it.

Read the words you posted and you see that the Southern firebrands understood that abolition would destroy the south.

The immorality of slavery was unquestionable, but it was economics, not just morality, along with the idea that the slave owning states had the legal right to secede that led to secession. Even on a page with an antislavery agenda this message comes through.

The barrage on Ft. Sumter was to prevent the Federals from rearming and resupplying a position that dominated the waterway. The war had become inevitable by the time the cannon were fired, but slavery was only one issue.

Michael Frazier

[stand watie]

that is true ONLY for the 5-6% of slave-OWNERS.

the other 90+ percent of southerners (AND northerners, too!)couldn't have cared less about the slaves/preserving the "peculiar institution".

free dixie,sw

[stand watie]

sad that you are evidently as DUMB & filled with HATE for dixie & her people, as your pitiful excuse for posts indicates.

you seem to be joining "m.eSPINola" as FR's extremist/lunatic fringe element.

free dixie,sw

[brazzaville]

Good morning.
"Can quotes from "Gone With The Wind" or "Gods and Generals" be far behind?"

I haven't seen Gone With The Wind since I was a little kid. It must have been boring to me since the only thing I remember is the burning of Atlanta.

I'm continually amazed that a leftist lunatic like Ted Turner can produce excellent works like Gettysburg and Gods And Generals. Somehow the tragedy of the war for all sides came through without too much rancor. The novel Killer Angels, which provided the basis for Gettysburg was good too.

I have to admit that to Heyworth that I was mistaken about Ride With The Devil. The fighting mostly between Missouri and Kansas, not Illinois.

I've read stuff here that claims some FReepers say the Yankee sympathizers had it coming. Most people I know understand that the cruelty on the border came from both sides, fed by people whose homes had been burned and whose loved ones had been murdered by the other side. In fact, most of the people I've been exposed to who view the Civil War in absolutes are the South haters.

Michael Frazier

[justshutupandtakeit]

Raving again so early, stand? Still nothing of any value in your posts. Keep up the good work.

[justshutupandtakeit]

What is a "South hater"?

[stand watie]

i note that you're on your usual fact-FREE, DUMB-bunny tirade. pity!

are you trying to replace "MR SPIN" as our "class FOOL"????

free dixie,sw

[brazzaville]

Good morning.
"What is a "South hater"?"

Okay, how about Confederate haters? That doesn't quite sound right to me, since I'm trying to describe people who look upon the south and southerners with hatred and disdain but we can use "Confederate" for "South".

Attacks on Southern heritage are a very visible example of South hating, you know, hating the South and it's people. The Confederate Battle flag seems to really light their fires, doesn't it. I wonder if the Bonny Blue Flag would be acceptable to them.

Michael Frazier

[stand watie]

reference: south-HATERS, WELL-SAID!

SADLY, there are several of those benighted, "poor souls" on FR. MOST are PITIFULLY ignorant of the FACTS; the rest are just plain BIGOTS & HATERS (the HATERS are NO better than RACISTS, which they resemble.).

free dixie,sw

[stand watie]

NOPE not the BONNIE BLUE or S&B either (if they are smart enough to know what EITHER are! MOST are too ignorant to KNOW!).

south-HATERS are BIGOTS, who hate all us southerners/southrons,our culture, our mores, our sacred/bloodspattered/tattered battleflags, our memorials to our honored dead,our cemeteries, our hero-MARTYRS.

MOST OF ALL, they HATE the TRUTH about our ancestor's war for FREEDOM!

btw,all too many south-HATERS are also AMERICA-HATERS, too.

free dixie,sw

[brazzaville]

Good morning.
"...states have NOTHING to do with it."

That seems to be the bottom line for you. Even your choice of a FReeper name tells us that.

Michael Frazier

[swmobuffalo]

Go find my original post and there's my answer.