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.

[4CJ]

Chief Justice Marshall disagrees with that opinion.

Can you point to any constitutional action ever taken by the people en massee? Who did they vote for? Who ratified for another state? Can the "people" decide who are the electors for Florida? Can the "people" declare that queers can be legally married in Idaho, or vote on their representatives?

The definition of a CONFEDERATE REPUBLIC seems simply to be "an assemblage of societies,'' or an association of two or more states into one state. The extent, modifications, and objects of the federal authority are mere matters of discretion. So long as the separate organization of the members be not abolished; so long as it exists, by a constitutional necessity, for local purposes; though it should be in perfect subordination to the general authority of the union, it would still be, in fact and in theory, an association of states, or a confederacy. The proposed Constitution, so far from implying an abolition of the State governments, makes them constituent parts of the national sovereignty, by allowing them a direct representation in the Senate, and leaves in their possession certain exclusive and very important portions of sovereign power. This fully corresponds, in every rational import of the terms, with the idea of a federal government.
Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 9, "The Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection"

If the people were one mass, the states would have been abolished. They weren't.

P.S. Can you name/describe the great war/revolution that occurred to overthrow the Articles - if one occurred. I've seen numerous posters allege that the right of revolution means that the state could raise up military force to alter it's form of government.

[justshutupandtakeit]

You clearly don' know what happened at the NY Convention whose ratification of the Constitution was a stunning achievement by Hamilton in converting the Clinton hacks from two thirds opposed to voting yes. AND the proposal to ratify conditionally was voted DOWN.

He was "defeated" as badly as the Union armies in 1865.

[reelfoot]

"the image was quietly removed in August 2004 to avoid an uproar."

Of course, the American flag is offensive to many, seen as the symbol of oppression and genocide of American Indians, the banner of privileged males of European descent, oppressor of women, etc. Obviously, the stars and stripes will have to go, too, in favor of some new flag that celebrates diversity and multiculturalism so as not to offend anyone. It really shouldn't be displayed even for historic purposes since it might be found to be hurtful to some. [sarc./off]

[justshutupandtakeit]

South Carolina had no constitutional authority to unilaterally change the Union.

The rest of your post is senseless.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Hamilton was the MOST conservative Founder and has been roundly slandered and abused because of it for two hundred + years. His view of the Constitution is the one which has helped lead this nation to strength and greatness. His economic and financial policies were instrumental in making the North strong enough to defeat the Traitors assaulting the Union.

Hamilton is the greatest statesman we ever produced with the possible exception of Washington. Any question of the Constitution is best answered by consulting Hamilton. Washington depended upon his judgment in ALL matters and Marshall went to Hamilton first in all judicial matters. Comparing himself to Hamilton in legal understanding and knowledge was "like a taper to the sun" he readily admitted.

Washington's Farewell Address (written by Hamilton) was a WARNING about the nefarious and deceitful men who would attempt to destroy the Union through their self-seeking willingness to undo the work of the Founders.

[justshutupandtakeit]

You are arguing a straw man since I have never claimed the American people gathered en masse. The Congress's call for ratification conventions was a call to the American people to gather in states for them. This was a administrative convenience and that was the principle reason states were not abolished. Plus that structure made it easier to incrementally enlarge the Union. But the states themselves were explicitly excluded from making the decision to ratify or reject.

Another prime reason the Founders set up the representative structure as it did was not to emphasis the separate state structure but to prevent Democracy from gaining power.

Every federal election is, in fact, an action taken by the American people en masse it just is not reflected as a direct democratic vote but filtered through the representative process. But it represents the voice of the American people. Georgia does not refuse to vote or Illinois decide it will vote before the rest.

[justshutupandtakeit]

BTW Hamilton refers to how the Constitution "...leaves in their possession certain exclusive and very important portions of sovereign power." This means that states were NOT fully sovereign.

[stand watie]

try re-reading # 231.

that is the OPINION of virtually all the folks on these threads about your posts/brains/knowledge/etc.

perhaps you post DUMBER than you are. one hopes so.

free dixie,sw

[justshutupandtakeit]

You need a little more hysterical vitriol to make my conversion to Insanity complete. Keep trying.

[stand watie]

like i said, you might consider #231. that's as close to vitriol as i usually get, absent STUPID people who like to make RACIST remarks. SADLY there are SEVERAL of those types here on FR.

SOME also like sending out OBSCENE & THREATENING e-mails, too.

at least, you don't seem to be one of those benighted creatures.

free dixie,sw

[justshutupandtakeit]

You are veering to close to Sanity to be persuasive. Remember convincing requires MORE insults and lies.

[Heyworth]

SOME also like sending out OBSCENE & THREATENING e-mails, too.

Feel free to present some of these (edited naturally). I'd especially be interested in seeing the racist ones that you've claimed I sent you.

[stand watie]

instead of posting more NONSENSE to me, try doing some of the actions i suggested in #231.

for starters, stop reading the hysterical,south-HATING rants of the CSA-hating REVISIONIST, elitist, LEFT & see what the original documents say about dixie's war for FREEDOM. (you'll find that 90% of what they write is KNOWINGLY FALSE,deceptive,evasive and/or disingenuous.)

perhaps then, nobody will think you a fool. (at this time/date, you are rated for brains just ABOVE "m.eSPINola," the HATER & class cretin.)

free dixie,sw

[brazzaville]

Good morning.

We are stalled in building our house until more materials come in so I'll continue.

You gave me permission to post quotes, no, you implied that my position wasn't valid without them, so here are a few.

This has been an interesting thread, hasn't it.

"I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the United States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so..."
Abraham Lincoln in his inaugural address, 3/4/1861

"My paramount objective in this struggle is to save the Union and it is not either to save or destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that. What I do about slavery and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps save the Union."
Abraham Lincoln in a letter to Horace Greeley in 1862

"The Southern Confederacy will not employ our ships or buy our goods. What is our shipping without it? Literally nothing... It is clear that the South gains by this process and we lose. No --- we must NOT let the South go."
from the Union Democrat, Manchester, New Hampshire, 2/19/1861

"That either revenue from duties must be collected in the ports of the rebel states, or the ports must be closed to importation from abroad....If neither of these things be done, our revenue laws will be substantially repealed, the sources of our treasury will be dried up..."
from the New York Evening Post, 3/12/1861

"I pity them greatly, but I must be mum, for how could we do without sugar and rum."
British poet William Cowper(1731-1800) in a poem about slaves

"Our situation illustrates the American idea that governments rest upon the consent of the governed and it is the right of the people to alter or abolish them whenever they become destructive of the ends for which they were established."
Jefferson Davis

"All we ask is to be left alone."
Jefferson Davis in his first speech to the Confederate Congress

"Surrender means that the history of this heroic struggle will be written by the enemy..."
Confederate General Patrick Cleburne

At the beginning of the war, four states VA, NC, SC and GA provided somewhere around 75% of the revenue to the federal government under the Morrill tariff.

Regarding the beginning of the war, the first act of the new Confederate President was to send peace delegates to meet with the United States. Lincoln refused see them.

As to those opening shots at Fort Sumter, Lincoln had already dispatched Gustavus Fox with a fleet and some 1500 troops to set up what was essentially a blockade of Charleston harbor. When the South fired on the fort, they gave Abe the pretext he wanted to call up 75,00 troops and begin the war. Since the Union troops at the fort lowered their colors within two days and were allowed to be returned safely to the Union, despite the presence of a large force to help them, I have to assume that was the plan in the first place. Trying to turn my snide comment to you back on me was slick, but not applicable to this situation.

Slavery is morally reprehensible, as it has been when practiced by every race that has ever lived on earth, but it was only a part of the reason our ancestors killed each other, and it wasn't ended by Lincoln for reasons of morality.

As I said, this has been an interesting thread. One of the things I have learned is that there are virtually no unbiased sources.

Michael Frazier

[brazzaville]

Good afternoon.
"... the Clinton hacks"

This like the Geico commercial, isn't it? "We didn't know you guys were still around."

Michael Frazier

[lentulusgracchus]

[me] And where's the part about "betrayal"?

[thee] You tell me.

No, you tell me -- you guys used the word "betrayal". I want you to explain to me how General Lee's letter supports the notion of "betrayal," as in, "Benedict Arnold" or "Vidkun Quisling" or maybe "Anthony Blount".

Demarche, I'd believe. "Bad idea," I'd believe. "Poor policy," or any number of synonyms -- after all, that's what Madison, Washington, Franklin, and others thought of disunion, and even federal union. They wanted a centralized state. They didn't get it, and the actions of Lincoln's faction in 1859-60 in using the wedge issue of slavery to unite the North for a permanent factional takeover of the national government showed how prescient the old Patriots had been, in their misgivings about so-called "federalism" done Hamilton and Madison's way.

Ein Volk ein Reich! hasn't been America's style, ever. It's the burden of statists and corporofascists like you, to explain why it's good for us, even when we're just policy objects anymore, and seldom listened to.

[4CJ]

But the states themselves were explicitly excluded from making the decision to ratify or reject.

Explicit? Where? It's just the opposite - 'The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same'. The Constitution is established bewteen STATES. The conventions represent the sovereigns of the state - the people. They are they state. And it took 9 states to create the new union, not 9 people. States.

Every federal election is, in fact, an action taken by the American people en masse it just is not reflected as a direct democratic vote but filtered through the representative process. But it represents the voice of the American people. Georgia does not refuse to vote or Illinois decide it will vote before the rest.

No. Georgians do not vote for anyone in South Carolina. The people or America do not vote en masse for anyone!

[4CJ]

Still no reply about mulattos, nor any reply about the revolution that created the federal union. To hear the yankees, all every southern white boy wanted was to have sex with their slaves - certainly the predominance of such would be ample evidence of the lust and rapine that ALLEGEDLY occurred. Just as the yankees claim that "revolution" means military force, and not revolutionary as in 'a novel concept, or new method'. I wonder why they refuse to address such.

[lentulusgracchus]

Washington's Farewell Address (written by Hamilton) was a WARNING about the nefarious and deceitful men who would attempt to destroy the Union through their self-seeking willingness to undo the work of the Founders.

But the Northern States elected Lincoln anyway, didn't they?

Duckspeaker.

[lentulusgracchus]

Still no reply about mulattos, ....

I'm not seeing much of a reply about anything. Non-Sequitur seems to be the only one dealing in actual thoughts of some kind.

......nor any reply about the revolution that created the federal union.

But they'll drag in the word "perpetual" when it suits them, without bothering even to pretend to understands what it really means (which no, does not mean "permanent" or refer to an irrevocable consent). And they won't stick around to discuss the significance of the disconnect between the requirements of the Articles of Confederation for their amendment, and what actually happened when the Constitution was ratified.

To hear the yankees, all every southern white boy wanted was to have sex with their slaves......

Oh, wait, I thought we wanted to whip them and kill them and hang them from trees, on fire. Or something like that. Which is it? I'm confused.

..... - certainly the predominance of such would be ample evidence of the lust and rapine that ALLEGEDLY occurred.

Perhaps that would suit the South-bashers, too, since then they could join racial contempt to their list of regional and cultural ones.

Wonder how many of them are unacknowledged subscribers to the "one drop" doctrine so integral to the ideology of the Klan?