Posted on 03/03/2006 11:37:56 AM PST by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailypress.com ...
Oh, where to start? How about with this one, just come to hand?
....the colonists thought as Americans and acted as one people .....
And the state constitutions were created by the people of the states acting as the Continental Congress requested they do.
Hence the states are subsidiary to the overall voice of the American people speaking through their National authorities.
That authority has been refined from the initial reactions to the Intolerable acts through the occupation the beginnings of the Revolutionary War and the Articles. The Constitution represented yet another refining of that National Consciousness of being an American. Our views were never confined to petty states but were expressed by our greatest in terms of the Continent.
When Virginia was ruled by men concerned about something other than Slavery it volutarily gave the federal government vast tracts of land in the West it claimed. That is how much they considered themselves Americans. Other states did the same.
Of course, the Congress could not FORCE a state to have a convention. It DEFINED how a states voice would be heard on the question of acceptance. It defined the LEGAL world on that question.
Massachuetts constitutional power lies below the state or did at that time. Townships held the power to delegate to the state.
But the real point in all this is this all is an expression of what was becoming the American People.
Why don't you tell our friends and guests about ANY compliant I have ever made to the mods about ANYTHING said to or about me?
Geez buy a clue. The "TOTAL" program was racist slavery not a government.
Those clowns were hapless. Russian Nobility hapless.
Immediately they recognized their voices would only be heard if speaking as one. This organized voice started in the 1760s.
It refined its organization continuously since then. I support all those who worked to strengthen the ability of that people to speak and strengthen its Union.
Far for a lie, it is the underlying truth of most of these phenomena.
Never did the colonies nor states believe they could survive chopped into insignificant segments. Nor did the People in them.
So, how many years elapsed before living Hamilton ate his own words, and performed himself what he had assured us the federal government would never do, and was one of the "maddest projects" of government? LOL.
Your foot looks like a colander. Better put that gun away, boy.
In some faraway country founded and ruled by you, maybe.
This is not the case with the United States of America, as we have pointed out repeatedly to your slothful refusal to induce the obvious.
You just want to play empire with a federation and knock everybody on the head.
<yawn> Same old same-old. Guys like you are a dime a dozen -- like "National Greatness" Republican Sen. John McCain, whom Camille Paglia described as "positively bulging with protofascist impulses."
An American fascist is still a fascist, and you're wearing the jackboots to be one. All the necessary concepts that define corporofascism in the nation-state, you've articulated in your posts -- while standing on the caps key, another characteristic of guys with wild eyes and weak willies, who stride about ranting with clubs in their hands.
Grab a clue, pal. This is America.
The Constitution was written to frustrate guys like you.
Then you're much older than I had speculated. I'd pictured you more as a loudmouth-kid type, not so much 'old enough to know better.'
At present my son is picking up the slack as a Nuke on the USS Ohio.
Be sure to let him know that his efforts are appreciated & God Bless.
Finally, there it is: The Big Lie.
How far behind is the Farber quote? "Mystical bonds of union" my ass.
Nobody thought to write it down? No... nobody thought it at all.
LOL! For very obvious reasons - just as they most decidedly REMOVED the word perpetual.
Dear CLUELESS:
Lincoln sent ARMED ships & troops into Charleston, even after the US Congress REFUSED to do so. The congress was fully cognizant of the situation, the forces under Anderson's command were not starving. No war would have occurred if Lincoln had not sent in troops.
The convention had refused to grant the new federal government power to coerce a state, Hamilton conceded such in his attempt to alleviate the fears of New York. And guess what, the US Supreme Court had previously held that the federal government had no authority to use military force against a state.
In 1860, the governor of the state of Kentucky (Beriah Magoffin) filed suit against the state of Ohio, asking the courts to order the federal government to force the governor of Ohio (William Dennison), to return an alleged fugitive from justice, one Willis Lago, a free man of color.
It is true that Congress may authorize a particular State officer to perform a particular duty; but if he declines to do so, it does not follow that he may be coerced, or punished for his refusal. ...Face the facts, the people of each state are not amalgamated into one mass, the framers rejected the notion of perpetuity, the framers rejected the use of force against a state, the Supreme Court rejected that same force, Congress refused to attempt to coerce the seceded states by force, but Lincoln in his arrogance did what Hamilton considered to be the act of a MADMAN, a despot, a tyrant.The performance of this duty, however, is left to depend on the fidelity of the State Executive to the compact entered into with the other States when it adopted the Constitution of the United States, and became a member of the Union. It was so left by the Constitution, and necessarily so left by the act of 1793.
And it would seem that when the Constitution was framed, and when this law was passed, it was confidently believed that a sense of justice and of mutual interest would insure a faithful execution of this constitutional provision by the Executive of every State, for every State had an equal interest in the execution of a compact absolutely essential to their peace and well being in their internal concerns, as well as members of the Union. Hence, the use of the words ordinarily employed when an undoubted obligation is required to be performed, 'it shall be his duty.'
But if the Governor of Ohio refuses to discharge this duty, there is no power delegated to the General Government, either through the Judicial Department or any other department, to use any coercive means to compel him.
Chief Justice Taney, Commonwealth Of Kentucky v. Dennison, 65 How. 66, 108, 109-110 (1860)
He was not speaking of putting down insurrections in the Federalist now was he? And the federal government is EXPLICITLY given the power to put down insurrections in the Constitution now isn't it?
Does it take much practice to be so dense or is that a by-product of swallowing the treasonous pap of the Slavers?
The Constitution was written by the very people I laud and you attack as being "fascist" Washington, Hamilton, Madison, Morris.
It is YOU who believe such nonsense as that the 10th amendment is a Self Destruct button the states can push to blow up the Union whenever they wish. Not I.
It is YOU who believe that the federal government was conceived to be as powerless as the federations in ancient history which were EXPLICITLY rejected as models. Not I.
You say "this is America" while not even believing there is any such thing as a Nation or a People. Little wonder those thinking like that led the Nation into four years of unnecessary bloodshed in order to protect their petty tyrannies.
Fortunately we had men like The Continentalist around to counter the short-sighted and delusionary. He even prophetically warned of those designing and small-minded and their predispisition to attack the Union in Washington's Farewell Address.
Your mental pictures of me are as accurate as those of the Founding and the RAT Rebellion.
Nothing is more obvious than the fact that the American People have been creating a new Nation conceived in Liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. That struggle has gone through several major phases all with that goal.
It has not been merely a struggle between ruling classes or blind chance. But the working out of Liberty in action.
God Bless America.
There was no need for the word since making a more perfect Union from a government of a Union already declared perpetual need not mention it. Madison explained clearly that it was perpetual in any case in his letter to Hamilton.
Lincoln was commander in chief NOT Congress. Insurrection was punishable in 1792 and in 1861.
Sumter was not the only US propery attacked by the Insurrectionists in any case.
As though the Commander-in-Chief did not have the RIGHT and DUTY to do as he thought best with US military forces and posts. LoL.
It is a complete LIE that the Founders did not provide for putting down insurrections. It is also a complete LIE that the Founders did not believe the Union was perpetual as it had been declared a dozen times in the Articles.
But all the DSs have are LIES.
ROTF! The alleged perpetual union lasted just a few years, the new union was made more perfect by reducing the number of states required to consent to changes.
You are deliberately confusing the Union with the GOVERNMENT of that Union. It was the government which changed not the idea of the perpetual Union.
anybody USING that TERM OF ABUSE marks them as a DUNCE & a FOOL of the 1st class.
but of course we FReepers ALL knew that about "mr.spin", the fool & BIGOT.
now, back under your log, with you.
free dixie,sw
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.