Posted on 02/15/2010 3:29:27 PM PST by central_va
I know that your reading comprehension is abysmal, at best, but a South hater like you couldn't possibly have missed the the word 'Southland' in my comment.
Darn! Almost forgot that you are the master of cherry picking and revisionism who constantly endeavors to emulate his hero, disHonest Abe.
Non-sensical: his dishonesty knows no bounds.
Tell me, how is leaving the Mafia unlike a state(s) trying to leave this beautiful Union?
Why don't you get yourself a copy, read it, and decide for yourself?
Or are you just afraid that you might actually learn something that would conflict with your current viewpoint?
When are you going to grace the world with your self proclaimed brilliance in typeset, blabberpuss?
You're always challenging everybody else with your sophomoric catcalls to produce their 'volumes' of works but the only 'works' that you ever produce are the pathetic and glaringly dishonest ejaculations that you puke up all over this board.
Come on, ns! Link us to your Amazon page so that we can all bask in the delicious warmth of your omnipotent and enlightening musings!
Pffftttt.......you're just a totally pathetic poser.
Well I've read articles by Graham where he expounded on his secession history and found them to be the same old Southron song-and-dance. He's got the usual claim that states 'seceded' from the Articles of Confederation to form a new country - the old 'seceded from the U.S. to form the U.S.' arguement that has never made any sense at all to me. He overblows secession sentiment in the New England states, as do all Lost Causers while at the same time conveniently forgetting that the consensus of opinion in the South was that such threats were treasonous. He disses Texas v White, par for the course. And on and on and on. The same old Southron position that the Constitution granted protections for some states and not for others which makes for the Orwellian "all states are equal but some are more equal than others" arguement that you Southron types love so well. So really, if the book is nothing but more of the same then I don't see the point in wasting my time. Sorry.
Of course I didn't miss it. I just assumed you were talking about Davis and his cronies and the way they trashed the confederacy and their constitution.
The way the South did it? Because they did a mafia-like bust out by helping to run up the debt and then walked away from it and they stole everything of value they could get their hands on on the way out. Can't get more Mafia-like than that.
Well if I ever come up with a wild-ass theory like the Constitution is akin to the Publisher's Clearing House contest then I'll be sure to do that.
You're always challenging everybody else with your sophomoric catcalls to produce their 'volumes' of works but the only 'works' that you ever produce are the pathetic and glaringly dishonest ejaculations that you puke up all over this board.
"Always challenging everyone...?" And when did I do it before asking Galt to expound on his unique theory? Can you point that out for us? Or are you just getting carried away with your own glaringly dishonest ejaculations that you puking up all over the board?
Pffftttt.......you're just a totally pathetic poser.
And you're just plain pathetic.
Of course you don't! But I should point out that Mr. Graham is a Canadian and his book traces the history of peaceful secession back to Britain's Glorious Revolution in which the Crown passed from JamesII to William and Mary WITHOUT armed conflict.
Of course I realize that you have your own agenda and wouldn't want to read anything that might interfere with THAT!
Yeah I found it interesting where he claims that Rhode Island and Virginia eacefully seceded in 1776 then breezes by that whole 1776-1783 blip that was the Revolutionary War.
In any case why did the confederacy blow their chance to conintinue that line of peaceful secession stretching back from James II to William and Mary by initiating a war over Sumter?
Of course I realize that you have your own agenda and wouldn't want to read anything that might interfere with THAT!
Well if I have my agenda then you certainly have your's as well.
Further proof that you're as dumb as an anvil.
I sure do! I will seek the TRUTH wherever that quest might take me!
Based on what I've read you really need to seek a bit harder.
More like your knowledge of Davis and his policies while running the confederacy are abysmal at best.
On this thread alone you have ignored James Wilson, St. George Tucker and I don’t recall how many others who were actually there at the time of our breaking away from the British Crown and who’s opinions are counter to yours but I suppose that is to be expected from you. Others who read through this thread will perhaps not be quite so hard headed as you and could possible learn a thing or two. At least that is my hope.
Perhaps YOU should practice what you preach!
Those who don't will be those who have read those gentlemen you named in context and without your blinders. Those who do will be Lost Causers to begin with. In either case, you are entitled to hope.
Every time you hit the Post button you submit a wild-ass theory.
Can you point that out for us?
Sure. You've done it to me. It's one of your pathetic debating techniques: when you're losing the argument you demand to see the published works of your opponent in a desperate and childish effort to discredit him.
Back to my point. Since you're the foremost authority on US history with a special emphasis on the War of Northern Aggression, why don't you share with us the tomes that you've penned? Hmmm? Or are you simply wasting all of your vaulable expertise and time on us poor Lost Causers?
Put up or shut your pie hole, gomer.
The only thing that non-sensical practices is lying and trolling.
Pot, meet kettle.
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.