Boycott the History Channel's Advertisers

Coach Is Right ^ | 12/20/10 | Bruce Karlson

[brucek43]

Recently the History Channel proved that it is as snarky as those of who watch it thought.

To wit: the Georgia Division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV) wanted to run some ads on the History Channel. These ads pointed out the legal basis for secession and, quite accurately, that the North invaded the newly configured Confederacy (Manassas/Bull Run is, after all, in Virginia). Another pointed out that Northern interests essentially ran the Federal government, frequently to the advantage Northern supporters at the expense of the South. The most accurate ad of all simply stated that ANY STATE had the right to remove itself from the Union. It is fair to opine that, if our Founders had put an ominous clause in the Constitution forbidding an exit, our nation would have started out with many fewer states…including Virginia,... … Continue Reading:Boycott the History Channel’s Advertisers!!

[ApplegateRanch]

That would be discriminatory. Have to make it a twofer, so the East doesn't feel slighted.

I vote California and Massachusetts.

[BroJoeK]

CharlesWayneCT: "Why would you enter protracted arguments and world-changing compromises to convince some state to enter the union, if you expected they could simply vote themselves back out next year?"

Good post.

Remember, the Founders were quite explicit in their views that the new Constitution, like the old Articles of Confederation was "perpetual" and "forever."

We can see this directly in a letter from Virginian James Madison to his friend Alexander Hamilton in New York, advising Hamilton that the new Constitution must be ratified in whole (no conditions) and "forever."

"My opinion is that a reservation of a right to withdraw if amendments be not decided on under the form of the Constitution within a certain time, is a conditional ratification, that it does not make N. York a member of the New Union, and consequently that she could not be received on that plan.

Compacts must be reciprocal, this principle would not in such a case be preserved.

The Constitution requires an adoption in toto, and for ever.
It has been so adopted by the other States.
An adoption for a limited time would be as defective as an adoption of some of the articles only.
In short any condition whatever must viciate the ratification.
What the New Congress by virtue of the power to admit new States, may be able & disposed to do in such case, I do not enquire as I suppose that is not the material point at present...

This idea of reserving right to withdraw was started at Richmd. & considered as a conditional ratification which was itself considered as worse than a rejection."

[BroJoeK]

Raymann: "this coming from someone who thinks they did have the right to secession (but glad it failed)."

Of course they had the "right" to secede -- legally, with the approval of Congress, and under such conditions as Congress might set.

And they didn't "fail", because they didn't want a legal secession -- what they wanted instead was a victorious War of Independence, where Jefferson Davis would be the new George Washington.

But Davis could never be a new George Washington, because unlike our Founders' many allies, the Southern Cause could never find any foreign powers willing to support their loathsome "peculiar institution" -- slavery.

[BroJoeK]

Michael.SF.: "Once the south seceded the war was on, for all intense and purposes.
The location of the War just had to be determined and the North decided first."

Most people forget that it began as entirely a War of Southern Aggression against the Union -- of which the firing on Union forces in Fort Sumter was only the most remembered example.

There were many others, including seizures of Federal properties, captures of Federal forces and Southern military invasions of Union states and territories all around the Confederacy.

These were never intended to be "peaceful secession," but rather were provocations for a glorious Second War of Independence, which would establish the Confederacy as a powerful and respected force in the world.

[BroJoeK]

x: "For the record, Southerners dominated the federal government in the years leading up to the Civil War."

Great post.

[RivaRascal76]

The History tries to rewrite HISTORY or comments about organizations about which they haven’t a clue. For example, I have been a Free Mason since the very day I turned 21. The History Channel chastises Masonry because they are not privy to any real information about the organization, nor do they seem to know of the good works Masons and their Wives (though The Eastern Star) nor of the Shriners Hospital for children. Technically too, on subjects that I am very familiar with, the channel’s experts are all too often in the dark. I agree with others that the shows are heavily scripted and, by the way, History Channel should have an ad posted for new Writers. I’m 76 years old and am very offended that most of the performers are so heavily Tatooed. Evidently the producers don’t know any ordinary folks who haven’t chosen to decorate themselves.

[Keith in Iowa]

>>>All “reality” shows are scripted. I found on IMDB Operation Repo had actors listed. None of it is real.<<<

I’ve always been one to say Reality TV is an oxymoron. Nothing on TV is real outside of a live camera pointing at a live event with live sound and with no commentators.... add the commentators, and you have bias, and the reality ends.

[nascarnation]

Man, I can never give up Ice Road Truckers..............