Posted on 04/09/2017 10:23:13 AM PDT by Kaslin
New York City seriously contemplated seceding from the Union just before the outbreak of the Civil War. The mayor of the city was Fernando Wood, a rakish, charming, and handsome devil. He put his finger to the wind when southern states began to secede and decided NYC should stand with her sorely afflicted southern cousins.
But veiled in all the rosy political rhetoric was the hard and pragmatic fact that New York was a central hub of the slave trade, inextricably tied to the South’s cotton empire. Money did the real talking. Wood knew that, as he was a crook who had made a fortune selling public offices and offering immigrants citizenship in exchange for votes.
Mayor Wood decided disunion was a “fixed fact” and on January 6, 1861, he proposed New York City declare its independence. Henceforward, it would be called the Free City of Tri-Insula. Wood proclaimed New York City would “make common cause with the South” as a sovereign entity. He added the City could “deny Federal troops the right to march through the city.”
Nothing much seems to have changed since Woods’ era, a time during which Harper’s Weekly, reporting in 1857, declared New York under Wood was “a huge semi-barbarous metropolis… not well-governed nor ill-governed, but simply not governed at all.”
That is how ungovernable NYC liked it then -- and apparently still does now, having declared itself a sanctuary city; and thus, essentially free of following federal and state laws concerning immigration.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Very interesting. Thanks for posting.
w, s ping....
Since these cities and states have offered “sanctuary” to these foreign nationals, no Federal funds should be allowed to be used to subsidize these foreign nationals/”democrat” voters. These “sanctuary” states and cities need to put their own state and city funds where their big mouth is. The U.S. taxpayers do not pay taxes to provide welfare and wealth to foreign nationals.
Insightful angle.
Texas is the only state that can secede the rest are bound by law the things that enter a fools mind has no limits.
That’s the rub; these areas became “sanctuaries” because their high costs/low opportunities chased Americans out, and now they want infusions of federal cash transfers as a pseudo-economy (based on the education and poverty industrial complexes). Remember Pelosi said a government check was the same as a paycheck? This is what she meant.
Except again NYC gives more to the rest of the country in federal taxes than it receives in federal aid every year. So yeah. I call Bullshit. ou and the anti comandeering doctrine that holds that is is Unconstitutional to force local officials enforce federal law. So I’ll call double bullshot.
Thanks for posting this. It’s one of the best articles on the leftist-driven destruction of the Union I’ve read. Lincoln’s words in his June 16, 1858 “House Divided” speech certainly ring true today. The divisions today between open borders globalists and those who believe in national sovereignty and the rule of law are very deep and seemingly as irreconcilable as the divisions in 1858 of which Lincoln wrote.
The New England states spent years of indecision about seceding before the War of Northern Aggression.
PING
Turn a General like William Tecumseh Sherman loose to make a march through the liberal sanctuary states like Sherman himself did through the south.
(Europe Reaping What it Sowed With Open Borders Policy for Muslim Refugees)
See any women or children among these immigrants?
Well then, I guess it’s time to find another Sherman to march on through and make them howl.
Can't seem to catch a break here. I vote against all these miserable slimeballs, but they always win the elections, by hook or CROOK.
Gravy trains are tough to stop - especially when the wheels are liberally (sic) greased with taxpayer monies shoveled at “new” voters” even when they don’t speak English or give a crap about “America”. Their main concern is about the “free” money and benefits received for their loyalty to criminal politicians.
Hmmm... I’ll be damned. And I thought I knew something about American history
I’d fully support any president who said that any city or region that was found to be sabotaging our country’s ability to protect its borders would effectively be expelled from the union when the president invokes martial law, and then in order to fully protect our borders reallocates any federal funds for that area to building a wall to keep all residents - legal or not - inside that region, requiring citizen checks at the limited entry and exit points that were made available.
Protecting our borders from invaders falls under the POTUS duties of Commander in Chief - and any friends or the invaders should therefore become enemies of the U.S. - and that would include any judges who try to disempower the president from performing that duty!
Wood also opposed the 13th Amendment. A good Democrat of his era.
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.