Ahh ... another ANTI-states-rights "conservative" heard from!
I'm sorry I confused you with sarcasm.
Slavery is not legal in the US now. I take this as evidence that the South lost.
States' rights do not trump anything at the federal level. I take this as evidence that the south lost.
I'm trying to state that the current facts speak against this "historian"'s claim that the South won during the peace what they lost during the war.
I don't know why you percieve this as being anti-States' Rights on my part.
And if the South would have won, slavery would have been legal for how much longer again is it? Slavery was still legal immediately following the War within these United States. And you'd think that if these folks in the north were so concerned with abolishing slavery they might have done it sometime at the beginning of the War to claim a moral high ground
States' rights do not trump anything at the federal level. I take this as evidence that the south lost.
And we're happy about this for what reason again? Could you fill me in? I seemed to have missed that memo. Even abe in his first inaugural address recognized the rights of the states to control their own domestic issues. Mind you, he also went on to rant about 'union before the states' and enforcement of 'trade laws'(i.e. continued raping of the South through tariffs) to the general government as well but even a blind squirrel will find a nut from time to time