Posted on 02/25/2003 5:47:28 PM PST by southcarolina
Edited on 07/20/2004 11:48:25 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Hey look here. Click on the good vice mayor's mug and you can see her 'wonderful' service with all the contact info you need
Simple solution. Let it sit there a couple of years, boot out the politicians who put it there, then melt the thing down and make a cannon out of it.
The first 13th amendment Lincoln personally pushed through the House (and the Senate as well) said the following:
"No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State."
Really? Cause in both world wars, Germany waged warfare on american shipping long before we entered into the conflict. In fact, some of Hitler's u-boats were taking out our ships within sight of the Atlantic coast and in the Gulf of Mexico. As for Saddam, well, there's the terrorist connection (contrary to what the media reports, he's been in bed with islamic jihadist bombers and their financing agents for years) and they've been attacking us for decades.
So everyone who says anything good about the confederacy is revealing a longing for slavery? If that is so, would it include the man who made this statement?
"On the part of the North, the war was carried on, not to liberate slaves, but by a government that had always perverted and violated the Constitution, to keep the slaves in bondage; and was still willing to do so, if the slaveholders could be thereby induced to stay in the Union...On the part of the North, the war was carried on, not to liberate slaves, but by a government that had always perverted and violated the Constitution, to keep the slaves in bondage; and was still willing to do so, if the slaveholders could be thereby induced to stay in the Union. The principle, on which the war was waged by the North, was simply this: That men may rightfully be compelled to submit to, and support, a government that they do not want; and that resistance, on their part, makes them traitors and criminals."
I ask because he was a lifelong abolitionist who spent decades prior to the war giving free legal representation to fugitive slaves.
Really? Cause in both world wars, Germany waged warfare on american shipping long before we entered into the conflict. In fact, some of Hitler's u-boats were taking out our ships within sight of the Atlantic coast and in the Gulf of Mexico.
All USN anti-sub work prior to Pearl Harbor was done in the North Atlantic in cooperation with the Royal Navy. U-boats did not operate off the U.S. coast and in the Carribean until after 12/7/41.
The Germans did not attack U.S. "shipping" in 1941. Prior to 12/7/41, Hitler had strict orders that no U.S. ships were to be attacked. However, U-boats were actively attacked by USN units after about Halloween, 1941 and reacted defensively, torpedoing at least three U.S. warships, including Greer, Kearney and Rueben James.
Walt
I resent your implication, you have no idea how I would treat a statue of Lincoln. Whatever antipathies I might have toward him - for what I consider to be illegal & unconsitutional actions - does not imply that I would in any way desecrate a statue in his honor. I'd fight against it being erected and I'd fight to have it removed, but a vandal I'm not.
So untrue, as Lincoln (an the rest of the world) acknowledged. Lincoln acknowled that his action was unconstitutional, and his EP as written, left hundreds of thousands of slaves in bondage in northern states and parts of southern states under union command. He even reversed the orders of two of his generals that emancipated slaves. Lastly, if Lincoln freed the slaves, there would not have been any need for the 13th Amendment.
PS. Lincoln was elected to 2 terms, not one. We "nimwads" got a real education - you should demand a refund, and spend it on a class on etiquette.
Sigh. Dan Bryant paid Emment $5 for the use of the song, as did "Newcombe's" "Buckley's" and other minstrel bands. Emmett wrote "Dixie" in 1859, and was also the author of "Old Dan Tucker" (his name and his dog's), "Greenbacks", "Here we are, here we are, or, Cross ober Jordan" and numerous others. Legend has it that Emmett actually got the insipration for the song from Ben and Lew Snowden, neighbors of a friend that were also musicians.
P.P. Werlean published it with the words by Peters, and did pay $600 to Emmett for the copyright afterwards.
Interestingly, Chief Justice William Rehnquist led a sing-along of "Dixie" at a June 1999 conference held in Virginia.
If someone crosses the line hit the abuse button. You are still posting here, so obviously some of us are pretty lenient. Do you have a problem with free-speech? Or should the federal government supress dissident voices ... ?
Nevermind, I already know the answer to that one ;o)
Jest ain't my style!!!!!!
Hmm, sounds more like a 19th century Napster. Is that how intellectual property rights usually got purchased, or just how you southerners generally did business back then?
Your recollection of how "Dixie" became the anthem of the Rebellion is spotty. Perhaps this letter published in the Richmond Dispatch will shed some light on the matter. The Origin of Dixie
-btw Dixie was also a favorite of our 16th president, who had it played at his (first) inauguration (but for some reason not at his second).
Ya think? If you read the link you provided, it perfectly substantiates my "recollection" as to the origins of "Dixie".
But Werlean sold thousands of copies without giving Dan a nickel. Not only was Emmett robbed of the profit of his songs, but its authorship was disputed. Will F. Hays claimed it as his own.
Pond brought the matter before a musical publishers' convention and settled the question of authorship; but Dan reaped no benefit from this tardy justice.
Sounds to me like Werlean and Hays were a couple of cheap scam artists trying to profit from another man's labor, and the rightful author Emmet, only got a token payment after having his (intellectual) property rights disputed. I'll ask you again. Is this how southerners generally did business?
You forget this line: 'Bryant came to Emmett and said: "Dan, can't you get us up a walk-around?' And Bryant did pay Emmett $5 for the song at the time
Bryant was the employer, Dan the employee. Under copyright law, the employer (unless relinquished) owns the rights to materials created by their employees for the employer. Emmett did receive $600 from Werleans after a publishers convention (not a court of law) decided Emmett owned the song.
That said, Werleans did pay Emmett for the song. If Emmett had problems with the resolution, he could have taken it to court, and lost his $600.
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.