Posted on 04/16/2003 5:44:44 AM PDT by Lady Eileen
Washington, DC-area Freepers interested in Lincoln and/or the War Between the States should take note of a seminar held later today on the Fairfax campus of George Mason University:
The conventional wisdom in America is that Abraham Lincoln was a great emancipator who preserved American liberties. In recent years, new research has portrayed a less-flattering Lincoln that often behaved as a self-seeking politician who catered to special interest groups. So which is the real Lincoln?
On Wednesday, April 16, Thomas DiLorenzo, a former George Mason University professor of Economics, will host a seminar on that very topic. It will highlight his controversial but influential new book, The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War. In the Real Lincoln, DiLorenzo exposes the conventional wisdom of Lincoln as based on fallacies and myths propagated by our political leaders and public education system.
The seminar, which will be held in Rooms 3&4 of the GMU Student Union II, will start at 5:00 PM. Copies of the book will be available for sale during a brief autograph session after the seminar.
the last time i counted, there were 59 federal agencies with police.
what do they all do, besides waste taxpayers money??? do we REALLY want to know???
free dixie,sw
FRee dixie,sw
GOPCap is right about this, as usual. I found the following in Davis' "State of the Union" address to the Confederate Congress on Feb 26, 1862:
I invite the attention of Congress to the duty of organizing a supreme court of the Confederate States, in accordance with the mandate of the Constitution.
Say what?
you should have known that!
GOT YA!
FRee dixie,sw
Where?
let that be your project for the day. reading the Constitution is good for the soul;going to get a copy yourself is good for the soles.
free dixie,sw
Sole, soul, whatever.
Anyway I have read it. Infact, here's a link to it. So where is it?
So you're saying that Davis was no better than President Lincoln?
I made no value judgement about Davis. In answer to your question, I pointed out that the Confederate Supreme Court was in the same place as Lincoln's obedience to the US Constitution. In other words, it didn't exist. That is the point you have been making all along, isn't it?
GOPCapitalist has discussed why the Confederate Supreme Court didn't exist. If you have some facts to contribute, I'd be happy to listen to them.
On the contrary, the U.S. Supreme Court was alive and well and making judicial decisions on a whole host cases. Some went against the adminsitration and some were decided in its favor. To say that President Lincoln or the Union government totally ignored the Supreme Court in the same manner that the Davis regime ignored the supreme court is utter nonsense.
GOPCapitalist has discussed why the Confederate Supreme Court didn't exist. If you have some facts to contribute, I'd be happy to listen to them.
No, the fact that the Davis regime and the confederate congress conspired to eliminate a branch of government required by their constitution speaks volumes.
How about you?
Oh, so now Brooks "mugged" Sumner. And you call me "all over the board" on this issue?
Then you claim he just had to bring a second along because dueling tradition required it, even though it wasn't a duel?
No, items covered by a code of seeking recourse of honor in general bring along a section, be that course a duel, caning, sword fight, joust, beating or what have you.
Why not call it what is was?
I am calling it what it was, Non-Seq. It was a caning by an individual seeking satisfaction from an insult to his honor. He conducted that caning under, and with the guidance of, traditional chivalric honor codes, which state very clearly that, while dueling and other such combats may settle a matter between peers, an insult to honor from a social inferior (i.e. a vagrant or other societal low life) is properly met by caning, beating, or other such act. Brooks considered Sumner, with some merit mind you, to be the equivalent of a vagrant and treated him accordingly.
Two men got together and half-killed another
How can you "half kill" somebody, non-seq? The act of killing either occurs or it does not - there is no in between.
unarmed man for what they saw as an insult to their relative?
I don't believe Brooks' second was related to Butler.
Why toss in this crap about dueling when that wasn't their intention in the first place.
Because the same code that governed dueling led Brooks to cane Sumner. Simply put, had Sumner been a gentleman rather than a vagrant, he would have been challenged to a duel. And if you think Preston Brooks was simply trying to avoid dueling, you don't know much about Preston Brooks. But since, under historical codes of dueling and other combats of honor, gentlemen do not duel with those who are not their peers, a caning was chosen.
Homicide was.
If that is so, you should be able to prove the intent. But looking at the facts of the case, you will never be able to prove that it was anything other than a good beating for the recompensation of honor.
Oh, and quit trying to pass Sumner off as a decrepit old senior citizen. He may have been cranky all the time and probably smelt funny like many old people, but at the time of the 1846 beating Sumner was a grand total of about 45 years of age.
That must've been quite a conspiracy, non-seq. Would you mind providing some documentation of it? I ask because all the facts suggest that significant dissent from Davis occurred in the Senate and among several state governors. Some even called for Davis' resignation. You see, non-seq, unlike the legislature of yankeeland with Lincoln, the confederate congress did not simply rubber stamp anything and everything Davis wanted. If you doubt me, go look up a biography or two about Pendleton Murrah.
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.