On Preservation of the Union at Any Cost

[Kirk Freeman]

The States, not "the people", ratified the constitution of the united States.

That was refuted in McCulloch v. Maryland (1819).

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Its OK folks. The guy in the redcoat, squawking about racism, cannot harm you. His King has no power here, thanks to secession.

No, I'll be there to stop you and your authoritarian field of dreams.

To stop your manic dreams of an authoritarian state. To stop your dream of internal passports and slavery that you lust after in the Confederate States of America.

You defend slavery all you want, I'll be there to oppose you.

 

[Henry]

Making Sherman the Devil. The parade of horrors that his March to the Sea was made up in order to fit the Lost Cause religion's cosmology.

"From the Official Records, a Colonel Adin Underwood of Massachusetts described Sherman’s gratuitous bombing and burning of Atlanta after the Confederate Army had left the city as having burned to the ground “37 percent of the city” according to Sherman’s military engineers. This included many private homes and even churches.

An Ohio infantryman is quoted as describing “an ocean of fire” all throughout Atlanta. Eventually, at least “two-thirds of Atlanta lay in ashes” according to the Official Records. A Major Nichols was told that “the holocaust devoured no fewer than five thousand buildings.”


When Sherman’s chief military engineer, Captain O.M Poe, voiced dismay over seeing so many corpses of women and children in the streets of Atlanta, and informed Sherman that the day-and-night bombardment of the city was of no military significance, Sherman coldly called the corpses “a beautiful sight” that would quicken the ending of the war (Michael Fellman, Citizen Sherman, p. 184). There were approximately 4,000 private homes in Atlanta before Sherman’s bombing, with only around 400 left standing."

So these are not horrors...simply made up events.

Maybe you are a lawyer with a future in politics...much like another statist with which I am familiar.

 

[Henry]

That was refuted in McCulloch v. Maryland (1819).

Would that be the same court that ruled people were property?

 

[steveh_131]

Ya think? The biggest one being not returning runaway slaves. State freedom=good, personal freedom=negotiable, I guess.

They were half right, and I can support that half of their beliefs without supporting the other, right?

No one is arguing. I am teaching you.

To be honest, all I've seen you teach so far is a graduate level course in logical fallacies. Straw-men, insults, red herrings, the works.

As to actual history and rational debate, you've been thoroughly schooled.

Why crazy Uncle Lew, the Southern Avengers and Libertarians throw in with the slavers of the CSA is beyond me. I know it appeals to their authoritarian nature, but you would think they would use a better stalking horse.

Thank you for the perfect example. This is a masterful use of all three of the illogical and dishonest debate techniques that you are teaching us.

 

[steveh_131]

No, I'll be there to stop you and your authoritarian field of dreams.

To stop your manic dreams of an authoritarian state. To stop your dream of internal passports and slavery that you lust after in the Confederate States of America.

You defend slavery all you want, I'll be there to oppose you.

Do you rehearse these things in the shower each morning and giggle to yourself?

 

[rambone]

Colonies acknowledged right of secession as they ratified constitution

Multiple colonies acknowledged that Right of Secession in their ratification documents upon adopting the U.S. constitution. They never would have joined if they believed they were giving up their sovereignty to a central government.

Here are the tweets.

Delegates of the people of Virginia, duly elected in pursuance of a recommendation from the General Assembly, and now met in Convention, having fully and freely investigated and discussed the proceedings of the Federal Convention, and being prepared as well as the most mature deliberation hath enabled us, to decide thereon, DO in the name and in behalf of the people of Virginia, declare and make known that the powers granted under the Constitution, being derived from the people of the United States may be resumed by them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression, and that every power not granted thereby remains with them and at their will: that therefore no right of any denomination, can be cancelled, abridged, restrained or modified, by the Congress, by the Senate or House of Representatives acting in any capacity, by the President or any department or officer of the United States, except in those instances in which power is given by the Constitution for those purposes: and that among other essential rights, the liberty of conscience and of the press cannot be cancelled, abridged, restrained or modified by any authority of the United States.

Virginia's Ratification - The U.S. Constitution Online

We, the delegates of the people of the state of New York, duly elected and met in Convention, having maturely considered the Constitution for the United States of America, agreed to on the 17th day of September, in the year 1787, by the Convention then assembled at Philadelphia, in the commonwealth of Pennsylvania, (a copy whereof precedes these presents,) and having also seriously and deliberately considered the present situation of the United States, — Do declare and make known, —

That all power is originally vested in, and consequently derived from, the people, and that government is instituted by them for their common interest, protection, and security.That the enjoyment of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, are essential rights, which every government ought to respect and preserve.

That the powers of government may be reassumed by the people whensoever it shall become necessary to their happiness; that every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by the said Constitution clearly delegated to the Congress of the United States, or the departments of the government thereof, remains to the people of the several states, or to their respective state governments, to whom they may have granted the same; and that those clauses in the said Constitution, which declare that Congress shall not have or exercise certain powers, do not imply that Congress is entitled to any powers not given by the said Constitution; but such clauses are to be construed either as exceptions to certain specified powers, or as inserted merely for greater caution.

New York's Ratification - The U.S. Constitution Online

We, the delegates of the people of the state of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, duly elected and met in Convention, having maturely considered the Constitution for the United States of America, agreed to on the seventeenth day of September, in the year one thousand seven hundred and eighty-seven, by the Convention then assembled at Philadelphia, in the commonwealth of Pennsylvania, (a copy whereof precedes these presents,) and having also seriously and deliberately considered the present situation of this state, do declare and make known,—

I. That there are certain natural rights of which men, when they form a social compact, cannot deprive or divest their posterity,—among which are the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.

II. That all power is naturally vested in, and consequently derived from, the people; that magistrates, therefore, are their trustees and agents, and at all times amenable to them.

III. That the powers of government may be reassumed by the people whensoever it shall become necessary to their happiness. That the rights of the states respectively to nominate and appoint all state officers, and every other power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by the said Constitution clearly delegated to the Congress of the United States, or to the departments of government thereof, remain to the people of the several states, or their respective state governments, to whom they may have granted the same; and that those clauses in the Constitution which declare that Congress shall not have or exercise certain powers, do not imply that Congress is entitled to any powers not given by the said Constitution; but such clauses are to be construed as exceptions to certain specified powers, or as inserted merely for greater caution.

Rhode Island's Ratification - The U.S. Constitution Online

 

[rambone]

Contemporaries knew secession was constitutional

Secession was absolutely viewed as a prerogative of the states. So much so, that contemporaries in congress proposed amendments attempting to officially prohibit it. The proposed amendments failed, and the existing right persevered.

On March 2, 1861, after seven states had seceded and two days before Abraham Lincoln’s inauguration, Sen. James R. Doolittle of Wisconsin proposed a constitutional amendment that said, “No State or any part thereof, heretofore admitted or hereafter admitted into the Union, shall have the power to withdraw from the jurisdiction of the United States.”

Several months earlier, Reps. Daniel E. Sickles of New York, Thomas B. Florence of Pennsylvania and Otis S. Ferry of Connecticut proposed a constitutional amendment to prohibit secession. Here’s my no-brainer question: Would there have been any point to offering these amendments if secession were already unconstitutional?

On the eve of the War of 1861, even unionist politicians saw secession as a right of states. Rep. Jacob M. Kunkel of Maryland said, “Any attempt to preserve the Union between the States of this Confederacy by force would be impractical, and destructive of republican liberty.”

This history lesson is coming from Dr. Walter E. Williams. Are there any liars brazen enough to call him a neo-confederate slaver white-supremacist?

Secession: It's constitutional | Walter Williams

 

[Dead Duck]

This history lesson is coming from Dr. Walter E. Williams. Are there any liars brazen enough to call him a neo-confederate slaver white-supremacist?

Oh much worse - He's a Libertarian.

 

[steveh_131]

Let's not forget this one:

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

 

[steveh_131]

This history lesson is coming from Dr. Walter E. Williams. Are there any liars brazen enough to call him a neo-confederate slaver white-supremacist?

Where did he get this stuff from, L. Neil Smith novels?

Wait, never mind. He got it from history books I guess.

https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=DuA9AAAAIAAJ&rdid=book-DuA9AAAAIAAJ&rdot=1

 

[Trigger Time]

No, I'll be there to stop you and your authoritarian field of dreams.

To stop your manic dreams of an authoritarian state. To stop your dream of internal passports and slavery that you lust after in the Confederate States of America.

You defend slavery all you want, I'll be there to oppose you.

Oh **** man you crack me up. Do you really see yourself like this in the mirror? Now so many of your posts make sense

 

[spencer rifle]

This history lesson is coming from Dr. Walter E. Williams. Are there any liars brazen enough to call him a neo-confederate slaver white-supremacist?

He's also not an historian - he's an economist. Like most experts, worth a good listen within his area of expertise. Not so much outside it.

"From the Official Records, a Colonel Adin Underwood of Massachusetts described Sherman’s gratuitous bombing and burning of Atlanta after the Confederate Army had left the city as having burned to the ground “37 percent of the city” according to Sherman’s military engineers. This included many private homes and even churches.

An Ohio infantryman is quoted as describing “an ocean of fire” all throughout Atlanta. Eventually, at least “two-thirds of Atlanta lay in ashes” according to the Official Records. A Major Nichols was told that “the holocaust devoured no fewer than five thousand buildings.”


When Sherman’s chief military engineer, Captain O.M Poe, voiced dismay over seeing so many corpses of women and children in the streets of Atlanta, and informed Sherman that the day-and-night bombardment of the city was of no military significance, Sherman coldly called the corpses “a beautiful sight” that would quicken the ending of the war (Michael Fellman, Citizen Sherman, p. 184). There were approximately 4,000 private homes in Atlanta before Sherman’s bombing, with only around 400 left standing."

So these are not horrors...simply made up events.

Maybe you are a lawyer with a future in politics...much like another statist with which I am familiar.

Sherman also gave the civilian population warning and time to evacuate. Hardly the actions of a murderous rogue. He couldn't very well leave a hostile population in his rear, complete with supplies, transportation and manufacturing base, now could he? No army that wanted to survive would do that.

 

[steveh_131]

He's also not an historian - he's an economist. Like most experts, worth a good listen within his area of expertise. Not so much outside it.

Which of his facts were historically inaccurate?

I provided a link to a history book from over a century ago that confirms his statements.

 

[rambone]

Any economist who does not know history is worthless.

Besides, these are proposed constitutional amendments. Kind of a big deal. The type of thing that everyone should have learned.

 

[spencer rifle]

H. L Mencken, the last source quoted in the Williams article (the position of most emphasis) also said:
"I believe that it is better to tell the truth than a lie. I believe it is better to be free than to be a slave. And I believe it is better to know than to be ignorant."

"In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." (There's objectivity for you).

 

[Henry]

US Soldiers Raped, Pillaged, and Plundered ? LewRockwell.com

“In a January 31, 1864 letter to Major R.M. Sawyer, Sherman explained the reason why he hated the South in general, and South Carolina in particular, so much. The war, he said “was the result of a false political doctrine that any and every people have a right to self-government.” In the same letter Sherman referred to states’ rights, freedom of conscience, and freedom of the press as “trash” that had “deluded the Southern people into war.””

 

[Dead Duck]

Lew Rockwell?

More info from that Lib racist trash site.
Find some better sources.

 

[Henry]

Sherman biographer William Fellman (author of Citizen Sherman) quotes Sherman as saying this about his fellow American citizens from the Southern states: “To the petulant and persistent secessionists, why death is mercy, and the quicker he or she is disposed of the better… Until we can repopulate Georgia, it is useless to occupy it, but the utter destruction of its roads, houses, and people will cripple their military resources”. Sherman was referring here to his plans for the civilian population of Georgia after the Confederate Army had left the state.

 

[steveh_131]

Lew Rockwell?

More info from that Lib racist trash site.
Find some better sources.

For folks like you who talk before they read, I'll clarify.

The history came from a book written by Karen Stokes.

Book

[h=3]About the Author[/h]Karen Stokes is an archivist with the South Carolina Historical Society in Charleston, South Carolina, and has published articles on South Carolina history in numerous newspapers and journals. She is the co-editor of Faith, Valor, and Devotion: The Civil War Letters of William Porcher DuBose and is currently editing another collection of South Carolina wartime letters for publication in 2013.

And the article was written by Thomas DiLorenzo, a very bright Economics professor.