Posted on 05/24/2007 6:03:30 AM PDT by Rebeleye
Garbage In, Garbage Out.
Nothing personal.
But the land was deeded to the government by the act of the legislature in 1836. South Carolina had no claims to it.
So much for culture.
"To me, heaven on earth is a balmy summer night in the south, sitting on the front porch with your family around you, watching lightning bugs and listening to the crickets chirping. There is such a sense of peace here.
You must have a garage full of RAID :)
The bottom line is as you stated, to each his own.
What's at issue is the idea that somehow we are free as citizens of a state and unfree as citizens of our country.
There doesn't seem to be much real-life warrant for such an assumption.
Many would legitimately argue that the checks and balances written into the Constitution give us more rights as US citizens than we would ever have as citizens of a state.
But some people are always looking for some perfect utopia and they find it, or put it, somewhere in the past.
It's that longing and not the historical facts that matter for them.
But anyway, if there were no citizens of the United States and you got into trouble overseas, you could have to wait a long time as Virginia, Maryland, and any other states you've lived in tried to figure out (or avoid figuring out) who had responsibility for you.
I don't think you can make that case at all. Johnston will remain one of the great unknowns of the Civil War since he was killed midway through his first day in battle. In July 1861 you could say that Joe Johnston and P.T.G. Beauregard were the team to beat, but history has proven otherwise. When he was first appointed McClellan was supposed to be the boy genius of the battlefield and again, history proved otherwise. With the other Johnston we will just never know.
So compare and contrast Detroit with 9th Ward New Orleans.
Don't remind me.
"I’m looking forward to doing something this weekend with a peice of equipment highly illegal in NYC...."
Like what, a Camel or a Winston? lol
"We’ve got to practice for when the South Rises Again."
Is that the number one swamp tune these days?
"Especially now that we’ve disarmed you folks up thar."
Where is thar?"
‘With the other Johnston we will just never know.’
Fair point. Those that knew him in the Union Army sure thought highly of him, and were greatly concerned he was the guy they were up against.
‘So compare and contrast Detroit with 9th Ward New Orleans.’
The only difference is Nature can’t flush Detroit as she did the 9th ward in NO.
"Many would legitimately argue that the checks and balances written into the Constitution give us more rights as US citizens than we would ever have as citizens of a state."
Let them argue it. Let's see the federal bill of rights for federal citizens. You can provide a link. The checks and balances operate between states, state citizens, and the federal government and its branches. Without citizens of states, just mere residents, the balance has been removed. There is no state against which to enact unconstitutional legislation. Anything it enacts against federal citizen residents of states is allowable because that is how it was designed from the beginning.
"There doesn't seem to be much real-life warrant for such an assumption."
Do you have a better explanation for what would otherwise be unconstitutional activity? Let's hear them. Explain the attempts on guns, the paper currency, the odius IRS, the coming forced vaccines, the illegal immigration. All they have to do is keep the pressure on and wear us down until we tire. Their boldness has been inversely proportional to the number of de-jure state citizens. That number has gone to zero so their boldness has gone to infinity. Everything they want will come to be. They are not breaking any law by doing what they are doing. The devil is in the citizenship issue.
The federal government could always act as agent to resolve international problems with state citizens without having the citizen actually have to be a federal citizen. That is what the states created the federal government for, to do things like that.
Thanks again. Appreciated. Regards.
Lady, you and BoobStuckInMichgan or whatever his name is have done nothing but trash the North this entire thread so please save the 'more class than Yankees' crap. If you all hate the North so much then get the hell and stay the hell out. The interstate has Southbound lanes as well as Northbound ones. Keep your rebel rump in Dixie and you won't have to worry about rubbing shoulders with us racist, bustling, crowded Yankees. I'm not sure what you would find to complain about though.
Keep your Dixie. I spent over 9 years on active duty in the Navy and almost all of it was spent in the South. Want to know what I thought of it? It was OK. The people were nice enough. The weather wasn't too bad though I do like a change of season. All the places had the same kinds of bars and restaurants and entertainment. South Carolina and Florida and Mississippi were all peas from the same pod it seems to me. Nothing bad. Nothing to write home about, either. If I had to sum up what I thought about my time in Dixie in one word, that word would be apathy. It's just the place where I did my time and then went home.
Keep an eye on the History Channel. They do a lot of Civil War stuff and there was one on Andersonville called "80 Acres of Hell".
Better yet there are a lot of books on the subject. MacKinlay Kantor's "Andersonville" is still the best. Even though it's a work of fiction it's based on his extensive research. I'd place it alongside "Killer Angels" as two of the more accurate historical fictions. John Ransom's "Andersonville Diaries" were written by an inmate. There are a couple of histories out there that are somewhat mediocre. But the prison is covered in enough overall histories of the conflict that you can get a good picture of what it was like.
He did so by virtue of a 5-3 majority in the Supreme Court. Oh, I forget. It's the tired old Southron song-and-dance that only Supreme Court decisions you agree with are valid ones.
Do a little research why don't you?
That must have ben Ed being colorful again. Selfridge commanded two ships with names beginning with C. The USS Cairo was sunk by a confederate mine, hardly a matter to be ashamed of. His second one, the USS Conestoga, was sunk in a collision with the USS Sterling Price, unfortunate but that happened in wartime.
Read the orders....better yet hear Bearss tell the story - it's amazing to hear him.
Selfridge said he was maneuvering to return fire from some rebel shore batteries. While Porter at first accused him of disobeying orders he later recanted. He was also on the Cumberland when the Virginia sank her, thus accounting for all three 'C' ships. Following the loss of the Conestoga he took command of the Osage, at the other end of the alphabetic spectrum.
Nearly 800 replies later, and I still don’t know what “The South Shall Rise Again” means.
Living in Georgia, Texas and Florida never gave me an answer either.
Perhaps there isn’t one.
In the early years of the Republic, a state could simply declare that whole classes of residents weren't its legal citizens. Hence they had no rights and were subject to being bought and sold as property. As we saw in the Dred Scot decision, the argument was made that people in such classes weren't eligible for citizenship elsewhere in the country and would have to be treated as property and non-citizens wherever they went in the US.
There are a lot of problems with the 14th Amendment. It's poorly drafted. It was written at a time when the country was underpopulated and didn't distinguish between people whose parents were permanent residents and those who were just passing through. The whole distinction between legal and illegal entrants, so far as I know, wasn't in existence at the time. The Amendment's passage still didn't guarantee citizen rights to Indians and other minority groups. And the Amendment didn't specify just which rights of US citizens the states had to protect, so it became the source for all kinds of impositions on state and local government.
But the 14th Amendment was an improvement over what came before. That much is bedrock, at least for me. It was an improvement that states simply couldn't declare that whole groups of people would have no rights. So I don't see how some sort of "common law citizenship" or whatever you want to call it was an improvement over what you say replaced it. If it seems like it was to you, you have to take into account the fate of those who wouldn't have been recognized as citizens if it were wholly up to state governments.
One big difference between people is whether they regard state government as an expression of their wishes and desires. Some people who have a strong regional identity invest a lot of committment and faith in state government and state officials. For others among us, state government is simply another layer of bureaucrats who aren't any more responsive to our ideas than any other. We're just going to disagree about that. I certainly respect the federal system but don't see my state government as a great beacon of freedom and the federal government as the font of tyranny. The two are more alike than different, and left up to its own devises the state government would be as oppressive as Washington DC can be now.
A lot of what people are angry about is federal control over the pursestrings of government. That goes back to 16th Amendment and the institution of the federal income tax. If the federal government didn't have that power, it would be a lot weaker than it is now. Most of what the federal goverment does now would be done by the states. And we'd either be complaining about how inefficient that was, or else criticizing those states for taking so much of our money and having so much power.
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.