Posted on 03/10/2013 8:19:44 AM PDT by BroJoeK
“Their concept of self rule was to deny self rule to US states which did not permit slavery,”
Nonsense.
“to the US government which was a union of the people which preceded the US constitution,”
Utter nonsense.
“and to steal US property and imprison US citizens who did not support slavery.”
Time for meds.
Instead of blabbing, try factual discourse.
Not only beyond the President's power but also beyond the power of Congress to legislate slavery.
All legislative powers are enumerated in the Constitution and the power to legislate slavery is not among them. Powers not granted Congress are left to the states or the people.
The Constitution did not grant Congress legislative powers regarding slavery, voting, abortion, marriage, flag burning, or to prohibit the citizens from any endeavor in their pursuit of happiness.
The Constitution did provide an amendment process to add, or subtract, powers of legislation. The 13th amendment took the power to determine if a state would be free or slave away from the state and added it to congress’s legislative powers. The amendment itself is not legislation but it provides Congress with the power to enact legislation regarding the amendment. Section 2 of the 13th amendment adds the legislative power … Section. 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Mussolini was shrewd enough to recognize the value in “pomp & circumstance”. He appropriated or subverted many things to serve as jingoistic symbols - including flags, banners, bunting, and the fasces to instill a sense of national unity.
The unfortunate thing is that he set a precedent that (inappropriately in most cases) gets applied as a stereotype against anyone’s opponents.
Scurrilous, slanderous, and asinine. You’re batting 1000 ;-)
Southern states didn’t want US states which did not permit slavery to be able to ban slavery. Personal liberty laws, which delineated the procedures that slave catchers had to use in northern states were held unconstitutional, denying self rule to US states which banned slavery.
Slave catchers would, given their inability to get cooperation by state officials, support in the north, to kidnap poor whites, get false papers, and sell the kidnapped whites as slaves to cooperative slave owners such as R.E. Lee. That was one reason why slaves at Arlington over time became more and more white. The other was of course the raping of slaves by their putative masters.
Of course territories were controlled by congress. In territories Congress has plenary power, just as the state governments have plenary power over their territory. The Northwest Ordinance banned slavery, and was passed by the Congress under the Articles of Confederation, with many of the members of the constitutional convention voting for it.
Yes, Mussolini did pervert good symbols for the benefit of his corrupt state.
Just as Tolkien complained that Hitler perverted proper heroic northern myths to support the corrupt Nazi state.
And as our southern partisans corrupt the US revolutionary history in an attempt to justify the corrupt confederate pseudo state.
And with DNA evidence you would invent Lincoln’s identical twin brother to continue your falsehood.
The first is selective misapplication of a two-sided condition. Like smoking bans...the ban limits freedom of the smoker while giving freedom to non-smokers. My point remains the same and remains valid. Southernphobes today try to portray themselves as having some sort of moral high ground by saying or by pretending that the WBTS was fought to free slaves, which is not only wrong it would be hypocritical if true...given that the same war prevented Southerners from being free to decide their political fate.
The second comment would be hysterical if it wasn’t so revealing. I defy you to show any evidence R.E. Lee took whites as slaves. Seriously, take your meds.
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2007/06/24/the-private-thoughts-of-robert-e-lee
I particularly recommend the comments.
The civil war prevented some southerners from having the authority to torture and rape other southerners.
By contrast, it gave some southerners freedom from being raped and tortured under color of authority by other southerners.
So really your opposition is either on the side of rape and torture, or against it. By your choice, your soul is judged.
“By contrast, it gave some southerners freedom from being raped and tortured under color of authority by other southerners.”
Northern States also had slavery so did they rape and torture too, or was it just your hatred of the south that makes you say such stupid things?
You’re more full of poop than a Christmas goose.
Since you hate the South so much why are you so invested in the war that kept those States in the union? You’re just a typical liberal Yankee, a bigot.
As Michele Malkin would say, “gigglesnort”.
Seriously, you can’t be that stupid. There was nothing there that Lee said. Only stuff some dipwad said he said. That’s your proof? LMAOROTHF!
I especially liked this part:
“In another departure from the conventional portrait of Lee, you show him agonizing over joining the Confederacy.”
What?! She “discovered” one of the most commonly known things about Lee?! It was so well known Ang Lee used it in one of his movies.
Sorry, son. You’re way over your head. Come back when you drop your tail.
LOL!
Geez... You are an idiot. Or should I just call you Saul Alinski? Your “reasoning” is similar to saying, if you don’t agree with Obama’s policies you must be racist. You need to go back to DU, troll boy.
There is a reason why the Lee family doesn’t release the ledgers to anyone other than a Lee sycophant.
Lee was known for being a cruel master, even before the War of Treason to preserve Slavery.
No, I don’t hate the south. Yes, slave owners in the north were also cruel. Virginia, at the time that Lee was raping his slaves and selling their mostly white daughters to brothels was part of the US.
Lincoln was elected to limit that bad practice to where it already existed, that is, to ban the expansion of slavery to the western territories. That small half step toward righteousness was so offensive to the slave power that they resorted to treason in support of continuing and expanding slavery. Treason in support of the expansion of slavery is a bad thing. Is that really so hard for you to admit?
Glad you agree that Lee agonized over his violation of his oaths to support treason in support of slavery.
Pity he ultimately tood the wrong side. His father, not known for virtue, took the right side, helping to suppress insurrection. R.E. Lee was not the man his father was.
The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.
Per Article 4 of the US Constitution. Of course this means that congress has authority to forbid slavery in any new territories.
If you seriously believe that’s what I agreed to you should take your head out of your ass.
What else would you call it. Certainly Lee had taken oaths. Certainly he made war against the US. Certainly his war against the US supported slavery.
What else would you call it?
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.