[ClearCase_guy]

I am not interested in re-fighting the first American Civil War.
I am not interested in discussing the slavery of black Americans.

I will say this: States Rights are an important concept. Somewhere along the line, the federal government decided that it was everybody's boss, and that is a shame.

[reed13k]

I think the bigger hit came in the progressive era of the 1910’s when senator selection was modified (yes by amendment but it lessened state power) and the tax amendment which reached into the states to the individual as well (I think prior the feds had to rely on the states largesse more). The final straw came with the interstate commerce case in the 1930s when the supremes overstepped in order to placate FDR.

[AppyPappy]

State rights like Jim Crow?

We have Federal rights, not state rights. A state cannot ban guns for instance.

[AmericanExceptionalist]

I am not interested in re-fighting the first American Civil War. I am not interested in discussing the slavery of black Americans.

I will say this: States Rights are an important concept. Somewhere along the line, the federal government decided that it was everybody's boss, and that is a shame.

My own thoughts, exactly.

It is a bit like the Iran-Iraq War of the 1980s: There were good reasons for opposing both sides.

As a strong believer in the fundamental concepts of freedom and liberty, I find it difficult to engender warm and fuzzy feelings toward those who wished to continue the odious institution of slavery.

But I am equally repelled by the heavy-handed approach of the Unionists, who desired an overweening federal government...