Posted on 07/26/2013 3:42:50 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
Green paint was splattered overnight on parts of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C., U.S. Park police say.
They say a patrol officer found green plant splashed on the floor near the famous statue of President Lincoln, and some on the base of the statue, at around 1:20 a.m. local time.
The memorial, on the National Mall, will be closed until the U.S. Park Service can clean it up.
An investigation is under way.
CBS Washington affiliate WUSA-TV says its crew members got as close as they could to the statue and didn't see the paint, but saw evidence of...
(Excerpt) Read more at m.cbsnews.com ...
The Republic stood before Lincoln assumed office and still stood after he was gone, your delusions notwithstanding. You are wound tight as a drum cva - you would do well to find something else that is more relaxing to do.
A Lincoln Lovin' statist Libertarian, weird.
I'm fine, it's you fools that are lugging around the weigh of oppression without seeing it. One day when the scales fall from your eyes then you will see.
Actually, no you’re not. Your language is offensive, your positions are preposterous and you’re only semi-coherent. If you keep going on this way someone is going to take notice - and not in as nice a way.
Don’t play the fool, FRiend ;-)
FU
Dude, you are out of control. In answer to your PM, no - I am not threatening you. What an imbecilic thing to say! How am I going to follow through with that - cast a spell on you?! Send secret electrical impulses through the Intarweb? Come on.
I would be doing you a favor to ping the mod to have some of your more outrageous posts removed but I won’t. Instead I am inclined to leave them here as witness to what happens when someone loses their grip on reality.
Y’all have yourself a super technicolor day now, ‘yhear?
Wow, I must be over the target. A lot of flack here. I seem to be getting under you skin. Love it.
I was a Libertarian in California. I changed jobs, and moved to Sealy Texas.
I lived in Ron Paul’s district in Texas. I went to a few of his events. Oddly, he seemed to pander to people who favored secession. Not in 1860, but next week. They seemed a bit off to me, like the New Hampshire Libertarians who really only care about smoking pot.
To find sane people I joined the Republican Party. I really used to enjoy the barbeques. I even got myself a Barbeque Gun. Just needed something to break the ice. Clip loaded revolvers are rare enough to be remarkable and worthy of conversation.
Good people, once you get past their quirks.
Not interested in your pretend life. Tell someone the gives a crap....
You seemed to be interested enough to comment questioning how I could admire the great work that Lincoln did while myself being attracted to Libertarian Party and libertarian ideas.
I personally am very interested in how you picked up the mishmash of falsehood and spin that you seem to have influencing you. Feel free, if you like, to send a private message.
One great problem with government is corruption. One approach to corruption is to have power diffused, so that once one part becomes corrupt, another part either uncorrupted or even corrupted differently, can hold the other in check. That is the great genius of the US federal system. If a state government is corrupted, it could be put back in line by the people, or it could be restricted by the federal government, or the bad effects of its corruption could be mitigated by the inflow or outgo of uncorrupted people. We see how corrupt Detroit has hemmoraged jobs and people, and those who left are now less affected by Detroit’s corruption.
If one was to accept that Reconstruction government was corrupt, it was in part cured by KKK murders, and in part by the refusal of the US government to continue suppression of the KKK. In response to corruption in the de-reconstructed south, investments in the south were reduced, or were limited to areas where corruption was less of a problem.
On the other hand, if the pre-Reconstruction government was corrupt, or was differently corrupt, the intervention of the US government was at least able to change the path of its corruption, reducing the effect of that corruption on freedmen for the duration of the federal intervention.
It would be nice if you could discuss something without vulgar ad hominem attacks. You have some degree of learning and different experiences than I and I would like to understand it. The vulgarisms and ad hominem attacks detracts from your message.
Your “pretend” comments are falling on deaf ears.
Your statement shows a lack of understanding of the republic and its founding. The entire purpose of the US Constitution was to diffuse centralized power. Don't get hung up on the BOR. Lincoln aside, the republic was dealt a death blow in the 1860's. Thirty years later the Progressives finished off the weakened republic( I blame Lincoln for that weakened condition) with the 16th and 17th Amendments. Those two amendments killed the republic.
Try "rubbing your nose" in that and "pretend" you understand what I am saying.
The Consitution did indeed diffuse power, and federal powers were listed.
State powers were also limited, and to prevent military conflict between the states, (each state retained its militia) a means of resolution was provided using legal process, with the supreme court as original jurisdiction.
Citizens of one state are given rights when traveling through or doing business in other states in the Priviledges or Immunities clause. States rights to oppress local residents was further limited by the 14th Amendment.
The income tax amendment actually had minor effect. Income from wages, capital gains, or profits could already be taxed indirectly. Only income from rent of a property was considered not an indirect tax on behavior as it was thought to be too close to a direct tax on the value of the property, and so income on rent of property was not permitted to be taxed indirectly before the amendment. After the amendment, income from whatever source could be taxed indirectly. Other types of direct taxes (say a head tax) still retain the limitation as being proportional to census population. Since incomes and cost of living in different regions are different, head taxes are not used at the federal level.
The Election of Senators acted to diffuse power still more, removing authority to elect senators from the state legislature, and giving it to state voters. If diffuse power is a good thing, this was a good thing. Senator seats still remain hard to gerrymander, and still retain their long tenure in office.
To my mind, the northern US states had a better argument for secession than the southern states. The northern states were being denied due process for their citizens by the southern dominated US government. Further, they were being denied the authority to ban slavery on their own territory.
Still, they did not pretend to secession.
Slavery was indeed the kind of sin that would have justified secession, on the part of those who were opposed to the kidnapping, rape, and torture that were routinely used by the slave power. Justifying secession based on the demand that pretended rights to rape, torture, and kidnapping, not so much.
Citizens of one state are given rights when traveling through or doing business in other states in the Priviledges or Immunities clause. States rights to oppress local residents was further limited by the 14th Amendment.
The income tax amendment actually had minor effect.
The Election of Senators acted to diffuse power still more, removing authority to elect senators from the state legislature, and giving it to state voters. If diffuse power is a good thing, this was a good thing.
All unnecessary wordiness aside, you are now on record defending both the 16th and 17th amendments. All of Freeperdom knows what kind of person you "pretend" to be. In reality you are a progressive. IMO You should not be here.
Rather, if you can not defend the US constitution, as passed, and as amended, perhaps you would be happier someplace else.
Happy? You are happy? You are an idiot and a progressive. ( same thing)
I note you have no substantive disagreement with my reading of the various amendments.
You may prefer legislative selection of senators, as the common people can’t be trusted to vote for the right person.
You may prefer that large landowners not be taxed for rent they collect, while the people who pay them rent are taxed on their wages.
I think those amendments were reasonable changes in principle. That doesn’t mean I approve of all that happened afterwards. I am also on record for abolishing the Departments of Agriculture, Education, Labor, Housing and Urban Development as a start.
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.