

- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
Previous comments...
When the Civil War began, the 13th Amendment
had not yet been passed; the southern states ap-
parently feared it would be. "What is freedom to a
nation, but freedom to the individuals in it?"-(Har-
riet Beecher Stowe).-- If the national government
is going to give zero protection to the individual
rights of the people in the states which make it
up, it really isn't good for anything, and doesn't
amount to much.
---The states had ratified the Constitution; they
had, in so doing, ratified the process of amend-
ment; now the Southern States wanted to pull
out so that they wouldn't have to go by it, in the
event of an anticipated change. Treason, in
my book.
As for washington dc? Let's rename it Gitmo and put a mile high barb wire fence around it!
Both of my grandfathers came over from the other side...one from Germany, the other from Wales, both prior to WW I. I think it's a fair observation to say that neither of the, hopped on a leaky old boat and crossed the Atlantic because things were going so well in the Old Country. (One settled in western Pennsylvania where he was a coal miner, living in company housing, buying everything at the company store, paid with company scrip...effectively, a slave himself.). My question is this: why do people who were never slaves themselves think that I, who have never owned a slave (neither I nor any of my progenitors) own them anything whatsoever? An even bigger question is why is THIS question never even asked in the hallowed halls of government?
ton Monument; also the name of the nation's capi-
tal (although if George Washington could see what
is going on in it, he might very well want his name
taken off of it himself). But I do not think the
government should give official honor to Con-
federate traitors who fought against this coun-
try, sentimental attachments to the "Lost
Cause" to the contrary notwithstanding.
The United States was conceived as an alliance of several sovereign states, the 'national' government being responsible for interstate commerce, interstate communication and national defense. Everything else was the providence of the particular states. This was amply laid out in the enumerated powers clause. So when the Union gave itself authority over the inner workings of the southern states, it had in the view of the Confederacy, committed treason against the nation as defined by the Constitution. So it could be effectively argued that the Union were the traitors.