Mick
Mr. Orange
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2013
- Messages
- 21,564
- Likes
- 9,765
You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.
Abraham Lincoln
You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.
Should be kicked around ? Why do you think the south has the most poverty ridden states ? Dip sh!ts like you didn’t understand that when it was over , instead of helping to rebuild it like we have done around the world any time we destroy some place , it was pillaged and left in a heap . How stupid does one have to be not to rebuild your own nation after a civil war to make it stronger ?
Nothing like the smell of burning historical revisionists in the morning ... or any other time of day. It's a little like fires made from chow chips. Anyway, if that statement doesn't suit you, the whole speech is here
Abraham Lincoln > The War With Mexico: Speech in the United States House of Representatives
You didn't disappoint one bit. lol
Does it tho? The Supreme Court seemed to think you're wrong on the matter.
It's interesting the founding fathers created a method of allowing new states in, but declined to expand on how they could leave if they desired.
Does it tho? The Supreme Court seemed to think you're wrong on the matter.
It's interesting the founding fathers created a method of allowing new states in, but declined to expand on how they could leave if they desired.
...and even if you find that historically debatable, I don’t think there’s any doubt that’s the way many people have come to view the symbol. Arguing for Stars and Bars is kind of like arguing for the original meaning of the swastika. You may technically be right, but it’s hard to battle the ingrained symbolism.
you said it better than me....and even if you find that historically debatable, I don’t think there’s any doubt that’s the way many people have come to view the symbol. Arguing for Stars and Bars is kind of like arguing for the original meaning of the swastika. You may technically be right, but it’s hard to battle the ingrained symbolism.
Wait, who is asking you to give anything up?You mean we all have to give up a part of US history because some people choose to be offended by a symbol - and champion that as offensive? Doesn't seem to carry much weight that a lot of us see burning the US flag as offensive. Amazing how free speech is defined by libs.
I suppose it's easy for some to make light of our past when their forefathers didn't participate in it. I'm really sick of the jerks like AOC that show up and in one generation think the rest of the country owes them something.Hey, Mick; what if I told you that my great grandfather's grandfather (easiest to remember it that way) was a member of the House of Representatives when Lincoln gave that speech I quoted, and that his father had served multiple terms in the Senate, and his father fought in the Revolutionary War? Same last name as mine right up the chain - all neatly documented. Several ancestors on my father's side fought for the Union in it civil war - one of my great ... grandfathers (not gonna figure out the greats) was a Lt. Col. by the end ... I have his Colt 1851 Navy cap and ball revolver. See the interesting thing is that we can have respect and admiration for our ancestors regardless of our current opinions ... it's allowed. What those people were helped define the country as it is, but to a great extent they don't define us individually. That's something that makes us better - we have the right to choose who we are and what we believe, and for many of us, our ancestors fought so that we could have that right. It's why so many of us are disturbed when others feel the need to strip our individuality and our right to think and act as individuals. This isn't or at least wasn't a totalitarian regime.
Have you ever been in the military? If they say to drop and give them 20, you better drop and give them twenty. If they say get rid of that crap, you better get rid of that crap. This has nothing to do with you family history or stripping "you" of "your" rights.Hey, Mick; what if I told you that my great grandfather's grandfather (easiest to remember it that way) was a member of the House of Representatives when Lincoln gave that speech I quoted, and that his father had served multiple terms in the Senate, and his father fought in the Revolutionary War? Same last name as mine right up the chain - all neatly documented. Several ancestors on my father's side fought for the Union in it civil war - one of my great ... grandfathers (not gonna figure out the greats) was a Lt. Col. by the end ... I have his Colt 1851 Navy cap and ball revolver. See the interesting thing is that we can have respect and admiration for our ancestors regardless of our current opinions ... it's allowed. What those people were helped define the country as it is, but to a great extent they don't define us individually. That's something that makes us better - we have the right to choose who we are and what we believe, and for many of us, our ancestors fought so that we could have that right. It's why so many of us are disturbed when others feel the need to strip our individuality and our right to think and act as individuals. This isn't or at least wasn't a totalitarian regime.
Of course the Union allowed West Virginia in immediately. Strategically, it was necessary because the lines going towards Pittsburgh were extremely short with the 1860 boundaries and that was a critical iron and coal producing area for them. Also, if West Virginia hadn't broken off, the Confederates would have almost had Washington surrounded as well as a more direct route into Baltimore.Didn't stop the politically correct Union from finding it convenient to allow W VA to secede from VA though - that wasn't kosher if you want to use the argument that VA could never leave the union and still fell under Constitutional rules.
Maybe they thought common sense would prevail, and that it wouldn't resort to bloodshed. They did advocate for government "for the people, by the people". They understood the value of self governance. In no way do I think they would have wanted the Union split, but if things couldn't have been solved diplomatically, I'm not convinced they would have fought a war. The FFs worked together to compromise, for the betterment of all. They didn't act with an iron fist in the way Lincoln did.They sure did. Now which peaceful methods did they outline for a state to voluntarily leave the union in the Constitution?