Tom Salinger

Good Russian slant on this point of American history. One might have said instead of "and the U.S. is doomed to repeat it" that "my country is doomed to repeat it" if it were their country. Very odd phrasing.

Tom Salinger

Efreakinggads! Read! Open your eyes! The evidence is overfreakingwhelming the statues are about White Supremacy. Aarrgghh!

kankune Loc: Iowa

Don't be so freaking cranky Mr. Partially, of course it was. But apparently you see a statue as just a thing. You have no heart or feeling for ALL the history it represents...

E

A read all of this and I still think that the south was trying to secede for the rights of the individual states to decide their own future and not be subservient to the dictatorial politicians in Washington who they felt were over taxing them for their own benefit among other things. They joined in the fight against England to free themselves from the tyranny of England and the king, and now were subject to the tyranny of Washington. It is even worse today and that is why the people rebelled against what so many think of as sanity, to free us from the bastards in Washington.

I realize that many officers of the south owned slaves, as did General Grant of the north. But I can't imagine a single foot soldier owning a slave and sacrificing his life for the right to own one. They fought for States rights and freedom from tyranny.

KiraSeer2016

"Good Russian slant?"

Try not to think about it too much. It will tax your brain.

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

"Do these left wing zealots have any sense of awareness? Maybe they were too busy studying for their gender studies finals to see the reports of the Taliban destroying ancient Buddhist monuments in territory they had captured."

Here is a really big problem;
America is under siege.
A lot at stake.
How many liberals have a good grasp of what Communism delivers. The masses fell for the Bolshevik BS. The Chinese never knew what hit them. The ruthlessness is beyond most peoples comprehension, largely due to lack if studying it. It sure isn't taught in the government school system. Over 200 Million people starved and slaughtered by those regimes.
It is important to differentiate the different brands/sects of "Jew". The term "Jew" is misused a lot, fraudulently, and confusingly.
Judah is one of the 12 tribes of Israel. A Race (Hebrew)
Judaism is a religion (Torah/Old Testament and Talmudic/Babylonian Rabinism)
Jews are also a nationality (Nation of Israeli)
All categories attempt to claim they are the chosen people. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Many hide behind that claim. Most fundamentalist Christian churches don't teach the differences, and fall for that misrepresentation.
Hence, we have impotent churches, and ignorant Christians, that are not aware of the enemies of God/Yahweh within our nation.
Think about who has been trying to drive God out of public education and the public square?
Atheists? Who do you think these atheists are?
The ACLU and the anti-Defamation League (ADL) for starters.

Behind Communism
Here is a link to the PDF downloadable version
http://jrbooksonline.com/PDF_Books/Behind%20Communism.pdf

straightUp Loc: California

When has anyone on this forum EVER had an original thought?


Are you done with the rhetorical questions yet?


That doesn't mean it wasn't a divisive issue.


Here's what I said in a previous post about California secession.

As it stands, federal law actually prohibits any state from leaving the Union (which sounds a little draconian to me), so as much as we want to secede we know it's going to be a long process and this initiative is only a step in that direction. 
http://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/tpr?p=2083617&t=109395

So, you want to tell me again, how ignorant I am about constitutional history and theory? (BTW, "constitutional" is an adjective, you don't capitalize it).

...Maybe you should just present the facts as you know them, instead of being arrogant and telling people what you think they know or don't know.


Because 2017 isn't 1861 alabuck. A lot can change in 156 years... For instance, in the mid-19th century there was still a lot of territory in the west that had yet to be conquered and assimilated and expansionists in both the North and the South were in direct competition for that territory. Deciding if a territory is to be admitted as a slave state or a "free" state, made a big difference on the kind of business that can succeed there. That competition doesn't exist anymore.

I'm not saying an attempt to secede wouldn't lead to a war. But I'm willing to find out how far the effort can go before it gets to that... *IF* it ever does.


Well... I don't have quite the imagination to envision a world without economic or territorial competition but yes, I agree that slavery was an integral part to both arguments. But this perspective should tell you that slavery was only a factor in the economic and territorial dispute. Granted, the issue did play a more critical role than just the "attention getter" that I was portraying it as but nevertheless, I think it *was* a divisive issue and as I had said in my opening statement... "I've always believed the conflict was more about economic and territorial competition between states than slavery."

alabuck Loc: Tennessee

-----------------

Thanks for correcting my grammar.

As you said, it's against the law for any state to secede. As such, then, why even mention it as a possibility? Or, to put it in the vernacular, "Why go there?" I, simply can't understand the reasoning behind anyone wanting to dissolve our country, no matter what the reason. Any thought of secession, by any state, be it California or Texas, to name the first ones to come to mind, is a waste of time, effort and energy. Besides, even if it was not against the law, just how would California by able to reimburse the Federal government for all of the Federal properties located within the state? How about reimbursement for Federal contributions to Federal-State partnerships? Who determines the currency exchange rates? The weights and measures? Will they remain pounds and ounces or will California change to the Metric System? There are, simply, too many 'Federal to state' and 'state to Federal' connections to be resolved, even smoothly, allow for a state to secede.

Given that slavery was an integral part of any reasoning(s) for the secession movement of the 1800's, and, given that that secession movement was proven to be an abject failure, why would anyone still want to consider it as a method to an end? Our political system has a built-in system of methodologies to change the directions of our government should a majority wish to do so. One is called a "recall election." By this, the people have the opportunity to remove from office those representatives with whom there is disagreement. Then, another election is held to find a replacement(s) more in line with their wants and wishes. This way of doing things will be much faster and legal than your idea of secession.

Just saying ...

kankune Loc: Iowa

BIG RECALL ON JERRY BROWN. DEFECTIVE!!!