Just one very simple question

[subdjoe]

If the federal government were meant to be so overwelmingly powerful, as you suggest, then why did the founders not abolish the states and just have one central government?  Why did they limit it with carefully crafted and circumscribed powers?  And why emphasize those limits with: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Hey Sub joe........you said the Federal government was there to make sure evryone played nice...............and if they did not play nice what then? If the federal government is not powerfull you get this.


You clearly don't understand limits of authority, do you?  But, can you cite for me any examples of one state trying to take over another?  No?  So it doesn't matter, does it?  Your alarmist scenario never happened.  If it did, the federal govt. could step in to stop it.  But it can't run the states.  Think of an umpire in a football game.  He can call impose penalties, but he doesn't run either team, he just makes sure they both pretty much stick to the rules.  Your version would have him picking the players and calling the plays.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balkanization

As for the fighting spirit of the swiss............if the Alps had not been in the way...Hitler would have rolled over them in WW II.

How many wars have the Swiss started?


 I think every county in each state should have the right to succed from it's state.

I would have to check again, but I think that is unconstituional.  On the other hand, that is exactly what happened with West Virginia.  It was what, 38 counties that left the Old Dominion to stay with the Federal government?  Kind of wonder why they were allowed to remain an independent state after the Civil War. 

And I believe that Maine had been part of Massachusetts, and became a state on its own as part of the Missouri Compromies (going off the top of my head here).  Although in both cases, WV/VA anmd ME/MA there were huge cultural differeneces between the parts. 

[SouthernByGrace]

These guys put it to rest..............why can't you?

Well, YOU asked the question, not Joe...
Just because you don't like the answer, you can't cry foul and say "put it to rest..."

I'm gonna have to go with Joe on this one... he's absolutely right on every count.

1. Before the war, the states had much more power that the Federal Gov't. That's partly why Lincoln fought the war in the first place; to create a more centralized Federal Gov't. In fact, Lincoln is the father of big government. The problems we have in the gov't. today are easily traced straight back to Lincoln.

2. The reason it is not considered correct to call the war "The War Between The States," is because no state ever fought against another state. It was two separate countries fighting each other, not states fighting other states. So, your argument that one state would invade another is completely unfounded.

3. AtlLaw is right, too. Each state does have its own military. They always have. It is guaranteed in the Constitution. Actually, the Southern States had County militias during the war. I'm not sure about the Northern States. 

4. C4 is also right. The states DO have stronger powers that the Federal Government. Under the Constitution, the Federal Government's powers come strictly from the states. The states delegate power to the Fed. The Fed does not delegate it to the states. Instead, the Fed. intimidates the states into conforming to its whim... (i.e. speed limit laws; no conformance, no federal money for your roads) That same money came from the states to begin with...

5. C4 is also right about the war not being necessary. To echo his thought on that, watch this video of Ron Paul on Fox News, giving his views on it... I'm with these guys on it. I even said in my answer to your question that this was what I would have preferred to have happen...

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ron+paul+on+the+civil+war&search_type=aq=1&oq=Ron+Paul+on+the+

6. GaryG is right about Switzerland being a Confederation of States. I think it's the longest lived Confederation on earth, partly because they keep their nose out of everybody else's business and they mind their own, very unlike the U.S.

nealglen37, have you ever wondered why the United States supported 9 secession movements BEFORE the Civil War, and AFTER the Civil War, the United States has supported more secession movements that any other nation on earth. Why was it fit and proper for every other seceding nation on earth to get backing from the U.S., EXCEPT for the Confederate States of America? Why did the US oppose the Southern States' separation when they were exercising the EXACT rights that the US did when seceding from England. Why was it right for the US and not right for the CS?

And the man who said it Best was the Very man who opposed it the Most... especially when it came to the Southern States seceding...

"Be it resolved, that it is the RIGHT of ANY PEOPLE, sufficiently numerous for national independence, TO THROW OFF, to REVOLUTIONIZE, their existing form of government, and to establish such other in its stead AS THEY MAY CHOOSE."

Abraham Lincoln (on behalf of Hungarian Freedom) on January 9, 1852  (Only 9 years before the Civil War)
I guess ANY PEOPLE didn't include Southerners...

SBG

DEO VINDICE

[Swampman]

Just one very simple question. Do you wish the south had won the war?

No!  This country wouldn't exist if they had.

[nealglen37]

I could come up with another counter argument........but at the moment I am ejoying one of the true treasures of the south.........Wild Turkey...........what a beattiful marriage..............ditilled corn and oak barrels.

[nealglen37]

distilled.....sorry...should have stopped at two.

[nealglen37]

I love all you guys......................give me a hug.

[subdjoe]

These guys put it to rest..............why can't you?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzOAbekZoOc&feature=related

You are making quite an assmumption that "they put it to rest." They may or may not have.  Many accepted that they lost.  But that doesn't mean they put it behind them.  That clip - the 50th Anniverseray of Gettysburg maybe?  One last chance to see both old comrades and foes.  Totally different from putting it to rest. Not to mention hamming it for the camera. 

The Federal government was very harsh in its treatment of the south during Reconstruction,  and in many ways, the occupation and reeducation effort still continues.  That very film the clip was lifted from, the one by the Burns, is a good example of that continuing reeducation.  Look at how souther culture is portraied in the media, nothing positive about it, or very little.  And that is usually where it apes northern culture.   I believe it was Gen. Lee, just a few months before his death, told a gentleman that if he had known how harsh the federals would be with the south, he would not have surrndered.   

Even the founders expressed concern about how long the Republic would survive because of the sharp differences in culture and attitude between north and south.  Attitudes about work, wealth, how to go through life, were all different.  To put it very briefly, and only vaguly correctly - the people in the north were norman/saxon , gotta get more, and wealth is a sign of Gods favor, but you need to work hard, types.  In the south there were more of celtic, it's in Gods hands, I have enough for now, why worry, types.  A VERY rough generalization with lots of holes, but as a rouch sketch it works.


Here is an interesting little read: http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1978/4/1978_4_56.shtml

[nealglen37]

I think you ment to say it was in all the gods hands..................Those good old Celtic boys belived in more than one god.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_polytheism

[Cabin4]

Just one very simple question. Do you wish the south had won the war?

No!  This country wouldn't exist if they had.

I actually agree, this horrible country would not exsisit. We would likly have a much better one. One that actually follows the constitution.

[subdjoe]

I think you ment to say it was in all the gods hands..................Those good old Celtic boys belived in more than one god.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_polytheism

Yeah, that is why there are so many Celtic Orthodox Chrisitian saints.  Go back far enough and you can say that about any culture.  Did you even bother to read the article before you posted the link?  Here, the opening paragraph: 

 Celtic polytheism, sometimes known as Celtic paganism, refers to the religious beliefs and practises of the ancient Celtic peoples of western Europe prior to Christianisation.

Now, I may be wrong but "prior" usually means before.  And the Celtic lands, especially Ireland, were heavily Christian by about A.D. 500.

[nealglen37]

your stament

In the south there were more of celtic, it's in Gods hands, I have enough for now, why worry, types.  A VERY rough generalization with lots of holes, but as a rouch sketch it works.

Your stament...about the south......or did you mean people who came from lands where the celtic people originated.

[nealglen37]

Cabin4..............I'm sorry you feel that way, we will all miss you............so have you decided which country your moving to?

[subdjoe]

your stament

In the south there were more of celtic, it's in Gods hands, I have enough for now, why worry, types.  A VERY rough generalization with lots of holes, but as a rouch sketch it works.

Your stament...about the south......or did you mean people who came from lands where the celtic people originated.

Why not BOTH?  Or do you think that the people who came to America instantly dropped all their traditions, habits, and beliefs once they stepped off the boat? 

OK, with that, I will not be responding to you any more.  You seem, to me anyway,  intent on only tossing grenades and attempting to twist peoples words, and have no interest in serious discussion.

[nealglen37]

Peace baby

[Cabin4]

Cabin4..............I'm sorry you feel that way, we will all miss you............so have you decided which country your moving to?

I'm in the correct country and no plans to leave. Our current federal government is the one that needs to leave or change. It is currently an illegal entity not supported in it's current form by the American constitution.

[SouthernByGrace]

nealglen37, I think you need to be a little less sarcastic and actually READ what these guys are saying. YOU started this thread, and just because you aren't getting the answers you'd like, you can't twist everything everyone else says so it suits you.

1. subdjoe never said anything about ancient Celtics, which is what your link refers to. It was not ancient pagan Celtics that immigrated to America, but Christians. Therefor, joe's remark was indeed correct. The modern Christian Celtics that came here did NOT believe in more than one god. Keep it in context.

2. Cabin4 never said he didn't want to live here, or that he intended to leave. I happen to agree with his statement 100%. This country would NOT exist (IN ITS CURRENT FORM!) and would indeed be much better if the Constitution was still the law of the land and not just some antique manuscript sitting in a museum. I don't see how you could have gotten anything OTHER than that out of what he said.

3. WHY are you here? If you don't agree with somebody, say so, but don't twist what they are trying to say into something completely opposite. If you read what these guys are saying, and not respond to the complete opposite of it, you would get a greater understanding of their remarks. You have the potential to bring a great deal of knowledge to this forum, but NOT if you keep twisting what everybody else says. Keep it in context and READ what they are saying.

You don't have to agree with everything or everyone here. Folks can agree, disagree, or even agree to disagree. If you're not sure what somebody means, ask. But in the same light, understand folks can sometimes "misspeak" in their responses.
Replies such as Peace baby won't get you anywhere but out the door. Folks will put you on Ignore before you know it.

Now, everybody play nice... 

SBG

DEO VINDICE

[SouthernByGrace]

distilled.....sorry...should have stopped at two.

That's funny right there... 

[Gary G]

SBG wrote:

GaryG is right about Switzerland being a Confederation of States. I think it's the longest lived Confederation on earth, partly because they keep their nose out of everybody else's business and they mind their own, very unlike the U.S.

Which is exactly what our founding fathers recommended and the progressives, socialists, have forgotten. We have been in perpetual war since the progressive Wilson, and if employment continues to worsen we will be in it with Iran (how else can the big bankers and military industrial complex enrich themselves in a down economy). All this could have been prevented if Lincoln had not betrayed states rights and betrayed the constitution (or if the South had won).

You Yankees should have been pulling for the south. You would still have your freedom rather than being owned by the government who lets you have whatever portion they decide of your production after they first get theirs.

[Cabin4]

One statement from Articale 1 Section 8:

"To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;"

Seems like our federal govenment has lat this particular constitutional provision laps a few times....

[Gary G]

Cabin4, they can now start a war now without Congress appropriating the money or approving it. The Federal Reserve will print it out of thin air. (Another example of the Empirical President first introduced by Lincoln.) At least they always jump on someone that can't fight back very well. lol

[Cabin4]

Cabin4, they can now start a war now without Congress appropriating the money or approving it. The Federal Reserve will print it out of thin air. (Another example of the Empirical President first introduced by Lincoln.) At least they always jump on someone that can't fight back very well. lol

I know, I know. It's a 100% complete mess. Our federal government is a complete illegal entity. We have no need to worry about being taken over by a foreign entity, it's already happened, it's called Washington.

[nealglen37]

That guy is right................I apologize. I just like to argue.............no harm meant. Just seems like so many people take things so seriously in some of these forums, that I just like to stir the pot. For better or worse we are all Americans, and I know we all want the best for us........our kids.....and people around the world. Our anger should be saved for the two nut jobs.........one leads North Korea....the Other leads Iran.

[Gary G]

Just one very simple question. Do you wish the south had won the war?

No!  This country wouldn't exist if they had.

But, I would guess that you look favorably to the republics that succeeded from the former USSR.
So my question is, are those opposed to succession here and for succession there hypocrites?
Both were fleeing what they believed to be a repressive government.

[SouthernByGrace]

But, I would guess that you look favorably to the republics that succeeded from the former USSR.
So my question is, are those opposed to succession here and for succession there hypocrites?
Both were fleeing what they believed to be a repressive government.

Gary, my answer to your question would be YES! You can't be for and against the same thing at the same time. If secession is right for one group of people, by nature, it HAS to be right for Everyone, no matter what the time-period is.

As I said earlier, the US supported 9 secession movements BEFORE 1861, 1 DURING the 1860's (Not the CSA), and the US has supported MORE secession movements Since 1861 than ANY other nation on earth.

If anybody thinks a single one of those secession movements was right, and then turn around and say that the South was wrong, that person is a hypocrite. Period.   
And the ONLY difference in all those others and the South? Not one of those Other countries would have cost the US one cent. The South was footing the bill to run the government to the tune of at Least 80%!

Quote from Lincoln: "Let the South go? No, I cannot let the South go! From where, then, would we get our revenue to run the government?"   Harper's Weekly, in an interview with Sec. of War Stanton.

Does taxation without representation ring any bells? 

SBG

DEO VINDICE

[subdjoe]

SBG, do you have a link to the source of that quote?  I used to have it, but my laptop crashed and I havn't been able to find it again.

[SouthernByGrace]

joe, I used to have a copy of the article it came from. I loaned it to my brother to show some friends, and I never got it back. I know there are a lot of issues on the Library of Congress website, www.loc.gov, but I don't know if this one is among the one's they have or not. Now, see what you've done? I ain't gonna get any sleep tonight because I'll be up looking for this article....

I would like to add that, had I not known for an absolute fact that this was a legitimate quote, I would not use it.

I do know it was in Harper's Weekly, a periodical based in New York City, and it was an interview with U.S. Secretary of War, Edwin M. Stanton.

Now I gotta go find this quote... 

SBG

[Redtail1949]

simple question....

as all have seen it ain't that simple. the fact is that we can not go back and we are where we are.

what could have been...what should have been... great for day dreams but sadly...what is is what it is.

the next question should be....what do we do now?

[Cabin4]

simple question....

as all have seen it ain't that simple. the fact is that we can not go back and we are where we are.

what could have been...what should have been... great for day dreams but sadly...what is is what it is.

the next question should be....what do we do now?

Secession is still a real option for the states. There is a movement afoot out there and its growing. It is organized and will continue to organize more over the coming years. If whats happening in Washington continues, it will fuel the secession movement. I see no reason why secession should be considered unrealistic. In fact, its more realistic today than ever given the global nature of our economy. Look at what happened to the USSR recently.

[shortround]

Yes.

[SouthernByGrace]

Welcome to the forum, shortround. Glad you dropped by.

SBG

DEO VINDICE