QuoteAnd, yes, I agree with you, Lincoln's decision that The Union must survive was a big part of dismantling the Constitution.

Uh no. The Souths decision that armed rebellion, as opposed to Constitutional means, was the way to go; was a much greater problem then Lincoln. After all, the President was charged with putting down rebellions - as Washington had done with the "Whiskey Rebellion". In any case, the problem was, that after the Civil War was over they didn't take the Southern leadership and generals out and shoot them as the traitors they were. 

Quote from: mdgiles on November 19, 2012, 09:06:46 AM
Uh no. The Souths decision that armed rebellion, as opposed to Constitutional means, was the way to go; was a much greater problem then Lincoln. After all, the President was charged with putting down rebellions - as Washington had done with the "Whiskey Rebellion". In any case, the problem was, that after the Civil War was over they didn't take the Southern leadership and generals out and shoot them as the traitors they were.

Traitors? Surely you jest. There was no desire on the part of the Southrons to overthrow the US government. They simply wished to follow the natural law of determining their own way of government.

Quote from: Shooterman on November 19, 2012, 12:10:01 PM
Traitors? Surely you jest. There was no desire on the part of the Southrons to overthrow the US government. They simply wished to follow the natural law of determining their own way of government.

LOL!  That may be true but it is also irrelevant.  They lost.

p.s.,  No matter how just our cause was if we had lost the war with England, there might not ever have been a USA.  Winners set the terms and write the history.

Quote from: a777pilot on November 19, 2012, 12:13:24 PM
LOL!  That may be true but it is also irrelevant.  They lost.

No question it is true. They were not traitors.

There is little doubt they lost, but 'tis a shame it could not have been as peaceful as the secession from the Articles of Confederation.

Unfortunately the entire nation lost.

Quote from: mdgiles on November 19, 2012, 09:06:46 AM
Uh no. The Souths decision that armed rebellion, as opposed to Constitutional means, was the way to go; was a much greater problem then Lincoln. After all, the President was charged with putting down rebellions - as Washington had done with the "Whiskey Rebellion". In any case, the problem was, that after the Civil War was over they didn't take the Southern leadership and generals out and shoot them as the traitors they were.

I totally disagree with you.

The South, didn't want war, it was forced on them by the North.

You will undoubtedly whistle up the bombardment of Ft Sumter. Do you realize that Major Anderson (the Union Commander) was under orders to not take any "provocative" actions? Despite this he abandoned Fort Moultrie and occupied Fort Sumter.

Or, that he was given the opportunity to peacefully surrender the Fort (which was now part of the Confederacy) but declined to do so?

Did you know that prior to the bombardment, diplomatic envoys from the Confederacy were dispached to Washington to seek a peaceful resolution to the crisis?

Finally, do you know that the only person killed during the bombardment was a Union soldier who was mortally injured during the surrender ceremony?

Mr Lincoln wanted this war - it was an early example of not letting a crisis go to waste!

Quote from: valjean on November 17, 2012, 01:38:49 PM
This is a question I was thinking about to myself the other day and I am curious to see what you guys would suggest here. When speaking about a change here, I don't mean specific laws. Some people might want to have an amendment outlawing abortion or whatever, but what I'm aiming at here is just a structural change in government as laid out in the constitution.

If I could change one thing in the constitution it would be to alter the term durations and limits. I would prefer that the President only get to serve one 6 year term, that senators serve a maximum of three, 4 year terms, and members of the House of Representatives serve a maximum of six, 2 year terms. The fact that so many politicians look out for re-election is one of the biggest flaws in our system in my opinion, presidents are duplicitous about their true agendas even whilst sitting in office to try and ensure re-election. To solve this problem I would like to see a change made where the president serves only one 6 year term. I think 1, 4 year term is too short for a president to have an agenda and provide leadership, so 6 seemed to me like the good number between 4 being too short and 8 being too long. In regards to congress, you can only be a senator for a maximum of 12 years, and a member of the house for a maximum of 12 years. I think this would help to clear washington out periodically of those career politicians who get entrenched in a state or district and remain in power for decades. This would also encourage people who really want to be involved politically as a vocation to get active in their state legislatures which wouldn't have these limits or limits set by themselves. Emphasis added on the state legislatures would decrease the amount of abuse coming from the federal government in my opinion if states can maintain a strong network of devoted statesmen while Washington is periodically cleaned out of politicians who reach their maximum term limit.

Repeal the 16th and 17th Amendments.

The 16th is redundant and the 17th mortally wounded State Sovereignty.

There are many conservative forums:

Note that it is interesting and telling that almost all are going in the direction of Secession.  IMO this is because the real America who are Property Owners, and those that want to own property now clearly SEE the FED FOR THE BLOODSUCKING TAXING TYRANTS THEY ARE.

Nothing, and I mean nothing will stop the incessant and on-going stripping of both Property Rights and Individual Liberty grabs of these bastards.  "They" believe it is "Their Inherent Right, Duty, and Entitlement" to be the "Government Elite Class" who have all power to tell us what we can do.  From the BS PC Religion of Government which now has more followers than Christianity, to taxing each and every want of property by citizens....This is a barbaric Regime....both Dem and Rep......There is not a single Patriot in the entire Group.  It is about RULING not governing.

If someone "Breaks into Your Home".....Home Invasion.....then proceeds to Steal anything they want......Rape your Wife.....Kill your Kids....Humiliate you......you then would have no problem with putting a Bullet between their eyes.....Correct/

Now I ask you....Just what is the difference with what is now occurring?

Our Nation has faced such barbarism before.   It will only end when the "King is Killed" as a certain mid evil writer taught.  Wounding these barbaric scum, only means they will recover then return and kill us....

I am sure there is somewhere a book written on just how "Fragile" these dirt bag "Elite Political Leaders" are when faced with being "Taken Out"....I wonder what that book states, about just how few of the current leaders were eliminated providing the correct message to any who remain...Anyone remember the book name?

Seems there was something in the book about the "Cumulative Fear Effect" taking over to change behavior at only 10 eliminated?   Seems to me Fear of the American People is exactly the right medicine for these scum.

Seems like the number was fewer than 25.