- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
An editor for Military Times found it humorous to desecrate AP Hill's grave yesterday
Posted on 12/15/22 at 10:58 am
Posted on 12/15/22 at 10:58 am
quote:
Tim Wood
@TimOnPoint
This is how @jon_simkins, an editor for @MilitaryTimes expresses himself at the desecration of a grave.
All Confederates were Americans before their defiance and subsequent treason, and all Confederates were Americans after their defeat. You don’t have to like it.
His response:
quote:
Jon Simkins
@jon_simkins
·
1h
Replying to @TimOnPoint and @MilitaryTimes
And yet they were still treasonous and killed actual U.S. soldiers, but go off
Tim Wood Twitter
12
Posted on 12/15/22 at 11:06 am to Bobby OG Johnson
When the Constitution was written, there was an attempt to put a clause preventing any states from leaving the union. It failed to pass and would have resulted in ratification failure also.
Posted on 12/15/22 at 11:07 am to Bobby OG Johnson
Nobody buys these or takes them seriously, maybe boots.
Posted on 12/15/22 at 12:32 pm to Bobby OG Johnson
A.P. Hill is still twice the man simkins will ever be.
Posted on 12/15/22 at 1:08 pm to Bobby OG Johnson
What does Simpkins say about Biden's deals with China?
Posted on 12/15/22 at 1:16 pm to Auburn1968
quote:Background. I think that nothing in the Constitution in 1861 prohibited secession and that the Southern states had every right to do so, so don't start hurling insults.
When the Constitution was written, there was an attempt to put a clause preventing any states from leaving the union. It failed to pass and would have resulted in ratification failure also.
I have NEVER heard anyone make this assertion that a secession prohibition was proposed in 1789. Is there something that you can link?
13 people have upvoted your post, so surely someone has a link.
Additional data. An amendment prohibiting secession WAS proposed and failed in 1861. LINK. Are you thinking of this one?
This post was edited on 12/15/22 at 1:41 pm
Posted on 12/15/22 at 1:17 pm to Bobby OG Johnson
Note to the US Federal Govt: I'm proud that some folks had the balls to secede and fight against your tyranny.
Posted on 12/15/22 at 1:24 pm to Bobby OG Johnson
quote:
Jon Simkins @jon_simkins · 1h Replying to @TimOnPoint and @MilitaryTimes And yet they were still treasonous and killed actual U.S. soldiers, but go off
US soldiers were treasonous and killed actual British soldiers but go off.
And if, by some event, the British had reasserted control, they could have desecrated dead US soldiers graves.
Still wouldn’t be ethical.
Posted on 12/15/22 at 1:34 pm to Bobby OG Johnson
He got completely roasted in the comments. Just a trash human.
Posted on 12/15/22 at 1:37 pm to Bobby OG Johnson
Are there any fricking journalists left?
Posted on 12/15/22 at 1:51 pm to momentoftruth87
quote:
Nobody buys these or takes them seriously, maybe boots.
Problem is nobody is smacking them around anymore.
Posted on 12/15/22 at 1:53 pm to Bobby OG Johnson
Southerners have zero business fighting for the leviathan that massacred our ancestors and does everything it can to destroy our culture and villify our heroes.
Posted on 12/15/22 at 2:13 pm to SCLibertarian
quote:
Southerners
quote:
destroy our culture and villify our heroes.
Your heroes are garbage.
Signed- A Southerner.
Posted on 12/15/22 at 2:17 pm to Bobby OG Johnson
Can we discuss leaving the United States for a moment? There seems to be this modern spin on historical events that wanting to leave the United States is/was an act of treason. Is it though? For the sake of argument, I present David “Davey” Crockett. He not only left the United States for Texas but also told his detractors that “they may go to hell” as he left. He was fiercely opposed to the Indian removal act despite part of his fame arising from fighting Indians. When it passed, he packed his shite and was done. He died in a foreign land at the Alamo, yet somehow, even today no one considers him a traitor, only an American hero fighting for something greater than himself. Why is it that he gets praise when his fellow southern brothers who decided to follow suit get labeled as traitors?
This post was edited on 12/15/22 at 2:18 pm
Posted on 12/15/22 at 2:19 pm to Bobby OG Johnson
Lost Causers incoming
Posted on 12/15/22 at 2:22 pm to SCLibertarian
There seems to be a massive shift in pro US government sentiment throughout the south. My neighbor’s son for example was slated to join the US Navy but has decided against it.
If our military loses white southern men, there won’t be anyone to fight their wars.
If our military loses white southern men, there won’t be anyone to fight their wars.
This post was edited on 12/15/22 at 2:25 pm
Posted on 12/15/22 at 2:24 pm to Fells
quote:
Your heroes are garbage.
Signed- A self-loathing Southerner.
FIFY
Posted on 12/15/22 at 2:24 pm to terriblegreen
I assume this guy knows thousands of confederate soldiers, who killed US soldiers, are buried in Arlington?
Shall we dig them all up?
Shall we dig them all up?
Posted on 12/15/22 at 2:34 pm to Auburn1968
quote:To the extent that anyone cares, the minutes of the debate contain an exchange that SOME authors ( example) interpret consistent with your post.
When the Constitution was written, there was an attempt to put a clause preventing any states from leaving the union. It failed to pass and would have resulted in ratification failure also.
quote:In context of the preceding debate, the highlighted language does not appear to reference a state seeking secession, but a state that was refusing to recognize and follow laws enacted by the Congress.
The last clause of Resolution 6, authorizing an exertion of the force of the whole aganst a delinquent State came next into consideration.
Mr. MADISON, observed that the more he reflected on the use of force, the more he doubted the practicability, the justice and the efficacy of it when applied to people collectively and not individually. -A union of the States containing such an ingredient seemed to provide for its own destruction. The use of force agst. a State, would look more like a declaration of war, than an infliction of punishment, and would probably be considered by the party attacked as a dissolution of all previous compacts by which it might be bound. He hoped that such a system would be framed as might render this recourse unnecessary, and moved that the clause be postponed. This motion was agreed
It looks like they were discussing whether the central government would be authorized to march into a state and force the state through power of arms to obey Congress.
This post was edited on 12/15/22 at 2:51 pm
Posted on 12/15/22 at 2:50 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
A union of the States containing such an ingredient seemed to provide for its own destruction.
And yet he was 100 percent spot on in his observation. His point was that you can’t plant that seed without sowing your own destruction. What he failed to realize is that the seed didn’t need to be planted on paper. It was planted through rhetoric and policy which led Lincoln to believe he had the power to keep the union together by force.
quote:
The use of force agst. a State, would look more like a declaration of war, than an infliction of punishment, and would probably be considered by the party attacked as a dissolution of all previous compacts by which it might be bound.
War was declared. War was raged. According to Madison’s logic that very act would dissolve all compacts. That means that a war waged to maintain the union by default dissolves the union.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News