Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The Restored Government of Virginia was not the occupation government, you moron. The members of the secessionist government of Virginia vacated their seats in the legally recognized government of Virginia when they declared secession. The Restored Government of Virginia was chosen by the people of Virginia in areas not in rebellion, and was the legally recognized government of Virginia during the Civil War - EVEN BEFORE OCCUPATION.
The restored government WAS the occupation government, dumbass! The legally elected governor and House of Delegates were meeting in Richmond, not Wheeling.
You can't simultaneously claim to not be a part of the United States AND be the legally recognized state government of a state in the United States, that should be obvious, moron. The Virginia legislature ABDICATED its authority as Virginia's state government within the United States when it seceded!
Definitely not."The fact is that the southern states had to meet a bunch of conditions to get all of their political rights back. "
Well considering they felt that slavery was actually acceptable they should have had to realize that slavery was indeed like the lowest of the low. Just think, had they won, would there still be slavery? No nation that bases itself on Christianity can defend a position about "owning" another person.
With so many states refusing to implement Obamacare and talking of secession, it's important to remember that the original 13 colonies seceded from England. Liberals say secession is treason but that's nonsense.
"The fact is that the southern states had to meet a bunch of conditions to get all of their political rights back. "
Well considering they felt that slavery was actually acceptable they should have had to realize that slavery was indeed like the lowest of the low. Just think, had they won, would there still be slavery? No nation that bases itself on Christianity can defend a position about "owning" another person.
It's not nonsense, it's the reality, any state that even attempted such a folly would be declared a martial law area and the leaders arrested and imprisoned.
Address the issue. Why is it ok for the original 13 colonies to secede from England but wrong for say, Florida or Wisconsin to secede from the USA.?
Definitely not."The fact is that the southern states had to meet a bunch of conditions to get all of their political rights back. "
Well considering they felt that slavery was actually acceptable they should have had to realize that slavery was indeed like the lowest of the low. Just think, had they won, would there still be slavery? No nation that bases itself on Christianity can defend a position about "owning" another person.
The Industrial Revolution made slavery not cost effective.
Definitely not."The fact is that the southern states had to meet a bunch of conditions to get all of their political rights back. "
Well considering they felt that slavery was actually acceptable they should have had to realize that slavery was indeed like the lowest of the low. Just think, had they won, would there still be slavery? No nation that bases itself on Christianity can defend a position about "owning" another person.
The Industrial Revolution made slavery not cost effective.
Quite true. A slave cost $60,000-$80,000 in today's money. Then you have to feed, clothe, house, and provide the basic essentials of living and medical care for them for life. It's cheaper just to hire an emplyee, pay them a wage, and let them sort those issues out for themselves.
Definitely not."The fact is that the southern states had to meet a bunch of conditions to get all of their political rights back. "
Well considering they felt that slavery was actually acceptable they should have had to realize that slavery was indeed like the lowest of the low. Just think, had they won, would there still be slavery? No nation that bases itself on Christianity can defend a position about "owning" another person.
The Industrial Revolution made slavery not cost effective.
"The fact is that the southern states had to meet a bunch of conditions to get all of their political rights back. "
Well considering they felt that slavery was actually acceptable they should have had to realize that slavery was indeed like the lowest of the low. Just think, had they won, would there still be slavery? No nation that bases itself on Christianity can defend a position about "owning" another person.
Right, the installed, occupation Government of Virginia.
The Restored Government of Virginia was not the occupation government, you moron. The members of the secessionist government of Virginia vacated their seats in the legally recognized government of Virginia when they declared secession. The Restored Government of Virginia was chosen by the people of Virginia in areas not in rebellion, and was the legally recognized government of Virginia during the Civil War - EVEN BEFORE OCCUPATION.
Oh. You mean a puppet govt. did that after the fact. The fact is that the southern states had to meet a bunch of conditions to get all of their political rights back.
the restored government was the occupation government, dumbass! The legally elected governor and house of delegates were meeting in richmond, not wheeling.
you can't simultaneously claim to not be a part of the united states and be the legally recognized state government of a state in the united states, that should be obvious, moron. The virginia legislature abdicated its authority as virginia's state government within the united states when it seceded!
by the constitution, the entire legally elected representatives have to approve of forming one state out of another. Even lincoln doubted the legality of it.
statehood for west virginia: An illegal act?
Those are death camps, moron. Slave owners had a legal obligation to see to the welfare of their slaves, the Nazis did not. Slaves in the U.S. were treated much like domesticated animals are nowadays - slaves in Nazi death camps were treated worse than any domesticated animal and worse than most wild animals.Definitely not."The fact is that the southern states had to meet a bunch of conditions to get all of their political rights back. "
Well considering they felt that slavery was actually acceptable they should have had to realize that slavery was indeed like the lowest of the low. Just think, had they won, would there still be slavery? No nation that bases itself on Christianity can defend a position about "owning" another person.
The Industrial Revolution made slavery not cost effective.
yeah, slave labor proved not to be cost effective in Nazi and Soviet work camps.
what a fucking idiot!!!
Definitely not.
The Industrial Revolution made slavery not cost effective.
Quite true. A slave cost $60,000-$80,000 in today's money. Then you have to feed, clothe, house, and provide the basic essentials of living and medical care for them for life. It's cheaper just to hire an emplyee, pay them a wage, and let them sort those issues out for themselves.
Not quite. The invention of the cotton gin made large scale plantation operations a profitable activity. Save for that, slavery might well have petered out. However, in order to harvest that much cotton required a considerable workforce and that made slavery viable. It was the decision to restrict slavery from expanding into new states thus preventing cotton farming to grow which put the south over the edge. Ultimately, it wasn't about liberty. It was about money.
The elected government of Virginia DURING the war remained in Richmond. The self appointed and unelected bunch that fashioned themselves the government of Virginia had no authority.The Restored Government of Virginia was not the occupation government, you moron. The members of the secessionist government of Virginia vacated their seats in the legally recognized government of Virginia when they declared secession. The Restored Government of Virginia was chosen by the people of Virginia in areas not in rebellion, and was the legally recognized government of Virginia during the Civil War - EVEN BEFORE OCCUPATION.
Oh. You mean a puppet govt. did that after the fact. The fact is that the southern states had to meet a bunch of conditions to get all of their political rights back.
No, idiot, I'm talking about the legal government of Virginia DURING the war, NOT AFTER. Can you READ? That is the government that consented to West Virginia's becoming its own state BEFORE West Virginia was accepted by Congress, NOT AFTER.
Lord Almighty.
Those are death camps, moron. Slave owners had a legal obligation to see to the welfare of their slaves, the Nazis did not. Slaves in the U.S. were treated much like domesticated animals are nowadays - slaves in Nazi death camps were treated worse than any domesticated animal and worse than most wild animals.Definitely not.
The Industrial Revolution made slavery not cost effective.
yeah, slave labor proved not to be cost effective in Nazi and Soviet work camps.
what a fucking idiot!!!
The elected government of Virginia DURING the war remained in Richmond. The self appointed and unelected bunch that fashioned themselves the government of Virginia had no authority.Oh. You mean a puppet govt. did that after the fact. The fact is that the southern states had to meet a bunch of conditions to get all of their political rights back.
No, idiot, I'm talking about the legal government of Virginia DURING the war, NOT AFTER. Can you READ? That is the government that consented to West Virginia's becoming its own state BEFORE West Virginia was accepted by Congress, NOT AFTER.
Lord Almighty.
Not if you consider GIs mocking you when shells didn't go off by yelling "Made in Czechoslovakia!" at you, or everything from fuel pumps for tanks to guidance systems for V-1/V-2 rockets being monkey-wrenched by the slave laborers "cost effective".Those are death camps, moron. Slave owners had a legal obligation to see to the welfare of their slaves, the Nazis did not. Slaves in the U.S. were treated much like domesticated animals are nowadays - slaves in Nazi death camps were treated worse than any domesticated animal and worse than most wild animals.yeah, slave labor proved not to be cost effective in Nazi and Soviet work camps.
what a fucking idiot!!!
death camps were slave labor and it was cost effective. how one treats their slaves is irrelevant to the facts. but, do you know the cost of invading nations, rounding up Jews and other undesirables, and shipping them all over Europe with armed guards cost?
It's not nonsense, it's the reality, any state that even attempted such a folly would be declared a martial law area and the leaders arrested and imprisoned.
Address the issue. Why is it ok for the original 13 colonies to secede from England but wrong for say, Florida or Wisconsin to secede from the USA.?
When Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States.
Texas v. White
Yeah tell that to the slaves.. how one treats their slaves is irrelevant...
