[Login / Register]

Menu

Forums

error

This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.

Jim 5804 11253 Holiday	RE: MADE In the USA 2/5/2011 7:06:33 PM
	Corwin Amendment The Corwin Amendment. The Forgotten Amendment By Samuel Ashwood \| October 1, 2008 Not every amendment ever proposed for the Constitution of the United States has passed. However, even those that fail of ratification (e.g., the Equal Rights Amendment) tell us a lot about the general drift of society. For any issue to gain such national prominence that it would gain even a proposition for constitutional amendment means that issue is a major one in the society of that day. Many Americans remember the Equal Rights Amendment, but none alive today remember the Corwin Amendment. Very few Americans are even aware of its existence, because the writers of history have found it convenient to ignore anything that does not fit into the historical paradigms they have created. The Corwin Amendment destroys many of the historical elite’s fancies about Abraham Lincoln and the Civil War. The Corwin Amendment was proposed by Congressman Thomas Corwin of Ohio when the Cotton States began to secede from the Union in late 1860, early 1861. It read: No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State. In short, the amendment would have forbidden the Federal government to interfere with the institution of slavery. It was the hope of Corwin and the amendment’s supporters that, with slavery absolutely guaranteed by the Constitution itself, the Southern states would immediately return to the Union, averting the threat of civil war. The amendment gained great initial support. It was passed by both houses of Congress. Henry Adams noted that the 24-12 victory for the amendment in the senate was due largely to the lobbying of president-elect Abraham Lincoln. The amendment was then signed by lame duck president James Buchanan, although a presidential signature has no effect on whether or not an amendment is approved. When one considers some of the prevalent historical myths treasured in America, it is easy to see why the Corwin Amendment is completely ignored by mainstream historians. First, it destroys the myth that the Southern states seceded for no other reason than to protect slavery. The odds of passing the Corwin Amendment would likely have been very favorable, with only the New England states guaranteed to defeat it. Abraham Lincoln endorsed the amendment in his first inaugural address. But no Southern state ever gave a hint that they would return to the Union, even if the Corwin Amendment were approved. Shortly thereafter, Abraham Lincoln kept another promise he had made in his first inaugural address, that he would use armed force to collect tariffs and protect federal property in the Southern states. Needless to say, these bare historical facts also destroy the myth of Abraham Lincoln as the great Abolitionist crusader, and friend of the bondman. His support of the Corwin Amendment make it plain he was perfectly willing for the Negro to remain in bondage forever, if it kept the Union together. The Corwin Amendment, of course, failed, because the Southern states were disinterested in rejoining a Union where authority was shifting irrevocably to Washington, and away from the state capitals. Abraham Lincoln would call for volunteers to suppress “the rebellion,” and ensure that final power forever in the United States would rest in Washington. The Corwin Amendment is technically still pending. However, it does not seem due to pass any time soon.
	May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you, Jim Allen III Skype: JAllen3D Everything You Need For Online Success
	+0

Jim 5804 11253 Holiday	RE: MADE In the USA 2/5/2011 7:07:50 PM
	Care Of Freedmen Northern Care of the Freedmen "The story of the freedmen in wartime is one of gross mismanagement and neglect (on the part of the North). The problem was neither vigilantly foreseen by the government nor dealt with vigorously and promptly by it or by private organizations. The abolitionists who had called so long for emancipation should have foreseen that the mere ending of slavery was far from a solution of the stupendous and many-sided problem of creating...a new social order to meet the exigent new demands. All too often squalor, hunger and disease haunted the (black) refugees, their camps becoming social cancers that were a reproach to the North...Maria Mann, the first woman sent by the US Sanitary Commission as agent in a contraband camp, wrote of appalling conditions and often cruel treatment. Deaths were frequent, disease was universal, and the future so bleak that many of the refugees talked of returning to their slave masters, and some did so. Writing of the hospital, she said: "I found the poor creatures in...such quarters, void of comfort and decency;---their personal condition so deplorable that any idea of change for the better seems utterly impossible. Many of them seem to come there to die, and they do die very rapidly...the carcasses, filth and decay which 40,000 have scattered over this town, will make the mortality fearful when warm weather comes...So much formality attends red tape, and so few friends have the Negroes among the officials..." Speaking out sharply, Mrs. Mann charged the (US) Army with "barbarities" against the refugees....Malnutrition was evident in nearly every place "where the government has been obliged to support destitute contrabands." An aide of General Rufus Saxton at Beaufort (South Carolina) reported..."the ill-fed, ill-sheltered, ill-clothed, unmedicined" freedmen were an easy prey of the infectious maladies that swept their poor quarters." Washington failed utterly to foresee the widespread flight of slaves within the Union lines, to assess their needs realistically, and to make considered provision for their future. (For) several reasons Congress was unwilling to take farsighted action in behalf of the four million slaves that the war gradually released. In the first place (many Northern Congressman) wished to retard rather than accelerate emancipation. They raised some terrible bogeys: the Negroes would flock northward and flood the labor markets (a fear felt from St. Louis and Cincinnati to Baltimore); they would prove unruly and dangerous; and frightful expenses, necessitating heavy taxes, would be needed to care for the ignorant, helpless and often ailing refugees. A large part of the Union officers and troops agreed with...conservative attitudes (toward the Negroes). Many had an instinctive dislike of Negroes, and many shared the views of the Democratic Party on slavery. They turned the Negro back with contumely. Dissension on the subject persisted until after the Emancipation Proclamation, and never disappeared." The (proclamation) did not apply to the thirteen parishes of Louisiana, the forty-eight counties of West(ern) Virginia, or seven counties of Virginia (under Northern occupation). Here, as everywhere, loyal masters had the right to recover slaves up to the final proclamation. "Oh, you are the man who has all those darkies on his shoulders." So Grant in the autumn of 1862 addressed Chaplain John Eaton of the 27th Ohio, a 33-year old....whom he had just appointed supervisor of the contrabands crowding into the army camps at LaGrange, Tennessee. As Grant's troops advanced into northern Mississippi...owners fled their plantations and farms, and slaves thronged into the Yankee camps. The flood of want and misery appalled all observers. It was like the oncoming of cities, wrote Eaton. Many Northern soldiers, quite unused to color, had more bitter prejudices against it than Southerners. But even the benevolent were nonplussed, fearing "the demoralization and infection of the Union soldier and the downfall of the Union cause" if dark hordes swamped the advancing columns. Eaton found most (Northern) troops reluctant to serve the Negro in any manner, and even parties detailed to guard the contrabands did their work unwillingly. Once Eaton was roughly arrested by a colonel as he gave directions to some wandering Negroes; once his horse, used by a sergeant in foraging for contrabands, was shot by somebody who hoped to kill Eaton himself." (The War for the Union: The Organized War 1863-1864, Allan Nevins, Charles Scribner's Sons, 1971, pp. 418-428)
	May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you, Jim Allen III Skype: JAllen3D Everything You Need For Online Success
	+0

Mary Evelyn 23244 5352 Strawb...	RE: MADE In the USA 2/15/2011 7:56:27 PM
	Hi Jim, I got this article today from the Canada Free Press and thought this thread was the appropriate place for it. Funding for a second, unnecessary, unneeded and unwanted engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighterm General Electric The Alternative Engine – The Not-So-Little Engine That Wouldn’t Go Away By Van D. Hipp Jr. Tuesday, February 15, 2011 The federal government’s penchant for wasting taxpayer money is nothing new. Sadly, it’s what we’ve come to expect. And while the infamous $436 hammers and $600 toilet seats are distant memories, the current crop of federal spending excesses are… well, downright excessive. Some of the best examples from 2010 include: $112 million doled out by the IRS to prisoners filing fraudulent tax returns; over $15 million to help operate an elaborate shooting range outside of Las Vegas that’s losing money; and $2.5 million spent on an advertisement during last year’s Super Bowl to promote the 2010 Census. That doesn’t exactly sound like a government that’s all too concerned about a federal deficit north of $14 trillion and growing. But with a new year underway, a new-look Congress controlling the purse strings and the promise for a good dose of fiscal sanity on Capitol Hill, those days are over – right? We may know soon enough. An early test for the 112th Congress will come in the area of defense spending. At question is funding for a second, unnecessary, unneeded and unwanted engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. Almost 10 years ago, Pratt & Whitney won the competition to produce the engine for the mammoth weapons program – beating out competitor General Electric in the process. And while GE’s engine lost to Pratt & Whitney’s fair and square, you’d never know it. Shockingly, both have continued to receive federal dollars over the past decade to produce two separate engines for one aircraft line. How’s this possible? Welcome to Washington, DC. True, the Pentagon did request funding for both versions of the engine during the first few years in the event the Pratt & Whitney product wasn’t up to snuff. But that period has come and gone, and the Pratt & Whitney engine has met all expectations and then some. In fact, the Pentagon has been the most vocal critic of Congress’ wasteful check-writing to GE for the engine it doesn’t want. Just last summer, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said, “The Bush Administration opposed this engine. The Obama Administration opposes it. We have recommended for several years now against funding this engine, considering it a waste of money. And to argue that we should add another $3 billion in what we regard as waste to protect the $1.5 billion that we believe already has been wasted, frankly, I don’t track the logic.” Well put Mr. Secretary. And about that $3 billion, that’s roughly the amount the Pentagon estimates GE will need to complete its version of the F-35 engine. Enter the 112th Congress. With the historic election of 2010 sweeping so many ‘Tea Party’-approved fiscal conservatives into office, it would seem this taxpayer-funded GE gravy train may be pulling into the station for the last time. Let’s hope so. Unfortunately, before this congress was seated, $430 million was included for GE’s duplicative engine in the December congressional stopgap spending measure. Nevertheless, the real battle still looms ahead. Lobbyists for the corporate giant have already started making their case. Armed with a misguided message that more federal funding for an alternative engine at this stage will only yield a less-costly final product, GE’s K Street brigade is charging Capitol Hill. That barrage coupled with President Obama’s move last month to hire GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt to head the President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness gives cause for concern. One thing does seem clear: the next turn in this wasteful saga will hinge on the fortitude of the fiscally-conservative freshmen of the 112th Congress. GE and their hired guns are counting on the newly minted Republicans in both chambers (87 in the House and 13 in the Senate) to help maintain the status quo and throw more money at GE’s not-so-little engine that wouldn’t go away. And the American taxpayers who sent them to Washington to fight this very type of waste are depending on them to do otherwise. By Van D. Hipp, Jr. SOURCE: http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/33340 Van D. Hipp Jr. Most recent columns Van D. Hipp Jr. is Chairman of American Defense International, Inc., a Washington, D.C.-based consulting firm specializing in government affairs, business development and public relations. He is the former Deputy Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Army. Since the September 11th attacks on the United States, Mr. Hipp has appeared on the Fox News Channel well over 400 times as an expert commentator on the War on Terror.

	+0

Jim 5804 11253 Holiday	RE: MADE In the USA 2/16/2011 9:29:06 PM
	There are guys right here in my area that run cars on water. Give these guys some of that money they are throwing away and see what happens. A whole new industry blooms and and old one dissolves into dust as it should be. Our government is well known for choosing the wrong side, the wrong horse in a race, the wrong dictator to prop up, the wrong group to support and so on. So why would this be any different? Quote: Hi Jim, I got this article today from the Canada Free Press and thought this thread was the appropriate place for it. Funding for a second, unnecessary, unneeded and unwanted engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighterm General Electric The Alternative Engine – The Not-So-Little Engine That Wouldn’t Go Away By Van D. Hipp Jr. Tuesday, February 15, 2011 The federal government’s penchant for wasting taxpayer money is nothing new. Sadly, it’s what we’ve come to expect. And while the infamous $436 hammers and $600 toilet seats are distant memories, the current crop of federal spending excesses are… well, downright excessive. Some of the best examples from 2010 include: $112 million doled out by the IRS to prisoners filing fraudulent tax returns; over $15 million to help operate an elaborate shooting range outside of Las Vegas that’s losing money; and $2.5 million spent on an advertisement during last year’s Super Bowl to promote the 2010 Census. That doesn’t exactly sound like a government that’s all too concerned about a federal deficit north of $14 trillion and growing. But with a new year underway, a new-look Congress controlling the purse strings and the promise for a good dose of fiscal sanity on Capitol Hill, those days are over – right? We may know soon enough. An early test for the 112th Congress will come in the area of defense spending. At question is funding for a second, unnecessary, unneeded and unwanted engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. Almost 10 years ago, Pratt & Whitney won the competition to produce the engine for the mammoth weapons program – beating out competitor General Electric in the process. And while GE’s engine lost to Pratt & Whitney’s fair and square, you’d never know it. Shockingly, both have continued to receive federal dollars over the past decade to produce two separate engines for one aircraft line. How’s this possible? Welcome to Washington, DC. True, the Pentagon did request funding for both versions of the engine during the first few years in the event the Pratt & Whitney product wasn’t up to snuff. But that period has come and gone, and the Pratt & Whitney engine has met all expectations and then some. In fact, the Pentagon has been the most vocal critic of Congress’ wasteful check-writing to GE for the engine it doesn’t want. Just last summer, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said, “The Bush Administration opposed this engine. The Obama Administration opposes it. We have recommended for several years now against funding this engine, considering it a waste of money. And to argue that we should add another $3 billion in what we regard as waste to protect the $1.5 billion that we believe already has been wasted, frankly, I don’t track the logic.” Well put Mr. Secretary. And about that $3 billion, that’s roughly the amount the Pentagon estimates GE will need to complete its version of the F-35 engine. Enter the 112th Congress. With the historic election of 2010 sweeping so many ‘Tea Party’-approved fiscal conservatives into office, it would seem this taxpayer-funded GE gravy train may be pulling into the station for the last time. Let’s hope so. Unfortunately, before this congress was seated, $430 million was included for GE’s duplicative engine in the December congressional stopgap spending measure. Nevertheless, the real battle still looms ahead. Lobbyists for the corporate giant have already started making their case. Armed with a misguided message that more federal funding for an alternative engine at this stage will only yield a less-costly final product, GE’s K Street brigade is charging Capitol Hill. That barrage coupled with President Obama’s move last month to hire GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt to head the President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness gives cause for concern. One thing does seem clear: the next turn in this wasteful saga will hinge on the fortitude of the fiscally-conservative freshmen of the 112th Congress. GE and their hired guns are counting on the newly minted Republicans in both chambers (87 in the House and 13 in the Senate) to help maintain the status quo and throw more money at GE’s not-so-little engine that wouldn’t go away. And the American taxpayers who sent them to Washington to fight this very type of waste are depending on them to do otherwise. By Van D. Hipp, Jr. SOURCE: http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/33340 Van D. Hipp Jr. Most recent columns Van D. Hipp Jr. is Chairman of American Defense International, Inc., a Washington, D.C.-based consulting firm specializing in government affairs, business development and public relations. He is the former Deputy Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Army. Since the September 11th attacks on the United States, Mr. Hipp has appeared on the Fox News Channel well over 400 times as an expert commentator on the War on Terror.
	May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you, Jim Allen III Skype: JAllen3D Everything You Need For Online Success
	+0

Mary Evelyn 23244 5352 Strawb...	RE: MADE In the USA 2/17/2011 12:15:56 AM
	Quote: There are guys right here in my area that run cars on water. Give these guys some of that money they are throwing away and see what happens. A whole new industry blooms and and old one dissolves into dust as it should be. Our government is well known for choosing the wrong side, the wrong horse in a race, the wrong dictator to prop up, the wrong group to support and so on. So why would this be any different? Oh I agree wholeheartedly Jim. With sufficient financing our good old American ingenuity could probably work miracles in developing a lot of things, but too, there is too much red tape and laws and etc. hindering them also.

	+0

My Links