Redstate

Posted at 1:47pm on Jun. 11, 2008 With a Rebel Yell: Jim Webb hearts the Confederate States of America.

An attractive Veep for Obama? No, just another dumb guy.

By Mark Kilmer

In 1861, the United States of America went to war after being attacked at Fort Sumter, South Carolina, in April 12 of that year. The war drained the nation's blood until the Confederate States of America surrendered to the U.S.A. in Virginia, at the Appomattox Court House, on April 9, 1865. Those were painful years followed by additional painful years of reconstruction and humiliation. When all is said and done, the war ultimately ended the institution of African slavery in the Confederate States of America and drew them back into the United States, for that we should all be thankful.

Senator Jim Webb (D-Virginia) is not. If he had his druthers, the CSA would have won that war and the several States would have retained the right to allow their citizens to hold slaves. Politico.com writer David Mark does not put it that way in his his article on Webb at that web site yesterday, but it is how it reads.

He [Jim Webb] has suggested many times that while the Confederacy is a symbol to many of the racist legacy of slavery and segregation, for others it simply reflects Southern pride. In a June 1990 speech in front of the Confederate Memorial at Arlington National Cemetery, posted on his personal website, he lauded the rebels’ “gallantry,” which he said “is still misunderstood by most Americans.”

Webb, a descendant of Confederate officers, also voiced sympathy for the notion of state sovereignty as it was understood in the early 1860s, and seemed to suggest that states were justified in trying to secede.

“Most Southern soldiers viewed the driving issue to be sovereignty rather than slavery,” he said. “Love of the Union was palpably stronger in the South than in the North before the war — just as overt patriotism is today — but it was tempered by a strong belief that state sovereignty existed prior to the Constitution and that it had never been surrendered.”

The sovereignty was the power to enslave human beings if the State so chose. Love of the Union was palpably weaker in the South than in the north as the war started, and that is self-evident. The South split. And, Webb argues, the war was in part fought over the right of the Slave States to split from the United States of America if they so opted. But I do not mean this or any subsequent discussion to continue that war. We're here to look at Jim Webb.

Jim Webb has been a rather dunderheaded spokesperson for Barack Obama, and he is considered a short-lister in Barry's veep musings.

Read On….

Posted in 2008 | confederacy | Obama | Slavery | Webb — Comments (100)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 10:19am on May 24, 2008 Slavery in America: 2008

By Erick

I have an article in the Macon Telegraph, my local paper, this morning about modern American slavery. It's a problem we don't like to talk about, but it is a growing problem in this country.

Because it is wrapped up in growing libertine values about sex and prostitution, the problem is frequently ignored. I would respectfully submit that we cannot turn a blind eye to the problem.

The most common route into slavery is kidnapping and smuggling. In 2006, the Department of Justice charged nine people connected to an international sex trafficking ring. The ring smuggled women into the United States either with promises of a new life or against their will. The women were forced to work in brothels, usually in Asian themed massage parlors or spas. The network ran throughout the United States. The profits were funneled back to the Northwest and funded Asian organized crime operations.

Between 2005 and 2008, there have been numerous raids across the nation turning up the same pattern: Women held against their will who are forced to perform sex acts under the cover of giving massages. The women are frequently abused or drugged and are told repeatedly that if they seek help or talk to the police they or their families back home will be harmed.

A Clayton County raid two years ago found a significant number of the women were illegal aliens smuggled across the border and forced to work. Fulton and Gwinnett counties have found the same pattern.

How can Macon be wholly unique - no slaves here, just sex? In fact, it is no different here, despite some in this community who would say "it's just sex between consenting adults." The weight of all the data shows at least one of the individuals is not consenting.

"Legalize prostitution," is the most frequent retort. The Netherlands has legalized it, Australia has legalized it, New Zealand has, Sweden has. It is time for a new argument. Those countries are now at the top of the slave importation list. In fact, all of these countries, libertine symbols for the pro-prostitution crowd, have begun dramatically curbing or ending legal prostitution because of the connection between legal prostitution and increases in human trafficking.

You can read the whole thing here (scroll down to the bottom).

Posted in Culture | prostitution | Slavery — Comments (38)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 8:52pm on Apr. 14, 2008 In Retrospect: The 3/5ths Clause of the Constitution

By Martin A. Knight

And Now For Something Completely Different ...

liberalrepublican's comment here on the Framers of the Constitution tsk-tsking their ignominy in "signing a document that says that recognizes and legitimizes slavery and counts a slave as 60% man ..." reminded me of an experience I had sometime in the not-so-distant past - especially after reading simpson316 say it's "far better than nothing."

My response to that is ... no. It would have been much better if slaves had not been counted at all.

I remember telling a black liberal friend I was having a friendly (Right V Left) argument with that I wish slaves had counted for far less than 3/5ths of a human being when the Constitution was written. I said that 0% actually would have been the ideal, but 20% would have been okay with me. The conversation got a little less friendly (I got called an "Uncle Tom") until I gave him a small history lesson ... and he ended up agreeing with me.

The 3/5ths Clause, ultimately, was a Good Thing. And if it had been the 1/5ths Clause, it would have been even better.

Of course, you need to think beyond the initial Outrage! at how one human being could be considered to be worth just 3/5ths of another human being to see what I (and GOPaisano) mean.

Not many people who huff and puff and level the accusing finger at the nation's founders about it seem to be aware that the Slave States' representatives at the Constitutional Convention were the ones demanding that slaves be counted as full persons, while the Free states' spokesmen were the ones demanding that they not be counted at all.

Posted in 0.60 clause | Archived | Constitution | History | Slavery — Comments (29) / Email this page » / Read More »