although, that should be “mes nizzles”, shouldn’t it?
My ancestors left before they worked out the conjugations and case and tense and all.
Sampiro, those of us in the MMP are anxiously awaiting your short story about Scarlett, the time machine and the gay bar in Buckhead. We promise not to share it with the Mitchell estate.
You do still have my e-mail address, don’t you?
I have no particular dog in this fight, but I must say I’m amused that Bricker keeps saying “succession” instead of “secession.”
Not to spoil, but it answers her unasked question from the book, “Why the hell does Ashley keep trying to build a time machine?”
snicker
Gosh, I must have missed the fact that you’re a touchy Euro, given that your “Location” field is blank, as is (struggles, successfully avoids gratuitous insult).
Actually I was thinking more of WWI. Without American intervention, the Allies and the Huns might be hunkering in their trenches to this very day.
I had a dog in this fight but it died in the jaws of logical thinking and authenticated cites. I’ve got to stop responding to threads like this in knee jerk fashion. I hereby surrender except for one thing: Sampiro said it and I second it; the flag everyone gets so hot about is not and never was the Confederate Flag.
Oh, God-not THAT again…
<keels over>
I want to hear more about this time machine.
I always liked:
Save Your Dixie Cups. The South Will Rise Again!
Sampiro, when I was a kid my mom and dad went on a genealogy kick and we went through all the old wills - all my ancestors left their slaves, and their bed and bedding. Yours must have been a stingy bastard not to part with a few straw tick mattresses, eh? 
The thing is, it is in living memory, for extended meanings of the same, and it does sometimes affect daily life. I have a somewhat unusual last name, and I’ve never met another white person who shared it who wasn’t related to me. Met more than a few black people with it; I’m sure you know why. That’s kind of uncomfortable, you know?
A few years ago, my white sister-in-law went a statewide conference for Spanish teachers. When she went to check in, the organizers said, “But you’ve already picked up your materials.” Turns out there was also a black woman at the conference with the same first and (uncommon) last name who was also a Spanish teacher, who’d grown up in the same county that my in-laws are from. It was both kind of neat (that they’d both wound up in the same profession) and a touch awkward.
My father-in-law periodically mentions wanting to go to a family reunion of the black LastNames. My husband tries to point out that they would probably rather not have him there.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but having Southerner say “Bless Your Heart” to you is not condescending. They’re actually saying, “Fuck you” in no uncertain terms.
Forgive me, I haven’t read the whole thread, but this just jumped out at me (and apologies for the slight hijack):
Whoever is arguing this is wrong, plain and simple. The state has differentiated rights which are explicitly granted. In other words - you only ever need a law to restrict you from doing something, not allow you to do something. The Constitution does not grant rights; it guarantees some, but the rights not explicitly guaranteed are not touched either.
This applies to state’s rights in the same way - any right not explicitly granted to the Federal Government is implicitly granted to the individual states; the basis of the Constitution (and the Bill of Rights for that matter) is exactly the opposite of ‘whatever is not mandatory is forbidden’ - whatever is not protected is also allowed unless explicitly dis-allowed.
And where’s our fucking tea, you bastards???
Actually, states don’t have rights. They have powers. Individuals have rights.
Like I said, Irish, though I might’ve zoned out if your list were longer than that.
Nope, just the flag of traitors and scoundrels. Lots of glory in that! :rolleyes:
At the bottom of Boston Harbor, where we left it. You should know that. It was in all the papers, though I doubt it gets as prominent a place in American history texts as it did when I was young. 
:smack:
Knew I was getting something slightly wrong, but couldn’t for the life of me think of the language…
You’re absolutely right, but the concept still pertains. State powers are guaranteed by the Constitution, not limited. It’s a subtle but critical difference.
Not sure I fully agree. By providing a floor of protected individual rights, the Constitution limits the powers of the states as to how they can treat their citizens. By carving out a realm for the federal government it limits the powers of the states to act in certain ways regarding their relationships with other states, or with other foreign governments.
I think you are more trying to say that state powers exist independent of the Constitution, rather than being granted by it. As such the Constitution explicitly does limit state powers.
On one of my first trips to Georgia for business, I was in a more rural portion of the state for several days. One of the administrative assistants at the place I was visiting, on my last day there, declaired that she was glad that I turned out to be “one of those nice Yankees whose ancestors didn’t burn down the South.”
:dubious:
I – politely – informed her that, in fact, one of my ancestors was one of Sherman’s cavalry generals. He had, indeed, burned down the South. A rather wide swath of it, really. He was also vilified as a senator, by DW Griffith, to make the KKK hero of “Birth of a Nation” look better.
It was worth it just to see her mouth gaping open like some overfed koi. Had she not been so stupid about the whole thing, I would have been perfectly content to let that particular sleeping dog lie – 'cause my ancestor apparently was a bit of a carpetbagging bastard, leading to his being portrayed as the “evil senator” less virtuous than the KKK. But damn if I was going to admit as much to that rude wench.