The Brett Kimberlin Saga:

Follow this link to my BLOCKBUSTER STORY of how Brett Kimberlin, a convicted terrorist and perjurer, attempted to frame me for a crime, and then got me arrested for blogging when I exposed that misconduct to the world. That sounds like an incredible claim, but I provide primary documents and video evidence proving that he did this. And if you are moved by this story to provide a little help to myself and other victims of Mr. Kimberlin’s intimidation, such as Robert Stacy McCain, you can donate at the PayPal buttons on the right. And I thank everyone who has done so, and will do so.

Showing posts with label history. Show all posts
Showing posts with label history. Show all posts

Saturday, April 21, 2012

The Seating of Hiram Revels and the Meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment

File:Hiram Rhodes Revels - Brady-Handy-(restored).png
You know, I have told this story several times privately and it occurred to me that it was the perfect kind of thing for my blog, given my general legal and history geekery.  I thought I would tell you about the first black man seated in the Senate, the Reverend Hiram Revels.  This is him at the right.

One of my side projects when I was an undergraduate student was studying the history that surrounded the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment.  I was keenly interested in what the anti-discrimination principle meant to them.  That is why, for instance, I learned so much about Thaddeus Stevens.

And one of the veins I studied was the story of the seating of Hiram Revels.  For a day or two I sat in the library at my school reading the congressional record as they considered the issue and it actually is a fascinating story.

The year was 1870, and this was to be the first year that Mississippi was to be allowed to have representation since the Civil War.  Back in that day, senators were chosen by the state legislature.  That is, instead of choosing your Senator by direct election, the legislature voted for its choice to be your senator.  So when you hear of Abraham Lincoln running against Stephen Douglas, what he actually was doing was he was campaigning for his party as a whole in the state, so that they would have enough power in the legislature to make him the Senator.

That is important because that meant that when Mississippi was let back into representation in Congress, they had two choices of seats to offer Mr. Revels, and it was up to the Mississippi legislature to choose which one they offered.  And whose seat did they give him?

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Obama Flunks History (Again)

Man, how is it that no one in the White House knew this was wrong?

With victory at hand, Lincoln could have sought revenge. He could have forced the South to pay a steep price for their rebellion. But despite all the bloodshed and all the misery that each side had exacted upon the other, and despite his absolute certainty in the rightness of the cause of ending slavery, no Confederate soldier was to be punished, Lincoln ordered.

(Source.)  Um, no, Mr. President.  Just off the top of my head there was Henry Wirz, executed for war crimes at Andersonville.  And I could be wrong, but I think there were others.

Maybe I am just too big of a history geek, but how does he not know this?  I mean Wirz was one of the early precedents for punishment for war crimes after a war, and after the holocaust people would look back at Andersonville with a new set of eyes.  The sight of those soldiers looking literally like walking skeletons took on new meaning:

Take a long look and you will get why there was so much rage at the South after the Civil War.

(Yeah, that's a little off topic, but those who suffered at Andersonville deserved to be remembered).

In Which George Washington Saved the Republic...

Yes, really, he did and not just by killing redcoats.

This was a nice op-ed from President’s Day.

Tuesday, February 2, 2010

Early Draft of the Constitution Found in Philadelphia

This is kind of cool.  Someone found an early draft of the Constitution in Philadelphia.  Really, read it, it’s kind of cool, at least if you are a big history geek like me.

Meanwhile, William Jacobson over at Legal Insurrection has entirely too much fun with the idea.

It does beg the question, though.  If the constitution doesn’t matter, as many liberals claim, then why do we work so hard to preserve an original copy of it in our archives?  Why not just throw it out, if that text is merely an inconvenient anachronism written by dead white men?

Oh, wait, no, no, forget I said that.  I don’t want to give anyone ideas.