Lincoln (Part 1)

"We desired the court to have held that they were citizens so far at least as to entitle them to a hearing as to whether they were free or not; and then, also, that they were in fact and in law really free.  Could we have had our way, the chances of these black girls, ever mixing their blood with that of white people, would have been diminished at least to the extent that it could not have been without their consent.  But Judge Douglass is delighted to have them decided to be slaves, and not human enough to have a hearing, even if they were free, and thus left subject to the forced concubinage of their masters, and liable to become the mothers of mulattoes in spite of themselves--the very state of case that produces nine tenths of all the mulattoes-- all the mixing of the blood in the nation."

In this passage Lincoln is making a point regarding keeping women as slaves simply because they did not "originate" in this nation.  Lincoln is stating that even if these girls were freed, they would end up in the same situation. Lincoln is also pointing out that although bloods are not supposed to be mixed, it is fact the white slave owners that end up taking advantage of these women and impregnating them against their will.  This is the classic scenario where we are telling the Slave owners/traders that they can do what they want with the girls as long as they are not public with it.  Many mulatto babies are made within a household because the men could not control their urges, but the women are expected to do whatever they are told.


B.  Twentieth-century artist Romare Bearden presents a stylized depiction of the odyssey of captives from Africa to the United States. The ship shows the low decks that were constructed on slaving vessels so that the maximum number of African captives could be transported. A black man's silhouette frames a view of the African continent, a U.S. flag, and seabirds thought to symbolize the souls of Africans returning to their homeland.

Civil Disobedience (part 2)

Elizabeth Cady Stanton: " He has never permitted her to exercise her inalienable right to the elective franchise.  He has compelled her to submit to laws, in the formation of which she had no voice.  He has withheld form her rights which are given to the most ignorant and degraded men-both natives and foreigners. Having deprived her of this first right of a citizen, the elective franchise, thereby leaving her without representation in the halls of legislation, he has opposed her on all sides"

Stanton is pointing out what is painfully obvious during these times, that all men and women were NOT created equal.  It is a known fact that women had to fight for many rights that all men were given like the right to vote.  What Stanton is saying that the right to vote, especially on laws, was reserved for men alone.  Why should women have the right to vote? Well, that can be answered simply by acknowledging that women have to abide by these laws as well.  This passage relates to the      Reading because it displays how civil disobedience was the only way to attain the rights that women were entitled to.

I chose this passage because I feel as though this still rings true to an extent.  I'm not saying that women don't have the same rights as men, but they certainly don't hold the same weight or capacity as those that men carry.  A women's opinion is not valued as much as a mans is.

Frederick Douglass: "He says he does not wish to coerce us, but he thinks we had better go!  What right has he to tell us to go?  We have as much right to stay here as he has.  I don't care if you did throw up your caps for him when he came to this city--I don't care if he did give you 'his heart on the outside of the City Hall and his hand on the inside.'  I have as much right to stay here as he has!"

This passage deals directly with the oppression of slaves and the trouble they had when it came to the having a voice in the electoral vote.  He is fighting for the right to be in the specific area and be heard during the vote.  Slaves make an easier target for oppression since it is easier to control what is supposed to ultimately be a slave owners property.    He is fighting for the right to be
.'
This passage hit close to home because women have been thru this with women's rights
.
 

Civil Disobedience (Part 1)

Henry David Thoreau:
    "Law never made men a whit more just; and, by means of their respect for it, even the well-disposed are daily made the agents of injustice,  A common and natural result  of an undue respect for law is, that you may see a file of soldiers, colonel, captain, corporal, privates, powder-monkeys, and all, marching in admirable order over hill and dale to the wars, against their wills, ay, against their common sense and consciences, which makes it very steep marching indeed, and produces a palpitation of the heart.  They have no doubt that it is a damnable business in which they are concerned; they are all peaceably inclined.  Now, what are they? Men at all? or small movable forts and magazines, at the service of some unscrupulous man in power?"

    In this passage, Thoreau is stating that the law does not make a man more just, because without even realizing it, service men are made to be a major part of the injustice that the government imposes on the military.  These men will obey by marching to these wars, knowing that their government may not be one hundred percent right for declaring or participating in war.  They become robots who simply follow rules and directions because they are taught that this is right and patriotic.  By doing this, their sense of self is diminished.  They become pawns in a game of chess played by the government.

    I chose this passage because I don't always agree with those who voluntarily join the military.  While it IS honorable for a person to want to sere his/her country, sometimes they are forced to do things which they disagree upon morally but don't want to go against a government who has "stood by them" for the sake of "liberty and freedom."  I don't necessarily agree with decisions made by our Presidents or governments, but like most people, what can I really do about it? Nothing, which is what most Americans do.

Two of the passages "Christian Arguments against Slavery" and "Plea for the Suppression of the Slave Trade" both relate to the writings of Thoreau because they both argue that if one does not partake in an act, it cannot exist.  For instance, with the Christian Arguments, they state that a man should not be denied his rights to be free.  Christians should not encourage slave trade activities.  Also, I have to agree with the statement made in the Plea for Suppression that states that the slave trade cannot exist if slave owners did not trade slaves!  This has to be the most simple and clear statement thus far.  Obviously, if no one demanded slaves, there would be no market for it.  Although this thought would not end slavery, it would be a stepping stone towards it.  This relates to Thoreau because he is stating that if soldiers did not partake in war, there would be none to fight.

The Anti-Federalists - Post #6

Richard Henry Lee's Letters from the Federal Farmer (1787), Letter Iv 

"The trials by jury is very important in another point of view.  It is essential in every free country, that common people should have a part and share of influence, in the judicial as well as legislative department.  To hold open to them the offices of senators, judges and offices to fill which an expensive education is required cannot answer any valuable purposes for them; they are not in a situation to be brought forward and to fill those offices; these, and most of the offices of any considerable importance, will be occupied by the few.  The few, the well born, etc. as Mr. Adams calls them, in judicial decisions as well as in legislation, are generally disposed, and very naturally too, to favor those of their own description."

In this passage, Lee is stating the obvious, that most minority and/or poor people cannot occupy these important positions because they simply do not have the means to accomplish the educational requirements for the judge and legislative departments.  It is clear that this is still present and prevalent to this day.  I cannot honestly say that I have not witnessed my fair share of minorities holding these powerful and important positions/roles, but I can say that the "few" or the elite are still very dominant in this area. What Lee is trying to say is, why make it appear as if ANYONE can attain these positions as if it were truly up for grabs allowing for a trial to be truly fair and honest.  

It is up to the "people" to look out for their own kind.  Unfortunately, racism still exists in the judicial system as well as the government.  I will not say that ALL politicians and judges are looking out for their own but how many times have we all witnessed the unjust actions of a judge who did not favor the same description of that person being tried. 
I also believe that a person has control over his/her own fate.  If a poor minority truly WANTS to become someone of importance, they will stop at nothing to achieve this.
 

Differences between horizontal and vertical federalism

Vertical federalism means that the Federal government is granted power by the Constitution oer defense, monetary policy, foreign policy and the regulation of inter-state commerce.  The States are left to govern themselves.  Horizontal federalism states that no branch of the government can lend itself to another.  This statement means that no parties within the government should coincide when, in fact, they MUST work together in order for the government to work as a whole.

The Constitution and the Federalist (Part 2) (post #5)

James Madison's Federalist Essays - The Federalist No. 10 (1787 - 1788)
    The passage that I chose from this essay is as follows: "The instability, injustice, and confusion introduced into the public councils, have, in truth, been the mortal diseases under which popular governments have everywhere perished; as they continue to be the favorite and fruitful topics from which the adversaries to liberty derive their most specious declamations."
    In this passage, Madison is stating that previous, and certainly current, governments will fail inevitably due to the structure within the government.  The instability, injustice and confusion that have been injected into our government systems have been the major downfall of most.  These imperfections are used by those who wish to see the government fail as fuel.  They use the weaknesses that they know exist to turn a government against itself.  These, Madison states, are the diseases that spread amongst those who are against "liberty for all".
   In my opinion, Madison has a valid and proven point.  Think about how a disease, an infectious disease, affects a population as a whole.  It works from the inside, spreading its ugly side effects to those surrounding and eventually can, and has, demolished populations.  Madison is saying that without stability and justice, a government will undoubtedly fail as our adversaries would wish.  It is up to the government as a whole to try to fight against what will cause it to perish.  Unfortunately, when the public sees a weakness, it is often used as a negative force to get results that could not have been achieved previously.


Alexander Hamilton's Federalist Essays ' The Federalist No. 15
   The passage that I chose is as follows:  If, therefore, the measures of the Confederacy cannot be executed without the intervention of the particular administrations, there will be a little prospect of their being executed at all.  The rulers of the respective members, whether  they have a constitutional right to do it or not, will undertake to judge of the propriety of the measures themselves.  They will consider the conformity of the thing proposed or required to their immediate interests or aims; the momentary conveniences or inconveniences that would attend its adoption."  
   In this passage, Hamilton is discussing the way that laws are viewed and executed.  He is pointing out the clear separation of the Confederate states at this point.  Hamilton states that although each state knows the law and how it should be punishable, should it be disobeyed or broken, they will take it upon themselves to make whatever decision they deem necessary at the moment.  They will not conform to having to follow a chain of command or protocol because it may or may not be convenient for them at the given time.
   I feel like Hamilton is trying to say that each state, as an individual as well as a confederate state, as part of the constitution, should work harmoniously as one nation to execute the laws and follow that same protocol for punishment.  No one state should be deciding to do something other than what the other states agreed to as a nation.

   

The Constitution and the Federalist (Part 1) (post #4)

     I chose Art. III of the Declaration. "The said states hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defence, the security of their Liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretence whatever."

    In my opinion, at the time that this was written, the general thought was that all states were to be independent as states, meaning, they had their own laws and autonomy.  The union of the states was for the purpose to defend each other should the need arise.  In other words, they could remain as they were, being independent but  would join during wars.  Eventually, all 50 states joined the United States and the agenda is as it was set out to be. 

     All of our states abide by a set of common law within their own state but still must abide by federal law, which is voted on by Congress members that each state votes (appoints) into office.  This union hasn't changed much with the exception of the common laws.

  
"Obama Pans GOP Supercommittee Idea ( from the "Roll Call" link) by Emily Pierce, October 8, 2013."
    
I don't really understand politics much, however, I do understand clearly why Obama wants to raise the credit limit on spending for the United States.  I don't necessarily agree with his decision, but I do hope that this issue is resolved quickly.  His statement regarding default makes more sense than any GOP official could understand.  Think about you as a borrower and how one late payment can drastically and negatively affect your credit worthiness.  This is the same issue that Obama is trying to raise awareness on.  I don't know if his solution will work but I hope that an agreement can be made for the government to continue to function.

The American Revolution - Post #3

The passage that I chose from The Declaration of Independence is as follows:  "That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." The passage that I chose from Thomas Paine is as follows: "Man has no property in man; neither has any generation a property in the generations to follow." (Paine, Rights of Man-Part One, 1791)

I chose both of ese passages because they are both similar in my opinion.  The Declaration is stating that the governments that will protect man's rights are within man itself.  In other words, it is stating that without a Man, there is no government.  Man has the ultimate power when it comes to governing because other men give them that so called power.

Paine's passage is stating that although the government is run by men, at no man has the right to tell anoer what he may and may not do.  I honestly believe that Thomas Paine was directly referring to this passage in the Declaration.

Paine mentions "Every age and generation must be as free to act for itself, in all cases, as the ages and generation which preceded it"

I interpret the Declaration passage as stating that the government and he men that sit in it should follow in their forefathers footsteps and allow the government standards to remain the same, never change and continue as it has been.  Paine's reading says e opposite, in my opinion.  I feel as though he is stating that although we should allow the government to rule, we should also allow for growth and change with the generation that it is present in.

Both of ese passages relate to the class because in me we learn how the political system worked before our generation.  Many things have changed that would not have been allowed in the generations preceding ours solely because of the government's ability to adapt to the needs and wants of the people who are voting.