my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » Why is the Mississipi State Tax Commission closed today? (Page 2)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Author Topic: Why is the Mississipi State Tax Commission closed today? Aaron Mehocic Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 804 From: New Castle, PA, USA Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-18-2005 09:33 PM                     Although Lee was in command of the Army of Northern Virginia (the largest and best equiped of southern forces during the Civil War), he did not loose the war for the Confederacy. The South lost the war based on a number of miscalculations and in the end, the odds were just not in their favor. Lee is celebrated by many Americans - north, south, east and west - because of his character, poise, and way he lived his life. He was born into a wealthy Virginia family, yet his father was a drunk who abandoned his wife and kids. Lee was quite smart and graduated second in the West Point class of 1829. During the Mexican War, Lee served as a scout and located a path through an ancient lava flow prior to the final assault on Mexico City by General Winfield Scott. When abolitionist John Brown attempted a slave uprising by capturing the gun factory at Harper's Ferry in 1859, Lee led a detachment of Marines in resecuring the facility. Yet in all this, Lee held duty, honor, country not only as his motto, but as the hallmark of his personal traits. Books have been written about his Civil War service, but what he did after the war was more important. Facing charges of treason, Lee turned himself into Federal authorities on his own knowing full well he may be executed. He also asked other former Confederate commanders to do the same. Lee advocated and supported the new ammeddments to the Constitution abolishing slavery and black suffrage. Later he became president of Washington (now Washington & Lee) University in Virginia, where he rehired committed faculty and restocked the war-ravaged library collection. Lee died in October of 1870. Thats why Lee is celebrated today. His human actions speak louder than his military might ever did.  |  IP: Logged Michael Schaffer "Where is the Boardwalk Hotel?" Posts: 4143 From: Boston, MA Registered: Apr 2002 posted 01-19-2005 02:25 AM                        Thanks for the detailed background info. Still, he may have been a nice guy as such, but didn't he work on breaking up the US? What is the motivation behind dedicating a holiday to a man who technically appears to be a traitor? How did he hold duty and country high and yet played a very active role in an attempt to deconstruct his country? He didn't fight for the USA, but for the CSA. Why did he advocate the abolition of slavery, but led people into battle and death in a conflict at least partially triggered because his side did not want to abolish slavery?  |  IP: Logged Dustin Mitchell Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1865 From: Mondovi, WI, USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 01-19-2005 02:40 AM                     Anyone want to take bets on how long before this thread is locked? In any event, at the time many people felt more loyalty to their state than they did to the USA as a whole, Lee was one of them. Although I never have fully bought the 'state's right's not slavery' argument for the Civil War (hint: the term 'state's right's' didn't become popularized as a caue for the Civil War until the 1880's), it was a factor. Only about half of the South seceded with South Carolina. States like Virginia stayed in the Union until Lincoln tried to use force to keep the seceeding states in the union, only then did they also secede. When Virginia seceded after the battle at Fort Sumpter Lincoln asked Lee to lead the Union army. He would have accepted but he would not fight against his native Virginia.  |  IP: Logged Michael Schaffer "Where is the Boardwalk Hotel?" Posts: 4143 From: Boston, MA Registered: Apr 2002 posted 01-19-2005 02:58 AM                        Why lock the thread? These are not political arguments, but historical questions. Or are some states still planning to secede?  |  IP: Logged Dustin Mitchell Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1865 From: Mondovi, WI, USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 01-19-2005 03:10 AM                     The debate over the issues that led to the Civil War is still raging today, Mississippi's Martin Luther King Jr/Robert E. Lee Day and Alabama confederate flag issue are just two examples.  |  IP: Logged Michael Schaffer "Where is the Boardwalk Hotel?" Posts: 4143 From: Boston, MA Registered: Apr 2002 posted 01-19-2005 03:24 AM                        Flag issue? Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't Texas the only state which can vote itself legally out of the US? Isn't any secession activity by definition illegal? Or were the Confederate states technically entitled to declare themselves out of the union? Whatever happened back then, is there any number of people anywhere who seriously wish to split their state from the US?  |  IP: Logged Chris Hipp Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1462 From: Mesquite, Tx (east of Dallas) Registered: Jul 2003 posted 01-19-2005 02:31 PM                     There are several radical groups that want to try to convince a state to secede, but I dont think any of them will convince any state to do it.  |  IP: Logged Aaron Mehocic Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 804 From: New Castle, PA, USA Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-19-2005 02:34 PM                     The idea of state succession was not a new idea to the generation that fought the Civil War. Late in the proceedings at the Constitutional Convention of 1787, South Carolina delegate Charles C. Pinckney offered a resolution to be included in the final draft that any state could legally succeed from the Union if it felt the Federal government was too "oppressive". Benjamin Franklin personally cornered Pinckney in another room at the convention and advised the younger delegate to drop it . . . or else. The final draft to the Constitution bears no legally binding clause permitting state succession. Abe Lincoln used this point as reason enough to "invade" the southern states with a Federal (Union) army. Two other succession events from the Early American Republic: During the War of 1812, all of the New England states suffered economic downturns as a result of lack of trade with Europe. At the Hartford Convention of 1814, these states threatened to leave the Union since the Federal government did not take into account their economic well-being when declaring war on their premier trading partner - Britain. Unfortunately for the New England plotters it was too little too late since the war had turned and America was winning on the Niagara front. Cooler heads prevailed at this convention as well, and New England stayed loyal to the United States. In 1832, South Carolina evoked the Nullification Act which sought to "null and void" any Federal law in which state leaders disagreed with. Cotton planters blamed low cotton prices on Federal tariffs designed specifically to choke the southern agricultural economy. When South Carolina officials refused to collect the tariff, President Andrew Jackson threatend to send troops to arrest the ring leaders and restore order. This, however, was seen as an insult to ALL southerners since Jackson was from Tennessee and his Vice President, John Calhoun, was a native South Carolinian himself. Calhoun sided with his state's officials and resigned in protest from the Vice Presidency (though newspapers at the time claimed he was preparing for a Senate run). Regardless, Jackson and Calhoun's friendship ended abruptly . . . and so too did the Nullification Act. Today, no state in its right mind will ever argue succesion from the Union. Its brought up more for a laugh than anything serious. However, the Quebecois Succession Movement in Canada inches closer and closer to its goal of disolving the bonds between Quebec and the rest of Canada. Many believe that the next refferendum vote will be enough since Quebec's succession becomes more and more popular in the 40 or so years since first suggested. We'll see what happens.  |  IP: Logged Michael Schaffer "Where is the Boardwalk Hotel?" Posts: 4143 From: Boston, MA Registered: Apr 2002 posted 01-19-2005 03:28 PM                        quote: Aaron Mehocic Cotton planters blamed low cotton prices on Federal tariffs designed specifically to choke the southern agricultural economy. Was that true, and if so, why would they try to choke the economy of the southern states?  |  IP: Logged Dustin Mitchell Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1865 From: Mondovi, WI, USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 01-19-2005 04:14 PM                     While it is true that when it was admitted as a state Texas was alowed special provisions in its constitution for sucession (or, interestingly enough, the ability to split itself up into as many as 5 seperate states), neither of these provisions exist any longer, they were removed after the Civil War.  |  IP: Logged Aaron Mehocic Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 804 From: New Castle, PA, USA Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-19-2005 06:09 PM                     It wasn't so much that Federal authorities had it out for the southern states and hoped to destroy their agrarian base, but what one needs to remember here is that trade tariffs were the only real way the early American Republic could raise money. The Federal income tax you and I pay did not come into creation until 1913. Prior to that the government operated on a finite amount of cash usually generated by riping off the states. The South Carolina Legislature believed the Federal government was being "oppressive" by charging a tax to ship their product (cotton) out of state, but no tax was paid by northern factory owners who used that cotton to make cloths or other items. The Nullification Act of 1832 sought to strengthen the planter's political and economic clout, while not damaging their business relationships with Yankee industrialists. Essentially, the northeners got what they wanted and the southerners didn't have to pay the Federal government to send it to them.  |  IP: Logged William Leland III Master Film Handler Posts: 336 From: Charleston, SC, Registered: Aug 2002 posted 01-19-2005 07:56 PM                        I never heard of Robert E. Lee day. they never mentioned this school. you think living in the south i would of heard of this.  |  IP: Logged Tao Yue Expert Film Handler Posts: 209 From: Princeton, NJ Registered: Apr 2001 posted 01-19-2005 10:34 PM                        Certainly export taxes on cotton (and the lack thereof on Northern manufactured goods) were a concern. But the tariff on imported manufactured goods is the more classical case of Southern complaints over trade policies, as Southerners felt it amounted to double taxation. Cotton going to Britain was taxed, then incoming goods from Britain were also taxed. While export taxes were also a concern, Also, isn't it generally considered that the 1998 vote on Québec secession was their last hurrah? They didn't even manage a majority, not to mention a supermajority; the Supreme Court later ruled that a regular majority vote would not be binding; and continued immigration would continue to dilute the Québecois vote. On Robert E. Lee, there's talk in military history circles that he is overrated as a general. Needless to say, this view is highly controversial.  |  IP: Logged Jim Ziegler Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 753 From: West Hollywood, CA Registered: Jul 99 posted 01-19-2005 11:04 PM                     When Robert E. Lee became a U.S. Army officer, he took the following oath - " I do solemnly swear or affirm (as the case may be) to bear true faith and allegiance to the United States of America, and to serve them honestly and faithfully against all their enemies or opposers whomsoever, and to observe and obey the orders of the president of the United States of America, and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to the articles of war." By taking up arms against the United States, he violated that oath. What he did after the war notwithstanding, he betrayed his country and surrendered his honor. If anyone is interested, the historical background of that oath can be found here: http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/apj/apj02/win02/keskel.html  |  IP: Logged Aaron Mehocic Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 804 From: New Castle, PA, USA Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-20-2005 10:28 PM                     There is no question Lee violated the oath as written for his historical period of service. In legal terms he is a traitor to the United States of America and WAS possibly subject to court martial and execution as such. Fortunately for Lee, the post-war Republican party was too factionalized between the Radicals and Regulars to worry about the guilt or innocence of the supreme military commander of the vanquished Confederate government. I merely suggested in my previous posts that Lee's humanity to his fellow citizens speaks volumes as to how he lived his life. As to Lee being over rated as a military commander, I will argue that there may be some truth to that as well. Prior to the Battle of Gettysburg in July, 1863, Lee won every fight in which he commanded troops. Exactly one year earlier at Battle of Malvern Hill, Confederate forces attacking on vague orders from the general "accidentally" broke the center of the Federal line and caused a few Yankee commanders an afternoon of grief and fear. Lee had no idea his men would be so successfull, yet in successive battles, he constantly looked for another repeat opportunity to present itself so this time he and his army could capitalize. At Gettysburg, Lee felt he had that opportunity, but, alas, he was wrong . . . and 10,000 men died in a little over 45 minutes. One more miscalculation on Lee's part that I can think of off the top of my head was his inability to judge Union General Ulyses Grant's battlefield strategy (particularly at Battle of Spottsylvania Court House in May, 1864 and again at the Battle of Cold Harbor in June, 1864), as it related to other Federal commanders he faced previously. When Grant took the pounding that he did after opening up the North Anna Campaign resulting in the Battle of the Wilderness, Lee expected a northern retreat back to the safty of the Washington DC defensive line. Two months and 30,000 casualties later Grant was knocking on the Confederate capitol city of Richmond's door. I don't think Jefferson Davis and other Rebel leaders were too happy about that, and I've read some modern historians' views on this subject. Needless to say, Bobby Lee didn't get steller reviews on this. Oh, and there was the plan to escape into the mountains, link up with Joe Johnson's army, defeat Grant, then turn and face Sherman . . . but I wont go there.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.