[gutzmank]

The value of a degree is entirely subjective. It depends on the reasons you want the degree and the effort you expend in obtaining it. No one can tell you how your degree will benefit you.

[gutzmank]

I fear that I don’t, although you can find the cases in which the traditional law of nuisance was essentially abandoned in any introductory Property Law casebook.

[gutzmank]

No, I think the traditional view is correct.

[gutzmank]

Again, you are entirely welcome.

On the Christians of the contemporary Middle East, I highly recommend Dalrymple’s _From the Holy Mountain_.. It is the story of one traveler’s trek from Mount Athos through all the countries of the Levant to most distant Egypt. By turns, it is inspirational, fascinating, and heartbreaking.

[gutzmank]

Yes, Aaron, including in my essay “Lincoln as Jeffersonian: The Colonization Chimera,” which appears in Brian Dirck, ed., _Lincoln Emancipated: The President and the Politics of Race_ (Northern Illinois University Press, 2007).

[gutzmank]

I find it hard to believe that there was a ban on doing so before. As it’s a defendant’s right to demand a jury trial, I’d have thought he could waive it.

[gutzmank]

You’re welcome.

[gutzmank]

You’re 100% welcome.

[gutzmank]

You’re welcome.

[gutzmank]

I agree with evassar92 that it could be done via a convention or an amendment and couldn’t be done by the Federal Government.

[gutzmank]

There were large numbers of Loyalists in Upcountry South Carolina, the Hudson River Valley of New York, and the large cities of New York and Philadelphia.

[gutzmank]

That he always intended to do what he ultimately did do is a non-falsifiable claim. The chief problem is that there is no evidence to support the idea that he was a secret abolitionist in, say, 1845 other than the fact that in 1863, he issued the Emancipation Proclamation and by the end of his life, he had shepherded the 13th Amendment to adoption.

I find it incredible that Lincoln always was an abolitionist and wisely never acted like one. (Not only did he not act like one, but he attended minstrel shows (whose subject matter was mockery of blacks’ speech, appearance, walking, etc.) commonly, used the n-word on several recorded occasions, etc.) In fact, I tend to accept Phil Magness’s argument that Lincoln never abandoned his desire to deport all American blacks from the country–that is, to “colonize” them abroad.

[gutzmank]

No, it had nothing to do with that.

Northern states wanted slaves to count 100% for taxation purposes and 0% for representation purposes.
Southern states wanted slaves to count 0% for taxation purposes and 100% for representation purposes.
3/5 for both purposes was the compromise.

It wasn’t a philosophical statement. No one denied that slaves were human.

[gutzmank]

John Steele Gordon and Robert E. Wright both have well-received books on the general subject. I can’t personally vouch for them, however.

[gutzmank]

The Confederation could not pay for an embassy to Spain, could not pay the interest on its loans, could not pay the soldiers what they had been promised, could not raise troops, etc. In short, it was next to worthless. This isn’t to say that amendment could not have worked, but surely the situation in 1787 was untenable.

I had never heard of those authors prior to reading your query, other than seeing one of their books’ titles mentioned. I’m sure there has been no peer review: who are their peers?

[Author]

Posts