Posted on 11/26/2005 9:36:29 PM PST by Mier
I confess to be a Lincoln lover, and a Confederate/rebel "disliker," yep.
Don't remember that, but I'm honored if it said that. The author challenged my view that Lincoln was an avowed Christian after 1863. I stand by my sources. If he doesn't like them, he doesn't have to accept them, and we'll see when we get to heaven. Since I know the reviewer, and since we have corresponded since, and since he has never made any derogatory remark about our treatment of Lincoln, I think we're pretty right-on with what we say.
Complete and utter nonsense. But let's take this one step at a time. How about this for a start. What is the source for his claim that Lincoln shut down 300 newspapers? I've looked and looked and I can't find any evidence to support his claim at all. None, zero, nada, zip, zilch. That should be an easy one, so perhaps you can let us all know what DiLusional had to support his asinine claim, what with his crap being so well documented and all?
What justification is there to ignore the constitution?
So if the confederates were so onerously despotic to their own members and citizenry, how did they maintain cohesion?
In part, fear. The confederacy was controlled by thousands of appointed office holders called habeas corpus commissioners. They had the power to order anyone jailed without trial for suspected acts of disloyalty, real or imagined. It's been claimed that there were upwards of 15,000 political prisoners jailed under Lincoln. Evidence shows that over 5,000 were jailed under Davis. On a per capita basis you were more likely to be jailed with out trial in the confederacy than in the United States.
And that justified murdering almost 200 men and boys?
Some? Or most? Or almost all?
Other suppressions may have been done simply because the paper or its editors criticized the way the administration was handling the war or thought the South was correct in its interpretation of the Constitution.
Which ones? And I notice that you didn't point out that the New York World and the New York Journal of Commerce where suspended it was for suspected financial fraud. And you also failed to mention that almost every one of those papers published throughout the war. Finally, if you posted this in support of Tommy DiLusional's claim that Lincoln shut down 300 newspapers, well, you're still 272 newspapers short.
All history (not written by supporters of the southron myth machine) will admit that the Kansas-Missouri border war started well before the outbreak of the rebellion and that the supporters of slavery were just as brutal as were the supporters of abolition. The first sack of Lawrence brought on the Pottowattomie Massacres which caused the massacre at Marias des Cygne which resulted in the Battle of Osawatomie and so forth and so on. And once the rebellion began the bloodshed on both sides got worse. So please don't try to paint Quantrell and Bloody Bill Anderson and their ilk as simple southern farmboys forced to commit acts against their will. They were blood thirsty psychotics who loved every minute of the misery and death that they caused. And there were more than a few just like them on the Union side.
From Link:
Suppression of these editors began early in the war. For example, in August of 1861, the Christian Observer was closed by the U.S. marshal in Philadelphia. (62) At the same time, a federal grand jury in New York cited the Journal of Commerce, the Daily News, the Day-Book, the weekly Freeman's Journal, and the Brooklyn Eagle for the "frequent practice of encouraging the rebels now in arms against the Federal Government." This was followed by an order from the Postmaster General forbidding the mailing of these newspapers. (63)
if you posted this in support of Tommy DiLusional's claim that Lincoln shut down 300 newspapers, well, you're still 272 newspapers short.
Still trying to get others to do your homework for you? I suggest that you ask DiLorenzo himself. He can be reached over the Internet.
Here's some additional information for you:
The same day the Jeffersonian was sacked, a secessionist newspaper in Easton was mobbed, and a publisher in Haverhill, Massachusetts, was tarred and feathered by a mob.
And ...
In July of 1862 military officials suppressed the circulation of the Quincy Herald on the premise that it encouraged the work of rebel guerillas in western Illinois. Pro-union mobs also shut several papers, including the Bloomington Times, through intimidation or the outright destruction of offices and printing apparatus.
And you also failed to mention that almost every one of those papers published throughout the war.
Kind of hard to publish if your printing press is destroyed. Perhaps some papers were published again once their publishers, editors, and proprietors were freed from prison. But they were no doubt under threat of being jailed again if they published something in sympathy with the South or something against the Lincoln Administration.
When faced with presure from the public, Lincoln did occasionally back down on a paper closure.
In June of that year [1863] General Ambrose Burnside, in command of the department of the northwest, unilaterally suppressed the [Chicago] Times, as well as the Jonesboro Gazette "on account of the repeated expression of disloyal and incendiary statements." Residents of Chicago responded with a mass meeting of twenty thousand and demanded free speech. The Illinois House of Representatives passed a resolution condemning Burnside's order, and the next day President Lincoln revoked it.
And from an old post of PeaRidge's:
A mob of Federal soldiers demolished the offices of the Democratic Standard in Washington, DC, after it editorialized about military blunders during the Battle of First Manassas. This same thing happened to the Bangor Democrat when a Unionist mob completely destroyed the Maine paper’s printing facilities and demanded the hanging of the editor.
And this is unconstitutional how?
Still trying to get others to do your homework for you? I suggest that you ask DiLorenzo himself. He can be reached over the Internet.
I'd rather ask you, you're the one claiming Tommy's BS is so well documented.
Kind of hard to publish if your printing press is destroyed.
Ah yes, all those printing presses you claim that were destroyed by federal troops. Or was it mobs? You're story keeps changing.
Seward could have been a member of today's MSM.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, September 17, 1861.
JOHN A. KENNEDY, Esq.,
Superintendent of Police, New York.
DEAR SIR: I have received your letter of the 14th, relative to the National Zeitung and M. C. Stanley. In reply I have to state that if you will furnish me with the names of one or two persons whose arrest would be likely to produce a proper effect upon the course of that paper I will communicate a decision upon the subject.
I am, very truly, yours,
WILLIAM H. SEWARD
Have you checked his bibliography? Most of his writings I have read have clear documented sources.
Well,I'm not fond of d*mn Yankees either, so I guess that just about evens it out.
Documentation please. NOW look who is putting out a solid crock of manure.......
Mostly men, very fewboys, and hell YES it was justified!
The "redlegs" sure didn't have a problem with murdering Southerners of any age! (or gender)
You have to wonder if all these "patriots" who sneer when they use word "yankee" are the types to cringe when Yankee Doodle Dandy is played. George Washington and all the other revolutions were sneered at and called "yankees" by the Brits and every American-hating foreign body likes to use the word "yankees" in a similar condescending, sneering tone. They should move to France or Mexico, they'd be right at home with all the other "yankee" haters.
Amigo! I hate the yankee bastards up north as well! You are my kinda guy. I am a HUGE fan of the right of secession too. Just wait til the Chicanos get a majority in Texas and run your legislature. We will fight for soviegnity right and hertiage, and secede from the yankee scumbags. Civil War II, here we come! Viva Atzlan!
Painting with a BROAD brush as you do indicates a closed mind concerning many subjects of importance.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.