Posted on 12/27/2010 10:31:54 AM PST by trumandogz
The Civil War is about to loom very large in the popular memory. We would do well to be candid about its causes and not allow the distortions of contemporary politics or long-standing myths to cloud our understanding of why the nation fell apart.
The coming year will mark the 150th anniversary of the onset of the conflict, which is usually dated to April 12, 1861, when Confederate batteries opened fire at 4:30 a.m. on federal troops occupying Fort Sumter. Union forces surrendered the next day, after 34 hours of shelling.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
who the hell is spike? LOL at you knuckleheads thinking that is some sort of insult. LOL!!!
that nickname for me is almost as lame as your shilling for a government and system that kept people in chains.
try again LOL
hurdy hur spikefromohio hurdy hur
Well, since you’ve asked, I have to say.....I swear on the grave of my mother; the blood of my martyred uncle and cousins; the lives of my children and grandchildren, no, I do not work for “.gov”, nor any other organization, nor private political facility or faction.
Further, I did not mention living, sitting president. For one to do so would be beyond foolish and well into the area of idiocy. We were referring to Lincoln, from 1865, and the toasting of the occasion and lamentation of the waste of Southern lead.
Now, Can we assume (bad choice of a word), for the sake of argument, that you’d not have approved of JWB’s actions had you been alive in April, 1865?
The same way Al Sharpton can be a white hating bigot but spend most of his time with whites.
Tell us, what do you feel when you pass that statue of RE Lee?
It's you, Spike.
LOL at you knuckleheads thinking that is some sort of insult. LOL!!!
We're laughing at you for being such a knucklehead that you don't understand that you've been insulted.
It may be a Southern stereotype, Spike, but I lived in Michigan near the Ohio state line for several years and I know from experience that there's more trailer trash in Michigan/Ohio than in the entire South and your posting style definitely fits the trailer trash profile.
"What is a bit unsettling is the thought that you may wish to practice what you believe....since you believe, apparently, that offing a president whom you vehemently disagree with is a good idea and so long as ‘good Southern (Confederate) lead’ isn’t wasted in the process."--thumper1960
Reread that sentence, especially the first part, and tell me that it doesn't sound like you're talking about a sitting president and trying to bait texconfederate. Now, you either thought about that, or you didn't. If you didn't, perhaps you need to choose your words more carefully.
Now, Can we assume (bad choice of a word), for the sake of argument, that you’d not have approved of JWB’s actions had you been alive in April, 1865?
If I'm a Southern? I've lost my kin, my land, my livestock? Yankee troops are patrolling the streets? Carpetbaggers are living in my home? Are you kidding me? Would a Jew have approved of Hitler's assassination in 1945?
chirp...chirp...chirp...chirp...chirp...chirp...
Ditto: OK. Lets do a little time-line thing here instead of time shifting.
Jefferson Davis serves as Secretary of War under President Franklin Pierce from 1853-1857. He was not in the Senate during those years.
The Kansas Nebraska Act passed in 1854.
The Trans Continental Railroad Act passed Congress in 1862 -- eight years after the Kansas-Nebraska Act. At that point, Stephan A. Douglas (April 23, 1813 – June 3, 1861) had been dead for nearly a year, and Jeff Davis was otherwise occupied in Richmond.
!!!
A good example of how some folks use the mix and match approach to their historical commentary. Thanks for correcting the record.
chirp...chirp...chirp...chirp...chirp...chirp...
My goodness what a drama queen.
Unlike the Jews who were forced to endure and survive their circumstance, the south brought all that onto themselves.
And maintaining that the War of Northern Aggression was about slavery is an example of how some folks use the affirmative action, politically correct revisionist approach for their historical commentary.
Thanks for correcting the record.
You're welcome.
Well, well. The artful dodger has returned.
What about answering post# 1090, dodger?
Wearing blinders that large must chaff a LOT. No wonder you are so angry so much of the time.
I agree the war was not about slavery. It was about putting down an insurrection and preserving the Union.
However, secession was 100% about slavery and without secession there would have been no war.
Post# 1090, punk.
Answer it.
What insurrection? When did the Confederacy try to destroy the US government?
and preserving the Union.
When it's done at gunpoint it's called 'subjugation'. (look the word up if you're not entirely sure of the definition)
However, secession was 100% about slavery
That's the affirmative action, politically correct, revisionist yankee version, alright.
without secession there would have been no war.
Correction: without Lincoln's invasion there would have been no war.
My but you are a grump this morning. Didn’t your mama tell you “You catch more flies with honey than vinegar”?
Now that’s revisionism pokie. You know better.
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.