Posted on 04/12/2010 12:12:09 PM PDT by wolfcreek
Based on the hundreds of e-mails, Facebook comments and Tweets I've read in response to my denunciation of Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell's decision to honor Confederates for their involvement in the Civil War -- which was based on the desire to continue slavery -- the one consistent thing that supporters of the proclamation offer up as a defense is that these individuals were fighting for what they believed in and defending their homeland.
In criticizing me for saying that celebrating the Confederates was akin to honoring Nazi soldiers for killing of Jews during the Holocaust, Rob Wagner said, "I am simply defending the honor and dignity of men who were given no choice other than to fight, some as young as thirteen."
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
It's true I expect no thanks for my insightful comments, but please, if my tense is not understandable; I'll slow down to the third grade level for you.
Another great Virginian. If it wasn’t for him we would be speaking English right now (well with an accent anyway).
Just more background noise.
Oh, I understand you well enough, I just rarely agree with your hyperbolic foolishness...;)
You can thank me later, when the balloon goes up my favorite mule tit.
My favorite story about confederate money, by the way, is that counterfeiters decided, after a while, that it was so worthless it wasn't worth counterfeiting. One of them was selling $20,000 of CSA notes for $5 US.
We used to go into the Huntsville Army/Navy store and buy bundles of confederate bills for pennies...
I can’t find the letter yet; a guy in Ewells Corps was complaining that he couldn’t use Confed. Money to by I what I recall was Jam/Jelly from a store in York PA. The shop owner then called him a Tory. P-eed him off. I’ll keep looking.
They were more reflective of the enmity between Misery and Kansas. Quantrill's Raiders, the Redlegs under Gen. Blunt, and the Jayhawkers were mostly guerrillas.
Quantrill's massacre at Lawrence could only be considered pure terrorism. The Confederate Army, with which Quantrill had aligned himself, was horrified. I think they killed 176 civilian men and boys in cold blood.
Apparently some of the counterfeit confederate money is actually worth more to collectors than the real stuff.
You do so love your Southron myths, don't you? You are aware that Jackson was a slave owner much of his adult life, and was a slave owner the day he died?
Robert E. Lee letter dated December 27, 1856..
Yes, let's look at that letter. "The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, physically, and socially." Much better that they live a life in bondage in the U.S. than as free men in their own country. "The painful discipline they are undergoing is necessary for their further instruction as a race, and will prepare them, I hope, for better things." Bear in mind that at this point blacks had been slaves for over 230 years in the U.S. How much longer was their preparation necessary? Forever as far as Lee was concerned. Those who would work for an end to slavery were wrong, so far as Lee was concerned, it was entirely up to God. And God forbid that they should upset the slave owner - of which Lee was one. In fact, Lee was so 'opposed' to slavery that in January 1865 he was writing, "Considering the relation of master and slave, controlled by humane laws and influenced by Christianity and an enlightened public sentiment, as the best that can exist between the white and black races while intermingled as at present in this country, I would deprecate any sudden disturbance of that relation unless it be necessary to avert a greater calamity to both. I should therefore prefer to rely upon our white population to preserve the ratio between our forces and those of the enemy, which experience has shown to be safe."
Lee's opposition to slavery was tepid at best and non-existent at worst. And his own words show it.
And what restrictions were those? Specifically?
“Who GAF what the left says? “
The idiots who turn off American Idol just long enough to actually absorb some random, out-of-context sound bite and then go vote based entirely on that because they’re too lazy to think for themselves.
New House ep on the DVR.
Fun’s over.
[No more soup for you]
Play with this instead.
See ya!
That wasn't Lincoln's, that was Corwin. But at that it would have been totally opposed by the Southern leaders, because like other compromise proposals they shot down it protected slavery only where it existed and did not guarantee its expansion into the territories or the other free states. By comparison, let's look at some floated by the rebel leadership. Toombs wrote a doozy:
Resolved, That declaratory clauses to the Constitution of the United States, amply securing the following propositions, be recommended for adoption:
1. That the people of the United States shall have an equal right to emigrate to and settle in the present or any future acquired territories, with whatever property they may possess, (including slaves,) and be securely protected in its peaceable enjoyment, until such Territory may be admitted as a State in the Union, with or without slavery, as she may determine, on an equality with all existing States.
2. That property in slaves shall be entitled to the same protection from the government of the United States in all of its departments, everywhere, which the Constitution confers the power upon it to extend to any other property; provided nothing herein contained shall be construed to limit or restrain the right now belonging to every State to prohibit, abolish, or establish and protect slavery within its limits
3. That persons committing crimes against slave property in one State and fleeing to another, shall be delivered up in the same manner as persons committing other crimes, and that the laws of the State from which such persons flee shall be the test of criminality.
4. That Congress shall pass efficient laws for the punishment of all persons in any of the States who shall in any manner aid and abet invasion or insurrection in any other State, or commit any other act against the laws of nations, tending to disturb the tranquility of the people or government of any other State.
5. That fugitive slaves shall be surrendered under the provisions of the fugitive slave act of 1850, without being entitled to either a writ of habeas corpus or trial by jury, or other similar obstructions of legislation by the States to which they may flee.
6. That no law shall ever be passed by Congress in relation to the institution of African slavery in the States or Territories, or elsewhere in the United States, without the consent of a majority of the senators and representatives of the slaveholding States.
7. That none of these provisions, nor any other provisions of the Constitution in relation to slavery, (except the African slave trade,) shall ever be altered except by the consent of each and all the of the States in which slavery exists.
Why not just sign all powers over to the slave states? And notice how the entire concept of state's rights as they pertained to the non-slave states went right into the crapper. And then there was Davis' proposal. Shorter, but no less subtle in guaranteeing slavery's expansion:
Resolved, That it shall be declared, by amendment of the Constitution, that property in slaves, recognized as such by the local law of any of the States of the Union, shall stand on the same footing in all constitutional and federal relations as any other species of property so recognized; and, like other property, shall not be subject to be divested or impaired by the local law of any other State, either in escape thereto or of transit or sojourn of the owner therein; and in no case whatever shall such property be subject to be divested or impaired by any legislative act of the United States, or of any of the Territories thereof.
Again, takes the concept of a non-slave state off the table by guaranteeing slave owners the right to move to a non-slave state with their chattel and there was nothing local laws could do about it. Not to mention again making sure that all territories were slave territories.
So please tell us all about that enlightened attitude in the South towards slavery. I'm sure we would all love to hear about it. All that culture and heritage and all.
You could, and for all I know still can, buy a print of a picture of Lawrence after Quantrill and his guys finished with it. The caption is "Missouri 204 Kansas 0". The border war is alive and well still.
Just when you thing that the Southron BS couldn't get any deeper you offer that.
Well at least now you know where they’re getting some of their crap...
Here's my favorite:
"A very interesting fact on slavery is that at the time the War of 1861 -1865 officially commenced, the Southern States were actually in the process of freeing all slaves in the South."
Yep. Both sides got some pretty hard heads.
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.