Posted on 07/26/2021 4:33:01 PM PDT by ammodotcom
The Battle of Appomattox Courthouse is considered by many historians the end of the Civil War and the start of post-Civil War America. The events of General Robert E. Lee’s surrender to General and future President Ulysses S. Grant at a small town courthouse in Central Virginia put into effect much of what was to follow.
The surrender at Appomattox Courthouse was about reconciliation, healing, and restoring the Union. While the Radical Republicans had their mercifully brief time in the sun rubbing defeated Dixie’s nose in it, they represented the bleeding edge of Northern radicalism that wanted to punish the South, not reintegrate it into the Union as an equal partner.
The sentiment of actual Civil War veterans is far removed from the attitude of the far left in America today. Modern day “woke-Americans” clamor for the removal of Confederate statues in the South, the lion’s share of which were erected while Civil War veterans were still alive. There was little objection to these statues at the time because it was considered an important part of the national reconciliation to allow the defeated South to honor its wartime dead and because there is a longstanding tradition of memorializing defeated foes in honor cultures.
(Excerpt) Read more at ammo.com ...
Never mind reply 659.
There are five known manuscripts of the Gettysburg Address in Lincoln’s hand, which differ in several details. The written documents also differ from contemporary newspaper reprints of the speech. Maybe we should say that didn’t happen either?
While we’re at it, Stephens lived two decades after the speech was first published. Did he ever disavow it, or deny he said those words?
Are we on the same page? I am not denying that Stephens gave the Cornerstone Speech as quoted. Did I flub again? Did you mean the reply to 659, which is post 660?
My error. We’re on the same page.
“Those that use that quote to condemn Stephens have no proof. “:
What proof do you have that Stephens ever existed? Aren’t you relying on newspaper reports? Or do you have his original birth and death certificates (if there are any).
Repealed by the House but did not change the foreign shipper law against multiple domestic ports of call and pickup.
Questions worthy of Socrates.
Very good. Now you understand the logical fallacy.
True, the cabotage laws remained. But you said the law required foreign ships carrying southern exports pay compensation and that requirement was revoked in 1830. The millions of bales of cotton leaving southern ports bound for Europe could go on U.S. ships or foreign ships without the tonnage penalty the U.S. charged before.
Yeah, sure. I’ll get right on it.
Will you get back to us?
Don’t think I’m gonna take that stroll through Coocoo Corners with you bro.
So, you are not going to “I’ll get right on it” after all. Lose interest?
Am I your “bro”?
Bro? I didn’t call you Bro.
What you referred to was a mislabeled post that was apparently altered to change its meaning. Maybe by the Deep State. You should recheck it.
Prove it didn’t happen.
Bro? See 674
That’s a mislabeled post that was apparently altered to change its meaning. Maybe by the Deep State. Or might have been DimLamp. You should recheck it.
Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?
Ok, you are not competent for this discussion. If you are, prove it.!
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.