[fortheDeclaration]

Hey, can I help it if the Confederates blew it!," which is an assertion of personal opinion that also appears in a post laced with personal invective rather than substantive discussions of the subject matter. Speaking of supplanting substantive discussions with venom and personal invective, I see that you are apt to continue that practice:

Wow!

saying the South blew it is considered laced with venom?

I said nothing to you that your pompus attitude did not deserve.

Get off your high horse.

The South either could have taken Washingtona and chose not to, in which case they 'blew it'or they wanted to take Washington, and couldn't and thus, they 'blew it'.

Actually, I think God had a lot to do with their defeats, so it really wasn't all their fault.

[GOPcapitalist]

Wow! saying the South blew it is considered laced with venom?

It's a belittling value judgement upon the south's decision not to attack Washington after the battle of Manassas when an unloaded statement of opinion recognizing your own belief that their failure to do so was a mistake would have more than sufficed.

I said nothing to you that your pompus attitude did not deserve. Get off your high horse.

There's no need to get angry with me, ftD, for simply identifying the weaker elements of your posting habits. Nor does my critique place me upon a "high horse." If you don't like being criticized over your unnecessarily combative and loaded choices of terminology there's a simple solution - don't use them.