Posted on 05/10/2010 3:17:06 PM PDT by Davy Buck
"If Lee was a traitor (and I don't believe he was), he would be the only traitor for which a ship in the United States Navy was ever named. He would be the only traitor in Statuary Hall at the U.S. Capitol. He would be the only traitor whose image was used in a positive way to recruit military personnel to fight and win WWII. Quite an accomplishment for a "traitor", wouldn't you say. . ."
(Excerpt) Read more at oldvirginiablog.blogspot.com ...
I admire your fortitude and self discipline in continuing to take this emotion based mythology on thread after thread.
Eh, everyone needs a hobby.
How about I count you in the group of hypocrites that refuses to condemn the confederate leadership for worse failings than those you condemn Lincoln for. Does that work for ya?
Here is Grant's comment in fuller context.
In the case of the war between the States it would have been the exact truth if the South had said, "We do not want to live with you Northern people any longer; we know our institution of slavery is obnoxious to you, and, as you are growing numerically stronger than we, it may at some time in the future be endangered. So long as you permitted us to control the government, and with the aid of a few friends at the North to enact laws constituting your section a guard against the escape of our property, we were willing to live with you. You have been submissive to our rule heretofore; but it looks now as if you did not intend to continue so, and we will remain in the Union no longer." Instead of this the seceding States cried lustily, "Let us alone; you have no constitutional power to interfere with us." Newspapers and people at the North reiterated the cry. Individuals might ignore the constitution; but the Nation itself must not only obey it, but must enforce the strictest construction of that instrument; the construction put upon it by the Southerners themselves. The fact is the constitution did not apply to any such contingency as the one existing from 1861 to 1865. Its framers never dreamed of such a contingency occurring. If they had foreseen it, the probabilities are they would have sanctioned the right of a State or States to withdraw rather than that there should be war between brothers. -U.S. Grant, Personal Memoirs
Perfect! Rest your 'case' on the idiot that presided over the most corrupt presidency in US history!!
Of course, that is the yankee way..........
When your hero, ns, gets tired of Reb bashing, South hating and lying about the War of Northern Aggression, he runs down Sarah Palin, Christianty, pro-lifers and boasts of his eternal love for Jon Stewart.
In case you haven't figured your hero out, he's a libtard troll that should have been banned a long time ago.
And since you obviously never get tired of lying about the War of Southern Rebellion we don't have to worry about what your other interests are, if any.
But, hey - you scored a 'triple delete,' sport! That must be worth something!
Congratulations!
;>)
I notice you still have not addressed the Eleventh Amendment - and your apparent complete lack of knowledge thereof. Kind of surprising, for someone who criticizes others, based on their opinions regarding constitutional law (but then, maybe numbers under 13 just don’t register with you ;>)...
You mean your imaginative interpretation thereof, don't you?
Of course, CJ Chase had been one of them, when he joined Lincoln's cabinet. He was one of the strongest Abolitionist sectionalists in the Republican Party. Which is worth a speculation about why Lincoln named him not just to an associate justiceship, but to the Chief Justiceship, of the Supreme Court.
Does that mean he'd have to climb 34 feet to reach corpse level?
Come on. That's classic appeal ad populum, the same thing I objected to in the beginning. If I object to an emotional appeal as such, and you simply repeat it, what is that? My point is, popularity is not an arbiter of facts in argument. Neptunism was the regnant school of geology in 1750, and if we accepted your argument, we'd all be Neptunists still.
Revisionism set in when people started to make some kind of national hero out of Lee after the war.
Fair enough, and Southern writers have written in opposition to the mythmaking, to point out Lee's flaws as a commander.
But treason wasn't among them.
Even if they did, which they do not (unless you get to pick out your own favorite phrases and present them robbed of context), the fact remains, that the genesis and evolution of the Nullification Crisis refutes your assertion that absent a slavery issue, there would have been no secession, no civil war.
The Morill Tariff had passed out of the house in spring of 1860 without a hint of rebellion.
So the House passed a bill hostile to the South -- but it didn't do it without a hint of secession! [Note: there was no rebellion.] Secession had been in the air ever since the North poured forth its tears on the grave of race-war fomenter John Brown, and cried out bitterly over his failure to instigate the slaughter of millions.
From that moment, the Union was dead.
It was what they saw as the threat to the expansion of slavery that caused their actions, not the tariff.
I don't have my cc. of Rhett's "Appeal" and the Texas Declaration handy, but your singular emphasis on "expansion of slavery" (Lincoln's platform chestnut) is misleading and, I think, wittingly so. It wasn't just slavery, it was everything, it was the future, it was the hostile domineering of Northern politicians, it was the hatred Northern political propagandists had whipped up in the Northern States against the South, in the course of building a sectional party not only capable of, but committed to, subjugating and helotizing the South.
Those documents make that apprehension clear.
Why would he care? The president of the Swiss Confederation doesn't. And his people are happy.
Cutting the country in half won't make politicians more honest or more responsible, though, and it would mean living in weaker countries in a world dominated by foreign powers. (Emphasis ironically supplied -- with amazement that I had to.)
What do you think it's been like living in the South for the last 130 years?
Where have you been?
If Lee was a traitor then Jefferson Davis would certainly be one as well. He is in Statuary Hall as well, as one of the two allowed submission by the great State of Mississippi.
bttt
One more time ......
A charge of treason, in the United States, is burdened by the requirements of Article III of the U.S. Constitution, so let that be your guide in posting.
Key phrase: "IN the United States". After May 23, 1861, Robert E. Lee was a citizen of Virginia, but no longer a citizen of the United States. Remember too that in the 19th century, citizenship meant citizenship of a State, and that a person was a "U.S. citizen" only derivatively, because his home State was a part of the Union. I defer to others who have researched that area more deeply than I, but that is the gist of it.
“Boy, how we need Lee Today! God bless Lee and the rest of the True Americans. . . The Confederates!!”
Amen!
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.