Posted on 12/27/2010 10:31:54 AM PST by trumandogz
Sam was opposed to secession -- he was, after all, the quintessential Jacksonian Unionist, like the folks up in the hollers of the Appalachians who'd contributed their aliquot of cousins to the defense of the Alamo and disliked secessionism -- but what he WOULD NOT do, was grasp the hand of Abraham Lincoln, who offered Gov. Houston federal troops if he would turn against his own People and certify insurrection in Texas. Instead, he threw Lincoln's letter in the fire.
That is because he had CHARACTER ..... unlike the Southerners who got themselves fame and bronze statues for turning against their own, rallying to the dictator and the service of his dark cause, and licking the hand of the South-haters up north.
That's always been a good gig for conscienceless Southerners ..... like Tom Wicker at the Old Grey Whore, Jim Lehrer, Hodding Carter, Jimmuh Carter, Jody Powell, David Farragut, and George H. Thomas.
Good gig. Paid well, in cash and in the tinselly rewards of the Vanity Fair. Just lick where they tell you, and keep licking.
But it is happening here, as the unconfuted discussion at his link shows -- Marxist propaganda and agitation, right on this thread, and you are doing it. You and Thumper and a couple of others.
And who was denying that right? How was that 'right' being infringed? The Federal government, sadly, acknowledged that certain humans were nothing but property to be bought and sold like cattle.
There was not a single statute or Federal regulation or even bureaucratic or judicial overreach that I am aware of that limited that 'right' within the states that allowed for it.
So tell me. What state right was being violated?
Texas was a state, and Lincoln was president.
Admit it: you cheer the murder of a US president.
Oh, that’s right, yu already did. You drink a toast to the murder.
Maybe you’re gutless and wouldn’t think of doing it yourself.
But then, maybe you would. That’s makes you a threat and an unstable personality.
You want him to answer in the terms set by your Marxist poster-meme. You want him to answer, "slavery, slavery, it was all about slavery." But that is a historical mega-lie, and you are propagating it.
ALL the States' rights were under attack by the Northern interests, because it was the South they meant to war down, to make smooth the way of their political faction to total power. They made the federal government all-powerful (do you deny they achieved this?) ..... drove it like a bulldozer over sectional, regional, areal differences, to provide a seamless, transparent continuum of political patronage for enterprise and commerce. No Little People getting in the way. No States and their legislatures interfering, taxing railroads for example (the railroads won that case in California, in the 1880's). Or do you deny that the Republicans built a national political machine, and drove it right over the American Experiment?
The right of self-determination was the big one, the main right under attack by the Republican sectional faction that used "slavery" as their banner to unite the North against the South and take them to war. It's there -- just look at it. Look at the results of the war. How many Democrats were elected president between 1860 and 1932? Power -- that's what it was about.
Or will you say that the Black Republicans did not drive a steamroller over the States?
Looked at yet another way, how many people had to die, before you'll admit that the Republicans attacked the People's rights?s The evil joke is, they ruined as many Midwestern farmers as they did Southern ones -- it just took longer, and the Midwestern farmers took 50 years to figure out who was screwing them.
Come on now, I answered your question, now you answer mine.
Perhaps the Secret Service should be informed of your leanings.
Oh, right, they already have been. You cannot challenge their Americanism.
Remember: nothing is ever safe and secure. A heads up for ya. You’re a nascent threat, on many levels. rein yourself in or be reined in.
:-)
Lincoln was never President of Texas. James Buchanan was President when Texas seceded, and Andrew Johnson was President when Texas surrendered to the armies of the night.
Really.....do have that brain injury treated.
It may not be viable as a defense in a court of law.
Threatening to denounce FReepers as terrorists and assassins to the federal authorities on account their opinions won't get you far on this board.
Golly, that sounds frightful. If you believe that to be true why aren’t you alerting the mods so that it can be attended to?
Texas never left the Union, since the United States didn’t recognize the secessionist temper tantrums. Texas malcontents knew Lincoln was assured of election and just days before his official installation as president, Texas pitched their largest fit. Buchanan didn’t recognize the secessionist claims, either.
The Confederates lost. Deal with it. The Confederate BS parade is a farce as most Americans dismiss the lost cause rantings of bigots and inferiority complex sufferers for what it is.
The war’s been over and done with for 145 years. Lee recognized it for what it was and championed a return to normalcy as a whole and indivisible nation.
Arf!
Reminds me of David Horowitz.
-btw You have nothing to fear from that toothless old Texas queen.
Happy New Year!
Well apparently it isn’t as series as you first let on if that is your response. BTW: I see that the mods are already here and watching. I bet if they ever see a hint of anything like what you purport they will address it head-on (unlike you apparently).
Sure it did. If Texas never left the Union, then the bonds at issue in Texas vs. White would have been good bonds, and due and payable -- right?
Right?
Just like Ohio and Illinois bonds.
Right?
When they rebelled everything they did became suspect and subject to scrutiny and investigation.
Holding sympathies with those who assassinate US presidents won’t get you far, either.
You so-called Americans who worship the Confederacy must take all the baggage the Confederacy had to offer.
That includes the actions of a so-called hero to your fellow travelers: John Wilkes Booth. At least one of you claims to toast each April the cowardly assassination of a sitting US president. An act that would have done nothing for the South, since the war was over and Lee had surrendered the ANV to Grant days earlier.
The murder was political terrorism. And one of you celebrates it as an event worth salute. More perversely, this person claims to be an honorably discharged veteran. Imagine that! What of the oath, I wonder.
Let me educate you, boy, no one who advocates terrorism against my fellow citizens or who tolerates or champions or celebrates the destabilization through terror, murder or any other means and threatens the safety and security of my country is immune from being a target for surveillance or apprehension.
We do not express our displeasure with elected officials by shooting them in the back of the head. Or, do you approve of such actions, as does Tex the Confederate? do YOU celebrate the Lincoln assassination as some great victory for the Confederacy?
You must, since you didn’t denounce the statement.
Of course, your pro-Confederate rantings will most assuredly bring unwanted and unwarranted scrutiny of this website from the over-reaching apparatchiks in Washington.
Unless that is your ultimate goal.
Fifth columnists.....hmmmm.........just what agenda does the pro-Confederate cabal have, I wonder.
Oh, it's serious all right -- calling the Secret Service to a man's house and denouncing him as a right-wing terrorist? With Janet Napolitano and Eric Holder in office, just looking for white conservatives to crucify for "terrorism" and Obozo's FCC now prowling the Internet and looking right down JR's throat?
Our boy Thumper is a nasty one, and if the mods sympathize with you and him, well, I can't do anything about it except acknowledge that the pool table is listing a bit. That's why you're getting super-personal with TexConfederate, trying to bait him so the mods can pop him -- telling him you're going to call the Secret Service to his house, warning him to his face, shaking your finger in his face and insulting him. Super nasty IMHO, but hey, if the mods disagree ......
Straight out of the Democrat play book. When I oppose Obama Care, I'm a racist. When I oppose gay marriage, I'm a 'Homophobe' -- what ever the f' that is. If I oppose SALT, I'm a war monger.
And now you come in with the same crap. I ask a man what state right was being violated by the Federal government in 1860 that justified secession, and you start calling me a freaking Commie.
Stuff it lentulusgracchus.
Unlike some of your fellow lost causers who don't know s**t about history and are all about their imagined heritage and G-g-g- grandpappys legacy, you can do some decent posts when you care to. I pegged you as far better than a slobbering psycho like stand watie.
Don't stoop to ad hominin.
I looked at your home page, and I took the same test and scored in the exact same quadrant as you. My earliest involvement in politics was attendance at an AuH2O rally in 1964.
Don't play stupid games. This is about history, and about getting it right. It's not about you, me, our ancestors or the current condition of any state North or South. It is about what happened 150 years ago. I happen to think it is important that we get it correct.
If you have an answer to what state right was being violated in 1860, say so. If not, admit so. But don't be calling me a Marxist anymore.
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.