Posted on 05/14/2003 5:37:51 AM PDT by WhiskeyPapa
You mean they practice the Clinton - liberal Democratic techniques of your party's affiliation?
I'm not a racist because I decorate the graves of Confederate ancestors, or even if I should be foolish enough to discount gravity's affinity for my ever enlarging backside to don a wool uniform and run through a field mimicking a Rebel yell, until the inevitable heart attack felled me. ;)
Some people, like your friend, and Walt, are prone to letting their "stupid" hang out for all to see. Waving a rebel flag outside one's pickup window and hurling invective at those who disagree with you is a slightly more visible example of a mind narrowing to the point of intellectual occlusion, but Walt's posts show symptoms of the same malady.
Although shame isn't what you'd accept, eh Walt? You'd prefer to relegate Southerners to the degenerate pile for standing up for what they believed in. Pride in Southern heritage is no vice, Walt. It's an appreciation for all aspects of history that have made the Southern experience rich and vibrant for all those who've been blessed enough to have been born Southern.
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v09/v09p-65_Hesseltine.html
{snip}
Showing Northern political complicity in the intentional suffering and deaths of Union captives.
During the Civil War, when stories of suffering in Southern prison camps in Richmond and Andersonville began to spread over the North, Secretary of War Stanton prepared to use the stories to "fire the Northern heart." The Union armies were waging a relentless war upon the South's transportation system, and the Confederates were unable to provide adequate housing, clothing, medicine, and food to the prisoners. Instead of exchanging the prisoners -- the obviously humane solution -- the Secretary of War preferred to allow Union soldiers to suffer from disease and privation in Southern prisons. Stanton knew that the very presence of the prisoners furnished a drain upon the Confederacy's dwindling resources.
http://ourworld-top.cs.com/mikegriffith1/right.htm
{snip}
Showing Union economic and civilian brutality.A. Osceola, Missouri
James H. Lane, a United States Senator from Kansas returned to his home state of Kansas in the summer of 1861 to command what was called "Lane's Brigade." Lane was to retain his Senate seat while occasionally rampaging through Missouri. His brigade was composed of Kansas infantry and cavalry. This force was, in fact, a ruthless band of Jayhawkers (plundering marauders) wearing United States uniforms. James H. Lane was known as the "Grim Chieftain" for the death and destruction he brought on the people of Missouri. In September of 1861 Lane and his men descended on the town of Osceola, Missouri. This community of 2,000 was the county seat of St. Clair County, Missouri. It was here that Lane and his men established their criminal reputation. When Lane's troops found a cache of Confederate military supplies in the town, Lane decided to wipe Osceola from the map. First, Osceola was stripped of all of its valuable goods which were loaded into wagons taken from the townspeople. Then, nine citizens were given a farcical trial and shot. Then Lane's men went on a wild drinking spree. Finally, his men brought their frenzy of pillaging, murder and drunkenness to a close by burning the entire town.
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v02/v02p137_Weber.html
On political conditions that led to Andersonville, et al.
The SCV uses the same sort of "big lie" techniques the Nazis used.
Walt, Walt, Walt, Walt, Walt. Just because you have mastered the art of employing "big lie" techniques doesn't mean you have the right to hurl those kinds of accusations at others.
Good God, man! Does that make it right???? Are you defending atrocities, no matter who, or what, precipitated them? Whether or not the North or the South was the "first" to do wrong, it's a shame we all share! Don't defend it by sneering "They did it first!"
The SCV website is filled with lies and half truths. That defines your "confederate heritage."
Walt
The oh-so-honorable rebels violated the parole system and returned men paroled at Vicksburg back into service. Many were captured again at Chattanooga.
There seems to have been a de facto rebel policy of starving Union POW's to pressure the north to return to the exchange cartels. This was done as desertions from the rebel armies went from a trickle to a torrent.
Walt
Good God, man! Does that make it right????
It sure makes it wrong to present a B.S. program to a sixth grade class.
Walt
In 1863 General Henry Halleck became the Union representative involved in the exchange of prisoners. Under pressure from Edwin Stanton, the Secretary of War, these exchanges became less frequent. When Ulysses S. Grant became overall commander of the Union Army in March, 1864, he brought an end to exchanges. He told General Benjamin F. Butler that "He said that I would agree with him that by the exchange of prisoners we get no men fit to go into our army, and every soldier we gave the Confederates went immediately into theirs, so that the exchange was virtually so much aid to them and none to us."
The decision of Ulysses S. Grant obviously increased the suffering of prisoners held by both sides but his defenders argued that this policy helped to reduce the length of the war. Grant's policy was also partly responsible for the disaster at Andersonville. The Confederate Army was so burdened with Union prisoners that by November, 1864, they began to send them back to the North without gaining anything in exchange.
After the conflict came to an end the War Department published figures to show that of the 200,000 members of the Confederate Army captured, over 26,500 died in captivity. Of the 260,526 prisoners that the Confederates took, 22,526 members of the Union Army died. This indicated that 13% of Confederate prisoners died compared to 8 per cent of Federal prisoners. Source: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USACWexchange.htm
Names?
Walt
A civilian doctor who had occasion to observe the Army of Northern Virginia noted that the death rate among the rebel soldiers was 2-3 times higher than that of Union soldiers. It sounds like being a POW of the Union was an improvement in their lot.
Walt
Walt, Walt, Walt, Walt, Walt. Just because you have mastered the art of employing "big lie" techniques doesn't mean you have the right to hurl those kinds of accusations at others.
Does the SCV or the League of the South or any of the "heritage" groups acknowledge that the root cause of the war was slavery?
They live on the big lie.
Walt
It is obvious you doubt, in toto, all submittals that conflict with your narrow views. Seeing that you live in Tennessee, might your hatred for the Southern heritage and history be because of something personal? Since there have been no other postings by individuals here, save our own, for some time, I must conclude that debating a fool is a fools game. Thus, I will search on for more "detailed" information and leave you to your own devices.
Sincerely.....
Nah. There's always somebody faster. And often, as in this case in particular, more accurate.
Well, aside from those the prostitutes he ran may have given him.
Well, aside from those the prostitutes he ran may have given him.
I know that the Earps ran a card game. I never heard they ran prostitutes. Of course all those floozies you see in the saloons were not for window dressing.
Walt
...might your hatred for the Southern heritage and history be because of something personal?
I don't know what happened to him, but my guess is that it was pretty traumatic. Perhaps as a kid in the second grade he had his milk money stolen by a bully wearing a Confederate flag t-shirt.
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.