Posted on 09/27/2010 1:27:31 PM PDT by RandysRight
Say what?
First of all, the war started before Lincoln was sworn in. Secondly, Reconstruction came after he had been assasinated.
Care to try for strike three?
No other country had a large segment of their population willing to launch a war to protect their slave property.
Second Manassas should have told everyone that there HAD to be a better way.
What was so special about Second Bull Run?
Which is my point.
The confederacy a Republic? After what Davis did in office? Are you serious?
Ping
Both Presidents Lincoln and Johnson favored a lenient approach to reconstruction. It was their belief that the nation could be best served by leaving the brutality of the Civil War behind quickly.
Johnson enacted Lincoln’s Reconstruction Act.
Radical Republicans, led by Thadeaus Stevens, argued that the South should be punished for starting the Civil War. Eventually, the dispute would lead to an attempt to impeach and remove President Johnson. Although the official reason for the impeachment of Johnson was his violation of the Tenure of Office Act, the underlying reason was Congress’ disagreement with Johnson over Reconstruction. Although Johnson was impeached by the House, the Senate fell just short of convicting and removing him.
The United States as a nation was more than a magazine subscription that you could drop at the slightest whim. There were commitments and shared responsibilities.
Never-mind that the “oppression” that the south claimed never rose to the point of legitimate protest, there was a right way to secede and then there was the way the south went about it.
They initiated the problem, they provoked a war, and then they suffered the consequences. I do wonder how things might have turned out had they gone about their secession honorably and legally.
My guess is that they would have been consumed by the Brits.
Actually, importing slaves was banned in 1808, so any slave trade taking place was slaves already here.
A more correct analogy would be states rebelling over a threat to the expansion of abortion rights or gay marriage rights.
What IS true is that Abraham Lincoln took the constitution, shredded it, tore it to pieces and threw it in the garbage.
In what way?
For twenty-five years this agitation has been steadily increasing, until it has now secured to its aid the power of the common Government. Observing the forms of the Constitution, a sectional party has found within that Article establishing the Executive Department, the means of subverting the Constitution itself. A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that "Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free," and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction.Of course, as anyone knows, Lincoln expressly denied any intent to abolish slavery, and, not having yet taken office, could not have taken any action signaling such an intent. South Carolina's grievance, then, is no actual grievance, but rather the fear that the North would eventually give them a grievance, despite their express statements to the opposite.This sectional combination for the submersion of the Constitution, has been aided in some of the States by elevating to citizenship, persons who, by the supreme law of the land, are incapable of becoming citizens; and their votes have been used to inaugurate a new policy, hostile to the South, and destructive of its beliefs and safety.
On the 4th day of March next, this party will take possession of the Government. It has announced that the South shall be excluded from the common territory, that the judicial tribunals shall be made sectional, and that a war must be waged against slavery until it shall cease throughout the United States.
How does one reconcile Lincoln's assertion that he won't impose the North's anti-slavery sentiment on the South with the warning SC cites? I guess CW would say SC presumes Lincoln's lying. (If so, why not wait until his actions betray the truth?) But the other reconciliation is that Lincoln hopes to undermine the South's democratic support for slavery, by exposing it for the evil it is. If this latter explanation is so, that explains why SC was in such a hurry to secede: rend the fabric of civil discourse before slavery is undermined. This, of course, would mean that the confederate cause was undemocratic.
He looks more like an activist than a historian.
And I could put up $5000 dollars in gold if I'm proven wrong (so long as I get to decide if I am wrong).
Seriously, though, there may be a support group in your area for people who want to get out of a cult organization. Check them out.
Yeah, Lincoln almost certainly would have pursued a lenient approach.
Maybe Southerners shouldn’t have blown his brains out, eh?
“The United States as a nation was more than a magazine subscription that you could drop at the slightest whim. There were commitments and shared responsibilities.”
which part of the Constitution was that in?
Really Wrong.
Yes I know, I had a great great grandfather who fought for the south,he died long after of a smoldering infection from a wound. I still think the whole thing including slavery was wrong wrong wrong.
It isn’t enumerated in the Constitution as you well know. That doesn’t change the fact that they way the south went about quitting the union was illegal and immoral.
And for that they paid a dear price.
bump
And I can always spot a Lost Cause Moron. They're the ones who post nonsense like this and then accuse anyone who disagrees with them of being a liberal.
You should go to college sometime. It really is enlightening. Try my statement out on almost any mainstream history professor and see what he says.
ML/NJ
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.