And your evidence is -- what?
All those nights Lincoln spent playing chess with you and the sleepless guy?
Seriously, swattie, what the heck is the matter with you?
Were you dropped on your head or something?
Posted on 03/28/2008 12:15:10 PM PDT by cowboyway
Over the last few months, celebrations for Abraham Lincoln's 200th birthday have drawn attention to the Kentucky native's life and his legacy as president. But the 200-year anniversary of another Kentucky president's birth, Confederate President Jefferson Davis, is receiving mixed reviews.
"I'll say it this way - winners write history," said Ron Bryant, a Lexington historian writing a book on Davis. "We need heroes, we need villains. Lincoln became a hero and Davis a villain."
Davis was born in what is now Todd County, Ky., in 1808, one year before Lincoln. Davis served as the only president of the 11 southern states that seceded from the Union between 1861 and 1865. The Confederate States of America surrendered in 1865, and Davis was locked in prison the same year.
Despite being denounced by many civil rights groups, signs of Davis' legacy can still be found throughout the state.
In Southwest Kentucky, a structure resembling the Washington Monument stands in memory of Davis. At 351 feet tall, the Jefferson Davis Monument is the fourth largest freestanding obelisk in the world, according to Kentucky State Parks.
Although Kentucky never seceded from the Union, a statue of Davis stands in the rotunda in the state's Capitol building.
"The Civil War is still very much alive in many places," said Cliff Howard, a Jefferson Davis impersonator. "Kentucky was on both sides of the fence. It still is."
Having heard of Kentucky's reputation for "being a little backward," integrated strategic communications senior James Davidson Jr. was not surprised about Davis' statue in the Capitol building.
Davidson, first-vice president of UK's chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, said a statue of Davis leaves a bad impression.
"What is Frankfort saying to the rest of Kentucky with it being there?" Davidson said. "I respect everyone's heritage and Southern tradition, but given the history, I think it shouldn't be there."
The statue of Davis, installed in 1936, is one of five statues in the Capitol building. Lincoln is the largest in the center, and Davis stands in the corner behind his right shoulder. Former Kentucky Congressman Henry Clay, physician and drafter of the state constitution Ephraim McDowell and former Vice President Alben Barkley also stand in the rotunda.
The last time Davis' statue came into debate was 2003, when a coalition of African-American groups protested its presence in the Capitol building. A state advisory committee left the issue up to former Gov. Ernie Fletcher, who took no action during his term.
Gov. Steve Beshear does not plan to remove the statue because Davis is a historical figure who represents part of Kentucky's cultural history, a spokeswoman said.
Student Government President Nick Phelps said his feelings on the statue in the Capitol building resembled how he felt during a controversy two years ago about a 46-foot mural in Memorial Hall depicting the history of Lexington and its surrounding area. The mural, which some said stereotyped American Indians and blacks, was not removed.
"I was not in support of removing the mural, so I would not support removing Jefferson Davis," Phelps said. "I don't think we should remove history. I think it removes the question, 'Who is he?' "
Many students might ask the same question about Davis.
In Kentucky, the Civil War is part of the middle school curriculum. Unless students take an advanced placement history course in high school, that's usually the last time they focus on 19th century American history, said Nayasha Owens-Morton, a U.S. history and African-American history teacher at Bryan Station Traditional High School.
William Campbell has taught a class on Lincoln at UK for about 10 years as an English and honors professor. Students going into his class know little about the confederate president, he said.
"About Jefferson Davis, Kentuckians tend to know that he was from our state, that there's a memorial dedicated to him somewhere in the state, and that he was the president of the Confederacy," Campbell said. "Of Lincoln's writings, most have read only the Gettysburg Address. Of Davis's writings, most have read nothing."
the FACT is that DAMNyankee BIGOTS/haters do not WANT to accept that their "plaster, secular (but clay-footed) saint abe, the DISHONEST" was NOTHING more/less than a HATER/BIGOT/cheap,scheming politician, not dissimilar to "wee willie klintoon".
we all note that your posts have a SINGULAR lack of FACTS; otoh, nobody is surprised that a DY lies.
it's the nature of a DY to LIE, just as it is the nature of a SNAKE to SLITHER.
free dixie,sw
don't you get tired of being thought a FOOL & a "retard" by most people here???
free dixie,sw
the FACT is that "judy" (our local "special needs" teacher) believes you are "mentally challenged" (that used to be called "mentally retarded" in less PC times. otoh, based solely on the posts of the DUMB-bunnies of "the DY coven", you are NOT alone in being "mentally challenged".)
laughing AT the "useful idiots"/fools/BIGOTS of "the DAMNyankee coven".
free dixie,sw
otoh, BOTH were just as DISHONEST & AMORAL as men/POTUS. BOTH would have passed out "White House official recipes" for cooking people, if they thought 1% of the voters wanted to engage in cannibals.
NEITHER lincoln or klintoon were deserving of the public trust. period. end of story.
otoh, "Mary Todd" was NUTS, so that may be 1 reason that "dishonest abe" was as he was.
free dixie,sw
fwiw, the SAME groups of northeastern financial/social/academic ELITES want to control our lives NOW. (that's ONE reason that many southrons still desire FREEDOM from the north.)
free dixie,sw
"We destroyed the village in order to save it."
in the case of "lincoln, the TYRANT", it was FREEDOM, rather than a hamlet that was DESTROYED.
free dixie,sw
And your evidence is -- what?
All those nights Lincoln spent playing chess with you and the sleepless guy?
Seriously, swattie, what the heck is the matter with you?
Were you dropped on your head or something?
He’s the head of the confederate nut jobs here.
Income tax. Do I need to keep going?
You don't have a clue, do you.
Let's use the extreme case and maybe you'll get it. Let's say the lawmakers got together tomorrow (Sunday is appropriate for this example) and drew up legislation that stated "From this day forward, all people living in these United States will be Moral." You can make morality the law of the land, but you can't make people moral.
Your long list of links shows, accurately, that northern states and peoples had a long history of being involved in slavery and slave trading, and that many of them by the time of the war tried to ignore this and demonize southerners. So what? Have I ever said otherwise?
Did you bother to read the entire site? If so, you would know that the north was much more than 'involved in slavery' and that there was a systematic rewriting of northern history concerning slavery. So, is it such a stretch to think that the north might just rewrite the history books concerning the War of Northern Aggression?
Yes, the north is much more than 'involved in slavery' (even those words try to downplay it). They are responsible for it.
It's only after 'you people' come to grips with your falsified past that you will be able to have honest and open debate.
I agree the War set a precedent for expanded federal power. However, most of these powers disappeared for most of the rest of the 19th century, with expansion beginning again in the very late century as a result of the Progressive movement. Your analogy also assumes that the Progressive movement, the New Deal and all the other expansions of federal power would not have occurred if Lincoln had not saved the Union. This is confusing sequence with causation.
The precedent, set by Lincoln, was the key that paved the way to the authoritarian oligarchy entrenched in DC today.
This does not mean that there might not be a considerably more tyrannical government in one or more of the multiple governments exercising authority over what is now the USA.
I'd bet that if the South and north had remained split that the north would have become a full fledged socialist/communist country and a red state/blue state map is all the proof you need.
This ain't nothing new. The 'Log Cabin Republicans' have thought so for quite some time.
I guess a man sleeping with another man for four years is normal up north..........
You should know, putz.
Just reread all the lies that you schmucks have written about the South and Southerners on these threads.
Unfortunately, it doesn't stop with you schmucks on these threads.....it's in your history books.
You schmucks want to live a lie, that's fine, but you won't force your lies on the South anymore.
The web has become a great liberator of yankee lies, from disHonest Abe to Hillary and Obama.
Before proceeding, let me remind you that he isn't known as 'disHonest Abe' for nothing. (Do you have a date for that quote?)
with the exception of course that I'm in favor of full legal and social equality.
Thats mighty white of you.............
Those who foresaw great turmoil and trouble if slavery were abolished have largely been proven correct.
Abolishment was inevitable.
The way it was done was unconscionable.
Needed to be repeated......
You must have been licking swattie’s backside - you’re sounding more & more like him every day...
Oh, I get it - It’s a southron thang. Well, y’all would be best to keep it to yourselves...;’}
Is that a threat?
You know, I’ve tried to be polite and engage you in civil discussion.
When you bring up an issue I’ve tried to address it with facts rather than rhetoric.
You seem to have a compulsion to engage in name-calling and ad hominem attacks, on historical figures as well as those who try to discuss issues with you. If southerners in the 1850s were anything like you I believe the North showed great restraint in how it responded to their provocations.
A couple of years ago, before I’d engaged in some of these extended debates, I had a great deal of sympathy for the southern cause. I believed then, and still do to some extent, that historical revisionism was attempting to demonize the South and all southerners for their past history. I still respect southern military history. No group of men ever fought with greater heroism and honor, regardless of what I think of the cause for which they fought.
A great deal of this sympathy has dissipated, largely because of abusive Confederate apologists like you and SW.
I hope you take great pride in driving away your most likely allies in the fight against the continuing attempts to demonize southern and Confederate history.
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.