On this date in 1864 President Lincoln receives a Christmas gift.

[Bull Snipe]

"I beg to present you as a Christmas gift the City of Savannah, with one hundred and fifty heavy guns and plenty of ammunition and about twenty-five thousand bales of cotton." General William T. Sherman's "March to the Sea" was over. During the campaign General Sherman had made good on his promise d “to make Georgia howl”. Atlanta was a smoldering ruin, Savannah was in Union hands, closing one of the last large ports to Confederate blockade runners. Sherman’s Army wrecked 300 miles of railroad and numerous bridges and miles of telegraph lines. It seized 5,000 horses, 4,000 mules, and 13,000 head of cattle. It confiscated 9.5 million pounds of corn and 10.5 million pounds of fodder, and destroyed uncounted cotton gins and mills. In all, about 100 million dollars of damage was done to Georgia and the Confederate war effort.

[BroJoeK]

Kalamata on Madisoin's "in toto and forever": "...Note: the document could also be “changed” by a blood-thirsty dictator, like Lincoln; but he corrupted only the original intent, not the written words themselves.
That is my last word on that letter."

That last sentence is just Kalamata-code for, "yes, I know you're right here, but as a trained, dedicated Democrat I can never openly admit that anything you G.D. Republicans say is true."

Oh, dear... did I just make up a quote and put it in Kalamata's mouth?
Naw… I'm pretty sure he meant it... ;-)

[BroJoeK]

OIFVeteran to Kalamata quoting Jefferson: "When any one state in the American Union refuses obedience to the Confederation by which they have bound themselves, the rest have a natural right to compel them to obedience.”
- Thomas Jefferson, 24 January, 1786"

Given the year (1786), Jefferson is here advocating for stronger national government than then existed under the Articles of Confederation.
His words could apply to such things as taxes and national defense.

Years later Jefferson worried about a Federal government too strong and needing Nullification by states.
But nearing the end of his life Jefferson had another thought:

"I regret that I am to die in the belief that the useless sacrifice of themselves by the generation of 1776, to acquire self-government and happiniess to their country, is to be thrown away by the unwise and unworthy passions of their sons, and that my only consolation is to be, that I live not to weep over it.
If they would but dispassionately weigh the blessings they will throw away, against an abstract principle more likely to be effected by union than by secession, they would pause before they would perpetuate this act of suicide on themselves, and of treason against the hopes of the world.
To yourself, as the faithful advocate of the union, I tender the offering of my high esteem and respect."
Thomas Jefferson ltr to John Holmes 22 April 1820."

And Madison refers to similar Jefferson opinions (which I've not seen):

"Even in the case of a mere League between nations absolutely independent of each other, neither party has a right to dissolve it at pleasure; each having an equal right to expound its obligations, and neither, consequently a greater right to pronounce the compact void than the other has to insist on the mutual execution of it.
[See, in Mr. Jefferson's volumes, his letters to J. M. Mr. Monroe & Col. Carrington] "

Bottom line: our Founders believed in and practiced disunion from necessity (1776) or mutual consent (1786) but never unilateral secession at pleasure (1860).

[BroJoeK]

Kalamata to OIFVeteran: "Your incessant hero-worship of a greedy, brutal, blood-thirsty dictator who destroyed our free government cannot be healthy."

Our FRiend Kalamata repeats such Bull-Schiff endlessly enough that I'm inclined to conclude it's sort of the core essence, distilled down to a few words, of what he truly believes.
In other words, all his other posts, all those lengthy quotes, all his convoluted reasoning and presumptuous insults -- all that is just so he can stand on his mountain-top and yell to the world: Lincoln the "brutal, blood-thirsty dictator".

Just as Democrats today proclaim our Republican president a "brutal dictator" who must be impeached!

I'm beginning to think that such insane accusations are a Republican badge of honor -- along the lines of "deplorables" and "irredeemable" -- that if Democrat heads aren't insanely exploding, then Republicans haven't really done much good.

[BroJoeK]

Kalamata to OIFVeteran: "Face it: nothing Davis did or did not do will hide Lincoln’s legacy of terror.
Lincoln will go down in history as a blood-thirsty, power-mad psychopath.
Count on it."

And there it is again, the core essence of Kalamata's beliefs, the lessons he was taught as a child, the organizing principle around which everything else he believes is built, the necessary "fact" which justifies every other lie the Dan-child was taught or invented.

And today a new generation of children is being abused by Democrats, politically, into believing that Republican President Trump is the devil incarnate and 60 years from now those Kalamata juniors will be on internet sites proclaiming with total conviction just what their Democrat abusers teach them now.

Abused children are to be pitied, their Democrat abusers condemned.

[rockrr]

This "quote" clearly identifies Mr. Olive as Adam Schiff's twin brother, demonstrating they went to the same school for political lying and learned the same lessons there on how to attack Republicans.

Kalimari's posts amply demonstrate that, although someone may have filled his noggin with voluminous notions, he hasn't truly learned any lessons at all.

[RegulatorCountry]

Your BroJoke mini-me routine is nothing if not amusing. Does he ever trip over you running around his feet?

[rockrr]

“It’s life’s illusions that I recall
I really don’t know life at all” - Kalimari

[rockrr]

GFY

[RegulatorCountry]

Such an intelligent rejoinder.

As you were, back under the skirts you go. Try not to piddle in excitement.

[BroJoeK]

OIFVeteran to Kalamata: "Here James Madison's word is to never allow America to be “rendered into pieces”, the very thing that the southern rebels did."

Kalamata to OIFVeteran: "Baloney.
James Madison and the real republicans of his day would have tarred and feathered Lincoln, and drug him behind a horse for 40 miles, before hanging him.
The greedy, power-mad Whigs, like Lincoln, divided our country.
Only the polically-challenged would believe Lincoln was a true republican.
He and his ilk formed the foundation of the influence-peddling, big government RINO’s, and the Democrat Party."

And here it is yet again, the true Dan-child, abused by Democrats as a boy, politically, now becomes the abusive adult, hoping to convince Republicans that old Democrat lies are the real truth of history.

They're not, they were lies from the beginning and still are.

Kalamata "I am the only conservative in this conversation.
You don’t even know the meaning of the word.
You really should study how to interpret history, rather than cherry-pick it."

Our Dan-child is "conservative" only as defined by lunatic Democrats, meaning: anti-Federalist, anti-Founders, anti-Constitution, anti-Republican, anti-American.
What he wishes to "conserve" is the Old Confederacy -- not of course as it actually was, but rather as our Lost Causers fantasize it to have been.

This was reality, but only for a few:

[DiogenesLamp]

The ship Harriet Lane fired on sailed out Charleston harbor.

Back when I first started discussing the Civil War with people I thought the Harriet Lane was an egregious example of unnecessary belligerence on the part of South Carolina.

Last year I learned that the Harriet Lane was carrying a secret contingent of men intended to be used to reinforce Sumter. In other words, they were engaging in deliberately provocative belligerence against the Confederates.

Still, this did not excuse the behavior of the Citadel Cadets who fired at them without provocation, because how could they have known the Harriet Lane was secretly carrying arms and munitions to be used against them?

And then I learned that these forces were transferred to the Harriet Lane out in the middle of the ocean for the express purpose of keeping it a secret, meaning they knew that if people knew the truth, they would be angry about it.

And then I learned, word of what the Harriet Lane was carrying did in fact reach Charleston long before the Harriet Lane got there, so people did know that the Harriet Lane was on a belligerent mission against them.

And so now what I used to believe has been shown to be wrong based on the arrival of new information that I previously did not know.

And so I changed my mind about this incident.

Remember, the plan did not call for the war ships or the supply ship to enter the harbor. Lie off, transfer the cargo to small boats and have them towed in to the Fort. Same plan would have worked for an unarmed merchant ship with an unarmed tug.

If this is true, why then did Admiral David Porter write in his account that all those ships would have been quickly sunk? Did Admiral Porter have it wrong, and he simply didn't understand the plan?

[DiogenesLamp]

The claim that the war was caused by slavery is the narrative of the Left and neocons. They had me fooled for the better part of my life.

Me too. Took awhile, but I finally realized this is a propaganda narrative, and the real goal was power. This narrative was just a vehicle to hang on to power, and still is.

[DoodleDawg]

The claim that the war was caused by slavery is the narrative of the Left and neocons. They had me fooled for the better part of my life.

Apparently it had the Southern leaders of the period fooled, too. You all do seem to be a gullible bunch.

[DiogenesLamp]

On the one side we have the opinions of DiogenesLamp, self-confessed pro-Confederate, anti-American, anti-Federalist & anti-Republican who wants only one thing: to destroy the USA.

You act like you are going to respond to my point and then you just launch into an ad hominem? Do you think you will hurt my feelings with this sort of rant? Are you doing it to impress others?

I don't think adults need to waste people's time by portraying others as "bad people." It does nothing to convince the person you are arguing with of the correctness of your claim, and it doesn't convince any undecided observers either.

It is simply "preaching to the choir". It is not debate.

Back to the discussion. How do you get Abortion out of the 14th Amendment? How do you get banning prayer in public schools out of the 14th amendment?

[Bull Snipe]

Still, this did not excuse the behavior of the Citadel Cadets who fired at them without provocation, because how could they have known the Harriet Lane was secretly carrying arms and munitions to be used against them?

You mean Star of the West don’t you?

“he simply didn’t understand the plan?”

That is why they chartered two steam tugs and put extra boats on Powhatan.
The Navy folks knew that portions of the entrance to Charleston were blocked. The ships lie off shore, transfer the provisions to the boats, the steam tugs tow the boats to Fort Sumter. They are shallow draft so they should have been able to negotiate any impediment to entering the harbor.

[DiogenesLamp]

But Kalamata's posts are awash in ad hominems, so you should not feel sorry when he gets back what he dishes out.

I skip over his ad hominems too. I find some of the quotes he posts quite interesting, and so I often go to the trouble to look them over when I see them.

Also, "Someone else does it too!" is not a good argument. One person's bad behavior does not make another person's bad behavior acceptable.

Yes, DiogenesLamp is a different story, beginning with the fact that you are usually quite good about not attacking other FReepers with ad hominems.

Well thank you for noticing. I generally don't have any desire to cast fellow Freepers as bad people. I know that the vast majority of people on this website are good, decent upstanding individuals who are a credit to their communities, and though I and they may disagree about various subjects from time to time, I do not regard any of these people to be motivated by bad impulses.

When all is said and done, we are all on the same side.

I'm guessing there was a pretty Southern girl who stole your heart and would not give it back, and so to please her you'd do just about anything, right?

My woman is from San Diego. I guess that is south of the Mason/Dixon line, isn't it? :)

And while i'm at it, she has a pretty good resemblance to Elizabeth Montgomery, and in fact her last name was "Montgomery." Her dad was Elizabeth's cousin.

[DiogenesLamp]

"Withdrawal from the European Union is governed by Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union.

Withdrawal from the American Union is governed by the Founding Charter of the United States which is also known as "The Declaration of Independence."

Also, the Brits are a nuclear power, and they can literally F*** up the European Union if the Union gets uppity about it.

Just goes to show, "speak softly and carry a big stick" is a pretty good rule for getting what you want.

For some reason people are perfectly willing to recognize your rights if you have the muscle to force them to do it if they become obstinate.

[wardaddy]

You’re a better man than I gunga

I’ve been here a long time

Some of these south bashers were definitely not on our side

Whiskey papa

Llan Deussant

Who is george salt?

Morton sult

#3fan

Illbay

R9etb

Non Sensical

Sinkspur

Stormer....God help us

And so on

But given you’re much more capable than I arguing fine points I’ll defer

I’m more about I don’t like self righteous Yankees calling my ancestors nazis or joining the woke tearing down out statues than I am deconstructing Lincoln

I’ve been this way since Manhattan 1982 when I first confronted such liberals

Kalamata is pretty damn good from my perch....incredible actually

He keeps em jumping around on a skillet....uncomfortable even when facing off against a the whole posse

It’s impressive whoever he or she is

The thread goes on forever....

[Kalamata]

>>BroJoeK quoting OIFVeteran quoting Lincoln: "I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men every where could be free. Yours, A. Lincoln."
>>Kalamata wrote: "Summary (paraphrasing): "I intend to colonize Blacks and Mulattos to ensure they are "free" somewhere else besides America. I don't want those sub-humans mixing with us white folk. Until then -- while they remain here in American -- they are not free to marry and mingle with whites, to hold public office, to vote, or to serve on juries." -- A. Lincoln"
>>BroJoeK wrote: "This "quote" clearly identifies Mr. Olive as Adam Schiff's twin brother, demonstrating they went to the same school for political lying and learned the same lessons there on how to attack Republicans. Compare Olive's "quote" of Lincoln here to Shiff's "quote" of President Trump alleging an illegal phone call with the Ukrainian president."

BroJoeK's posts are always deceptive. He lies like Adam Schiff, but on steroids. This was my original DIRECT quote of Lincoln:

"I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, [applause]—that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."

[Fourth Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Charleston, Illinois, September 18, 1858: Lincoln's speech, in Roy P. Basler, "The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln Vol 3." Rutgers University Press, 1953, pp.145-146]

This was my summary of Lincoln's statement:

"I intend to colonize Blacks and Mulattos to ensure they are "free" somewhere else besides America. I don't want those sub-humans mixing with us white folk. Until then -- while they remain here in American -- they are not free to marry and mingle with whites, to hold public office, to vote, or to serve on juries." -- A. Lincoln

How could any honest broker object to my summary of Lincoln's statement?

Answer: honest brokers do not object.

Mr. Kalamata

[DiogenesLamp]

So, only 6% of US imports came directly to Confederate state ports and less than 2% to CSA ports other than New Orleans.

That is misleading. The system was rigged so that things the Southerners bought would land in New York and then be packet shipped to their city through New York controlled shipping companies.

The navigation act of 1817 pretty much created this situation, along with Washington DC subsidies for mail carrying and such.

The end user still pays the taxes even if it lands in New York and then gets packet shipped to Charleston by an American shipping company.

Oh, and the New York businesses charged quite a lot for their packet shipping service as well as all their other management "services." According to some accounts I have read, New York was pulling 60% of the income from Southern exports.