Posted on 03/08/2022 5:03:25 AM PST by Homer_J_Simpson
WASHINGTON, Friday, March 7.
The more the President's Message is discussed the more difficult is it to define the position of parties in regard to it. One great point, however, is gained the subject is universally discussed with more calmness than has ever before characterized a question about Slavery.
DEPARTURE OF GOV. JOHNSON FOR TENNESEE.
Gov. ANDREW JOHNSON, accompanied by his son, Col. ROBERT JOHNSON, WILLIAM A. BROWNING, Secretary, &c., Hon. HORACE MAYNARD, and Hon. EMERSON ETHERIDGE, Clerk of the House, left Washington this afternoon for Nashville, via Harrisburgh, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati and Louisville.
THE MAILS TO THE SOUTH PACIFIC, VIA PANAMA.
The Senate Committee on Post-offices, at their meeting to-day, authorized Mr. COLLAMER to report Mr. SUMNER's bill to provide for the carrying the mails from the United States to foreign ports, with a recommendation that immediate action be had, so as to provide for carrying the mails to the South Pacific before the 21st inst., after which date Commodore VANDERBILT has notified the Postmaster-General he will refuse to take the mails. The bill, as reported, provider that any vessels clearing from a foreign port shall take and receive any mail matter placed on board said vessel by the United States Consul or by the port officers of such foreign port or place, for the United States, and shall deliver the same to the Post-office of the place aforesaid in the United States.
ALLOTMENTS OF THE NEW-YORK SOLDIERS.
The Allotment Commissioners from New-York to-day closed up the object of their mission, having visited upwards of 70 regiments, and handed over to the Paymaster-General all the certificates, so that that officer can complete what remains to be done. They have been eminently successful.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
That is an interesting comment.
If the South went to war to preserve constitutional slavery, who took up arms to violently overthrow constitutional slavery?
Set your thinking aside for a moment. Like me, you probably want people in the blue-state culture to like you; at least you don't want them to kill you.
Get some life insurance by identifying something people in blue-state culture say they believe and get in emotional synchronization. Simply say, I denounce that in the strongest possible terms. It could be something that happened 200 years ago.
The other day I saw a dog chase a cat and said loudly, “I denounce that in the strongest possible terms.” Liberals around me loved me.
I'm telling you it works.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iz6UkIYpc9A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OODHwiEfCvc&t=56s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UC2OqBl-uc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5tMoEiKw9g
Silly and steered by emotional responses. Exactly why they make horrible voters.
You Rebs enshrined it in The Confederate Constitution
Lincoln wanted to end slavery , and he did.
His utmost imperative was to preserve the Union. Your side LOST Reb and you just can't admit that.
AHHHHH SHADDDUP DUDE.
You Rebs started a war to preserve slavery. Admit, stupid.
“The Constitution , as first drafted in 1781 said nothing on the subject of slavery t the national level, leaving it to the individual states.”
That is an interesting comment.
May we see your data on that?
Look it up on line the same as I did you lazy ass Reb.
You made a bold claim. I challenged you to back it up. You can't do it.
No need. Your side passed the permanent slavery amendment through congress. All the Southern states had to do was vote "yes" and we would have had a permanent slavery USA.
Shows what kind of horrible human beings were on your side.
Three things wrong here. The Constitution was drafted in 1787, not 1781, and secondly the Constitution prohibits congress from passing a law to abolish the slave trade until 1808.
If the constitution specifically bars congress from passing a law to stop the slave trade until 1808, it demonstrates that slavery was inherently legal on the national level.
Thirdly, Article IV, Section 2 is the "fugitive slave clause" of the US Constitution. It specifies that slaves must be returned to their masters.
So yeah, the US Constitution has slavery incorporated right into it, though they go to great lengths in avoiding the usage of the word "slave."
You probably believe the United States invented slavery, dont you?
Check out The Articles of Confederation stupid.
Google the info just as I did. Under Articles of Confederation, the first draft of what would later become the Constitution. Just can’t admit you Rebs went to war to preserve slavery, can you?
You started a war over it AND LOST! Didn't you?
Your side LOST THE WAR IT STARTED!
I don't know anyone growing up in the United States that is unaware of Hebrew slaves in Egypt.
I am surprised you would ask such a thing.
I am well aware of the Articles of Confederation, but you said the United States Constitution, which is a very different thing.
As the US Constitution was the more permanent National Charter and governed subsequently to it's adoption, that document determines the rule of law in the US, and that document implicitly makes slavery legal in the US.
Had the Northern Republicans gotten their way, the original 13th amendment would have made slavery permanent.
Just shows what horrible people they were.
Also, you sound like you are trying to convince yourself. Repeating something over and over again might work on you, but it isn't going to convince me or any rational person.
Well, you seem totally convinced that the Civil War was not about $$$.
When is that EVER true?
To the contrary. I have been saying for the last three years or so that the Civil War was *ONLY* about money.
The Civil War was launched by Lincoln to protect his corrupt buddies in the North who made a lot of money because the Government controlled the South's trade with Europe.
When they declared independence, this was a grave financial threat to the powerful men of the North that ran industries which would be devastated by the South trading directly with Europe.
The Civil War was only about money, but we've been taught the fiction that it was about slavery. No, it was about money, and only money.
When is that EVER true?
It is never true. Wars are fought for money and power. Nothing else.
No. Don’t try that bs with me Lampster. The South, that is the Confederacy lost everything as a result of the war it started.
And 157 years later, NOTHING is going change that.
And as far as ‘’repeating something over and over’’. HA! Says Mr.Asperger’s Syndrome himself.
I don’t care if the facts of history are tiresome to you, they’re facts none the less.
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.