Lincoln holiday on its way out (West Virginia)

West Virginia Gazette Mail ^ | 9-8-2005 | Phil Kabler

[M. Espinola]

"To some, it's obvious who started the war."

It certainly is abundantly obvious who started the Civil War, coupled with the driving issue of slavery forever interlinked to the seditious Confederate ring leaders. Once again you have attempted to deny the Confederate goal to expand their Forced-Labour-Empire westward

Enter The No Spin Zone

Declarations of Causes of Seceding States:

Mississippi:

"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world."

"That we do not overstate the dangers to our institution, a reference to a few facts will sufficiently prove."

"The hostility to this institution commenced before the adoption of the Constitution, and was manifested in the well-known Ordinance of 1787, in regard to the Northwestern Territory."

"The feeling increased, until, in 1819-20, it deprived the South of more than half the vast territory acquired from France."

"The same hostility dismembered Texas and seized upon all the territory acquired from Mexico."

"It has grown until it denies the right of property in slaves, and refuses protection to that right on the high seas, in the Territories, and wherever the government of the United States had jurisdiction."

"t refuses the admission of new slave States into the Union, and seeks to extinguish it by confining it within its present limits, denying the power of expansion."

"It tramples the original equality of the South under foot."

"It has nullified the Fugitive Slave Law in almost every free State in the Union, and has utterly broken the compact which our fathers pledged their faith to maintain. "It advocates negro equality, socially and politically, and promotes insurrection and incendiarism in our midst."

==================================

South Carolina:

..."an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery.."

Sectional interest and animosity will deepen the irritation, and all hope of remedy is rendered vain, by the fact that public opinion at the North has invested a great political error with the sanction of more erroneous religious belief.

"United together, and we must be a great, free and prosperous people, whose renown must spread throughout the civilized world, and pass down, we trust, to the remotest ages. We ask you to join us in forming a confederacy of Slaveholding States."

==========================

Georgia:

..The law for the admission of Missouri, prohibiting slavery in all that portion of the territory acquired from France lying North of 36 [degrees] 30 [minutes] north latitude and outside of Missouri.

"The prohibition of slavery in the Territories is the cardinal principle of this organization."

======================

Texas:

"We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable."

"She was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as Negro slavery-- the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits-- a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time." (There's plenty more where those quotes came from)

======================================================

You were saying what? Slavery was not the issue? Your boys making those speeching today's KKK still quote speak of nothing else.

"Allmost all of the reasons for war seem to be driven more by fiery rhetoric than by a desire to actually carry slavery westward."

Those pro-slavers you admire and steadfastly support, were defeated before they could expand their Slaveocracy westward, while in the South the slave masters had their Slave Empire dismantled.

Don't you feel it's a real shame those Confederate slave wiping traitors were denied their goals? Too bad about those poor little old Confederates losing all their Jim Crow 'laws'. Funny how rarely the courts get it right & overturned those Deep South 'laws' as being unconstitutional.

[Colonel Kangaroo]

How dare you suggest that Southern gentlemen actually take responsibility for this sort of enterprise. Why that would require...hard work, sweat, and mingling with mud-sills. Not to mention, skill and ingenuity...

I think very few people, even those who defend the CSA, can sympathize with a group having such a warped viewpoint as the planter aristocracy at the apex of the Southern pyramid. Thus the effort to try to ignore such blunt expressions of the planter elite mentality as found in the Cornerstone speech.

[Colonel Kangaroo]

Through the normal Constitutional Political process, maintenance of slavery was the one thing that was undoubtedly and rigidly safe within the Union. It would appear as though the Radicals were the ones who used the war to circumvent the process.

It's a regret that there was not enough people in the South with your viewpoint in 1861 because we wouldn't have had this statement from the South Carolina declaration of causes for secession:

"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."

The words of the Confederates of 1861 plainly point to slavery as the central issue.

[Gianni]

It certainly is abundantly obvious who started the Civil War,

Finally, an FR Unionist who can read. Lincoln, in combination with Fox, created the plan that plunged the country into war. The totally-unqualified-to-make-the-decision Lincoln, following the advice of the totally-unqualified-to-make-the-decision Fox, contrary to the advice of trained military personnel, made the decision to violate the armistice. Just to be 100% certain, Admiral Lincoln sabotaged his own invasion plan by diverting Powhatan to Florida.

Congressional inquiries were stonewalled until the Union war machine was in full force. What passes as an acceptable answer to Congressional inquiry sure has changed:

MESSAGE TO THE SENATE.

TO THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES:--I have received a copy of the resolution of the Senate, passed on the 25th instant, requesting me, if in my opinion not incompatible with the public interest, to communicate to the Senate the despatches of Major Robert Anderson to the War Department during the time he has been in command of Fort Sumter. On examination of the correspondence thus called for, I have, with the highest respect for the Senate, come to the conclusion that at the present moment the publication of it would be inexpedient.

ABRAHAM LINCOLN

WASHINGTON, MARCH 16, 1861

It seems that once he realized how long his leash was without Southerners in congress, he got pretty good at it, though:

To the house of representatives:

In answer to the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 24th instant, asking the grounds, reasons, and evidence upon which the police Commissioners of Baltimore were arrested and are now detained as prisoners at Port McHenry, I have to state that it is judged to be incompatible with the public interest at this time to furnish the information called for by the resolution.

Abraham Lincoln.

Admiral Lincoln was a real weasel when it came to manipulating public opinion:

But if, as now appears to be true, in pursuit of a purpose to drive the United States authority from these places, an unprovoked assault has been made upon Fort Sumter, I shall hold myself at liberty to repossess, if I can, like places which had been seized before the Government was devolved upon me. And in every event I shall, to the extent of my ability, repel force by force. In case it proves true that Fort Sumter has been assaulted, as is reported, I shall perhaps cause the United States mails to be withdrawn from all the States which claim to have seceded, believing that the commencement of actual war against the Government justifies and possibly demands this.

Once again you have attempted to deny the Confederate goal to expand their Forced-Labour-Empire westward.

No, in fact, I could not have addressed it more directly. Which state in the West was a slave empire, messpinola? The territories were open to slavery, so where were the enormous numbers?

You were saying what? Slavery was not the issue?

No, in fact I said that slavery was the primary issue. Clean out your ears, dunderhead, you're making an ass of yourself.

[Gianni]

It's a regret that there was not enough people in the South with your viewpoint in 1861 because we wouldn't have had this statement from the South Carolina declaration of causes for secession:

I don't understand what you're trying to say. Clearly, the Radicals desired to upend the Constitution. The new president expressly stated that that sectional conflict would be carried forward (as you quoted in the 'house divided' line). The election, the makeup of the new congress, all factors pointed to political domination of the Southern states, and Lincoln himself confirmed that the power would be used against them.

Do you trust Lincoln's words to be correct? Then there were two alternatives, peaceful separation and bloody fratricidal war. The South made their choice, Admiral Lincoln made his.

[Non-Sequitur]

The election, the makeup of the new congress, all factors pointed to political domination of the Southern states, and Lincoln himself confirmed that the power would be used against them.

The country had been dominated by the south for most of the prior 80 years and yet the North saw no need for rebellion or 'bloody fratricidal war'. Why did the south see the need for this if not for the purpose of protecting their slavery?

[M. Espinola]

"Finally, an FR Unionist who can read. Lincoln, in combination with Fox, created the plan that plunged the country into war. The totally-unqualified-to-make-the-decision Lincoln, following the advice of the totally-unqualified-to-make-the-decision Fox, contrary to the advice of trained military personnel, made the decision to violate the armistice. Just to be 100% certain, Admiral Lincoln sabotaged his own invasion plan by diverting Powhatan to Florida."

This is a news bulletin: You are been awarded the Stand Award of the Week based on that "violate the armistice line.

"It seems that once he realized how long his leash was without Southerners in congress, he got pretty good at it, though:"

As I recall Abraham Lincoln was a Southerner himself, you know, born in a log cabin, near Hodgenville, Kentucky. If I am not mistaken Hodgenville, Kentucky is not exactly Park Avenue. Is that not correct Col Sanders?

"Admiral Lincoln was a real weasel when it came to manipulating public opinion:"

Honest Abe must have been had some tutoring from the Confederates in the "real weasel department.

Old Abe was in the Navy as an Admiral no less? Incredible stuff one learns reading the history according to the neo-Confederate spincultists. Was Lincoln a Lt General in the Union Army Air Core as well? LOL

Old Abe was correct in locking up Confederate Fifth Columnists behind Union Lines as in "evidence upon which the police Commissioners of Baltimore were arrested and are now detained as prisoners at Port McHenry" opps lost the key too.

The 16th President confronted with a Confederate armed rebellion went on to say "I have to state that it is judged to be incompatible with the public interest at this time to furnish the information called for by the resolution." A wise decision with renegade traitors in the midst. Abe knew national security was at great risk and acting accordingly without spilling the beans to Confederate spies lurking about.

"No, in fact, I could not have addressed it more directly. Which state in the West was a slave empire, messpinola? The territories were open to slavery, so where were the enormous numbers?"

The treasonous cotton upper crust first had to attempt to overthrow the United States government and install Davis & poster boy Stephens in the White House, prior to full scale importation of their slaves to the Western states & territories, but guess what Col, the little coup failed big time.

Don;t you think Davis...oh mean "President Davis", aged greatly while in the clink way up here in unconquered 'Yankeeland'. Maybe it was the lack of ladies shawls and those nightly, fancy, cotton plantation, 10 course dinners, served by his 'happy' slaves that made him depressed?

"No, in fact I said that slavery was the primary issue. Clean out your ears, dunderhead, you're making an ass of yourself."

When you're right, you're right, I am a dunderhead and an ass attempting to pry out the truth on the Civil War with a neo-confederate mouthpiece like .....you.

By the way, whose on first?

[mac_truck]

[pee] Interestingly enough, elsewhere in the same book, he [P.C. Coker] tells of the improvements in the harbor....particularly of a major dredging project that concluded in 1860. It was massive, and designed to develop a channel in the harbor to handle the newest and largest deep draft ocean going freighters.

Oh Yeah? I'll bet you a plate of spaghetti that the major dredging of Charleston harbor Coker talks about in his book was a FEDERAL project not a State one.

[Colonel Kangaroo]

Do you trust Lincoln's words to be correct? Then there were two alternatives, peaceful separation and bloody fratricidal war. The South made their choice, Admiral Lincoln made his.

That does not change the fact that slavery was the only issue separating North and South to the point of rupture. And I don't think peaceful separation was a longterm prospect either. As Lincoln said the two regions were too intertwined foe real separation and there could not be a long coexistence between the North, a society based on the ideals of freedom of the Founders and a backward society based on slavery principles the ancient Assyrians would be proud of.

[M. Espinola]

"..a society based on the ideals of freedom of the Founders and a backward society based on slavery principles the ancient Assyrians would be proud of."

Right on target, taking it directly to ground zero. Bravo!

[Gianni]

The country had been dominated by the south for most of the prior 80 years and yet the North saw no need for rebellion or 'bloody fratricidal war'.

Seen it, been there, done that. During the 80 years of supposed Southern domination, what were the abuses of the federal government? How many Southerners called for overturning the constitutional guarantees of the North? Undoubtedly, there were abuses of government, but I'm not sure a great deal of them rested on sectional hostility, save those surrounding the war of 1812.

Why did the south see the need for this if not for the purpose of protecting their slavery?

Of course they were leaving to protect their slavery, but it was framed in the much larger picture of objective rule. For years before the war an outright state of hostility existed in Kansas & Mo. Thousands of Northern editorialists, and preachers open mourned the death of the terrorist John Brown. Any victory which returned the country to the Constitutional agreements on slavery - Dred Scott, the FSA, etc was bemoaned throughout the North as an opressive injustice inflicted by Southerners, and now there was an administration and sufficient congressional support to wrest the government from it's constitutional chains (and they made clear their intent to do so).

[Non-Sequitur]

During the 80 years of supposed Southern domination, what were the abuses of the federal government? How many Southerners called for overturning the constitutional guarantees of the North?

And the abuses on the part of the North were?

[Non-Sequitur]

For years before the war an outright state of hostility existed in Kansas & Mo.

At least be honest and admit that that hostility was present on both sides of the issue, pro-slavery and anti-slavery.

Any victory which returned the country to the Constitutional agreements on slavery - Dred Scott, the FSA, etc was bemoaned throughout the North...

And any suggestion of limits on slavery inflamed the south.

...and now there was an administration and sufficient congressional support to wrest the government from it's constitutional chains (and they made clear their intent to do so).

So you claim, and that was justification for rebellion.

[Gianni]

This is a news bulletin: You are been awarded the Stand Award of the Week based on that "violate the armistice line.

There was not a man in the Cabinet that did not know that an attempt to reinforce Sumter would be the first blow of war. - Gideon Welles

Even preparation to reinforce will precipitate war. I would instruct Anderson to return from Sumter. - William Seward

They have placed an engineer officer at Fort Pickens to violate, as I consider, our agreement not to reinforce. - Braxton Bragg

The people petitioned and pleaded, begged and implored Lincoln and Seward to be heard before matters were brought to a bloody extreme, but their petitions were spurned and treated with contempt. - New York Express

We have no doubt Mr. Lincoln wants the Cabinet at Montgomery to take the initiative by capturing the two forts in its waters, for it would give him the opportunity of throwing upon the Southern Confederacy the responsibility of commencing hostilities. But the country and posterity will hold him just as responsible as if he struck the first blow. - New York Herald

I have had a conference with Secretary Mallory of Florida, and Secretary Fitzpatrick of Alabama, in which they informed me that they and Secretary Slidell had a personal interview with the President and the Secretary of the Navy and were assured by them that no attack would be made upon Fort Sumter and Fort Pickens or any excuse given for the shedding of blood during the present administration. - Governor Moore

Lincoln is trying to plunge the country into a cruel war as the surest means of destroying the Union upon the plea of enforcing the laws and protecting public property. - Steven Douglas

Heck Messpinola, even the commander in charge of the expedition to Pickens refused to land troops, as he knew it was a violation of the armistice and an outright act of war. Fortunately, for the bloodthirsty, Admiral Lincoln ordered his replacement.

As I recall Abraham Lincoln was a Southerner himself, you know, born in a log cabin, near Hodgenville, Kentucky. If I am not mistaken Hodgenville, Kentucky is not exactly Park Avenue. Is that not correct Col Sanders?

See how many of your yankee buds agree with that one.

Old Abe was in the Navy as an Admiral no less?

It's sarcasm. It would seem that trumping the opinions and orders of those with actual military expertise was a favorite hobby of King Lincoln.

Abe knew national security was at great risk and acting accordingly without spilling the beans to Confederate spies lurking about

What the hell are you talking about now? Okay, it's been 145 years, what was the super-secret nature of the arrest of the Maryland legislature? Stonewall Lincoln couldn't admit that they were arrested to prevent assembly and political excersize.

The treasonous cotton upper crust first had to attempt to overthrow the United States government and install Davis & poster boy Stephens in the White House,

Source that one, monkeyboy. 'Till then, you might as well say they were waiting for extraterrestrial contact.

[Gianni]

As Lincoln said the two regions were too intertwined foe real separation

Freudian typo?

there could not be a long coexistence between the North, a society based on the ideals of freedom of the Founders and a backward society based on slavery principles the ancient Assyrians would be proud of.

Founders, a majority of whom were slaveowners. Or were they the good slaveowners, while their children were the evil slaveowners. Get over yourself, your little hyperbole fools nobody.

[mac_truck]

[Hey] You've talked about Warehousing Acts, Navigation Acts, and more. So I go off to learn more about those subjects. But what I find doesn't support what you claim they do. It only supports that the south didn't care to spend its capital on other things (imported luxury goods, perhaps) than on ships and harbor improvements.

[Pea] Somehow, I knew you would come around to arrogant bashing again. Let me give you an example again of what you don't know. In the earlier post on Charleston, you cut and pasted a quote from an author, P. C. Coker. He wrote a book entitled "Charleston's Maritime Heritage", and you pasted a paragraph from that book. Interestingly enough, elsewhere in the same book, he tells of the improvements in the harbor....particularly of a major dredging project that concluded in 1860. It was massive, and designed to develop a channel in the harbor to handle the newest and largest deep draft ocean going freighters. So, your contention: "...the south didn't care to spend its capital on other things (imported luxury goods, perhaps) than on ships and harbor improvements." ...is not only factually incorrect, but really arrogant bashing, Sir.

Actually South Carolina didn't mind spending FEDERAL dollars on deepening the Charleston Harbor. Those appropriations had been ongoing for almost a decade. H.R.585. Several decades if you go back to the FEDERAL appropriations to develop and improve a system of forts for the defense of Charleston Harbor. I haven't been able to uncover any evidence that those independent minded South Carolinians eschwed any of that FEDERAL largess however. State sovereignty has its limits...

Pea, rather than focusing you attention on what you perceive to be arrogant bashing , why don't you try presenting a cogent rebuttal to the charge that the South was in no way prohibited from any of the activities promoted by either the Warehousing Act or the Navigation Act. Failure to do so leaves a rather large hole in your 'unfair economic practices led the South to leave' paradigm [lol].

[M. Espinola]

"Lincoln is trying to plunge the country into a cruel war as the surest means of destroying the Union upon the plea of enforcing the laws and protecting public property. - Steven Douglas"

I thought AlGore, another sore loser of a presidential election was willing to hit below the belt, but maybe AlGore was reading Steven Douglas.

Oh by the way could you explain Douglas' meaning of "protecting public property"

It truly is amazing that on a website entitled 'Free' Republic, defenders of slavery in America are still spouting their 'confederate' propaganda some 145 years after the defeat of the enemy within.

"Stonewall Lincoln couldn't admit that they were arrested to prevent assembly and political excersize."

Once again your historical terminology is all swamped up, "Stonewall" was your man. (It's a shame he did not remain loyal & fight for the Union, as some born below the Mason Dixie Line did indeed, to their credit as loyal Americans.)

If you desire to head down this road "Heck Messpinola..Source that one, monkeyboy.." two can play that game ginzo-Gianni the greeseball defender of the last pro-slavery insurrection.

[Colonel Kangaroo]

Are you sure the majority of the Founders were slaveowners?In defense of the 18th century Founders, even most the slaveowners among them weren't as proud of their squalid system as the slave lovers of Dixie were in the 1860s. The leaders of the South regressed while the rest of the country progressed.

"Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. This truth has been slow in the process of its development, like all other truths in the various departments of science. It has been so even amongst us. Many who hear me, perhaps, can recollect well, that this truth was not generally admitted, even within their day. The errors of the past generation still clung to many as late as twenty years ago. Those at the North, who still cling to these errors, with a zeal above knowledge, we justly denominate fanatics."

--Alexander Stephens

[Colonel Kangaroo]

I never thought that I would hear anybody in the 21st century expressing approval for the Dred Scott decision and the Fugitive Slave Act, two of the most noxious blights on the history of America.

Thank goodness for the Radical Republicans and the armies from the North, which removed by force this wicked system from our land.

[Gianni]

the South was in no way prohibited from any of the activities promoted by either the Warehousing Act or the Navigation Act. Failure to do so leaves a rather large hole in your 'unfair economic practices led the South to leave' paradigm

That's like saying the North was in no way prohibited from taking advantage of the cotton gin or the slave system, and their failure to do so left a rather large hole in the 'unfair economic practices led to separation' paradigm.

Tell me, is there anything, today, preventing North Dakota from taking advantage of coal subsidies? Or gaining benefit from a steel tariff? It seems those would be acts tartgeted to benefit states like West Virginia or Pennsylvania, regardless of where they apply.