Posted on 10/17/2006 5:18:26 PM PDT by bushpilot1
Eisenhower letter regarding Robert E. Lee
President Dwight Eisenhower wrote the following letter in response to one he received dated August 1, 1960, from Leon W. Scott, a dentist in New Rochelle, New York. Scott’s letter reads:
“Dear Mr. President:
“At the Republican Convention I heard you mention that you have the pictures of four (4) great Americans in your office, and that included in these is a picture of Robert E. Lee.
“I do not understand how any American can include Robert E. Lee as a person to be emulated, and why the President of the United States of America should do so is certainly beyond me.
“The most outstanding thing that Robert E. Lee did was to devote his best efforts to the destruction of the United States Government, and I am sure that you do not say that a person who tries to destroy our Government is worthy of being hailed as one of our heroes.
“Will you please tell me just why you hold him in such high esteem?
Sincerely yours,
“Leon W. Scott”
Eisenhower's response, written on White House letterhead on August 9, 1960 reads as follows:
August 9, 1960
Dear Dr. Scott:
Respecting your August 1 inquiry calling attention to my often expressed admiration for General Robert E. Lee, I would say, first, that we need to understand that at the time of the War Between the States the issue of Secession had remained unresolved for more than 70 years. Men of probity, character, public standing and unquestioned loyalty, both North and South, had disagreed over this issue as a matter of principle from the day our Constitution was adopted.
General Robert E. Lee was, in my estimation, one of the supremely gifted men produced by our Nation. He believed unswervingly in the Constitutional validity of his cause which until 1865 was still an arguable question in America; he was thoughtful yet demanding of his officers and men, forbearing with captured enemies but ingenious, unrelenting and personally courageous in battle, and never disheartened by a reverse or obstacle. Through all his many trials, he remained selfless almost to a fault and unfailing in his belief in God. Taken altogether, he was noble as a leader and as a man, and unsullied as I read the pages of our history.
From deep conviction I simply say this: a nation of men of Lee’s caliber would be unconquerable in spirit and soul. Indeed, to the degree that present-day American youth will strive to emulate his rare qualities, including his devotion to this land as revealed in his painstaking efforts to help heal the nation’s wounds once the bitter struggle was over, we, in our own time of danger in a divided world, will be strengthened and our love of freedom sustained.
Such are the reasons that I proudly display the picture of this great American on my office wall.
Sincerely,
Dwight D. Eisenhower
Fixed it for you.
Well, after all, I am a historian with several degrees. I am from the South originally, and therefore am considered an expert on Southern culture. I attended several Southern universities, studying under notable historians. Later, migrating North, I achieved graduate degrees, and completed several papers on the history of slavery. One undergraduate paper I did was on slave breeding, and interestingly enough, I used the Internet to source new material. This, of course, was the forerunner to today's modern research by some of the posters here, and influenced the Howard Dean planning team on support and fundraising.
...
I am a research assistant at a major New England learning center, and having done quite a bit of research on the slave breeding in the South, maybe I can help you.
...
I have online access to electronic versions of the following peer-reviewed economic journals:
American Economic Review, Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Canadian Journal of Economics, Econometrica, Economic Geography, Economic History Review, Economic Journal, Economica, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, International Economic Review, Journal of Economic History, Journal of Economic Literature, Journal of Human Resources, Journal of Industrial Economics, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Journal of Political Economy, Journal of Risk and Insurance, Oxford Economic Papers, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economics and Statistics, Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, Bell Journal of Economics, Journal of Economic Abstracts, Contributions to Canadian Economics, Journal of Labor Economics, RAND Journal of Economics, Journal of Applied Econometrics, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Journal of Insurance, Publications of the American Economic Association, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity. Microeconomics, American Economic Association Quarterly, Journal of the American Association of University Teachers of Insurance, and Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (American Association of University Teachers of Insurance).
...
Yes, today what we might call luxuries were lavished upon the breeding class in the middle states. However, studies show that the more luxuries they obtained, at one point procreation related activities began to decline, producing, if you will, a breeding bell curve. And thank you for your suggestion that recreation leather ball point acquisition, and procreation scoring might be affected by an external independant variable, instead of direct causation.
This may require further data review. I will take this concept of yours to my moderated research and discussion group to view their research, and obtain a final answer.
Best wishes from Boston Cosmo
...
With no radios, t.v.s, or stereos, the occupants took many baths, and would retire early. Wealthy landowners were importing large amounts of lovely bedding, fine perfumes, wine, whiskey, and cigars. All of these items were given the procreants for their enjoyment, and were readily available in the log cabins. Thus the large trade in fine wines and cigars was for the benefit of these people.
On weekends, the slave owners would supply the breeding population with recreational pastimes. Oval shaped leather balls were given to the men who then proceeded to organize groups that would move these balls over the fields. The females were given decorated gingham short skirts which permitted jumping and cartwheels, and encouraged to affiliate them selves with these groups and to verbally encourage their favorite groups to move the balls. A point system eventually followed and enabled scoring of the activity. This was the forerunner to today's game of football. Occasionally to reward the participants, baskets of peaches were brought to the field, and eventually someone thought to tack one to a tree. Tossing of the ball into the basket also became popular.
...
Greetings from Boston. Here is the perspective on Lincoln from my dissertation -->Even though the large majority of Americans, North and South, believed in a right of secession as of 1861, upon taking office Lincoln implemented a series of unconstitutional acts of such monumental proportions that no man who had the least bit of respect for constitutional liberty could have done such things.
...
Hello and Greetings from Boston As you may remember, I am a noted historian and former resident of the South. I beleive you said "No distortion is too low for him or his gullible fans."
...
"Cosmo," your m.o. is familiar by now. You are even more of a liar and braggart than squattie. Who are you to "reprimand" anyone?
Several problems with that. First, I've never heard that the South was an exporter of food, exactly the opposite. Where do your figures come from? Second, hos did they pay for it without exports. Third, are you honestly suggesting that the government placed a tariff on war materials?
First, Sir, there was no rebellion. There was separation.
On the contrary, Sir, the southern actions were a rebellion.
The Movement of Goods in the Antebellum Economy
"In the years before the war, Southern ports were leading exporters of domestic produce."
The Union Navy's Blockade Reconsidered
David G. Surdam
© 1998 by David G. Surdam
Naval War College Review, Autumn 1998, Vol. LI, No. 4
True. But the claim is that imports were totally dependant on exports to pay for them and that doesn't seem to be the truth.
Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery - the greatest material interest of the world.~Mississippi secession declaration
See, that was easy. If you want to thoroughly identify with the Confederates, then just thoroughly identify with slavery.
Why was New York doing business with the Slave states in 1860 putting $200,000,000 in their pockets. New York city pockets.
Well said DomainMaster
For the same reason that America does business with communist China today. Call it an "engagement policy."
Saw that on another thread, and it reminded me of you. Cheers.
Moi? You must not have a dictionary to look up "indignation": "strong displeasure at something considered unjust, offensive, insulting, or base; righteous anger."
As far as fake indignation goes, this is pretty good: "Don't be concerned with me. Just be aware that you may not know what you think you know when you are posting your non-sequiturs that you use to ridicule others. That borders on the paranoid."
So's this: 'To repeat, "Your arrogance is affecting your judgment, and it is becoming obvious to many people here.'
And this is pretty good, too: "You are the one around here that absolutely insists that validity rests in "peer review", and you must now apply your own qualification to non-sequitur's source, who, as you admit, is no more than some undergraduate who published a term paper on line."
But I don't think you have a patch on DomainMaster for indignation faked: "Your slushy commentary does not change the facts: You posted a quote that misquoted an original source and act shocked that it should matter. You continued to support the erroneous out of context meaning delivered by your quote despite being exposed and continue to deny its importance."
It all has to do with what I said earlier:
That seems to be the strategy: pick something to get indignant about and harp on it for a long time. Then you convince yourself that you're really on to something, that you've somehow uncovered the fatal flaw in someone's argument or character, when really you're just being a pain.
If you can put someone else on the defensive and wax on and on about some supposed deception, you figure you've "won" in some way. All the better if you get someone else to melt down, or if you simply label their responses "meltdowns." It's all a very familiar game by now.
It's all about fake indignation (or indignation faked) with you guys. Don't put your problems on my head (or I may get indignant as well).
We need to remember a time when the USA was more civil and not insane...
The civil war changed that as the prevailing attitude. And that is the lens many mistakenly use when forming an opinion on the civil war. Even if slavery were the root of the war, the underlying disagreement was not about slavery (that difference had been brewing for decades by 1861). Rather, the disagreement dealt with a state's right to 'opt out' of the federal compact.
I suggest that during the formative years of Lee's youth (1820-1830), contemporary scholars would have taken for granted a state's right to leave...and the notion that a state couldn't was 'new' and downright revolutionary in 1861. Heck, most northerners didn't agree with Lincoln at that time, when it came to going to war over it.
Lee is not without fault, but far from a villain. Some people forget that an abolitionist hell bent on starting a war, by the name of Brown, was defeated at Harper's Ferry...by a then federal officer named Robert E Lee. Both sides were itching for a fight, and Lee did his duty the best he could...with his underlying allegiance to his state (as was customary in his youth) and not to the union.
ps: I'm the son of Yankees, who grew up in the south, and now lives in the state where the seeds of the civil war were sown - Kansas. I have relatives who fought for the union army (and one who fought on both sides). I am also a graduate of West Point (I mention because that seems to have become a theme of this thread). I have no blind loyalty to the south or the confederacy...but I feel I have a deep understanding of the southern psyche, and bristle at northerners who reflexively paint southerners as racists.
The secession of the Southern states meant that untaxed goods would be flowing directly from Europe to Southern ports. Since over 70% of Treasury revenue came from tariffs, and that as much as 75% of the tariff revenue was going to cease to exist, Lincoln did what he said he was going to do in his inaugural address.....force the South to pay.
Secession, slavery, etc. were just empty issues.
It was a tariff-trade war.
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.