Posted on 06/07/2007 5:42:31 PM PDT by freespirited
Major Garrett has sources on both sides of the aisle telling him we can write the bill's obituary. Roll call going on now.
By the way, I’m still waiting for your explanation of what “NeoConfed” means. You really do owe me an explanation if you are going to assign labels.
Come on, explain yourself.
So was Clinton. And he was and is a disgrace to the South that gave him birth.
So your point is what?
Don’t be so cocky. Book sales can drop. Especially when boycotted :)
I knew you were going to say that, which is the reason I asked you clarify your “traitor” comment. Grow up.
Sorry, that doesn't fly.
I have no respect for you anymore.
Dang...I expect that kind of stuff from the elitists.
Not from you, though.
I guess you are an elitist, too. :o(
neoconfed is a boogeyman some liberal scholars cooked up.
So what is Foote wrong about: The Chase quote or the Lieber quote?
we do take on the "neo-Confederates" as well as the Marxists in their interpretations of the CW.and
I read many books on the CW - from Gallagher, WC Davis, Burke Davis, Catton, Hummel, Thorton, Adams, Ward. Most of those I consider scholarly historical work. Though I find exceptions, I generally think they do not have a political agenda.
A couple of threads with some great CW book recommendations are:
The Best Civil War Books - FR Opinions Sought
The South and Southern History
Those volumes should keep you busy for a long time!
Gee, I just hopped on this thread to get an update on the latest regarding the immigration bill and its death or resurrection, depending on the day, when I find myself in the middle of the Civil War. Well, I’ll try another thread that actually is talking about the immigration bill. Meanwhile you blue and greys can battle it out.
compared to Doris Kearns Goodwin or Douglas Brinkley maybe....
I wonder if Larry is having fun yet....one little slip of the keyboard and the light finally shines on his own personal bias......which sorta stunned me after I bought his "conservative" history book..
I knew when i read the book and saw this obsession with slavery, the South and Jim Crow like that was of such predominance in American history and meanwhile almost nothing on nastiness towards Indians or some unsavory stuff Yankees might have done I knew this was a book that was a different sort of conservatism than mine...
not terrible mind you but quite stilted and revisionist towards the South...anyone who just adores Thaddeus Stevens or Charles Sumner...the Boxers and Schumers of their day...has lost me as a conservative.
I will never understand modern day northerners who loathe southern heritage so much....especially those who claim to be right wingers...we are the literal finger in the dyke that stops the liberal dam from innundating us all...southern crackers...without our bloc like voting habits it’d be over already
I don't think your thesis is correct.
One thing I will never understand is the willingness of would-be conservatives to attack the South. Jumping in bed with the liberal/social movement benefits only the Left. Bush has proved that by striking deals with Kennedy and look whose left holding the bag.
There is a new breed of conservatives who are hostile to the traditions of the South. They write selective history, they paint the GOP as an organization that can never do wrong, and it's getting tiresome.
Why drag up the past when the men who fought the battles sought peace through reunions and friendships. Hell - Buckner and Joe Johnston carried Grant's tomb. So why drive the wedge among conservatives....all the "compassionate conservative" deals are backfiring on the GOP.
At some point (and maybe it's already happening), Southerner conservatives will quit voting Republican. The history-lite books with a political angle do nothing for me - can't say much for Larry's book, but I sure won't read it after his treatment of great men like Jackson and Lee.
BTW: I'm reading Ed Bearss Fields of Honor - fantastic book with anecdotes between descriptive battles that only Bearss could do.
“Gee, I just hopped on this thread to get an update on the latest regarding the immigration bill and its death or resurrection, depending on the day, when I find myself in the middle of the Civil War.”
Well apparently we southerners need to defend our own right to citizenship in the opinion of a certain wannabe historian.....so from that perspective, it’s spot on!
That seems to be a very uncomfofrable fact for those who buy into the myth of the rebellion being a pure movement arising from the southern people. The rebellion was the result of political manipulations from a decaying ruling class in the interest of slavery. I believe the ignominious collapse of the reb armies testify to the illegitimacy of the movement. The Confederate soldiers in the end were realizing that a Slave Empire was not worth the price.
Attacking the slaveowners' Confederacy and attacking the South are two different things.
The secessionists' own words testify that all they were interested in was protecting slavery.
The slaveowners sacrificed the lives of good soldiers on both sides because they wanted to be able to take their slave property anywhere in the US. It's hard to find any other action so loathsome in American history.
To me, exaltation of a slavery regime is not compatible to conservatism.
Further, I take exception to any flavor of history that demonizes these men to "advance the party line."
So let's look at it -
The GOP practices a different conservatism than what I am comfortable with. The new brand of conservatism aligns itself with Ted Kennedy's interests, calls for more nationality and less sovereignty, provides for open borders, puts other nations interests ahead of its own countrymen.
I believe in these United States, I also believe there was only one perfect man to ever walk the earth. I don't believe in mudslinging a man's name 150 years after he's gone. Lee and Jackson were patriots - we need more men who are faithful, Christian leaders these days.
Even if that were true, we have already had many years of little or no enforcement- meaning we have had many years of open borders. Not to mention open borders is an open invitation to terrorists, so it should be a primary concern to anyone interested in the War on Terror.
Thank you, wardaddy.
It’s nice for us “slow readers” to have things explained. ;o)
These social moderate PC conservatives excite me about as much as anal fissures.
They resent us because they are jealous of our community ....our bond.
Anywhere you go in the world, if you meet an American from Dixie, it’s just amazing the familiarity....sense of belonging to a shared culture beyond just being an American...which is pretty good already.
only thing that tops that is if you are from Texas maybe...but that’s Dixie too.
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.