Posted on 07/23/2013 8:18:43 AM PDT by Bon of Babble
Rush Limbaugh would have sided with the confederacy during the Civil War, according to MSNBC analyst Dorian Warren.
Warren, a Columbia professor and fellow at the progressive Roosevelt Institute, explained that Limbaugh “represents the Confederacy. He would have been on that side that went to war around the question of slavery.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
And all entirely irrelevant.
when liberals get desperate they bring out the Rebel Flag and the rusty chains of slavery. They see their day coming to an end—but they will not go peacefully—they will fight to the very end—the Army may have to pry Obama out of the White House. To then this is a religious, moral crusade to bring America to the glories of Communism and the workers utopia of the United Nations.
You’d be surprised how often that happens...
He knows what he's up to.
He's working off a script "red state = right to work state = Confederate state = slave state."
What's important to him isn't historical accuracy, it's getting his message out.
yes, entirely irrelevant s that the bashing can continue. Like the black community wanting revenge, not justce; Confederacy bashers want punishment, not healing.
.....in other words, COMPLETELY USELESS. A bum scrapping aluminum cans is more productive than this clown.
Democrats are stupid but black Democrats are flat our retarded.
MSNBC (pronounced: eh'mess'en-be-cee) 1. The state of mind of total psychosis, esp. as regards news reporting and political commentary. 2. To be clinically insane, yet to be entrusted with the delivery of news copy. 3. The act of seeing racism in all matters, regardless of actual presence. 4. To be a spokesperson for any Democrat politician. (ex. "Did you see that reporter? He went all MSNBC on that witness!") (syn: insanity, madness, moonbattery, bias, unhinged) (ant: sane, unbiased, sober)
But by changing the law into a tax issue FROM THE BENCH, he did make law.
You must admit that the North invaded the South. thus the
South was primarily defending their homes.
No, not at all. Some of us just want a little accuracy.
Sure, in response to an insurrection and acts of war.
I wouldn't be surprised if David or Albert or Jacob Limbaugh in the 8th Missouri Cavalry regiment was an ancestor.
But even Obama had Confederate ancestors (I think. I haven't been able to find any in the army yet).
It doesn't say anything about present-day politics.
What rights of what state that pretended to secession?
Particularly slavery in the territories, not in the various states.
Except Lincoln said, over and over “A house divided can not stand. The United States can not stay divided over slavery, it will either become all of one thing, or all of the other.?
Slavery could have been abolished. It would have taken a constitutional amendment (3/4s of the states).
That is just about the same as what the SCOTUS did when they ruled that Social Security was constitutional, as a tax.
The United States didn’t invade anyone. They put down an insurrection.
Most of the insurrection took place on the territory of the United States. Of course the insurection had naval forces and privateers too, and went to other countries. Vermont was invaded from Canada.
I will suggest that slavery as practiced in the US had some unconstitutional elements.
The practice of having people be given the status of slaves at birth was an unconstitutional punishment by corruption of the blood.
Possibly true, though highly, often intentionally, misleading.
Only 5% (or whatever) of the population of the Confederacy held legal title to slaves. But slaves were generally held by the head of the household, and we generally refer to a family owning its home, not the father who is listed on the title.
Similarly, I think it is eminently reasonable to look at the percentage of families that owned slaves, not individuals holding legal title.
In the Lower South (SC, GA, AL, MS, LA, TX, FL -- those states that seceded first), about 36.7% of the white families owned slaves. In the Middle South (VA, NC, TN, AR -- those states that seceded only after Fort Sumter was fired on) the percentage is around 25.3%, and the total for the two combined regions -- which is what most folks think of as the Confederacy -- is 30.8%. In the Border States (DE, MD, KY, MO -- those slave states that did not secede) the percentage of slave-ownership was 15.9%, and the total throughout the slave states was almost exactly 26%.
Data from 1860 census.
http://www.civilwarcauses.org/stat.htm
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.