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 ...
2 viewers? They doubled the viewership recently.
Where did the viewer come from, Current?
I said slavery was the only issue in the Lincoln/Douglas debates. Which it was.
Slavery was the main, but not only, reason for secession, which course occurred several years after the L/D debates.
Secession led to war. War, and the demands of fighting it, eventually created a determination to destroy slavery.
Actually, the southern states were ticked off by too much exercise of states' rights by northern states, which had passed laws attempting to interfere with the Fugitive Slave Act.
Southerners demanded the Federal government take action against these states. The Republicans would obviously not do so, and it was one of the issues leading to secession.
So the only real states' rights issue in 1860 was one of northern states opposing a federal power grab!
Plenty of freepers here who make a living on this forum metaphorically with the same old confederacy smear...non stop
vitriol towards southern whites as racist conservatives is not limited just to the wacky left
Rush is of German stock so even though his family has southern accents ..likely they were Missouri Union sympathizers
though I’d be glad to claim him
..I can hope his momma’s side had some rebs
Just curious. Were you aware that two of the highest tariffs protected sugar growers and hemp growers, all in slave states?
“The Civil war was less about slavery than it was about States Rights”
I believe for the southern business leaders and their puppet politicians it was all about Slavery.
For the overwhelming numbers of southern soldiers who were not slave owners it was about their right to keep their state sovereign.
The new confederacy is all about freeing the slaves from the leftist plantation, all the slaves, regardless of color. It is the home of liberated, liberty loving individuals. Come join us Y’all.
Slavery was a vehicle- but imagine if the southern states objected to the federal government telling them...oh, I dunno... that they had to buy health care?...
...interesting...hopefully nobody would be stupid enough to frame an armed internecine conflict around such a nonsensical issue...
...better yet, hopefully nobody would be so stupid as to fire upon and repossess a federal fortress, thus precipitating the armed portion of the conflict, over such a preposterous issue...
Except that the Fed wasn’t trying to force the states to eliminate it. Lincoln said specifically that, whatever his personal feelings about slavery aside, he recognized that he was powerless to change what could only be done through congressional action as an amendment to the constitution.
Quite to the contrary, the south imposed their “value system” onto the north by compelling northerners to intercept and return escaped slaves.
The north went to war to protect the union and ended up freeing the slaves. The south went to war to protect the institution of slavery and ended up losing everything.
Remind us again MSNBC why your ratings are in the toilet?
Yes.
So the tariff issue was more than just “northern industry imposition on southern agriculture.”
In actual fact, the effect of tariffs on southern planters was exactly the same as the effect on northern farmers, who were a considerable majority of the population even in the North.
The hilarious part of the issue is the notion that if the South had won its independence it wouldn’t have taken action to protect its own infant industries, as the USA did after the War of 1812 showed what a bad idea it was to buy much of your military hardware from a potential enemy.
I can never tell.....is MSNBC trying to be the Onion, MAD Magazine, or the Weekly World News?
True, but you get blank stares if you mention the Corwin Amendment and Lincoln’s endorsement of it in his first inaugural address.
And you’ve missed the historical facts completely. The Fed was not trying to force the states to eliminate slavery and Lincoln stated that he did not have the power to do that while the states were all a part of the union under the Constitution. He noted that it was not an issue that the Fed could rule on. If it was, Dred Scott would have been thrown out even after the SC decision. Lincoln knew that any federal ruling forcing abolition on states within the union was unconstitutional, just like obamacare is unconstitutional. Now, once the southern states foolishly seceded and stated that they were seceding over slavery, they no longer had the protection of the Constitution. Even with that, Lincoln did not declare emancipation for several years in hopes of pulling the south back and ending the war.
It was all about slavery, and states rights was a post-defeat excuse for the southern leadership to take heat off of them over why they ruined their states over an “asset” only a few (of them) owned. State’s Rights is another fine piece of democrat mythology/propaganda.
The North was not asserting any power over state rights to hold slaves. The North did assert that the secessionist states had no right to secede, over slavery or for any other excuse.
I know facts are a troubling thing to have to deal with, but necessary none the less.
Fact #1 - Only 5% of people who lived in the Confederacy owned slaves.
Fact #2 - Slavery was legal in this country at the time. Lincoln freeing the slaves on his own would have been unconstitutional and likely impeachable.
Fact #3 -Democrats in the North were perfectly content with slavery, working behind Lincoln’s back to negotiate a separate peace with the North. That is called treason.
The war supposedly ended in April, 1865. However, there are a number of people who insist on continuing the fight against the Confederacy, even some here on FR.
And to the NSA trolls, FU.
Neatly and concisely stated.
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.