Posted on 10/12/2018 7:13:42 PM PDT by yesthatjallen
President Trump praised Confederate Geader Robert E. Lee as "a great general" on Friday during a campaign rally in Lebanon, Ohio.
"So Robert E. Lee was a great general. And Abraham Lincoln developed a phobia. He couldnt beat Robert E. Lee," Trump said before launching into a monologue about Lee, Lincoln and Ulysses S. Grant.
"He was going crazy. I dont know if you know this story. But Robert E. Lee was winning battle after battle after battle. And Abraham Lincoln came home, he said, 'I cant beat Robert E. Lee,'" Trump said.
"And he had all of his generals, they looked great, they were the top of their class at West Point. They were the greatest people. Theres only one problem they didnt know how the hell to win. They didnt know how to fight. They didnt know how," he continued.
Trump went on to say, multiple times, that Grant had a drinking problem, saying that the former president "knocked the hell out of everyone" as a Union general.
"Man was he a good general. And hes finally being recognized as a great general," Trump added.
NBC News (@NBCNews) October 13, 2018 Trump has drawn criticism for his defense of Confederate statues, including those of Robert E. Lee.
He drew widespread condemnation last year following a deadly rally in Charlottesville, Va., saying that white nationalist protesters were there to oppose the removal of a "very, very important" statue.
"They were there to protest the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee, Trump said at the time. This week it's Robert E. Lee. I noticed that Stonewall Jackson is coming down. I wonder, is it George Washington next week and is it Thomas Jefferson the week after? You know, you really do have to ask yourself, where does it stop?
Trump, speaking at another rally in Ohio last year, said that he can be one of the most presidential presidents to hold office. "
With the exception of the late, great Abraham Lincoln, I can be more presidential than any president thats ever held this office, he said to a crowd in Youngstown.
BroJoeK believes the contemporary poppycock that the Union(USA) was in the "fight for its existence"
You asked an obvious rhetorical question, I gave you rhetorical responses, twice.
First I noted it isn't just state vs. Federal, some people also hate specific cities.
That should have been a big clue.
How is that not clear to you?
In a way it was. If the Confederacy had won it’s independence, the Union as it existed before January 1 1861 would have died.
An act of congress cannot override a very specific constitutional clause. You must amend it. Article IV, *REQUIRES* slaves to be turned back to their masters if held by state law. It does not allow congress to override it by "confiscation acts".
They didn't believe it strongly enough to put forth an amendment to free them. As a matter of fact, they apparently didn't believe it strongly enough to stop the Corwin Amendment from passing congress, and being ratified by 3 northern states. (The Corwin Amendment strengthened protections for slavery in the United States.)
Sounds like they didn't believe it very strongly at all, until it became a cause celebre, and after it was determined that it would be in the interests of empowering the Liberals of that era.
Virtually his entire cabinet said he would cause a war by doing this, and Major Anderson in Command of Ft. Sumter also said this would cause a war when he learned of it.
No war fleet, no war.
Of course I have also learned that Lincoln intended to deliberately start a war by the actions of Lieutenant David Porter in command of the Powhatan in Pensacola. It is clear that Porter's orders was to fire on the Confederates near Fort Pickens, and he was only prevented from doing so by the quick action of Captain Meigs.
Lincoln had *TWO* plans to start a war. If he had failed in Charleston, Porter was to start it in Pensacola.
Porter did indeed fire (and with no news of the events in Charleston) on Confederate ships in Pensacola, and were it not for the news that the war had already started in Charleston, Porter's actions would have likely started it in Pensacola.
Porter himself said that he believed at the time his were the first offensive actions of the war.
So I wonder if it works both ways. So when a territory was admitted to the Union, the Union as it existed prior to that territory becoming a state would have died. Right?
It did make a lot of money for powerful interests in Washington DC and New York. If you start looking at events from the perspective of enriching robber barons in New York and Government cronies in Washington, a lot of events make more sense than they otherwise would.
You might find this article of interest.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/05/how-the-robber-barons-hijacked-the-victorian-internet/
Wealthy Liberals in the North East trying to control the communications system? Sounds like today, doesn't it?
Cui bono?
Yeah, Lee mightve been our greatest general. At this rate it wont be long (if were not there already) when declaring George Washington to be a great American will be controversial.
So? The British Union as it existed before July 4, 1776 died, but what remained of it went on to be more prosperous than it had ever been in it's entire history. So did the part that broke away.
And we still celebrate the death of the British Union as it existed before July 4, 1776.
So you are denying the fact. The U.S. as it existed before January 1 1861 would have remained the same?
It helped finance the construction of the Transcontinental railroad. As did nearly 60 million worth of 30 year bonds the Gov. floated to help pay the construction costs. Lincoln occasionally did work for the Illinois Central RR.
Don’t think he was on a permanent retainer for them. Nor do I know if he worked for any other railroad.
sure, why not.
I'm not denying it, i'm merely pointing out it wouldn't necessarily have been a disaster. England went on to become more powerful and wealthy than it had ever been. The Union may have very well done so as well.
Never said it would be a disaster. Only commented that it would be different.
That it was beneficial to the larger public is clear, but what is not clear is whether or not this was the prime consideration in the government getting this involved with the doings of industry.
Lincoln's philosophy of "Mercantilism" did benefit the public eventually, but it benefited the powerful people first. As I've gotten older, i've become cynical as to which master our government serves first.
I've speculated that it would have likely prevented the US intervention in World War I, and preventing that would likely have prevented a lot of subsequent disasters, such as the rise of Hitler and his Nazism.
As a matter of fact, looking at the history following US entry into WWI, I can hardly see how it could have turned out much worse than it did in terms of loss of life and loss of freedoms world wide. I'm not sure a stalemate or a German victory would have been worse than what we got.
Yes, it would have been different. Perhaps better, Perhaps worse, perhaps even nearly the same.
That is such blatant nonsense I can't believe DiogenesLamp continues to post it with even a smidgen of sincerity.
And DoodleDawg fully answered in post #307, saying Lincoln:
Lincoln's 1862 Emancipation Proclamation was an executive order to all Federal units under Lincoln's command, declaring Confederate slaves free when they reached Union lines.
Like the previous Confiscation Acts, Emancipation was an act of war under authority of Article 1, section 8 and the 1807 Insurrection Act.
All of which DiogenesLamp well knows but refuses to acknowledge because it shoots down his favorite historical fantasies.
****************************
Note on this map those states & territories colored as "disputed".
By any definition, Confederate efforts to seize those through military force amounted to constitutionally recognized invasion or rebellion, and as such an existential threat to the United States:
I never speculate on what might have been.
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.