Posted on 07/23/2020 1:39:06 PM PDT by DoodleDawg
No he's not. He vetoes it and shows that he won't cave to the Maoists. His choice is clear.
Only in your deluded mind.
“African slavery, as it exists in the United States, is a moral, a social, and a political blessing.”
~Davis
“If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong.”
Abraham Lincoln
But since you have a problem seeing the moral difference between those two positions let me apply those quotes to a modern day moral question. Since Davis was a democrat and Lincoln was a republican here is how they would sound today.
“Abortion, as it exists in the United States, is a moral, a social, and a political blessing.”
Jefferson Davis
“If Abortion is not wrong, nothing is wrong.”
Abraham Lincoln
"The vandals of the North . . . are determined to destroy slavery . . . We must all fight, and I choose to fight for southern rights and southern liberty." [Lunsford Yandell, Jr. to Sally Yandell, April 22, 1861 in James M. McPherson, For Cause and Comrades: Why Men Fought in the Civil War, p. 20]
"A stand must be made for African slavery or it is forever lost." [William Grimball to Elizabeth Grimball, Nov. 20, 1860, Ibid.]
"This country without slave labor would be completely worthless. We can only live & exist by that species of labor; and hence I am willing to fight for the last." [William Nugent to Eleanor Nugent, Sept 7, 1863, Ibid., p. 107]
"Better, far better! endure all the horrors of civil war than to see the dusky sons of Ham leading the fair daughters of the South to the altar." [William M. Thomson to Warner A. Thomson, Feb. 2, 1861, Ibid., p. 109]
"A captain in the 8th Alabama also vowed 'to fight forever, rather than submit to freeing negroes among us. . . . [We are fighting for] rights and property bequeathed to us by our ancestors.' " [Elias Davis to Mrs. R. L. Lathan, Dec. 10, 1863 Ibid., p. 107]
"Even though he was tired of the war, wrote a Louisiana artilleryman in 1862, ' I never want to see the day when a negro is put on an equality with a white person. There is too many free n----rs. . . now to suit me, let alone having four millions.' " [George Hamill Diary, March, 1862, Ibid., p. 109]
"A private in the 38th North Carolina, a yeoman farmer, vowed to show the Yankees ' that a white man is better than a n----r.' " [Jonas Bradshaw to Nancy Bradshaw, April 29, 1862 Ibid.]
"A farmer from the Shenandoah Valley informed his fiancée that he fought to assure 'a free white man's government instead of living under a black republican government.' " [John G. Keyton to Mary Hilbert, Nov. 30, 1861, Ibid.]
"The son of another North Carolina dirt farmer said he would never stop fighting the Yankees, who were 'trying to force us to live as the colored race.' " [Samuel Walsh to Louisa Proffitt, April 11, 1864, Ibid.]
"Some of the boys asked them what they were fighting for, and they answered, 'You Yanks want us to marry our daughters to the n----rs.' " [Chauncey Cook to parents, May 10, 1864, Ibid.]
"An Arkansas captain was enraged by the idea that if the Yankees won, his 'sister, wife, and mother are to be given up to the embraces of their present dusky male servitors.' " [Thomas Key, diary entry April 10, 1864, Ibid.]
"Another Arkansas soldier, a planter, wrote his wife that Lincoln not only wanted to free the slaves but also 'declares them entitled to all the rights and privileges as American citizens. So imagine your sweet little girls in the school room with a black wooly headed negro and have to treat them as their equal.' " [William Wakefield Garner to Henrietta Garner, Jan 2, 1864, Ibid.]
"[If Atlanta and Richmond fell] we are irrevocably lost and not only will the negroes be free
No, just name them after American heroes instead of traitors. Here’s my recommendations;
Fort Eisenhower
Fort Pershing
Fort Patton
Fort Bradley
“Only in your deluded mind.”
That is an interesting comment. And raises a question (stop me if you have heard this one) that has never been satisfactorily answered.
If the South was fighting for slavery, who was fighting against slavery?
“Fort Eisenhower”
Among liberals who have heard of President Eisenhower, he is quite controversial because of his knowledge and respect of American history and heroes.
One leading liberal on this board said about President Eisenhower after learning of his having written something nice about General Lee: “Ike had his head up his ass when he wrote this.”
Are you sure you are willing to buck the hate-Eisenhower mob?
I warn you: it will take courage to support President Eisenhower.
Add this to your list of things said by slave-state born American heroes:
“I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.”
No. The men in my Great grandfathers family fought because the Yankees came down here. One died at 17 fighting the invaders. They didn’t own any slaves...
Never said Lincoln wasn’t a racist. I have explained to you before that Lincoln was anti-slavery. The only people who were completely in the moral right in regards to race relations were the radical abolitionist who were anti-slavery and anti-racist.
If you dislike Lincoln because he was racist you must hate Jefferson Davis because he was pro-slavery and racist.
“This has been a bad week for PDJT...”
Don’t get yourself trapped into the thinking that appearing to not do anything is what it seems. When people allow the focus of such a broad spectrum of “provided” information that is known to be wrong (lies), to a limited source of topics, then they limit the capacity of people’s knowledge. And it’s all in Alinsky’s playbook they have been using for over half a century. Every rule past #1.
There is much more going on in the country than what the media is trying to focus you on using controlled destructive tactics to either frighten or scare you into a retaliation rather than a rational evaluation. When you respond with “feelings” rather than thought, you’ve lost. And they are covering for the failure of the liberals.
The wall continues to be built even though Trump has had to fight congress every inch of the way. Trump is hammering China’s economy with imports from us dropping 3.3% more in July alone. The tariffs and restrictions are bringing them to their knees. According to the Department Of Labor, unemployment, used by tactics of liberal governors, dropped 9.4% during the week ending July 18 from the previous week alone.
There’s more, so one should not limit to the things you cannot change like having the liberals tell the truth. One should focus on the big picture so everything doesn’t have that cloud of doom over it when you talk to a prospective voter or even for your own well being. Remember what happened to the boy who cried wolf. When he got what he lied about, the woof, and the people grew tired of his cries and their pain, they wouldn’t respond and it ate him. When people get an empty belly, they won’t respond. And without an emotional response, liberals are a nuisance, not an opponent. And they become trivial as they destroy with their tactics the very need they require, the people’s support. Educate the country. Don’t get emotional, get smart. And get others smart. That’s all we really have to offer in this world.
rwood
Does this include John Brown and those that planned and financed his murder raids?
If Lincoln truly was a racist, do you think he should be honored with a memorial on public property in Washington, D.C.?
"Murder raids"? Don't you mean his exercise of his Second Amendment rights to resist tyranny?
Thanks, I needed that.
How many times in 2016 did the media crow “we’ve got him this time!!” over something Trump said? How many Republican challengers did he beat out to gain the nomination?
Fact is, PDJT has more lives than a cat. His opponent by now is a gibbering idiot.
My great hope is the millions of Trump supporters afraid to express their views; 77% of Republicans fear losing their jobs, their property vandalized, or being assaulted if they speak out. They can’t be polled because they will lie to pollsters or just not answer the phone. Some Democrats are already expressing frustration at their inability to smoke these people out.
My other hope is skyrocketing sales of guns and ammo. I’m waiting for Biden’s `gun czar’ to repeat what he already said; “no sense your buying that AR-15 because you’re just going to have to turn it in”.
So yes, there’s hope. Trump has been underestimated ever since he first entered politics.
Heyward Shepherd.
Thank a string of Supreme Court decisions for that. According to the conservative majority of the court, corporate campaign money is speech, and speech influencing policy is a feature of our Constitution, not a problem.
"While American democracy is imperfect, few outside the majority of this Court would have thought its flaws included a dearth of corporate money in politics.”--John Paul Stevens, Dissenting Opinion in Citizens United.
“If the South was fighting for slavery...”
Interesting thing is that the south was not fighting for slavery, slavery was collateral damage. Slave labor was the cheapest labor they could use and they wanted to expand.
The Southern states wanted to assert their authority over the federal government so they could abolish federal laws they didn’t support, especially laws interfering with the South’s right to keep slaves and take them wherever they wished. The South wished to take slavery into the western territories, while the North was committed to keeping them open to white labor alone. Both being what would now be called racist.
Meanwhile, the newly formed Republican party, whose members were strongly opposed to the westward expansion of slavery into new states, was gaining prominence.
The election of a Republican, Abraham Lincoln, as President in 1860 sealed the deal. His victory, without a single Southern electoral vote, was a clear signal to the Southern states that they had lost all influence.
Feeling excluded from the political system that previously had protected their financial system, they turned to the only alternative they believed was left to them: secession, a political decision, that led directly to war. So it was really about finance more than slavery. Slavery was just a tool that got in the way of agreed expansion financially with the new republican party pushing back against the old southern democrats that had had their way for a lot of years in their financial operations.
rwood
“Don’t you mean his (John Brown) exercise of his Second Amendment rights to resist tyranny?”
I’m a little confused here. You don’t exercise your rights by attacking a federal armory. On October 16, 1859, radical abolitionist John Brown, commanding twenty-two men, attacked the federal arsenal at Harper’s Ferry along the Potomac River in what is now West Virginia. Brown hoped his raid would spark a slave insurrection and force upon the nation the war that would end slavery. Interesting addition to this is the commander President James Buchanan sent in to re-capture the armory was Colonel Robert E. Lee. “From a speech by Henry David Thoreau, “A Plea for Captain John Brown,” 1859”
There was no tyranny to concerning the second amendment to resist. He went into the armory, thinking the slaves in the area would flock to join him, which never happened. He and his men actually were holding slaves hostage at the time of the attack. In all, sixteen people were killed and ten of his men including two of his sons. He was tried and found guilty of murder and treason with reason. This was not an act of war, but ultimately was part of the causing of one. He was no hero, he was a terrorist.
rwood
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.