And yet... you came on this thread to cheer on our Lost Cause defenders, to mock my "cut & paste" posts and then to lie claiming I said the GOPe is "the abortion party".
As for that term, "Lost Cause", or "Lost Causer", it's only one of many we could just as well use.
In the more recent past I've used "pro-Confederate" and that's just as good a term as "Lost Cause", imho.
If you-all prefer "pro-Confederate" to "Lost Causer", I'm OK with that, though I'd have to ask, what exactly about the Lost Cause do you disagree with?
wardaddy: "I am against tearing down statues and referring to my ancestry as nazis and yankee bigotry towards my people."
Sure, but please remember this: you Democrats put those statues up -- you never asked Republicans for our permission to erect Confederate statues.
Of course we never objected -- Confederates are not the only old enemies we honor today, think of US Army helicopters named for Indian tribes.
But now Democrats want to tear down their own statues, and so you want us Republicans to come to your defense, but why should we, when the only thing you-all can think to do is lie about the Civil War and about Republicans?
You-all hate us to the core, and yet you still want us to do your bidding -- how insane is that?
As for calling Confederates "nazis", that should not happen here, ever, because Confederates weren't, far from it.
On the other hand, there are some unfortunate comparisons:
- Just as the Second World War for America started at Pearl Harbor, so the Civil War started at Fort Sumter.
And just as Japanese chose to attack American forces, so Jefferson Davis chose to attack at Fort Sumter. - Confederates declared war against the United States (May 6, 1861), as did WWII Axis powers.
What other major powers did that? - Nazi Germany killed fewer Americans than the Civil War.
We do hate the lies some of you tell each other and post on Free Republic - and some of our Lost Cause liars even claim to be Northerners!.
We also know that you-all represent a mere tiny minority of all Southerners.
wardaddy: "I also grew up surrounded by it ....the remnants ...even where I now type...my own homes foundation and cistern is antebellum and figured tangentially in the Battle of Franklin...1864 ...and I knew relatives who’s parent fought in it or experienced the reconstruction era"
One of my great grandfathers served in an Illinois volunteer infantry regiment, they marched or rode rails & steamboats thousands of miles over the "western theater", including the Battle of Nashville, December 1864.
He was captured (& paroled) in 1863 by a Nathan Bedford Forrest raid and wounded at Fort Blakely, near Mobile, at the war's end.
My mother was born & raised in western NC, her neighbors' ancestors were victims of the "Shelton Laurel Massacre" -- look it up.
wardaddy: "I also think it was about slavery ....the expansion of it ....and a lot more.
Cultural divides that persist to to this day evident by this very thread and your venom. "
FRiend, if you see "venom" in my words, it's only because you yourself have "projected" such feelings.
And you know, that's what Democrats naturally do, right?
They are forever accusing us of whatever it is they are most guilty -- it's their nature, it's what being a Democrat means.
So, let's talk about that "a lot more"...
Your allies here, like DiogenesLamp, tell us Civil War was not really "all about" slavery, that slavery was just the "excuse" and the "real reason" was, we might call it, "Northern economic dominance" of Southern States, right?
Well... my response has always been: maybe that's true, but only for a very tiny minority of Southern leaders, the 1%ers, or even the 1% of 1%ers, who might grasp how (to use DiogenesLamp's term) the "money flows from Europe" could be better optimized to serve the financial interests of Southern 1%ers.
That might even be true.
However, the 99% of patriotic Southerners were never going to buy into such arguments, as demonstrated in the 1830 Nullification Crisis -- nobody then wanted to go to civil war over purely financial theories.
On the other hand, threats against slavery motivated a majority in the Deep South, and slavery plus Union coercion motivated a majority in the Upper South -- that's what their secession documents said!
wardaddy: "I’ve lived amongst yankees and had yankee paramours and like many of them same as folks down here....most have zero truck with what you’re obsessed with."
Here's the truth: contrary to your own "projections", I'm "obsessed" with nothing you imagine.
I do post here to, as much as possible, correct the lies & nonsense from our pro-Confederates -- if you prefer that term to "Lost Causers", it's fine by me.
wardaddy: "Somewhere along the line neocons at national review and elsewhere in an unsettling alliance with race obsessed leftists decides that demonizing the south was good for both.
The land of paleos and bigots must be served up on a platter.
Neocons and GOPe do this deflect charges of racism they endure 24/7.....no no no it’s those southerners and their flags"
Sorry, but I don't know what you're talking about here.
I'm a huge fan of Ronald Reagan & Donald Trump, both genuine conservatives as near as I can tell, both won some major political battles, but also lost some big ones.
So all your talk about "Neocons" and "GOPe" goes right over my head -- I don't know those people, have not seen them on Free Republic, and don't understand why you keep flogging them.
wardaddy: "He [Lincoln] was no abolitionist I’m surprised you made such a claim."
Naw... here's the simple truth: Lincoln was no abolitionist before 1861, unlike, for example, Republican 1856 Presidential Candidate John Fremont, Lincoln was a "moderate" on slavery before the Civil War.
And even as war began Lincoln was trying to hold-back radical Fremont from abolishing slavery in Missouri by military decree.
But as war progressed, Lincoln came to see that destroying slavery was necessary to destroy the Confederacy -- hence 1861 Confiscation Laws ("Contraband of War"), Lincoln's 1862 Emancipation Proclamation and 1864 13th Amendment.
So Lincoln became an abolitionist and more.
wardaddy: "I’m under no illusion that had the industrial north needed slave labor they would have justified it but with those ports laden with European labor slavery in the north was not growing ."
Sorry, but that is pure counter-historical fantasy -- Northerners were committed to abolition in the North long before cities like New York exploded with poor immigrants from Europe.
And in those days Southerners like Thomas Jefferson were happy to abolish slavery, in the Northwest Territories.
Jefferson even proposed plans for Federally paid national abolition with compensation for slaveholders!
In those days there were plenty of common grounds between North & South.
wardaddy: "It’s ironic now the south who’s history you bemoan with vitriol here day after day is the last redoubt of our American way of life....along with a few parts of the mountain west and rural Midwest.
That fact remains elusive for you to excogitate"
Because that's totally false, and you well know it.
The real divisions in American are not North vs. South or East vs. West, etc., it's Big City vs. rural, small towns & suburbs.
So Southerners have vastly more in common with Republicans in the East, North & West, than you do with Democrats in your own Big Cities.
Think of this: who's trying to tear down your Confederate statues, is it Northenr Republicans?
No, of course not, it's your own Big City Democrats.
Here, yet again, is the 2016 election map by county.
All the red counties are Trump supporters, and they are your friends and allies, so you should not be projecting bad thoughts onto them.
And notice, please, there are just as many "blue" counties in the South as anywhere else.
So it's just not all about North vs. South, it never really was.
