woodpusher:
"I was just documenting that you have cognitive issues...
Due to your Biden syndrome, in your confusion you imagined that DiogenesLamp had "quoted" woodpusher." You're right, I checked your homework and it's a clear case of clerical mistaken identity -- I mistook your twin brother (or sister), FLT-bird, for you, sorry about that, young fellow.
I'll be more careful in the future.
And maybe you can help out by explaining in what ways you actually differ from FLT-bird?
woodpusher: "Our conversation is on another thread where you established that Abraham Lincoln, Ulysses S. Grant, and Roy P. Basler were all Lost Causers. "
And here you demonstrate your own "cognitive issues" and also validate my criticism of many Lost Causers -- you can dump-truck a full 14 yards of quotes on us, but have only specious arguments to cement all that aggregate together.
First, here, you duplicated your post to jmacusa, just changing the addressee.
Second, your duplicated posts #127 & 128 both refer back to your post #123, in which you seem to think you've made a very, very, too too clever argument, actually quoting someone else's words, but presenting them as if they were your own, then demanding:
"Am I right, or am I a Lost Causer?"
So jmacusa responded factually (& I chimed in) that Freedmens' Bureaus were hated by Southerners so abolished by Congress in 1872.
Now comes woodpusher's Big Reveal: his words in post #123 were not his own, they were quotes from Ulysses Grant!
So that means jmacusa and BroJoeK have called Ulysses Grant a Lost Causer, WOW!
What a brilliant thinker is woodpusher, getting two Union defenders to call Grant a Lost Causer, AMAZING!
Except, of course, it's not.
Grant's quote is from December 1865, years before incidents like this one:
"Failed attacks led to a massacre during the 1868 elections, with the insurgents' murders of about 1,300 voters across various southern states ranging from South Carolina to Arkansas."
Such incidents tend to suggest that Grant's words of 1865 were perhaps a bit naïve.
However, Grant's words which woodpusher
did not quote in his post #123, but did quote in his post #127-8 show us that perhaps Grant was not so naïve as woodpusher would have us think:
"It is not the thinking men who would use violence towards any class of troops sent among them by the general government, but the ignorant in some places might..."
Finally, to nail down this point: Grant's quote is dated December 18, 1865, and less than a week later on December 24, 1865 in Pulaski, Tennessee, six former Confederate officers first gathered as an informal social club, modeled after the iconoclastic
Sons of Malta,
"...ludicrous initiations, the baffling of public curiosity, and the amusement for members were the only objects of the Klan..."
Years later:
"Beginning in April, 1867, there was a gradual transformation.
...The members had conjured up a veritable Frankenstein.
They had played with an engine of power and mystery, though organized on entirely innocent lines, and found themselves overcome by a belief that something must lie behind it all – that there was, after all, a serious purpose, a work for the Klan to do."[41]"
So I think Ulysses Grant can be totally forgiven for not foreseeing in December 1865 what didn't happen until years later.
And I would also forgive woodpusher for trying to play a silly trick -- it is, after all, all he's got to offer.
I don't, however, think woodpusher would qualify as, in Grant's words, a "thinking man".
Too many "cognitive issues". ![]()
woodpusher: "I was just documenting that you have cognitive issues... Due to your Biden syndrome, in your confusion you imagined that DiogenesLamp had "quoted" woodpusher."
You're right, I checked your homework and it's a clear case of clerical mistaken identity -- I mistook your twin brother (or sister), FLT-bird, for you, sorry about that, young fellow.
That's ok young child, but how you mistoook a statement by FLT-bird for statement in a non-existent post of mine remains a mystery.
And maybe you can help out by explaining in what ways you actually differ from FLT-bird?
First, his handle is FLT-bird and mine is woodpusher. Second, he was on the thread and I was not.
Maybe you can help out by identifying who is living rent free in your head, woodpusher or FLT-bird?
Before you made your "quote," my handle did not even appear on the thread.
woodpusher: "Our conversation is on another thread where you established that Abraham Lincoln, Ulysses S. Grant, and Roy P. Basler were all Lost Causers. " And here you demonstrate your own "cognitive issues" and also validate my criticism of many Lost Causers -- you can dump-truck a full 14 yards of quotes on us, but have only specious arguments to cement all that aggregate together.
First, here, you duplicated your post to jmacusa, just changing the addressee.
Second, your duplicated posts #127 & 128
First, that conversation is on another thread where you cut and ran. If you choose to resume it, do so on the proper thread.
Second, due to your lack of due diligence, failure to properly read the posts, and your typically shoddy research, you failed to notice that my #127 and #128 on the other thread are NOT duplicates as you state. They are materially different, and constituted seperate replies, necessitated by the different content of #124 by jmacusa, and #125 by BroJoeK.
For example, my first substantive reply statement in my #127 to jmacusa was "So, you think ULYSSES S. GRANT was not right about anything as quoted in my #123."
The first substantive reply statement in my #128 to BroJoeK was, "Just so we're clear, nothing from your Wikipedia links is relevant to whether anything in my #123 was accurate or false. One may be sure that the Wikipedia first severe period of violence in 1868 did not cause Reconstruction to be instituted."
Had your "attention to detail" extended to reading what I posted, up to the first substantive statement following the indented blockquote of what was replied to, you would have realized the two posts are markedly and materially distinct and different.