Replies

woodpusher: "First, that conversation is on another thread where you cut and ran. "

And yet you've brought it here.

woodpusher: "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."

And yet you used the same quotes to spring the same "trick" on both.
And you then claimed the same faux-victory over both.

But if you boil it down, the question you posed in #123 is whether US Grant was correct in December 1865 in saying that "the mass of" Southern "thinking men" accepted Union troops while "the ignorant" might not?
Indeed, did the mass violence against blacks perpetuated by the Klan & others years after Grant's 1865 report even mean Grant was wrong, or somehow (as woodpusher claims) a Lost Causer himself?!
In other words, when Grant said (Dec 1865, as quoted by woodpusher) --

"I am satisfied that the mass of thinking men of the South accept the present situation of affairs in good faith."

And also:

"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..."

-- did Southern "thinking men", after all, permit, encourage or even participate in violence against African-Americans, which began years after Grant's 1865 report and lasted many decades?

Now jmacusa may have his own answer to this, but mine is: that's a question which should be put to Southern "thinking men", and should you ever meet one and ask it, the answer would be of interest to everyone here.

Good post Joe. My answer is that the violence perpetrated against Blacks prior to 1865 was done in order to maintain the system of servitude and to intimidate and control the slave population. In his book "The Peculiar Institution'' Terrance Stamp points this out as one of the aspects of the ''institution''. The violence done to Blacks after the war was for revenge and resentment and to ''keep them in their place''.

woodpusher: "First, that conversation is on another thread where you cut and ran."
And yet you've brought it here.

No Joe, I was on the other thread minding my own business when you pinged me here to your "clerical error."

I had to wake you from your stupor to remind you that even if I was living in your head rent free, I was not on this thread and you were wandering around lost like Joe Biden.

woodpusher: "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."
And yet you used the same quotes to spring the same "trick" on both.

No, you ridiculous dissembler. My #123 on the other thread was not addressed to you at all. You were not even pinged to it. I used words of U.S. Grant, unattributed, and ended with "Am I right, or am I a Lost Causer? You can say it. You know I'm right."

It was solely to jmacusa who replied at his #124 that "you're not right about anything concerning the CW." Perhaps everything Grant said was "wrong." You were not pinged to #124 either. Your #125 was your response to #123, on your own initiative, in your attempt to pile on the comment of jmacusa. It is not my fault if you, of your own volition, choose to reply to a post not addressed to you. It is not my fault if you make a public spectacle of yourself taking issue with the supposed "Lost Causer" words of Ulysses S. Grant. You did that all on your own.