Skip to comments.
Why the sympathy for the South?
2/18/2003
| truthsearcher
Posted on 02/17/2003 5:53:30 PM PST by Truthsearcher
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160, 161-180, 181-200 ... 221-228 next last
To: Truthsearcher
some of us are tired of the culture wars being perpetrated against the South.
161
posted on
02/20/2003 6:39:05 AM PST
by
Centurion2000
(Take charge of your destiny, or someone else will)
To: The Iguana
A stunning fact if you think about it. Not really, when you consider that he wasn't on the ballot in 6 of the 7 original seceding states. The seventh, South Carolina, didn't hold presidential elections at all.
To: FreedomCalls
Imagine a President getting elected who gets not one vote in your region and you harbor strong feelings that he is about to circumvent the Constitution and trample on your rights. Lincoln's name wasn't on the ballot in most of the states you mention, and South Carolina didn't hold presidential elections at all.
To: takenoprisoner
There were abolutionists in both the north and south. Really? Who were some of the southern ones?
To: billbears
Which begs the question if the original Thirteenth Amendment was backed by him, and had passed the Senate, what was the war over again? Because the 13th Amendment was passed and sent to the states after the original 7 confederate states had announced their rebellion. Did you expect them to call it off?
To: John H K
With all due respect, having lived in the north for 22+ years and in the south for 33 years - the south IS God's Paradise on Earth.....:<)
166
posted on
02/20/2003 6:51:02 AM PST
by
oil
To: Non-Sequitur
Samuel Janney of Virginia and the Grimke sisters of Charleston, to name a few.
(Google is my friend.)
167
posted on
02/20/2003 6:51:55 AM PST
by
wimpycat
(Well it's good that you're fine and I'm fine. I agree with you. It's great to be fine.)
To: wimpycat
The Grimke ladies were also for women's rights. I'll bet that made them popular with the neighbors.
To: Non-Sequitur
And Yankee invaders stood guard over the election polls, didn't they?
To: stainlessbanner
In 1860? No they didn't. But inspite of the best efforts of the southern leadership Lincoln was still elected.
To: Alberta's Child
LOL. As well as Earnhardt, Eliott,Lynyrd Skynyrd ...
To: angry beaver norbert
Money.Key issue.
To: Non-Sequitur
Imagine a President getting elected who gets not one vote in your region and you harbor strong feelings that he is about to circumvent the Constitution and trample on your rights.Lincoln's name wasn't on the ballot in most of the states you mention, and South Carolina didn't hold presidential elections at all.
And that matters how? The premise is still the same.
Shoulf I have phrased it:
Imagine a President getting elected who isn't even on the ballot for you to vote against in your region ...
Or perhaps:
Imagine a President getting elected who can't even be bothered to put his name forward on the ballot in your region ...
The country was torn up over the issue of slavery and here a Presidential candidate runs for the office without even so much as bothering to put his name on the ballot in the most affected area of the country. What gall!
It would be as if the overriding issue of the day were water rights and a President won an election when he did not put his name on the ballot in the western states. Imagine some liberal effete easterner not even connected to the issue winning. Here you have a liberal mid-westerner winning the Presidency over the issue of slavery who doesn't come from a slave state and doesn't even bother to put his name on the ballot in the slave states. Actually, that's even more appalling.
You must look at the issue from their point of view. No one in the south today is advocating secession, but they were in 1861. They thought differently then. If you want to understand history you need to understand what motivated them then, not how we would approach the issue today.
173
posted on
02/20/2003 2:07:30 PM PST
by
FreedomCalls
(It's the "Statue of Liberty" not the "Statue of Security.")
To: #3Fan
Slavery was NOT considered immoral by most people at the time, and YES, at the time the founding fathers wrote the Constitution, these "minorities" were considered 3/5 of a person, and had little or no rights, hence the answer to your question is NO...
To: jlogajan
Because: Southern rights were guaranteed by the Constitution.
Slaves had no rights, as they were considered "property".
Read the "Dred Scott" decision. That tells it all, plain and simple.
To: Non-Sequitur
My great great grandfather for one.
176
posted on
02/20/2003 4:26:21 PM PST
by
takenoprisoner
(stand for freedom or get the helloutta the way)
To: FreedomCalls
And that matters how? It matters because it explains why President Lincoln didn't get a single vote from the southern states. It wasn't a matter of him not wanting to be on the ballot, it was due to the deliberate action of the southern leadership to keep him off the ballot. Who gets placed on ballots on the ballot is a state issue, it still is. Candidates today still need to qualify in every state. Allowing a vote for any presidential candidate in the first place is a state issue, witness South Carolina which didn't hold a presidential election for decades prior to the end of the Civil war. So suggesting that President Lincoln deliberately kept his name off the ballot in the south is the exact opposite of the fact.
To: takenoprisoner
My great great grandfather for one. If your great great grandfather expected the south to call off their rebellion then the fact that they didn't isn't the fault of President Lincoln. His beef would be with the confederate leadership.
To: Non-Sequitur
Mayland. Not Maryland.
179
posted on
02/20/2003 4:57:40 PM PST
by
gitmo
("The course of this conflict is not known, yet its outcome is certain." GWB)
To: Non-Sequitur
Too bad you weren't around then to advise him.
180
posted on
02/20/2003 5:23:56 PM PST
by
takenoprisoner
(stand for freedom or get the helloutta the way)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160, 161-180, 181-200 ... 221-228 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson