Skip to comments.
White without Apology
TooGoodReports ^
| 08/13/03
| Bernard Chapin
Posted on 08/13/2003 6:57:47 AM PDT by bedolido
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 421-430 next last
To: Lazamataz
Why, whatever do you mean??? Gee, thanks. :)
The moderators seem to sending all ACW threads to the Smokey Backroom. We'll see how long this one lasts.
Walt
81
posted on
08/13/2003 9:34:49 AM PDT
by
WhiskeyPapa
(Virtue is the uncontested prize.)
To: no one in particular
Geez, I'm learning more about Lincoln here than i ever did in school....
To: Ditto
Dang, and all this time I thought they were saying Lincoln worked in frayed sleeves... I'm soo embarassed...
83
posted on
08/13/2003 9:39:15 AM PDT
by
Hatteras
(The Thundering Herd Of Turtles ROCK!)
To: A_perfect_lady
I also remember when my career took off and I got moved into a higher tax bracket... I started to feel like I was working for others that did not appreciate it or do anything to improve themselves... I have been told that is the price we pay to have a society where everyone should feel hope because they have a shot at the dream...whether they step up and take the shot...Hmmmm
Also, it is the generalizations that all blacks feel a certain way about all whites and all Africans feel a certain way about all other nations... Please remember that there are differences of opinion and voices of dissent and reason in every culture...
84
posted on
08/13/2003 9:41:42 AM PDT
by
dwd1
(M. h. D. (Master of Hate and Discontent))
To: gatorbait
I'd just love to have a one-on-one chat with your supervisor.
85
posted on
08/13/2003 9:44:41 AM PDT
by
rdb3
(I'm not a complete idiot. Several parts are missing.)
To: squidly
It's called politics. Every President from Washington to Bush has had to restrain their ideas and plans until they could make sure it was the right time to implement them, sometimes that time never comes.
Even during the debates about our Constitution, men such as Washington and Mason (both southerners) felt that slavery was a blemish upon the new nation. But both knew that the infant nation couldn't abolish the institution at that time. Both were slaveholders and realized the economic and social impacts of emancipation upon the country, slaveholders and the slaves themselves. Even though they morally believed it should be done, they both knew that the country would fall apart if it happened in 1787.
The political situation at the time required that the new nation come first and be allowed to form and grow before slavery could be addressed. Unfortunately it took a horrible war that destroyed the lives of many honorable people, North and South, before we finally addressed the issue.
In 1861 the political situation seemed to dictate that that the Union be preserved first before slavery was addressed. Remember there was a great deal of sympathy for the Southern States in parts of the North before the firing on Fort Sumter. New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland and even New York had some strong Southern sympathies until the first shots were fired. Rodman Price (former Governor of New Jersey 1854-57) was advocating that NJ become allied with the Confederacy in 1861. New Jersey was not a slave state anymore in 61 but it was one of the strongest bastions of "states rights and private property" at that time and as such, it initially sympathized with the south in it's struggle against the Federal Government.
Lincoln may have had Abolitionist views but I am sure he didn't want to be the President of a country that was falling apart in front of his eyes. He said so himself "A house divided against itself, cannot stand". If he had signed the Emancipation in 1861 when he came into office, it is possible that Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, Kentucky and Missouri would have seceded within days or withdrawn their support for the Federal Union.
86
posted on
08/13/2003 9:51:45 AM PDT
by
XRdsRev
To: wasp69
and the occupied areas of the South such as New Orleans as well.
Right?
87
posted on
08/13/2003 9:56:33 AM PDT
by
wardaddy
To: XRdsRev
There was no good reason for him not to issue the EP once the war had started, yet he waited until the second fall of the war. Why is that? And why wouldn't he free the slaves in the non-secessionist states? I know the answer to the second question, and it is just more proof that he wasn't fighting the war to end slavery, as the revionist historians would have us believe.
88
posted on
08/13/2003 9:57:20 AM PDT
by
squidly
To: dwd1
Look, I'm just cranky today. Forgive me.
To: thegreatbeast
The ironic thing is, Lincoln freed almost no one. The Emancipation Proclamation, which went into effect in January, 1863, only applied to those states that were still in reberllion, and that were not under Northern control; nor did it apply to the border states where slavery existed, nor to Delaware, which still had some slaves (granted, not very many). So, you see that the Emancipation Proclamation really did nothing: it was a fraud, for all intents and purposes. The only states it was supposed to apply to were not affected by it, because they had already seceded and Lincoln had no authority over them. Slavery wasn't abolished until the passage of the 13th Amendment in 1865.
To: XRdsRev
Very interesting...
I am thinking about thinking about Professor Nash who was profiled in the movie "A beautiful mind". It seems his ideas were in place back then... small adaption "We do what is best for ourselves and the nation!" This was the clash of societal principles that took a civil war to resolve...
The one thing your post also shows me.... As a society, we have survived because of our ability to recognize a problem and work for a solution that is best for the nation... Not always fair to everybody...Not always nice...Every group is not always going to be happy but we are doing the best we can... And we have been around for quite some time... Sounds like we are a nation of pragmatists....
Nice post...
91
posted on
08/13/2003 10:03:11 AM PDT
by
dwd1
(M. h. D. (Master of Hate and Discontent))
To: Little Ray
"...there were many folks (North AND South) that didn't even see blacks (or Indians, or Chinese, or Irish...) as human..."
Or Germans. Especially Catholic Germans.
To: dwd1
yea...that 1920 suffragtette thing is a bit of an itch...lol
...as for black males voting...no problem..lol
when we granted full rights to women, we doomed ourselves to a lengthy flirtation with modern liberalism...emotive politics.
Do I have any answers?...no....just an observation.
93
posted on
08/13/2003 10:05:37 AM PDT
by
wardaddy
To: bedolido
The Emancipation Proclamation freed almost no one. See my earlier post.
To: A_perfect_lady
Nothing to forgive... I served nine years and twenty days to support the right we all have to agree and disagree... I welcome a good discussion because as a nation, people need understand that you have case... Nothing will be solved if we don't talk...
Thank you for the reply...
95
posted on
08/13/2003 10:06:37 AM PDT
by
dwd1
(M. h. D. (Master of Hate and Discontent))
To: rdb3
The grand effort at full black emancipation that occured from 1861-1970s was and still is a vast social effort (experiment) that does indeed entail many aspects of at a minimum socialism.
You are right.
96
posted on
08/13/2003 10:09:56 AM PDT
by
wardaddy
To: wardaddy
I think you are just like the rest of us... No easy answers but you are looking every chance you get... Good to hear from you....
BTW, what part of Florida should I direct the police to search for your body in case your wife reads your post? :-)
97
posted on
08/13/2003 10:10:38 AM PDT
by
dwd1
(M. h. D. (Master of Hate and Discontent))
To: wardaddy
But don't you just love those Juneteenth Celebrations?
The sad part about all of this is that until we become a true "established interest" within this country not taken for granted by the Democrats, this may well continue...
98
posted on
08/13/2003 10:13:08 AM PDT
by
dwd1
(M. h. D. (Master of Hate and Discontent))
To: squidly
Of course there was good reason. The North was losing militarily in the battlegrounds of Virginia. 1st Manassas in June 1861 was a devestating defeat that threatened the Capitol itself, Balls Bluff while a small battle was another defeat that had tremendous political effect with the death of General Baker, the Penninsula Campaign ended badly, Cedar Mountain, 2nd Manassas, Chantilly...all defeats with high loss of life including publicly beloved generals. Slaves who fled to the safety of the Army in 1861-62 became a problem and a threat to already questionable military effectiveness. The Army was not prepared to handle or feed these people and it was not until the Freedman's Bureau was up and running that they could do so.
The Army of the Potomac went through 3 changes of command and was very disorganized. It was hardly a good time to make a groundbreaking change in public/military policy. The Battle of Sharpsburg and the defeat of the Maryland Invasion provided the victory needed to boost public confidence in the administration and allowed them to make the radical jump the President had wanted for a long time.
99
posted on
08/13/2003 10:13:52 AM PDT
by
XRdsRev
To: dwd1
Nashville actually.
Knowing her, probably one should look for my teeth in the Insinkerator...lol
I'm not bashing the ladies but without them, I doubt we would ever have even crossed the New Deal Rubicon.
Regards.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 421-430 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