Posted on 10/03/2015 1:28:14 PM PDT by Kaslin
__________________
Typical Lib response; If you know you're wrong and can't win an argument, attack and call your opponent names.
You've only to Google Lincoln and Sherman to learn what murderous monsters they were.
I guess you deny Lincoln, THE PRESIDENT, said those racist things about blacks, when it is in congressional archive records. Ditto Sherman's insane swath from Atlanta to the sea, robbing, burning and murdering and raping the innocent.
The north never wanted blacks in their states, period. Many states had laws preventing them from coming or staying long, even if they were free. Those sentiments were from about 85% of the population. Those feelings did not change following the war. Racism was greater in the north than the south immediately following the war. Many were afraid they would take the jobs or lower the average wages by working cheaper. This was especially a concern in New York and Boston.
General Grant made the comment that, "The sole object of this war is to restore the Union. Should I be convinced it has any other object, or that the government designs using its soldiers to execute the wishes of the abolitionists, I pledge to you my honor as a man and a soldier I would resign my commission and carry my sword to the other side" in a letter to the Chicago Tribune 1862. Union General William T. Sherman said in 1864 "I am honest in my belief that it is not fair to my men to count negros as equals. Let us capture negros, of course, and use them to the best advantage." These two men both owned slaves, and did not want to free them. I honestly do not see how so many "politically correct" people can stand there and say the "North was right."
Confederate General Robert E. Lee, however, saw the world of slavery from a different view. He said "There are few, I believe, in this enlightened age, who will not acknowledge that slavery is an institution of a moral and political evil" In 1858. In 1866 he also made a statement that "All the south ever desired was that the union, as established by our forefathers, be preserved; and that the Government, as originally organized, should be administered in purity and truth." It wasn't a far fetched idea yet the people in this country then and still today are yet to grasp hold of something like morals, purity, or truth. But I guess that's where Confederate States President Jefferson Davis comes in with "Truth crushed to the earth is truth still and like a seed will rise again."
Cruelty of plantation owners to his slaves has been greatly exaggerated. Many were treated almost as family. True, the plantation owners did not consider them really human, (terribly wrong) but they would no more brutalize them than any of their animals.
The Negro [in the North] is free, but he cannot share the rights, pleasures, labors, griefs, or even the tomb of him whose equal he has been declared; there is nowhere where he can meet him, neither in life nor in death. In the South, where slavery still exists, less trouble is taken to keep the Negro apart: they sometimes share the labors and the pleasures of the white men; people are prepared to mix with them to some extent; legislation is more harsh against them, but customs are more tolerant and gentle.[3]
segregation was not enough for many Ohio whites, and they insulted, opposed, and sometimes literally attacked private schools set up to teach black children. Whites destroyed newly opened schools for blacks in Zanesville in 1837 and Troy in 1840. Similar mass resistance took place in Vermont and Connecticut.
anti-immigration rule was challenged in the case of a black man convicted for bringing a black woman into the state to marry her. The state Supreme Court upheld the conviction, noting that, �The policy of the state is ... clearly evolved. It is to exclude any further ingress of negroes, and to remove those already among us as speedily as possible.� There was no legal segregation in Indiana's public schools: none was necessary. The white citizens of the state would keep the schools racially pure more thoroughly than any legal provision could. A court upheld the white-only Indiana public schools in 1850, finding that, in the eyes of the state, �black children were deemed unfit associates of whites, as school companions.� http://slavenorth.com/exclusion.htm
Lincoln, Grant, Sherman- mass murderers of 800,000 and wounding of one million, 'to preserve the union'. They wanted the riches of the South and wanted to prevent them from seceding. They should have been hung for crimes against humanity
__________________
Typical Lib response; If you know you're wrong and can't win an argument, attack and call your opponent names.
You've only to Google Lincoln and Sherman to learn what murderous monsters they were.
I guess you deny Lincoln, THE PRESIDENT, said those racist things about blacks, when it is in congressional archive records. Ditto Sherman's insane swath from Atlanta to the sea, robbing, burning and murdering and raping the innocent.
The north never wanted blacks in their states, period. Many states had laws preventing them from coming or staying long, even if they were free. Those sentiments were from about 85% of the population. Those feelings did not change following the war. Racism was greater in the north than the south immediately following the war. Many were afraid they would take the jobs or lower the average wages by working cheaper. This was especially a concern in New York and Boston.
General Grant made the comment that, "The sole object of this war is to restore the Union. Should I be convinced it has any other object, or that the government designs using its soldiers to execute the wishes of the abolitionists, I pledge to you my honor as a man and a soldier I would resign my commission and carry my sword to the other side" in a letter to the Chicago Tribune 1862. Union General William T. Sherman said in 1864 "I am honest in my belief that it is not fair to my men to count negros as equals. Let us capture negros, of course, and use them to the best advantage." These two men both owned slaves, and did not want to free them. I honestly do not see how so many "politically correct" people can stand there and say the "North was right."
Confederate General Robert E. Lee, however, saw the world of slavery from a different view. He said "There are few, I believe, in this enlightened age, who will not acknowledge that slavery is an institution of a moral and political evil" In 1858. In 1866 he also made a statement that "All the south ever desired was that the union, as established by our forefathers, be preserved; and that the Government, as originally organized, should be administered in purity and truth." It wasn't a far fetched idea yet the people in this country then and still today are yet to grasp hold of something like morals, purity, or truth. But I guess that's where Confederate States President Jefferson Davis comes in with "Truth crushed to the earth is truth still and like a seed will rise again."
Cruelty of plantation owners to his slaves has been greatly exaggerated. Many were treated almost as family. True, the plantation owners did not consider them really human, (terribly wrong) but they would no more brutalize them than any of their animals.
The Negro [in the North] is free, but he cannot share the rights, pleasures, labors, griefs, or even the tomb of him whose equal he has been declared; there is nowhere where he can meet him, neither in life nor in death. In the South, where slavery still exists, less trouble is taken to keep the Negro apart: they sometimes share the labors and the pleasures of the white men; people are prepared to mix with them to some extent; legislation is more harsh against them, but customs are more tolerant and gentle.[3]
segregation was not enough for many Ohio whites, and they insulted, opposed, and sometimes literally attacked private schools set up to teach black children. Whites destroyed newly opened schools for blacks in Zanesville in 1837 and Troy in 1840. Similar mass resistance took place in Vermont and Connecticut.
anti-immigration rule was challenged in the case of a black man convicted for bringing a black woman into the state to marry her. The state Supreme Court upheld the conviction, noting that, �The policy of the state is ... clearly evolved. It is to exclude any further ingress of negroes, and to remove those already among us as speedily as possible.� There was no legal segregation in Indiana's public schools: none was necessary. The white citizens of the state would keep the schools racially pure more thoroughly than any legal provision could. A court upheld the white-only Indiana public schools in 1850, finding that, in the eyes of the state, �black children were deemed unfit associates of whites, as school companions.� http://slavenorth.com/exclusion.htm
Lincoln, Grant, Sherman- mass murderers of 800,000 and wounding of one million, 'to preserve the union'. They wanted the riches of the South and wanted to prevent them from seceding. They should have been hung for crimes against humanity
I think that's a fake quote. It comes from the Democratic Speaker's Handbook put together when Grant was running for president.
Think about it: you are an obscure ex-officer called back to lead some troops, not a political appointee. What business do you have writing to a major paper about your political views?
And if you had written a letter for publication saying you'd join the other side, wouldn't you at least have been court-marshaled?
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.