America thinks the unthinkable: More than half of Trump voters and 41% of Biden supporters want red and blue states to SECEDE from one another and form two new countries, shock new poll finds

UK Daily Mail ^ | October 1 2021 | MORGAN PHILLIPS

[FLT-bird]

This is what I figured out years ago, and I realized you can't reason a man out of a position he didn't reason himself into.

There's no point in humoring him - or the haradan. Neither arrived at their position through reason. Neither is capable of intellectual honesty. Both are obsessive and just want to steal as much of your time as you will let them steal.

[BroJoeK]

enumerated: "You have been brainwashed to accept a one-sided narrative, and there’s nothing I can ever do to change that."

DiogenesLamp: "This is what I figured out years ago, and I realized you can't reason a man out of a position he didn't reason himself into."

You guys are just typical Democrats, projecting your own mind-set onto others.
You are describing yourselves here.

And here's how you can know the truth about Fort Sumter: Jefferson Davis had a choice, war or peace, and he chose war.
He was accurately warned against war, by his Secretary of State, Toombs, but he chose to ignore the warning.
Why? -- that's the question answered in my post #312 above.

But you guys won't read the post, you don't care what reasons Davis had or didn't have, because in your minds none of that matters, what does matter to you is: how evil & wicked was "Ape" Lincoln.

Facts are still facts, regardless of your passions for ignoring them.

[BroJoeK]

wardaddy: "*how can Bro criticize cut and paste"

Ha! Because "cut and paste" is a big issue for wardaddy!
You hate, hate "cut and paste" when our side does it, but you're totally fine with it when your folks cr*p out their own "cut and paste" quotes, right?

One problem with your guys' quotes is the quotes very often don't actually mean what you-all claim.

wardaddy: "** I saw that post he made recently whereby he said GOPe was abolition party...I said then...whoa...someone will pick up on that huge faux pas"

What are you smokin' wardaddy?
What kind of cr*p are you shoving up your nose?
Those words are a total lie, I've never posted anything remotely resembling that.

So why are you lying about that?
What else do you lie about?

Typical Democrat behavior!

[enumerated]

“There’s no point in humoring him.”

Yeah, you are right. I don’t know why I ever bother.

Really stubborn guy… the mile-long arguments are not even worth scanning, because his bottom line is always going to be the same foregone conclusion: Everything was the South’s fault.

Just like everything is Trump’s fault.

And the irony is that if you disagree with anything, he calls you a Democrat. :-)

[BroJoeK]

woodpusher: "At this point, I was not even aware of the existence of this thread.
I had stated nothing on the thread, nor does it appear anybody quoted me saying anything. BroJoeBidenK merely has cognitive issues.
Only in BroJoeBidenK's head, was I here among his imaginary friends and adverseries, being "quoted.""

Naw, you're just driving yourself nuts here for no good reason.
The important fact is that you are indeed a big "cut & paste" poster, and that's a term of derision used by wardaddy against opponents of your Lost Cause.
So your name belongs with our other "cut & paste" Lost Causers, notably these days FLT-bird & DiogenesLamp.

Free Republic's traditional posting guidelines say: if I mention you in my post, then I should include your name in my address line.
It's a "rule" that oldtimers like wardaddy well know, but often chose to ignore.

That's why you were addressed.

[BroJoeK]

enumerated: "And the irony is that if you disagree with anything, he calls you a Democrat. :-)"

You guys are Democrats, Southern Democrats, with Democrat mind-sets which require, first & foremost, loyalty to the party's Big Lies, in this case, the Southern Democrats' Lost Cause.

enumerated: "Really stubborn guy… the mile-long arguments are not even worth scanning, because his bottom line is always going to be the same foregone conclusion: Everything was the South’s fault."

Noooo, not "the South's" fault, that's insane.
Jefferson Davis' fault -- yes.
Democrat Fire Eaters' fault -- yes.
Slaveholders' fault -- yes.
"Slave Power's" fault -- yes.
"King cotton's" fault -- yes.

But all of those were a tiny minority of "the South" -- in most Confederate states many were opposed to, first, secession and then war against the United States.
Consider these numbers:

1. The seven Deep South Confederate states provided circa 60,000 Union troops, about 95% of them black.
   
2. The four Upper South Confederate states provided 105,000 Union troops, 2/3 of those were white.
   
3. Three Union Border Slave-states provided about 245,000 Union troops, 83% of them white.

Those, among many other reasons, are why Union defenders never criticize "the South", only the Slave Power that ruled it.
So why ever would you defend them?

[DiogenesLamp]

...the mile-long arguments are not even worth scanning, ...

This.

And the irony is that if you disagree with anything, he calls you a Democrat. :-)

This.

[DiogenesLamp]

Did those ships fire the first shot?

Yes. The sending of them with orders to attack was the first shot. The putting warships in peoples faces and telling them those ships are going to attack them *IS* the first shot.

[wardaddy]

Feel free to go back and find anywhere in my history I support what you refer to as the lost cause.....i could care less about refighting it

I am against tearing down statues and referring to my ancestry as nazis and yankee bigotry towards my people.

I also grew up surrounded by it ....the remnants ...even where I now type...my own homes foundation and cistern is antebellum and figured tangentially in the Battle of Franklin...1864 ...and I knew relatives who’s parent fought in it or experienced the reconstruction era

I also think it was about slavery ....the expansion of it ....and a lot more. Cultural divides that persist to to this day evident by this very thread and your venom. I’ve lived amongst yankees and had yankee paramours and like many of them same as folks down here....most have zero truck with what you’re obsessed with.

As far as refighting every detail to the lead up and battles I’ll pass. It’s just not my main topic of interest.

Somewhere along the line neocons at national review and elsewhere in an unsettling alliance with race obsessed leftists decides that demonizing the south was good for both. The land of paleos and bigots must be served up on a platter.
Neocons and GOPe do this deflect charges of racism they endure 24/7.....no no no it’s those southerners and their flags

That at this late date...where all of traditional America is under siege ...you still persist in that tack says holy plenty.

As for Lincoln I have always been forthcoming...I’m ambivalent....he certainly offered good terms but he’s also quite flawed and took measures I don’t agree with....not a demigod but considering the circumstances I don’t judge him so harshly. He was no abolitionist I’m surprised you made such a claim.

I’m under no illusion that had the industrial north needed slave labor they would have justified it but with those ports laden with European labor slavery in the north was not growing .

I know having lived or worked or been almost everywhere on this rock that the south is special winner or defeated. No question of that.

No other part of America has this identity or cohesion....but it’s fading because y’all are streaming here in a tidal wave escaping the messes you’ve made.

I’m not sure where this leads but if the past is indicative it’s not good.

It’s ironic now the south who’s history you bemoan with vitriol here day after day is the last redoubt of our American way of life....along with a few parts of the mountain west and rural Midwest.

That fact remains elusive for you to excogitate

[DiogenesLamp]

I also think it was about slavery ....the expansion of it ....and a lot more.

I had been told this my entire life, and then one day I decided to look at this claim.

What I see is that this claim doesn't stand up to facts and reason. It was literally impossible to grow cotton in the territories, and nothing else would pay the slaveowner enough to make it worth the cost of keeping a slave.

(Slaves cost around $1,000.00 in 1860 money which is approximately $100,000.00 in modern money. )

Further proof is the Wikipedia entry on "New Mexico Territory" where it explicitly says there weren't a dozen slaves in the entire (stretching from Texas to California) territory.

So what if this "expansion of slavery" claim was just a lie?

That is now the model under which I operate in understanding what happened.

[jmacusa]

Because you are Lampster. I’ve called you and your fellow Rebs out on that a dozen times here and you can holler and stamp your feet all you want but the fact remains you are.

Now go ahead and flame away.

[BroJoeK]

wardaddy: "Feel free to go back and find anywhere in my history I support what you refer to as the lost cause.....i could care less about refighting it"

And yet... you came on this thread to cheer on our Lost Cause defenders, to mock my "cut & paste" posts and then to lie claiming I said the GOPe is "the abortion party".

As for that term, "Lost Cause", or "Lost Causer", it's only one of many we could just as well use.
In the more recent past I've used "pro-Confederate" and that's just as good a term as "Lost Cause", imho.
If you-all prefer "pro-Confederate" to "Lost Causer", I'm OK with that, though I'd have to ask, what exactly about the Lost Cause do you disagree with?

wardaddy: "I am against tearing down statues and referring to my ancestry as nazis and yankee bigotry towards my people."

Sure, but please remember this: you Democrats put those statues up -- you never asked Republicans for our permission to erect Confederate statues.
Of course we never objected -- Confederates are not the only old enemies we honor today, think of US Army helicopters named for Indian tribes.

But now Democrats want to tear down their own statues, and so you want us Republicans to come to your defense, but why should we, when the only thing you-all can think to do is lie about the Civil War and about Republicans?

You-all hate us to the core, and yet you still want us to do your bidding -- how insane is that?

As for calling Confederates "nazis", that should not happen here, ever, because Confederates weren't, far from it.
On the other hand, there are some unfortunate comparisons:

1. Just as the Second World War for America started at Pearl Harbor, so the Civil War started at Fort Sumter.
   And just as Japanese chose to attack American forces, so Jefferson Davis chose to attack at Fort Sumter.

2. Confederates declared war against the United States (May 6, 1861), as did WWII Axis powers.
   What other major powers did that?

3. Nazi Germany killed fewer Americans than the Civil War.

As for "yankee bigotry", I have no idea what that is -- nobody here hates "the South" or "Southerners".
We do hate the lies some of you tell each other and post on Free Republic - and some of our Lost Cause liars even claim to be Northerners!.
We also know that you-all represent a mere tiny minority of all Southerners.

wardaddy: "I also grew up surrounded by it ....the remnants ...even where I now type...my own homes foundation and cistern is antebellum and figured tangentially in the Battle of Franklin...1864 ...and I knew relatives who’s parent fought in it or experienced the reconstruction era"

One of my great grandfathers served in an Illinois volunteer infantry regiment, they marched or rode rails & steamboats thousands of miles over the "western theater", including the Battle of Nashville, December 1864.
He was captured (& paroled) in 1863 by a Nathan Bedford Forrest raid and wounded at Fort Blakely, near Mobile, at the war's end.

My mother was born & raised in western NC, her neighbors' ancestors were victims of the "Shelton Laurel Massacre" -- look it up.

wardaddy: "I also think it was about slavery ....the expansion of it ....and a lot more.
Cultural divides that persist to to this day evident by this very thread and your venom. "

FRiend, if you see "venom" in my words, it's only because you yourself have "projected" such feelings.
And you know, that's what Democrats naturally do, right?
They are forever accusing us of whatever it is they are most guilty -- it's their nature, it's what being a Democrat means.

So, let's talk about that "a lot more"...
Your allies here, like DiogenesLamp, tell us Civil War was not really "all about" slavery, that slavery was just the "excuse" and the "real reason" was, we might call it, "Northern economic dominance" of Southern States, right?
Well... my response has always been: maybe that's true, but only for a very tiny minority of Southern leaders, the 1%ers, or even the 1% of 1%ers, who might grasp how (to use DiogenesLamp's term) the "money flows from Europe" could be better optimized to serve the financial interests of Southern 1%ers.
That might even be true.

However, the 99% of patriotic Southerners were never going to buy into such arguments, as demonstrated in the 1830 Nullification Crisis -- nobody then wanted to go to civil war over purely financial theories.
On the other hand, threats against slavery motivated a majority in the Deep South, and slavery plus Union coercion motivated a majority in the Upper South -- that's what their secession documents said!

wardaddy: "I’ve lived amongst yankees and had yankee paramours and like many of them same as folks down here....most have zero truck with what you’re obsessed with."

Here's the truth: contrary to your own "projections", I'm "obsessed" with nothing you imagine.
I do post here to, as much as possible, correct the lies & nonsense from our pro-Confederates -- if you prefer that term to "Lost Causers", it's fine by me.

wardaddy: "Somewhere along the line neocons at national review and elsewhere in an unsettling alliance with race obsessed leftists decides that demonizing the south was good for both.
The land of paleos and bigots must be served up on a platter.
Neocons and GOPe do this deflect charges of racism they endure 24/7.....no no no it’s those southerners and their flags"

Sorry, but I don't know what you're talking about here.
I'm a huge fan of Ronald Reagan & Donald Trump, both genuine conservatives as near as I can tell, both won some major political battles, but also lost some big ones.
So all your talk about "Neocons" and "GOPe" goes right over my head -- I don't know those people, have not seen them on Free Republic, and don't understand why you keep flogging them.

wardaddy: "He [Lincoln] was no abolitionist I’m surprised you made such a claim."

Naw... here's the simple truth: Lincoln was no abolitionist before 1861, unlike, for example, Republican 1856 Presidential Candidate John Fremont, Lincoln was a "moderate" on slavery before the Civil War.
And even as war began Lincoln was trying to hold-back radical Fremont from abolishing slavery in Missouri by military decree.
But as war progressed, Lincoln came to see that destroying slavery was necessary to destroy the Confederacy -- hence 1861 Confiscation Laws ("Contraband of War"), Lincoln's 1862 Emancipation Proclamation and 1864 13th Amendment.
So Lincoln became an abolitionist and more.

wardaddy: "I’m under no illusion that had the industrial north needed slave labor they would have justified it but with those ports laden with European labor slavery in the north was not growing ."

Sorry, but that is pure counter-historical fantasy -- Northerners were committed to abolition in the North long before cities like New York exploded with poor immigrants from Europe.
And in those days Southerners like Thomas Jefferson were happy to abolish slavery, in the Northwest Territories.
Jefferson even proposed plans for Federally paid national abolition with compensation for slaveholders!

In those days there were plenty of common grounds between North & South.

wardaddy: "It’s ironic now the south who’s history you bemoan with vitriol here day after day is the last redoubt of our American way of life....along with a few parts of the mountain west and rural Midwest.
That fact remains elusive for you to excogitate"

Because that's totally false, and you well know it.
The real divisions in American are not North vs. South or East vs. West, etc., it's Big City vs. rural, small towns & suburbs.
So Southerners have vastly more in common with Republicans in the East, North & West, than you do with Democrats in your own Big Cities.

Think of this: who's trying to tear down your Confederate statues, is it Northenr Republicans?
No, of course not, it's your own Big City Democrats.

Here, yet again, is the 2016 election map by county.
All the red counties are Trump supporters, and they are your friends and allies, so you should not be projecting bad thoughts onto them.

And notice, please, there are just as many "blue" counties in the South as anywhere else.

So it's just not all about North vs. South, it never really was.

[jmacusa]

‘’referring to my ancestry as nazis and Yankee bigotry towards my people’’.

The actions of your Confederate ancestors, if indeed you have any don’t reflect on YOU unless you want them to.

[DiogenesLamp]

Ah! A map of what the nation would have looked like if they hadn't stopped the CSA from manifest destiny.

[FLT-bird]

Oh look BroJoeK is tagging me in yet again to show what a complete and utter lack of a life he has. He seemingly lives for these threads because lord knows he spends hours and hours per day every day one of them is up spewing his PC Revisionist lies and BS while trying to waste everybody else’s time to fill his empty days.

[FLT-bird]

And the irony is that if you disagree with anything, he calls you a Democrat. :-)

That's the funny thing. What did the North - New England especially - want? Big government. The total centralization of power. Corporate welfare. Being busybodies with everybody else. What do they want today? The same things. What did the South want? Limited government, balanced budgets with low spending. A non interventionist foreign policy. Decentralized power. What do they want today? The same things. He comes here and sides with Leftists yet tries to imply that anybody who disagrees with him is a Leftist. Hilarious.

[FLT-bird]

I disagree with you about the “about slavery” part but otherwise, you are correct. The Clairmont Institute Neocons sided with PCers to try to revise history starting in the 1980s. Prior to that even most in Academia recognized the importance of the economic differences such as the tariffs or federal government policies were the key driver in both secession and war. The Leftist PCers revived wartime and immediate postwar Yankee propaganda to try to demonize the South while sweeping completely under the rug the fact that they had been treating the South like their cash cow.

The Neocons have now largely returned to their Leftist roots....people like Bill Kristol, Max Boot etc are Democrats today. They were never on the Right. They just used the Right’s patriotism to get the foreign wars they wanted. So its really just open and avowed Leftists today who push the “all about slavery” myth. Just as I told everybody 25 years ago, it did not stop with the South’s history either. Now they’re tearing down statues of even the Founding Fathers, redesigning the stars and stripes, claiming America (not just the South) is at its core, racist, etc etc. All the same crap they threw at the South a generation ago.

[FLT-bird]

Yep. The English (who were real abolitionists btw) recognized this was nothing but Yankee Propaganda.

in 1860, in the New Mexico Territory, an area which encompassed the area presently occupied by the States of New Mexico and Arizona, that there were a grand total of 22 slaves, only 12 of whom were actually domiciled there. If the South intended to be a “Slave Power,” spreading its labor system across the entire continent, it was doing a pretty poor job of it. Commenting on this fact, an English publication in 1861 said, “When, therefore, so little pains are taken to propagate slavery outside the circle of the existing slave states, it cannot be that the extension of slavery is desired by the South on social or commercial grounds directly, and still less from any love for the thing itself for its own sake. But the value of New Mexico and Arizona politically is very great! In the Senate they would count as 4 votes with the South or with the North according as they ranked in the category of slave holding or Free soil states”.

They noticed the obvious. What the Southern states wanted was more seats in the Senate so as to block even more harmful legislation like higher tariffs that would bleed even more money out of their pockets. Notice how when they left, they were just fine with not staking a claim to any of the western territories. They no longer needed seats in the US Senate to protect themselves.

“What do you propose, gentlemen of the free soil party? Do you propose to better the condition of the slave? Not at all. What then do you propose? You say you are opposed to the expansion of slavery. Is the slave to be benefited by it? Not at all. What then do you propose? It is not humanity that influences you in the position which you now occupy before the country. It is that you may have an opportunity of cheating us that you want to limit slave territory within circumscribed bounds. It is that you may have a majority in the Congress of the United States and convert the government into an engine of Northern aggrandizement. It is that your section may grow in power and prosperity upon treasures unjustly taken from the South, like the vampire bloated and gorged with the blood which it has secretly sucked from its victim. You desire to weaken the political power of the Southern states, - and why? Because you want, by an unjust system of legislation, to promote the industry of the New England States, at the expense of the people of the South and their industry.” - US Senator Jefferson Davis 1860

[TwelveOfTwenty]

This is what the CW was about.

Here's the story behind that image. It reports he escaped the South to Union soldiers.

There's plenty more where that came from.

[FLT-bird]

Sorry but no. It wasn’t. In this example there was a particularly sadistic owner. That was not the norm. Scars on a slaves would indicate a slave who was either disobedient or who tried to run away. Both would lower the sales value of the slave.

The truth is slaves had been getting whipped for hundreds of years. Northerners didn’t care - just like they didn’t care that Yankee slave traders treated slaves far worse. It wasn’t a morality play no matter how much you want to pretend otherwise.