Replies

You never refuted anything. You just repeated the same false statements throughout. But since you can't move on, and since FR is willing to give you the bandwidth to repeat your garbage, we'll do it again.

You didn’t even know who your fellow Leftist James McPherson was. LOL!

Here's an interview with him, where he is clearly trying to tie those who opposed abolition with "the right wing in American politics", his words.

This is exactly what you're doing. The only difference is you're doing it indirectly by accepting the Confederacy's history as ours, but it's the same effect.

The North offered slavery forever by express constitutional amendment.

Wrong, some representatives in the North made a last ditch effort to prevent secession and the CW by drafting the amendment. Some of those representatives and the president who signed it were out of work the following year.

It was never ratified by more than five states, because no one else was interested in preserving slavery even at the risk of secession and the CW.

Much like reality in your posts, it was nothing.

Getting rid of a constitutional provision that bans all Blacks IS NOT abolitionism.

"A few stubborn proponents of the Topeka Constitution refused to abandon their document, but overall the abolitionists were eager to start over and make the most of their opportunity."

Of course Kansas couldn't abolish slavery because they were already a free state, but the first constitution was used to pass proslavery laws by the "Bogus Legislature". More here.

The Four Kansas Constitutions: Topeka

The voters showed the "Bogus Legislature" what they thought of their proslavery laws in 1858.

According to the Republicans themselves, they were not.

Some Rpublicans made questionable statements to audiences who wanted to hear them, but JD and the writers of the declarations of secession saw through this, and said so several times.

And they were right. When the Republicans finally got the votes they needed in 1865, they passed abolition.

False. South Carolina lawfully seceded. Their territorial waters were part of their sovereign territory.

Both sides had their legal claims to the waters. Since both sides had claims to the territory, the CW was the only way to resolve this.

Ft. Sumter was claimed by the state under its authority as sovereign. The federal troops there were illegal squatters.

It was also claimed by the Federal government.

There's no such thing as an act of war against people. Acts of war are against sovereign governments.

Does this mean bombing civilians aren't acts of war as long as they leave the governments alone? Who knew?

No its not (the same effect because the Confederacy and slavery are effectively synonymous).

It most certainly is. Most of the people in this country who don't buy your revisionism know secession was about slavery, regardless of any other reasons the slave holding states made up for seceding. When you tie the Confederacy to the right, you are tying slavery to the right.

All you have to do then is to stop repeating the false claim that he was just playing to the crowd.

The 4th debate with Douglas in 1858, where he made appalling comments to cheering crowds. These were some of the people Lincoln had to work with. You have even stated that not everyone in the North supported abolition and you are correct, yet you can't understand that this was what Lincoln had to work with.

He wasn't. He was not an abolitionist. He supported slavery forever by express constitutional amendment. He even supported strengthened fugitive slave laws.

Two policies that were never ratified.

(13th Amendment ratified) After he was dead.

By a Confederacy supporting democrat, who made the decision to assassinate Lincoln after Lincoln gave a speech on granting slaves citizenship.

Who Assassinated Abraham Lincoln?