Benefactor’s family demands refund after U. Richmond removes name from law school

The College Fix ^ | 1/18/23 | Rafael Oliveria

[DiogenesLamp]

Us Navy cargo ships have always been armed.

Pawnee was a warship. Pocahontas was a warship. Powhatan was a warship. Harriet Lane was an armed revenue cutter. Yankee was an armed tugboat.

The Baltic was carrying troops and munitions.

There wasn't a cargo ship in the lot.

But that was not Lincoln’s intention in resupplying Ft. Sumter.

His intention was clearly to provoke them into attacking Sumter. Cargo ships likely would not have provoked that reaction.

[jmacusa]

Here’s a simple question for you Re, a simple yes or nor.

Are you sorry the South lost the war?

Oh and thanks for the moniker. I’m proud to be a Yank, an American.

What are you?

[jmacusa]

A cargo ship of the USN is an armed ship. Armed for it’s defense, not offense. Take your meds already.

[Tired of Taxes]

>”And how did all of the others vote? Humphrey got one state in the whole region despite being the Democrat party's nominee.“<

We’re talking about Southern Democrats. We’re not talking about Republican voters in the South. Your argument is that the old Southern Dems were like today’s Republicans. That’s what we’re debating.

As I said, and as you know, six southern states voted for Democrat presidential candidates in '68: Texas for Humphrey on the Dem ticket, and five others for Wallace. Wallace was a Southern “New Deal” Democrat who wanted racial segregation, and Humphrey was LBJ’s VP.

Republicans are nothing like them.

>”Obviously they were not pure democracies.“<

Well, you touted their “democratic” politics.

>"Lincoln, the guy a lot of Republicans want to tout as the figurehead of the party. Yes, I cited him. He was hardly the paragon of tolerance/morality the court historians would like for us to believe."<

It was the 1800's. You keep referring back to the 19th century. You choose to ignore what Southern Democrats did in the 20th century. And yes, they were obsessed with race, just like Democrats are today.

You keep trying to justify everything the Southern Democrats ever did. In 20 years here, I've never come across anyone arguing in favor of the Southern Democrats.

[FLT-bird]

Here’s a simple question for you Re, a simple yes or nor. Are you sorry the South lost the war? Oh and thanks for the moniker. I’m proud to be a Yank, an American. What are you?

I think it would have been better had the South gained its independence just as I think it was better that the 13 colonies gained their independence.

I'm a Southerner and an American.

[FLT-bird]

We’re talking about Southern Democrats. We’re not talking about Republican voters in the South. Your argument is that the old Southern Dems were like today’s Republicans. That’s what we’re debating.

The point was even in 1968 before Southern voters had finally given up on the Democrat party because it had drifted too far leftward, Nixon got a lot more electoral votes out of the South than Humphrey did. But for one state, Southerners couldn't bear to vote for such a far Leftist even if he was a Democrat.

Republicans are nothing like them.

MAGA Republicans are nothing like RINOs. RINOs are nothing like 19th century Republicans. Political parties change over time.

Well, you touted their “democratic” politics.

They were as democratic as any places on earth at the time.

It was the 1800's. You keep referring back to the 19th century. You choose to ignore what Southern Democrats did in the 20th century. And yes, they were obsessed with race, just like Democrats are today.

You're awfully selective with your timelines too. I figure turnabout is fair play....especially since this is a thread about the War of Northern Aggression.

You keep trying to justify everything the Southern Democrats ever did. In 20 years here, I've never come across anyone arguing in favor of the Southern Democrats.

I don't try to justify everything Southern Democrats did. But you do try to demonize everything Southern Democrats did. You cling to the crazy notion that the two parties have always stood for the same things. They have not. They've changed even in the last 10-15 years. Southern Democrats in the 19th century and even the 20th were Conservative. The philosophy they supported is what MAGA Republicans support today for the most part.

[DiogenesLamp]

A cargo ship of the USN is an armed ship. Armed for it’s defense, not offense.

A Cargo ship is a ship designed for carrying cargo. A warship is a ship designed for war.

No cargo ships were sent, only warships.

[DiogenesLamp]

But through stupid Confederate impetuousness, opening fire on Ft. Sumter, he had one on his hands.

Yeah. Somehow they got the wrong idea from him sending warships with orders to attack them.

[Tired of Taxes]

Southern Democrats were only “conservative” in the sense that they didn’t like social change. At the same time, they loved big government programs.

Republicans favor low taxes, a strong economy, strong national defense, free enterprise, and limited government.

I’ve always been a Republican, and I vote in every election. But, if I believed Republicans were turning into Southern Democrats, I would stop voting Republican right now.

[FLT-bird]

Southern Democrats were only “conservative” in the sense that they didn’t like social change. At the same time, they loved big government programs. Republicans favor low taxes, a strong economy, strong national defense, free enterprise, and limited government. I’ve always been a Republican, and I vote in every election. But, if I believed Republicans were turning into Southern Democrats, I would stop voting Republican right now.

No. Southern Democrats wanted decentralized power, limited government, balanced budgets and a non interventionist foreign policy and a strong national defense - all positions that are considered Conservative today.

Republicans in Lincoln's time certainly did not favor limited government, low taxes, or decentralized power. Quite the opposite. They also thought government should pick winners and losers in the economy via massive corporate subsidies.

I've always been Conservative. I'm so glad to see the MAGA movement because the RINOs are not Conservative. They just talk a good game every few years when they need our votes and then stab us in the back once in office. I will never vote for those people again. In fact, they are enemy #1. They are the ones standing in the way of us having a real choice.

[BroJoeK]

Jmacusa: "Maryland very nearly joined the Confederacy. It's citizens wanted to secede but it's legislature said no."

No, not really.
Of course, it's true that many Marylanders sympathized with Confederates, but they were never a majority.
To show that, we have two key indicators:

1. On April 29, 1861, the Maryland legislature voted against secession 53-13.
   Note, this was after the April 19 Baltimore riots, but before the Confederates' May 6, 1861 formal declaration of war on the United States.
   The Confederate declaration of war meant that any US citizen who gave aid and comfort to Confederates was, by definition, guilty of treason, so there were no more votes on secession.

2. Past estimates credited Marylanders with chosing Union army service over Confederate service by just two-to-one -- about 50,000 Union to 25,000 Confederates.
   But even that number is based on unconfirmed Confederate bragging (Cooper to Trimble), more detailed analysis puts the number of Maryland Confederates at under 5,000.
   So the ratio was not just two-to-one, it was 10-to-1.

   In fairness to Cooper, he reported what he thought was the number of Confederate soldiers who said they were born in Maryland.
   By the time of the Civil War, many may well have emigrated from Maryland to other states, and were thus no longer Marylanders.
   The number of actual Marylanders who served in the Union army was 10-to-1 over Confederates, thus demonstrating again where Marylanders' true loyalties resided.

Of course, it might be argued that Marylanders serving the Confederacy were disproportionately more effective in damaging the Union, with one example being John Wilkes Booth.

[jmacusa]

So being that the South aka The Confederacy , went to war to preserve slavery then that would have been acceptable to you. So you're a Confederate.

[Tired of Taxes]

>"I've always been Conservative."<

Not if you agree with the Southern Democrats.

[DiogenesLamp]

I don't see much point in arguing with him. In the past I've presented him with information, and he couldn't grasp it. He turned it into something that didn't even make sense.

Some people just have to believe what they want to believe.

[FLT-bird]

So being that the South aka The Confederacy , went to war to preserve slavery then that would have been acceptable to you. So you're a Confederate.,/p>

So since the South went to war in self defense after being attacked by the North which was waging a war of aggression for money and empire and this would have been acceptable to you, you're a Yankee.

[FLT-bird]

Not if you agree with the Southern Democrats.

Because I hold the same views on a range of issues the Southern Democrats held. They were quite Conservative.

[FLT-bird]

They’re desperate to avoid admitting it....even when presented a picture of one of the warships sent.

How would the US react if China sent warships to Long Beach? Something tells me sending a fleet of warships to another country’s principle harbor would be considered an act of war by pretty much everybody in the US.

[Tired of Taxes]

"So being that the South aka The Confederacy , went to war to preserve slavery then that would have been acceptable to you. So you're a Confederate."

Interesting, isn't it? They are modern-day Confederates, still complaining about Lincoln, generations after the Civil War ended.

[DiogenesLamp]

Interesting, isn't it? They are modern-day Confederates, still complaining about Lincoln, generations after the Civil War ended.

And this is more or less why I don't bother to argue with you. You don't understand the connection between what happened in 1861 and how grossly powerful our Fed Gov is now.

Abortion, Homosexual "marriage", "Anchor Babies", banning prayer in Schools, and a whole host of other issues are directly traceable back to the 14th amendment.

I started out researching how Abortion became legal, and what I found is that the court cited the "penumbra" in the 14th amendment as legal justification for what they did.

If you actually read the 14th amendment, it is an unmitigated mess. Courts can read anything into it they wish to do, and that is what they did.

The corrupt deep state crony capitalist minions in the Fed Gov pretty much started with Lincoln. The people who took out President Trump through their corrupt election rigging were philosophical descendants of the system of government that Lincoln brought into existence.

If you ever worry about federal overreach (such as busing or court ordered tax increases) you can thank the work of Lincoln for bringing us into this situation.

So if you oppose abortion, homosexual marriage, banning prayer in schools, "anchor babies" and a whole host of other crap brought to us by the 14th amendment, this makes you a "Confederate"?

Well are *YOU* a Confederate, or do you agree that all that crap should be legally valid?

[DiogenesLamp]

They’re desperate to avoid admitting it....even when presented a picture of one of the warships sent.

Some people so badly want to believe something that they will refuse to look at anything which contradicts what they wish to believe.

We see the same phenomena with Global Warming and "Transitioning" someone's sex. We see the same phenomena with "black lives matters", and nobody wants to see George Floyd as a piece of sh*t criminal who overdosed himself.

They want to see "St Floyd."

You cannot really get such people to see reality. Their need for their illusion is simply too powerful to overcome with truth.