Posted on 12/29/2023 7:52:34 AM PST by SeekAndFind
The Nikki Haley slavery tempest in a teapot continues to roil some circles.
For those who have a life and have been spending it with family and friends this Christmas, some background: The candidate for the Republican presidential nomination is in political hot water for her answer to a questioner at a New Hampshire campaign event in which she failed to list “slavery” among the causes of the American Civil War.
She’s subsequently admitted slavery was among those causes, while adding that she thought the question was posed by a Democrat plant in the audience.
The New York Times continues to stoke the story, claiming her answer could “dent her crossover appeal to independents and moderate Democrats.”
Three thoughts:
First, NEWS FLASH: For many of us challenged by the cost of living, the rise in crime, the influx of illegal aliens, and the woke agenda being pushed on cultural-social issues, the enumeration and hierarchy of causes for why something happened 163 years ago is something we do not care about. I’ll even venture to say that unless those “independents” caucus with the Democrats in legislative bodies, they also probably are not burning with concern about the ranked causes of the Civil War.
Second, the Democrat reaction to “of course it was about slavery” is rather rich. Given the historical illiteracy that dominates our schools (we have no time to teach history after spending time on gender, sex, and critical race theory lessons), let’s recall a few facts.
It was South Carolina Democrats, not a South Carolina Republican, who initiated the treason of secession.
It was mostly Democrats who, in the last days of the Democrat Buchanan administration, tried to amend the U.S. Constitution to preserve the Missouri Compromise and, thus, preserve slavery.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
It is not a permanent union. The guys who wrote and signed this:
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
Would not have agreed to a no exit union.
Regardless of what you may think of Nikki Haley, this is standard operating procedure for the Democrats. She has seen improving poll numbers recently. In addition to Donald Trump, they need to destroy anyone else who may have a chance at being the nominee, hence this manufactured controversy.
Very well said !
Does that mean the people of a municipality can, on their own say so, secede from the county and state the municipality is in or that the people of a county in a state can, on their own say so, secede from the state or from the United States?
Birdbrain represents everything that is wrong with the Republican party.
The Republican establishment is built on three Holy Grails -- spending taxpayer money, allowing illegal immigration to satisfy its business interests and meddling in other countries so it and its donors can profit.
Haley is onboard with all of that.
He's not my guy, but I'm confident that Vivek would have hit that question out of the park.
The way Haley's net worth has increased since she left office is proof that.
"Parliament of Whores"
The GOP brings marshmallows to a gunfight.
WIKI
it was designed to house 650 men and 135 guns in three tiers of gun emplacements.
The exterior was finished but the interior and armaments were never completed
On December 26, 1860, only six days after South Carolina seceded from the Union, U.S. Army Major Robert Anderson abandoned the indefensible Fort Moultrie, spiking its large guns, burning its gun carriages, and taking its smaller cannon with him. He secretly relocated companies E and H (127 men, 13 of them musicians) of the 1st U.S. Artillery to Fort Sumter on his own initiative
The fort was not yet complete at the time and fewer than half of the cannons that should have been available were in place, due to military downsizing by President James Buchanan.
In a letter delivered January 31, 1861, South Carolina Governor Pickens demanded of President Buchanan that he surrender Fort Sumter because “I regard that possession is not consistent with the dignity or safety of the State of South Carolina.” Over the next few months repeated calls for evacuation of Fort Sumter from the government of South Carolina and then from Confederate Brigadier General P. G. T. Beauregard were ignored. Union attempts to resupply and reinforce the garrison were repulsed on January 9, 1861 when the first shots of the war, fired by cadets from the Citadel, prevented the steamer Star of the West, hired to transport troops and supplies to Fort Sumter, from completing the task.
After realizing that Anderson’s command would run out of food by April 15, 1861, President Lincoln ordered a fleet of ships, under the command of Gustavus V. Fox, to attempt entry into Charleston Harbor and supply Fort Sumter.
On Thursday, April 11, 1861, Beauregard sent three aides, Colonel James Chesnut, Jr., Captain Stephen D. Lee, and Lieutenant A. R. Chisolm to demand the surrender of the fort. Anderson declined, and the aides returned to report to Beauregard. After Beauregard had consulted the Confederate Secretary of War, Leroy Walker, he sent the aides back to the fort and authorized Chesnut to decide whether the fort should be taken by force. The aides waited for hours while Anderson considered his alternatives and played for time. At about 3:00 a.m., when Anderson finally announced his conditions, Colonel Chesnut, after conferring with the other aides, decided that they were “manifestly futile and not within the scope of the instructions verbally given to us.” The aides then left the fort and proceeded to the nearby Fort Johnson. There, Chesnut ordered the fort to open fire on Fort Sumter.
On Friday, April 12, 1861, at 4:30 a.m., Confederate batteries opened fire on the fort, firing for 34 straight hours. Edmund Ruffin, noted Virginian agronomist and secessionist, claimed that he fired the first shot on Fort Sumter. His story has been widely believed, but Lieutenant Henry S. Farley, commanding a battery of two 10-inch siege mortars on James Island actually fired the first shot at 4:30 a.m. No attempt was made to return the fire for more than two hours. The fort’s supply of ammunition was not suited for the task; also, there were no fuses for their explosive shells, which means that they could not explode. Only solid iron balls could be used against the Confederate batteries.
The Union fired slowly to conserve ammunition. At night, the fire from the fort stopped, but the Confederates still lobbed an occasional shell into Sumter. On Saturday, April 13, the fort was surrendered and evacuated.
The last Confederate commander, Major Thomas A. Huguenin, a graduate of The Citadel, never surrendered Fort Sumter, but General William Tecumseh Sherman’s advance through South Carolina finally forced the Confederates to evacuate Charleston on February 17, 1865, and abandon Fort Sumter. The Federal government formally took possession of Fort Sumter on February 22, 1865.
Anderson, now a major general, returned to Sumter with the flag he had been forced to lower four years earlier, and on April 14, 1865, raised it in triumph over the ruined fort.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Sumter
I cannot stand this bitch, however, I betcha half of Congress don’t know how many stars are on our Flag, nor what they represent.
And no switcheroo between the Stupid Party and the ‘Rats ever happened. Not even in the ‘60s.
Remind ‘em the Pubbies freed the slaves.
McClellan's stance on slavery...
He agreed that slavery should be limited prior to the American Civil War, but did not support the total abolition of the practice. However, his motivation to fight for the Union Army in the Civil War was to help preserve the nation intact rather than allowing it to divide into two countries.
The man was one of the most incompetent generals in American military history.
“The federal government’s main revenue source was the excessive tariffs imposed on the exports from the south”
Tariffs are not paid on exports. No goods grown or manufactured in any Southern state was subject to a tariff. Tariffs are collected on imported material and goods.
“The Civil War was fundamentally a conflict over slavery.”
“Lincoln first publicly advocated for colonization in 1852, and in 1854 said that his first instinct would be ‘to free all the slaves, and send them to Liberia’”
https://www.history.com/news/5-things-you-may-not-know-about-lincoln-slavery-and-emancipation
“Since Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation as a military measure, it didn’t apply to border slave states like Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky and Missouri, all of which were loyal to the Union.”
“Abolitionists....didn’t care about working within the existing political system, or under the Constitution, which they saw as unjustly protecting slavery and enslavers. Leading abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison called the Constitution ‘a covenant with death and an agreement with Hell,’ and went so far as to burn a copy at a Massachusetts rally in 1854.”
Nowhere on the planet does a Deep State hire the front office appearance types for brains.
Haley is just more proof.
Your first and last sentences are correct.
WIKI
On the first day of the convention, a peace platform was adopted. McClellan, the front-runner for the Democratic nomination, was personally opposed to a peace platform. McClellan supported the continuation of the war and restoration of the Union, but the party platform, written by Vallandigham, was opposed to this position.
General George B. McClellan had widespread support from the War Democrats, and was generally seen as the front-runner. The Peace Democrats, however, found it much harder to come up with a candidate. Many of them had hoped that Horatio Seymour would act as their standard-bearer, but early in 1864 he broke with the Copperheads and aligned himself with the more moderate Peace Democrats.
Vallandigham, the ideological leader of the Copperheads, recognized that he was too divisive a figure to earn the required two-thirds majority at the convention (indeed, he would be loudly booed by the War Democrats and even some of the more moderate Peace Democrats when he delivered a speech on the first day), and declined to put his name forward. Instead, the Copperheads eventually put forward former governor Thomas H. Seymour of Connecticut.
As the first ballot began, McClellan took a commanding lead over Seymour, with the support of both the War Democrats and the moderate Peace Democrats. The Copperheads, realizing that trying to stop McClellan’s nomination would most likely be futile, soon started to throw their votes behind the general, who finished comfortably in excess of the required two-thirds majority at the end of the first ballot. A motion to have McClellan’s nomination be declared unanimous was carried.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1864_Democratic_National_Convention
Speaking only for myself "Woulda", "shoulda", "coulda" debates as to the causes and necessity for the Civil War will never end; but the outcome is all that really matters
The US Constitution tolerated slavery because at the time of its ratification slavery was an on-going institution internal to certain states. The infamous 3/5ths clause does not use the word slave, slavery or slaves, and equally applied to Indians as well as other non-citizen residents.
Read the Confederate Constitution! It directly defends slavery and called it out by name (slave, slaves, slavery) 10 times. It was so proactive in its defense of its “peculiar institution” that no new territory could join it as a state unless it accepted slavery as internal institution. In contrast with the US Constitution which allowed the choice! Allowing choice is not very “pro”!
To call the US Constitution pro-slavery is simply disingenuous! It simply tolerated it. By not citing it specifically. By using non-specific text in the “3/5s passage” the US Constitution allowed at some future date for it to be “reformed away” without doing too much violence to the text. An editor with a pen could easily remove the “3/5ths passage”. If you look at the Confederate Constitution it is interwoven in the text in such a manner that editing it out with such a pen would shred the document.
Ther are some very good things in the CSA Constitution such as a one 6-year term for the President, strong statements on state sovereignty, etc. But to equate it to the US Constitution on the issue of slavery is to deliberate misread it!
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.