ABRAHAM LINCOLN: AMERICA’S GREATEST WAR CRIMINAL

Southern Caucus ^ | ? | Ron Holland

[nancetc]

Of course one would not study past his nose if it the information CW was reading shot holes in his base that Lincoln was a terrible man.

[WhiskeyPapa]

Prov. 17:15 "He that justifieth the wicked and he that condemneth the just, even they are an abomination to the Lord."

I commend you to Matthew, Chapter 7, 21-23.

Walt

[Hans Moleman]

You're still fighting to get back your slaves that you lost almost 150 years ago and you accuse me of not thinking and reasoning for myself?

LOL!!!!!

[bluecollarman]

I already addressed that with you in a previous post that you did not reply to.

You know...you make some valid points and then you say something foolish like this. You know very well this is a vast over statement. Davis was going to fire on EVERYONE. They were rioting for goodness sakes! He did exactly the right thing. Why do you suppose there was a food shortage in the first place?

At least Davis had the courage to position himself in the middle of the chaos and deliver the notice in person. You fail to note that NO SHOTS WERE FIRED and the riot ended 5 minutes later. Please quit using this argument to counter the draft riots they are not equal.

[bluecollarman]

Know what? You may be correct, you make some valid observations but I will just stick with the memoirs if you don't mind. I like the information to be first hand. We are finding out new stuff everyday,

History has a habit of changing to many little things to paint the victors in the best light don't ya think? By Grants own words..

I know Grant was not anti-slavery

I know he would not have fought for the north without a commission that he liked. It was all about money for him.

I know he was planning on setting up a nice little Negro country island for all of the free slaves to move to. You know, so they could be with their own kind.(his words)

I know he had no firm convictions on slavery at all until AFTER the war.

So I will make my judgments on the totality of his comments if you don't mind.

[CWRWinger]

"Convenient memory you Southerners have."

I am a northern born copperhead. I have no cultural or family ties whatsoever to the South.

I do believe the South was right, though.

[bluecollarman]

"Grant was known as a softy when it came to scarring, abusing, or disfiguring slaves. He also didn't make all that much money, even as a general."

Please...Grant was a poor manager and business man. A failure at everything he attempted until Lincoln gave him a shot. He was not anti-slavery and slave owners did not mistreat domestic help which is what his wife owned.

In fact, your precious General Sherman states " The domestic slaves, employed by the families, were probably better treated than any slaves on earth"

It was all about money for Grant he had no deeply held views against slavery and was a serious bigot until the day he died if you judge him by today's morals. Which you continue to do to the Confederacy by the way.

The North does not now, or has ever had any superior moral claim on which to stand. Whether it was working poor children in forced labor or slaughtering Native Americans and seizing the land. There is blood enough to go around.

Get off of your high horse, slavery was wrong, I side with General Lee not Sherman or Grant. It was not the cause of the war and you have enough sins of your own to wash.

[CWRWinger]

I'm not a libertarian. Never have been and after meeting a few on FR, never will be.

[CWRWinger]

Matt. 7:21-23

Very true words, indeed.

[Non-Sequitur]

I haven't read of any Southerners rioting against Jeff Davis for his policies.

I was just pointing out the error of your statement. And it would have been hard for Davis to separate himself from the disorder since it was happening right outside his door.

[Non-Sequitur]

And you know all that from what source?

[Non-Sequitur]

I side with General Lee not Sherman or Grant.

Really? Do you side with the Lee which paid passage for some of his slaves to emigrate to Africa? Something you Rebs keep hammering Lincoln on? Here, read all about it .

Or perhaps the Lee who said, "I have always observed that wherever you find the negro, everything is going down around him, and wherever you find the white man, you see everything around him improving."

Or perhaps the Lee who said, "You will never prosper with the blacks, and it is abhorrent to a reflecting mind to be supporting and cherishing those who are plotting and working for your injury, and all of whose sympathies and associations are antagonistic to yours. I wish them no evil in the world-on the contrary, will do them every good in my power, and know that they are misled by those to whom they have given their confidence; but our material, social, and political interests are naturally with the whites."

When compared with current day beliefs there aren't too many people from the 19th century who come off as pillars of racial tolerance.

[logic101.net]

Ahh, I'll have fun with this one! Too bad the little one is insisting on computer time right now!

[bluecollarman]

"When compared with current day beliefs there aren't too many people from the 19th century who come off as pillars of racial tolerance"

We always reach this point. I agree with you. That is why it is silly to keep bringing up a racist south by today's standard when the whole of the 19th century was racist by the same measurement.

"Really? Do you side with the Lee which paid passage for some of his slaves to emigrate to Africa? Something you Rebs keep hammering Lincoln on?"

Yes, I will take Lee with those quotes against Sherman and Grant. If you are defending the North as being an enlightened people in reference to "civil rights" or racial tolerance, it is a phony argument.

The easiest path for Lee would have been to accept Lincoln's offer and command the Army of the North. He could not, he chose the harder road. Sherman never would have made that sacrifice for the North and said so.

[bluecollarman]

"I haven't read of any Southerners rioting against Jeff Davis for his policies."

errr...I didn't make that statement, but they were not rioting against Davis' polices. They were a unruly, ulawful mob that was destroying private property. He had every right to issue the order.

[Restorer]

It was all about money for Grant

Just curious. What massive amounts of money did Grant make as a Union Army officer?

My understanding is that even as President, when many of his officials were feathering their nest, that he never made money for himself. It is well known that he literally accelerated his own death by working himself to exhaustion on his memoires which would provide for his family.

I have observed a peculiar pattern in pro-South vs. pro-Union posters on this forum.

The pro-Union posters are willing, even eager, to recognize the personal probity and even heroism of many Southern leaders, such as Lee and Davis, while holding to a belief that their cause was inherently evil.

Many of the pro-South posters seem to feel that their cause can only be upheld by attacks on the personal integrity of Union leaders such as Lincoln and Grant.

Why do you think this is? Why is it so difficult to admit that both Lincoln and Grant fought for what they thought was right, exactly as did Lee and Davis?

There were, of course, many opportunists and corrupt politicians on both sides. But not among the ones I have mentioned.

[billbears]

Oh, the riots in Richmond happened.

Eventually numbering some 50,000 people, the mob terrorized neighborhoods on the East Side of New York for three days looting scores of stores. Blacks were the targets of most attacks on citizens; several lynchings and beatings occurred. In addition, a black church and orphanage were burned to the ground.

But so did the New York Draft Riots

Willing to fight for Uncle Sam", but not "for Uncle Sambo", said one Pennsylvania newspaper. First Lincoln freed the slaves and now he was conscripting Northern men into the army and forcing them to fight and die to make his proclamation a reality. Thus reasoned many white workers in the North who were concerned about free blacks competing for their jobs. The unfair draft laws caused deep resentment throughout the North, and in the summer of 1863 protests and outbreaks of violence were common in virtually every Northern state. Secret societies were formed to organize resistance to the draft, and draft officers were assaulted.

Interesting quote from a Pennsylvania newspaper. Tell me, is Pennsylvania in the South? I forget. I thought it was over slavery and the utter despise that only the evil Southerners showed towards blacks.

[Colt .45]

You are soooooooooooooooo ignorant it is unreal. It isn't about slavery moron, its about RIGHTS! But you are soooooooooooo PC brainwashed that you couldn't come up with an original thought if someone paid you to. You spout this canned crap about "racist, and slavery", yet your state 'The Peoples Republic of California' has committed the most egrigious offenses against the Constitution, and you probably go right along with it. Of course you would being incapable of thinking for yourself. You probably don't know squat about the Constitution, or Bill of Rights. You definitely don't know squat about the Founder's original intent. And you're the type of person who's probably set back and let everyone else do the "dirty work" and you just live off their sweat and make a profit. You don't have a clue about what makng a stand is all about, nor do you have the character to do so.

[bluecollarman]

"And you know all that from what source?"

Okay, your right. I was wrong on one of them, this one "This I know he would not have fought for the north without a commission that he liked. It was all about money for him."

I confused Grant with Sherman. To his credit Grant records about service to the Union.

"but announced that I would aid the company in every way I could and would be found in the service in some position if there should be a war. "

The rest are supported from statements in his memoirs

[Elihu Burritt]

It was all about money for Grant he had no deeply held views against slavery and was a serious bigot until the day he died if you judge him by today's morals.

How do you explain the fact that Grant manumitted the one slave that he owned, 35 year old William Jones in 1859? William was worth a thousand dollars at the time, and Grant received nothing for the act. While you are at, you should explain the coincidence that Grants closest friends in Missouri, Henry and Taylor Blow. They bought Dred Scott and freed him in 1859 also. Hardly the act of your typical cruel and malicious Southern flesh monger.

You might also consider his biographer, Hamlin Garland, who talked extensively with Grants neighbors and friends in Missouri and concluded that the Grant family's use of slaves was 'a source of irritation and shame." Grant was not primarily an abolitionist, but it is remarkable to note that in his letters and writings, he never referred to blacks as 'slaves,' but only as 'Negro men' or 'servants.'

The primary complaint of his neighbors was that he paid the blacks that he hired far too much, and as southerners of the usual run of the mill racist type, they deeply resented that fact and the trouble that it caused. They also frequently complianed that Grant would never beat them as they felt he should.

What are you going to make up next?