To visualize the human future if we yield an inch to these moon-worshipping barbarians, picture a Muslim savage's foot stamping on Daniel Pearl's severed head. (Thank you, George Orwell.)
Posted on 03/25/2002 7:59:07 AM PST by aculeus
I believe that about covers it.
Let's Roll.
Oh, so I am a liar?
People do have a life away from the computer. Really, they do!
Tonight I have been with my family.
Maybe I can backtrack and give you a minute-by-minute schedule of my activities since 5:00 P.M. EST when I left work.
Can you honestly say that the Confederacy is the moral equivalent of totalitarian regimes such as:
"Napoleon's France for most of a decade, ...Japan in 1931, Germany in 1939, and Russia after World War II"?
As some say around here, "that dog won't hunt".
I believe that the Confederacy was merely fighting for their freedom, and for states' rights.
The states comprising the CSA were sovereign, and responding to invasion by the North.
They were sovereign states as spelled out in the Constitution, a document that has suffered injury, if not yet total death, from a thousand cuts since 1861.
If the author wants to equate anyone with despotic madmen such as Napoleon, Hitler and various members of the Japanese military, it should indeed be a leader from 1861... Abraham Lincoln.
He, along with various Supreme Courts and other Presidents who consider the Constitution a "living" document, have done so much damage to this constitutional republic.
I pray this damage is not irreparable.
That having been said, the rest of this article is actually very good.
Perhaps I wasn't clear about that before. I don't claim to be right all the time or even most.
However, that one sentence (see my #57) took the wind out of the author's argument for me.
I'm going to bed as soon as I get through paying bills, if that's acceptable to you.
Hope the rest of your evening goes well.
CD
You opened the can I didn't, CD. LOL!!
Well here we go, I'm sure Walt will show up soon and tpaine I'm suprised at you personally. Never thought of you as a Hamiltonian(Federalist)
Nazi Germany--destruction of an entire group of people, namely the Jews, all in the name of racial purity. Quite a sick motive actually and had never been done on that scale. Hitler was a tyrant on a scale never seen. To compare Jefferson Davis to Hitler we'd need to see some proof of extermination plans, or relocation of the slaves for a purpose to 'cleanse' the nation. No the only one who was even idiotic enough to suggest relocation was lincoln, not Davis
Communist Soviet Union--5 year plans, doing it for the people, and again mass killings? No sorry no Southern values there
Perhaps we could try Japan. Let's see an Emperor who was not voted on, did things on his whim and not the peoples', attacked land to get raw materials that he couldn't get for free anywhere else? Well, sounds more like the northern Tyrant but again not like Jeff Davis.
No the South was a land that did have slavery(constitutionally), was being raped in taxes(unconstitutionally), educated the slaves(Stonewall Jackson, Jeff Davis) for emancipation that most knew was coming over the course of time, and acted much as the state of Massachussetts during the war of 1812 and the state of Texas several times before by exercising their right to secede peacefully. The attack on Sumter was because lincoln broke promises given, and here in the South a promise is a promise. Sure there were some states that used slavery as the issue in the declarations of secession, but hey it was a Constitutional right up until that time. Much nicer than the northern states that refused to even house blacks(Illinois 1853, Oregon constitution 1859) or educate them(Vermont 1836)
We can pull out the statements from lincoln and pull out the statements from Davis. Sure racism was rampant, but it was not the cause of the War. The South wanted her freedom and lincoln chose not to give it. Not one of those mentioned along with the South was fighting for freedom. They were fighting for world domination and for destruction of land and people. Much like lincoln and sherman
History teaches us that certain nations, certain peoples, and certain religions at peculiar periods in their history take a momentary, but deadly leave of their senses —
Napoleon's France for most of a decade, the southern states in 1861, Japan in 1931, Germany in 1939, and Russia after World War II.
And when they do, they cannot be bribed, apologized to, or sweet-talked — only defeated. .
Can you honestly say that the Confederacy is the moral equivalent of totalitarian regimes such as: "Napoleon's France for most of a decade, ...Japan in 1931, Germany in 1939, and Russia after World War II"?
-- Can you honestly say that the author is saying that the CSA was a moral equivalent to totalitarian regimes? ---- He is not. - He only claims they ALL momentarily left their senses, -- a fair comment.
As some say around here, "that dog won't hunt". I believe that the Confederacy was merely fighting for their freedom, and for states' rights. The states comprising the CSA were sovereign, and responding to invasion by the North. They were sovereign states as spelled out in the Constitution, a document that has suffered injury, if not yet total death, from a thousand cuts since 1861. If the author wants to equate anyone with despotic madmen such as Napoleon, Hitler and various members of the Japanese military, it should indeed be a leader from 1861... Abraham Lincoln. He, along with various Supreme Courts and other Presidents who consider the Constitution a "living" document, have done so much damage to this constitutional republic. I pray this damage is not irreparable.
--- Nice rant, but seeing it's built entirely upon a false premise, it doesn't matter to the issue at hand.
You need to learn to read for content & fact, instead of jumping to conclusions.
That having been said, the rest of this article is actually very good. Perhaps I wasn't clear about that before. I don't claim to be right all the time or even most. However, that one sentence (see my #57) took the wind out of the author's argument for me.
And lottsa wind your misconception was. Nothing more. -- Thanks.
To visualize the human future if we yield an inch to these moon-worshipping barbarians, picture a Muslim savage's foot stamping on Daniel Pearl's severed head. (Thank you, George Orwell.)
That being said, it is the author's misinterpretation of historical fact to compare what happened in 1861 to Germany, Russia, and Japan. The fact is that the South in that exact period had thought it out for many years going back to the very start of this nation. Their grievances were just as important as the grievances of the American colonies to the crown in 1776. Are you saying that War of Independence was not thought out? Of course not but it was a war of freedom just as the South's attempt at freedom was in 1861. All I'm saying is that it was a bad representation if he was trying to make the argument to compare that time with the 1930s as well as garner support for his argument
And frankly scarlet, I don't give enough of a damn to argue further about it.
Also consider that the entire Middle East was just such a project. Not only that, but had oil been discovered there and found so useful before such profound "enlightenment," the savages inhabiting the region would have been pushed out or pacified. Instead, we have given them command of the world's economy and the proceeds there of so that their savagery can be very well financed.
Well, bully for him!
Jesse Jackson is a "Reverend", but does that make him the highest bastion of theological knowledge?
My ONLY issue was that the author was parroting the (incorrect) history set forth by the victors in the War Between the States...
the history approved by the Union & all of Lincoln's defenders.
FRegards,
CD
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.