Posted on 01/19/2005 5:41:26 AM PST by meandog
I can see you gradiated from a little red schoolhouse up north somewhere.AH--YOu are as entitled to your dementia
as JohnKerry is his-I reckon.
I am as conservative as the day is long sir.
There is no dementia in me sir. If you care to offer evidence rather than insults, I will respond again. I have the truth on my side. You have the misplaced longings for a thing that never was.
Scroll up and see who called Lee a traitor and likened him to Hitler.
I just love how most of you will agree that public schools are awful and change history to suit a leftist agenda....except your school....and only when teaching about the WBTS. Gee....on THAT they were telling the truth!
Pshaw.... they brainwashed you just as they do the little tykes today.
EXACTLY RIGHT!! :)
The cause he fought against was the Federal Government having complete control. Anyone who has read even the most biased of classroom history books knows that is why he joined the South. Anyone who still believes the Civil War was about slavery would probably believe every word Dan Rather has to say.
How about believing the southern leadership of the time?
"But not to be tedious in enumerating the numerous changes for the better, allow me to allude to one other -- though last, not least. The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution -- African slavery as it exists amongst us -- the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time. The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the "storm came and the wind blew."
Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery -- subordination to the superior race -- is his natural and normal condition. [Applause.] This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth." -- Alexander Stephens, March 1861
But hey, what did Alexander Stephens know? He was just the vice president.
I hope you don't think Lincoln was a great man because he freed the slaves. He owned more slaves than any other American President before him. The move to free the slaves was a political move to get re-elected. Also, Lincoln only freed the slaves in the South. The slaves were still slaves in the North.
> The cause he fought against was the Federal Government having complete control...
...over freeing the slaves.
> Anyone who still believes the Civil War was about slavery ...
... has probably read the individual Confederate state constitutions, which are quite clear on the topic.
> He [Lincoln] owned more slaves than any other American President before him.
Care to back that up?
Say what?
The war of northern aggression was entirely avoidable, since the South only wished to secede peacefully.
> since the South only wished to secede peacefully.
And thus they launched a war of aggression, starting with Ft. Sumpter.
Lincoln owned no slaves.
The move to free the slaves was a political move to get re-elected. Also, Lincoln only freed the slaves in the South. The slaves were still slaves in the North
Lincoln did not have the constitutional power to free the slaves in non-rebellious states. He did, however, have the power to ban slavery in rebellious areas in his role as commander-in-chief. Freeing the slaves was an attack on the economy supporting the rebels.
Us silly Rebs will keep up the good fight, then. Have fun with your snow shovel.
Typical of Neoconfederates as well that you ignore several separate and sincere comments I have made about the numerous laurels of the South & Southerners to wish a warm "stay the heck out".
Just doing my job, Cap.
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.