What about the Aliens?
Posted on 10/15/2005 8:38:50 AM PDT by teldon30
The first known example of the southron myth machine at work.
All good and accurate reasons why the south lost the war of Yankee Aggression.
Civil War: War between geographical sections or political factions of the same nation. {emphasis mine}
To call the conflict a civil war is to presuppose the outcome. The right of the southern States to secede and form the Confederacy was the central question being contended between the parties. Calling the War Between the States a "civil war" is done to hide the true causes of the war. Its just one of many ways modern elites poke southerners in the eye.
But I will admit that it is wisely, if unfortunately, written that the victors write the history.
Isn't her hearing scheduled to begin on Novemeber 7, 2005?
The democrats would like nothing more than to delay it in the hope that they win a senate majority. IF that happens, say hello to Alberto Gonzales because he'd be the best we could do.
Thanks for all of your information. An eye opener and like you said "sheesh, this was so obvious all along."
Care to quote Lincoln? And can you tell me just which 'states rights' were being violated?
"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause."
The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume V, "Letter to Horace Greeley" (August 22, 1862), p. 388.
emphasis mine.
So? Emphasis or not, Lincolns words above do not support your theory that "Slavery was not the cause of the war." It merely says that, to Lincoln, preserving the union was paramount. He does not address the cause.
And I see you are unable to answer my other question.
You must be the product of a government school.
Thank you for that link and for your brilliant posts. I will pour over it while I eat my lunch.
If the south had freed their slaves before the war then there wouldn't have been a rebellion to begin with.
You're welcome. :-)
"Karl Marx was an enthusiastic supporter of Lincoln, he even had spies serving in the Northern Army."
Please. Source?
The problem with this theory is that conscription in the North didn't start until late summer of 1863, and was pretty much a failure. Only about 6% of the Union Army was made up of conscripts. By 1865, on the other hand, about a quarter of the confederate army were draftees.
You're welcome. Speaking of lunch, it's nearly 11:30 here. Time for me to go get something productive done with this Saturday. ;-)
An accurate statement. But in fairness to Meade, I can't think of a single time where Lee pursued a defeated Union army either.
If you get a chance, read The Gangs of New York by Herbert Asbury. The major "anti-draft" riot in NYC was actually an excuse for the gangsters who ran the poor parts of town to attempt to take and ransack the whole city.
OK, so what was it that the south was importing in such massive quantities that the tariffs unfairly impacted them?
The California gold rush peaked 12 years before the beginning of the rebellion. They were called '49rs', remember?
Had the South had 20 years to develop its infrastructure and economy, and started to abandon slavery, what reasons would there have been to rebel? --- According to Paul Johnson, what was the basis for the rebellion?
Do you "Rebels" want an apology from the federal government and an "interpretative and contemplative" display at the Smithsonian done by revisionist, socialist, history professors to tell your side? Sure sounds like it.
OK, how about a rebellion, which Merriam-Webster defines as "open, armed, and usually unsuccessful defiance of or resistance to an established government"? That more accurate?
I undersdtand that he did not scout the battle field as he often did, but relied on other pairs of eyes.
wbts ping
You are correct!
Lee's health at Gettysburg was no better and no worse than it had been 8 weeks earlier at Chancellorsville.
I'm more of a Lincoln man than a Davis man!
If you do not want to be compared to Farrakhan, you should not think and act like him, which you are.
When you smear dozens of sincere principled conservatives as anti-southern evangelical bigots, you are acting like Farrakhan, who smeared whites as somehow scheming to flood New Orleans to kill black people. It would be bad enough for you to smear one person in this way, but you manage to smear every conservative with a principled concern about a candidate with no documented judicial philosophy.
Both your theory and Farrakhan's, involve hallucatinatory, slanderous allegations of bigotry. Both theories serve only to forment hatred.
What would you think if someone alleged that Bush nominated Mier's precisely because she was a southern Evanglical SMU grad like his wife? Discriminating in favor of these things? It's a mirror image of your argument, quite ugly isn't it? Hallucinating discrimination, and impugning the motives of others, is a terrible thing.
Numerous references in history...Just google marx lincoln and you will find lots of information.
Surely you jest.
For starters, the Union didn't institute a draft until the summer of '63. The early war Yanks were all volunteers. The confederates had a draft from the fall of '61 forward, and it was a great advantage because it stabilized their order of battle and enabled them to keep veteran units up to strength. The Yanks, on the other hand, bled their veteran outfits white while the politicians back home raised brand new units that had to climb an entirely unnecessary learning curve. Think what it meant for whole regiments -- whose men had been in the army all of two weeks, had never fired their weapons, and barely knew the manual of arms -- to be thrown into places like the East Woods and the Miller Cornfield at Antietam. The insanity of the personnel system is not a reflection on the men.
That said, the only example of a Union army collapsing in defeat was First Manassas, where a force of 90 day militia -- whose march discipline was very poor on the trek out from Washington -- dissolved into straggling on the way back. Btw, that force, untrained though it was, still very nearly won the battle. It executed a long and tiring flank march, broke the initial confederate position, and very nearly stormed the second before the fortuitous arrival of reinforcements squarely on their flank forced them to withdraw. Even then, they were not broken on the battlefield; they simply lost organization on the march back to Washington, which was unpursued because the equally raw confederates were just as disorganized in victory.
What other examples of "running conscript Yanks" do you want to propose? Chancellorsville? Sure, the 11th Corps broke, having been flanked and being in an entirely untenable position. But if you think the Yanks didn't rally, you've never walked Hazel Grove and seen the back-to-back gun emplacements. Joe Hooker lost that battle, not his troops; aside from the 11th Corps, whose misdeployment left it no chance at all, the Yanks stood their ground at every turn.
Fredericksburg? There was nothing at all wrong with the Yanks who walked up Marye's Heights. There was a lot wrong the the commanders who ordered them to.
Antietam? Yanks won that one, sort of.
Seven Days? Apart from Gaines Mill, Lee lost every battle and McClellan withdrew after every Union victory.
Valley Campaign? The confederates won that through marching more than fighting. Jackson had the only good map of the Valley and the federals he opposed, while outnumbering him in the aggregate, were drawn from three separate military divisions (the Valley being a transitional zone on the federal organizational map), had three separate chains of command and lines of supply, and never managed to cooperate.
Western Theater? There the federal commenced to win early and often, which is why the West is such a perfect counterpoint to the war in Virginia -- and why it tends to be ignored by Lost Cause mythologists.
Now, to answer the question posed by the thread. The confederates, informed by the example of the Revolution, thought the sheer size of the South would defeat any federal attempts at occupation and control, provided the Southern population remained resolute. They might have been right 50 or 100 years earlier, but they reckoned without the railroad and the telegraph, which gave the Yankee invaders strategic mobility, logistical staying power, and command and control over continental distances. New ballgame.
The Gold Rush peaked in the mid 1850's, but hard rock mining took up the slack and gold mining continues to this day. 100 million (in 1860 dollars) in gold went to the Feds just from my little area of the Sierras.
Marx's admiration for Lincoln was not reciprocated, and isn't surprising. Would you expect Marx to side with the slave owners?
True, but there is nothing to suggest that there was a sudden burst in gold output in California that helped pay for the war.
Lee didn't listen to Longstreet at Gettysburg?
Congressman Billy Bob. At least we know his judicial philosophy.
"Miers has no documented judicial philosophy history of advocating that the constitution be interpreted as written."
You'd love to see this be the requiring precedent for all nominees. You'd love it.
Confess MA. You just a plain vanilla legalist. ALL GOP nominees would be strict legalists, like you, if you had your way. Correct?
Political appointments to the SCOTUS, an established long tradition, by the GOP and Demoncrats, would be forever verboten in accordance with you view, yes?
I noticed as soon as I did, someone did above my post. Another reason why public school is absolute malnourishment of the mind.
Its what they refuse to teach you that causes the most harm.
What other industries were putting millions into the treasury and gold reserves in the 1850's?
Government reveunes during that period came almost exclusively from tariffs. So the import market was putting the millions in.
The history of stealth "trust me" candidates with no documented judicial philosophy, has been really horrific for Republicans.
Whenever another such candidate comes along, it is really predictable and ordinary for conservatives to be very concerned.
Note that one doesn't need to have been a judge, to express a judicial philosophy. A political appointment would be fine, go throw Santorum in there, he doesn't have a prayer of reelection anyway, and he does have a clearly documented judicial philosophy.
I'm sorry, I omitted the metal products from mining of the Comstock Lode which allowed further reserves to be used as collateral for financing of the Civil War.
Bottom line, you'd outlaw 'undocumented' nominess. Noted.
So how were the goods being purchased? With hot air or fiat money?
Any candidate who lacks a documented history of advocating a conservative judicial philosophy, to be specific. It doesn't have to be extreme or strict. Just something. Bush bypassed a very large pool of candidates that have this history, for one particularly lacking in it. Thus setting off alarming visions of Souter in a wide swath of conservatives.
What about the Aliens?
Congressman Billybob
Latest column: "Media Forget History of American Constitution When Reporting on Iraq's"
Cash.
Bravo
Most import were industrial goods. At the time northern manufacturers were at a significant competitive disadvantage to British and other European manufacturers. They used the power of the Federal Government to levy onerous tarrifs on these imports. This profited merchants and manufacturers in the north at the expense of largely poor farmers in the south (most of whom owned no slaves).
This how bad it is. The schools celebrate Cinco de Mayo to make the illegal aliens happy. But if you mention Jefferson Davis or Robert E. Lee in a government school you are condemned to a re-education class or expelled for insensitivity.
But I see I struck a nerve with the government school crack. So in the spirit of comity that fills us all on this forum (we are all on the same side you know) I apologize and take it back.
Ding! Ding! Ding! Thanks for the research.
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.