Posted on 06/23/2013 5:55:07 PM PDT by Para-Ord.45
From the time Abraham Lincoln entered the White House nearly a century and a half ago, there has been an anti-Lincoln tradition in American life. President John Tyler’s son, writing in 1932, seemed to speak for a silent minority: “I think he was a bad man,” wrote Lyon Gardiner Tyler, “a man who forced the country into an unnecessary war and conducted it with great inhumanity.”
Throughout his presidency Lincoln was surrounded by rivals, even among his own cabinet. Outside the White House, his many enemies included conservative Whigs, Democrats, northern copperheads and New England abolitionists. Wisconsin editor, Marcus M. Pomeroy, sniped that Lincoln was a
“worse tyrant and more inhuman butcher than has existed since the days of Nero.”
Shortly before his reelection Pomeroy added: “The man who votes for Lincoln now is a traitor and murderer.… And if he is elected to misgovern for another four years, we trust some bold hand will pierce his heart with dagger point for the public good.”
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Tariffs were levied on imports, with higher taxes on luxury goods.
The north paid more tariff, as shown by payments collected in northern ports vs. southern ports.
The south had more rich people, who demanded a lot of luxury goods.
how long? ...5, 10 yrs
Saying blacks are better off isn’t a statement of support for slavery. Sorry, you’re reading comprehension just isn’t correct.
Someone might argue that some blacks are better off with welfare. Doesn’t mean they support welfare or that it is true.
Congratulations again. For the first time you've said something that wasn't completely moronic ;-)
“”Slavery would have died out on it’s own”
how long? ...5, 10 yrs”
That’s the argument the black racists claim is the reason the USA has no right to exist, because slavery existing from its beginnings. Forget 5 to 10 years after 1860, slavery existing in the US for nearly 100 years already.
So, do you support the abolishment of the USA for having slavery for 100 years? Just remember, there are no slaves or slave holders alive today.
The mechanical cotton harvester, and the pesticides that eliminated the of hoeing and chopping, came along in the 1940s. By no coincidence, that’s the same time that sharecropping, the debt peonage labor system that replaced slavery, started to die out
Losing sucks, I imagine. Getting your assed kicked in a home game must really hurt.
I doubt I will ever get you to admit slavery is wrong. Has always been wrong, and always will be wrong.
Sure. The second one equates slavery with pet ownership. It's either a support of human chattel or a condemnation of dogs and cats.
Africa was terrible enough that many people came here as indentured servants for 7 years.
Oh please. Next thing you know you'll be telling us that they wanted out of the place so badly they were swimming out to the slave ships.
Many slaves were treated well. Nothing pro-slavery about that.
The pro-slavery part is the whitewash you and your buddies keep spreading trying to make an institution that involved owning a human being as property really wasn't that bad.
Many blacks are still enslaved on the democrat welfare plantation, so the first comment is roughly true; they weren’t ready for freedom and they still aren’t able to grasp it and take advantage of it. I can’t for the life of me understand why a free man would vote Democrat. I don’t. Never did.
Says the man from the state that went for Obama. Twice.
And yet you support a regime that was built around the idea of institutional slavery.
AS a young lawyer,age 28, he represented a slave owner. His personal feelings should have trumped the all mighty dollar ?
He married Mary Todd, who came from one of Kentucky’s most prominent slave-holding families. His personal feelings should have repulsed him from Todd?
He endorsed Zachary Taylor, a slave owner, in his successful 1848 bid for the Presidency.
Peoria, Illinois, 1854 he stated he would send all blacks back to Liberia.
August 21, 1858,Lincoln and Douglas debates he stated,
“I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and black races. There is physical difference between the two which, in my judgment, will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality, and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position.”
Lincoln was in favor of repatriation,either in Liberia or somewhere in the Caribbean . He was a fundamental believer in racial separation addressing the Colonization Society many times and studied at the feet of Henry Clay.
You see, the thing is that the guys are so invested in the losing cause of their great grandfathers that they cannot admit that they held an immoral position.
And also, being on the losing side of a total war will leave a mark for generations.
What they miss is that a great deal of the reason why the Conservative party will never, ever get the black vote is for the simple reason that the blacks will never be really treated as equals by these people. Certainly not all southerners, and not all descendants of the Confederacy fall into this category.
But, there are enough folks around who can suggest that slaveholding is akin to having a pet that it makes us ALL look like bigots.
I made my stand and they failed to take the challenge. It is their blindness to their own prejudice that makes me weep for them.
What I don’t understand is why they just don’t say it, and get rid of me. The reason is obvious—saying it would be an affront against the memory of their family.
So, whenever I see them spouting out that slavery would have died on its own, that I jump in their face.
Perhaps they should be chained to their desk at work, or to a post in the garage. And perhaps their boss should have a couple little girls brought up to his house tonight—just ‘cuz it’s a little chilly. It might only be for a year. Or maybe 20. And really, working at a desk or in a garage is about all they can handle, so it’s good not to let them get very uppity.
When I read what these men type, I am ashamed for them. Again, it must be horrible to have your families so traumatized by armies marching through your towns that the blind rage lives on for 150 years.
It is time to move on. You don’t have to stand tall for them anymore. They thought they were doing the right thing. I will grant them that. But as was the case in most wars, they were just conscripts—fighting against another army of conscripts.
Yes, 150 years later these men here read and post and debate. The real men did what they were told. Do these men today really think their kinfolk cared about all of this economic and political BS? We all know that is NEVER the case in conscripted armies. I honor their loyalty to their comrades. I honor their loyalty to their kin.
I cannot honor their blind allegiance to an economic model that is based on the immoral practice of slavery. If these other men on this thread had any honor, they would join me in loving the fighters, but despising the fight.
May I direct you to post 109?
The 13th Amendment freed only 50,000 of the 4,000,000 American slaves.
Most were freed, over 3M, by the Emancipation Proclamation, with the others freed by various state actions.
The EP freed those >3M slaves immediately. Enforcing their freedom took the rest of the war, but as the Union Army advanced, they enforced the law and the slaves were freed.
Wow...got your attention.
And no, I think Lincoln was a horrible President. But that is a debate for another days. I never said he was a good guy. In fact, I agree with most of your arguments.
I just think you cannot get past getting your ass whooped to see that the CSA was fighting for the wrong reasons.
Excellent summation.
I share your frustration, especially with the damage this moral blindness does to the conservative cause.
That's easy for you to say, living in the twenty first century. But, in 1850, Jefferson Davis pointed to many positive aspects of slavery as compared to any of the available alternatives to that institution at that time. How were blacks treated in the South? How were they treated in the North? Did the North really have any moral right to attack Southern traditions?
Well, I'll let then Senator Davis speak for himself:
And for what end, sir, is all this aggression? They see that the slaves in their present condition in the South are comfortable and happy; they see them advancing in intelligence; they see the kindest relations existing between them and their masters; they see them provided for in age and sickness, in infancy and in disability; they see them in useful employment, restrained from the vicious indulgences to which their inferior nature inclines them; they see our penitentiaries never filled, and our poor-houses usually empty. let them turn to the other hand, and they see the same race in a state of freedom in the North; but instead of the comfort and kindness they receive at the South, instead of being happy and useful, they are, with few exceptions, miserable, degraded, filling the penitentiaries and poor-houses, objects of scorn, excluded in some places from the schools, and deprived of many other privileges and benefits which attach to the white men among whom they live. And yet, they insist that elsewhere an institution which has proved beneficial to this race shall be abolished, that it may be substituted by a state of things which is fraught with so many evils to the race which they claim to be the object of the solicitude!
So, when you condemn slavery, please keep in mind that context is crucial, always.
Yes, Davis was so concerned about taking care of the poor negroes. He wanted to make sure they are comfortable and happy.
In any context that is condescending crap.
How about the context of one person “owning” another person is against natural law and should always be railed against.
You mean, like, freedom...?
http://www.amazon.com/For-Good-Evil-Impact-Civilization/dp/1568332351
Charles W. Adams, a U.S. tax attorney
“...the South paid about three-quarters of all federal taxes, most of which were spent in the North.” [p. 326-7]
Take comfort in the satisfaction of knowing that their great-grandfathers, their grandfathers, and likely their fathers were all democrats. Now they’ve tried to do a 180 from that and, like donning a suit, they try to take on the trappings of conservatism. They’re so screwed up from a slavish devotion to their death-cult Lost Cause that they don’t know which way is up most of the time.
You’ve seen on these very pages how irritable they get when attempting to pass a camel through the eye of a needle when it comes to denying or ignoring the inescapable truth which is that the confederacy was founded to perpetuate the enslavement of other human beings. That stain runs so deep that one would have to stare at the sun not to see it. In order to salve their consciences they indulge in Liberal Projection™ - they accuse their opponents of their very own offenses. It would be laughable if it weren’t so pathetic.
Take heart that you don’t have to drag those chains around with your every step.
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.