Replies

Lincoln was a blood thirsty tyrant, regardless of how history paints him.

I don't see the blood thirsty part, or the tyranny.

What I see when I study the history, is essentially a pissing contest between the central government and a president with a legacy to protect, and a bunch of states who wanted out of the family tree at any cost.

Someone had to win and someone had to lose. The fight was going to happen in any scenario.

To your post 369.

I agree. It was more about a pissing contest. Power, legacy, and rebellious men.

I just don’t think anyone won that conflict. True, the Union did defeat the Confederate forces and occupy the Southern states for a time after the war. But there wasn’t a family, on either side, which was unhurt by the unholy conflict.

a bunch of states who wanted out of the family tree at any cost.

Actually, just about every nation ended slavery within a 20 year time frame. We were pretty much the last.

We switched over to Mexicans here in TX and the southwest around the turn of the century, (also the Californians switched to the Chinese) the NE switched over to Irish and Italians about the same time.

Then as a nation we switched over to Japanese and Taiwanese, Korean, and most recently we uberswitched to Chinese again. They didn’t actually have to move here for it.

But only the black slaves and the Mexicans (so far) and their descendants are making any headway in terms of retribution, at least politically speaking. The other slaves have learned that productivity and profitability is better achieved innovating and achieving, not running to the fed for special treatment.

My favorite tagline -and I cannot remember the author! - is.... If you have a right to my services, then I must be your slave.

I hope Bob ‘Serve Somebody’ Dylan is in the highest tax bracket.