Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Site Notices
Page / 12
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 9:36:14 AM EDT
[#1]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

It could have been their road to victory.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If the south would have freed it's slaves then fired on Ft Sumter would we still be having this debate?


Probably not. But that begs the question, why would states like GA and SC free their slaves when they seceded to preserve them?

Call them serfs instead of slaves, give them a few rights, presto you have instant cannon fodder, support from England and a lower class labor force when you have won independence. Afterwards you can deport excess populations of undesireables or conduct progroms of the subserviant classes.



Lets not get on about the system of indentured servitude (slavery by contract or by judicial decision) that the North loved, loved, loved.

It could have been their road to victory.

It almost was.  Towards the end, the South sent a delegation to Britain promising to do away with slavery in exchange for their alliance. It was too late and GB refused.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 9:40:22 AM EDT
[#2]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
What's more noble?

Defending your lands and homes from an invasion sent by a Tyrant because you broke the Union in order to maintain the institution of human slavery.

Invading your neighbor to enforce said Tyrants rule.
View Quote


Fixed. Again.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 9:40:38 AM EDT
[#3]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History




My reaction exactly.

I was born and raised knowing my family had ancestors on both sides of the Mason Dixon line. That flag is of historical significance. It is not a symbol of hate. Those who understand history will agree with me. Those who wish to erase history and create their own will be named CNN.

Link Posted: 10/26/2013 9:42:33 AM EDT
[#4]
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 9:45:16 AM EDT
[#5]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
CSA was not in favor of men owning guns so they could fight back against an oppressive government.
View Quote

How so? All freemen, even blacks, could own guns and even cannons in the South before the war.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 9:46:08 AM EDT
[#6]
Since secession was legal...

The South did nothing wrong according to the US Constitution.

Lincoln on the other hand, trashed the Constitution multiple times.



Link Posted: 10/26/2013 9:47:24 AM EDT
[#7]
technically, the title is correct
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 9:49:51 AM EDT
[#8]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I believe that if it really was a flag for traitors and racists CNN would fly it over their headquarters.
View Quote


Sha-zam!
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 9:52:21 AM EDT
[#9]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Fuck Lincoln.
View Quote

Link Posted: 10/26/2013 9:55:08 AM EDT
[#10]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


I'm 25 and thought that for years. Not sure if it was taught in school or I got that impression off of tv. I still don't know completely what the whole thing was about, i'm under the impression it was more of a states rights vs federal rights thing?

View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
We have many here who say the same thing, and believe the War of Northern Aggression was fought for the sole purpose freeing the slaves.


I'm 25 and thought that for years. Not sure if it was taught in school or I got that impression off of tv. I still don't know completely what the whole thing was about, i'm under the impression it was more of a states rights vs federal rights thing?



Often times it's less about what you are being forced to do than the mere fact that you are being forced to do it
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 9:55:29 AM EDT
[#11]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


I believe that if it really was a flag for traitors and racists CNN would fly it over their headquarters.
View Quote




 
LOL! Truth, right there
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 9:59:09 AM EDT
[#12]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Sha-zam!
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
I believe that if it really was a flag for traitors and racists CNN would fly it over their headquarters.


Sha-zam!



CNN would be more suited to the Nazi flag. Fanatical zealots holding a power mongering Anti Christ on high.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 10:06:34 AM EDT
[#13]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Hell, I saw much more of that stuff growing up in Michigan, than I have in the South. Southern racist stereotype is just a stupid stereotype.
View Quote


Don't believe I stereotyped anyone in there. In fact, I pretty much said that I don't stereotype people based on the flag.  
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 10:10:14 AM EDT
[#14]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Oh, now you've done it.



I wonder if anyone realizes that the philosophical underpinnings of that speech were largely pioneered by yet another Southern great: John C. Calhoun.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



Quoted:


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 corner- stone 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. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.



This truth has been slow in the process of its development, like all other truths in the various departments of science. It has been so even amongst us. Many who hear me, perhaps, can recollect well, that this truth was not generally admitted, even within their day. The errors of the past generation still clung to many as late as twenty years ago. Those at the North, who still cling to these errors, with a zeal above knowledge, we justly denominate fanatics. All fanaticism springs from an aberration of the mind -- from a defect in reasoning. It is a species of insanity. One of the most striking characteristics of insanity, in many instances, is forming correct conclusions from fancied or erroneous premises; so with the anti-slavery fanatics; their conclusions are right if their premises were. They assume that the negro is equal, and hence conclude that he is entitled to equal privileges and rights with the white man. If their premises were correct, their conclusions would be logical and just -- but their premise being wrong, their whole argument fails.



I recollect once of having heard a gentleman from one of the northern States, of great power and ability, announce in the House of Representatives, with imposing effect, that we of the South would be compelled, ultimately, to yield upon this subject of slavery, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics, as it was in physics or mechanics. That the principle would ultimately prevail. That we, in maintaining slavery as it exists with us, were warring against a principle, a principle founded in nature, the principle of the equality of men. The reply I made to him was, that upon his own grounds, we should, ultimately, succeed, and that he and his associates, in this crusade against our institutions, would ultimately fail. The truth announced, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics as it was in physics and mechanics, I admitted; but told him that it was he, and those acting with him, who were warring against a principle. They were attempting to make things equal which the Creator had made unequal.



In the conflict thus far, success has been on our side, complete throughout the length and breadth of the Confederate States. It is upon this, as I have stated, our social fabric is firmly planted; and I cannot permit myself to doubt the ultimate success of a full recognition of this principle throughout the civilized and enlightened world. As I have stated, the truth of this principle may be slow in development, as all truths are and ever have been, in the various branches of science. It was so with the principles announced by Galileo-it was so with Adam Smith and his principles of political economy. It was so with Harvey, and his theory of the circulation of the blood. It is stated that not a single one of the medical profession, living at the time of the announcement of the truths made by him, admitted them. Now, they are universally acknowledged.



May we not, therefore, look with confidence to the ultimate universal acknowledgment of the truths upon which our system rests? It is the first government ever instituted upon the principles in strict conformity to nature, and the ordination of Providence, in furnishing the materials of human society. Many governments have been founded upon the principle of the subordination and serfdom of certain classes of the same race; such were and are in violation of the laws of nature. Our system commits no such violation of nature's laws. With us, all of the white race, however high or low, rich or poor, are equal in the eye of the law. Not so with the negro. Subordination is his place. He, by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system.



The architect, in the construction of buildings, lays the foundation with the proper material-the granite; then comes the brick or the marble. The substratum of our society is made of the material fitted by nature for it, and by experience we know that it is best, not only for the superior, but for the inferior race, that it should be so. It is, indeed, in conformity with the ordinance of the Creator. It is not for us to inquire into the wisdom of his ordinances, or to question them. For his own purposes, he has made one race to differ from another, as he has made "one star to differ from another star in glory."




Oh, now you've done it.



I wonder if anyone realizes that the philosophical underpinnings of that speech were largely pioneered by yet another Southern great: John C. Calhoun.
Or that the entire speech represents a textbook case of social conservatism.



 
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 10:11:16 AM EDT
[#15]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

How so? All freemen, even blacks, could own guns and even cannons in the South before the war.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
CSA was not in favor of men owning guns so they could fight back against an oppressive government.

How so? All freemen, even blacks, could own guns and even cannons in the South before the war.


Not true.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 10:11:29 AM EDT
[#16]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History


View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History





Quoted:



Hell, I saw much more of that stuff growing up in Michigan, than I have in the South. Southern racist stereotype is just a stupid stereotype.




 
Shit, I worked at a Union place for a few years and all the white guys were racist and hated things like people living on welfare.




Michigan is full of contradictions.






Link Posted: 10/26/2013 10:11:56 AM EDT
[#17]
It's a damn shame that the British decided to get their cotton from India.

And it's a damn shame all these carpetbaggers continue to flow into the South.

Every time I see one of those "Empire State" licence plates or a NJ licence plate, I want to puke because I know they probably want to change Georgia into the utopian shithole they are used to.  

They sell their shitty 400 sqft apartments in NYC for 800k and then buy a 10,000 sqft home down here.


It's one thing if you're coming to get away from all your northeastern bullshit, but it's another thing if you come here and then attempt to change this state with your votes.

Even some arfcommers from the northeast spout the dumbest liberal talking points about things like minimum wage and welfare.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 10:11:57 AM EDT
[#18]
America's dead, get over it. Fly whatever flag you want.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 10:13:39 AM EDT
[#19]
Born and raised in the south and have saw a lot of outside opinion in my days.  Been north twice,  first and the last time on the same trip.  Never could get used to  a crowd that started or ended every sentence with the word fuck.  Very few people owned slaves in the south, only the rich.  What always puzzled me was how the rich was able to convince the poor to charge cannon fire so they could keep their slaves.  Modern machinery was replacing slaves making them a liability.  I fly the STARS AND BARS over my property every day in honor of my kin buried in Elmira,NY.  Just my opinion, probably don't make sense to people in the north.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 10:15:30 AM EDT
[#20]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

How so? All freemen, even blacks, could own guns and even cannons in the South before the war.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
CSA was not in favor of men owning guns so they could fight back against an oppressive government.

How so? All freemen, even blacks, could own guns and even cannons in the South before the war.


Their right to bear arms was indeed written in their constitution identically to ours.

Art I. Sec 9. (13) A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Of course, that same document made a few... modifications.

Art I. Sec 8. (4) No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.

Art IV. Sec. 2. (I) The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired.

There were certain "states rights" that had to be nipped in the bud - lest they interfere with the institution of slavery.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 10:19:53 AM EDT
[#21]
The immediate cause of the Civil War was the expansion of slavery to the territories. The Southerners wanted to take their slaves to, say, Kansas and New Mexico (notwithstanding the fact that slavery wouldn't have been economically viable there). Lincoln's 1860 Republican platform was clear in its opposition to the expansion of slavery. When he was elected, the 7 states of the Lower South, beginning with South Carolina, seceded. The Upper South did not secede until after the firing on Ft. Sumter, or more properly, after Lincoiln's call for volunteers to suppress the rebellion.

Virginia put the secession question to a vote and followed all the democratic procedures. Except in the 50 counties that eventually became West Virginia, the vote was overwhelming to secede.

So, yeah, bottom line is that slavery was the root cause of the Civil War. All this talk of "states' rights" is just modern-day sophistry.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 10:25:52 AM EDT
[#22]
The US flag would have been called the flag of traitors at one time too . Ask King Gerorge.





Bet they Communist News Network forgot to mention that.

 
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 10:34:36 AM EDT
[#23]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
The immediate cause of the Civil War was the expansion of slavery to the territories. The Southerners wanted to take their slaves to, say, Kansas and New Mexico (notwithstanding the fact that slavery wouldn't have been economically viable there). Lincoln's 1860 Republican platform was clear in its opposition to the expansion of slavery. When he was elected, the 7 states of the Lower South, beginning with South Carolina, seceded. The Upper South did not secede until after the firing on Ft. Sumter, or more properly, after Lincoiln's call for volunteers to suppress the rebellion.

Virginia put the secession question to a vote and followed all the democratic procedures. Except in the 50 counties that eventually became West Virginia, the vote was overwhelming to secede.

So, yeah, bottom line is that slavery was the root cause of the Civil War. All this talk of "states' rights" is just modern-day sophistry.
View Quote


When Lincoln illegally made WV a new state he allowed them to have slavery.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 10:38:43 AM EDT
[#24]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
The US flag would have been called the flag of traitors at one time too . Ask King Gerorge.

Bet they Communist News Network forgot to mention that.  
View Quote


but, nobody ever denies that.

In fact, these principles remains things many of us who support what those traitors did, still stand behind.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Others who defend a different movement, now try to distance themselves from the principles in it.

Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; 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 moral condition.

...

For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery. They have endeavored to weaken our security, to disturb our domestic peace and tranquility, and persistently refused to comply with their express constitutional obligations to us in reference to that property, and by the use of their power in the Federal Government have striven to deprive us of an equal enjoyment of the common Territories of the Republic...A brief history of the rise, progress, and policy of anti-slavery and the political organization into whose hands the administration of the Federal Government has been committed will fully justify the pronounced verdict of the people of Georgia. The party of Lincoln, called the Republican party, under its present name and organization, is of recent origin. It is admitted to be an anti-slavery party. While it attracts to itself by its creed the scattered advocates of exploded political heresies, of condemned theories in political economy, the advocates of commercial restrictions, of protection, of special privileges, of waste and corruption in the administration of Government, anti-slavery is its mission and its purpose. By anti-slavery it is made a power in the state.

...

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world...The hostility to this institution commenced before the adoption of the Constitution, and was manifested in the well-known Ordinance of 1787, in regard to the Northwestern Territory.

The feeling increased, until, in 1819-20, it deprived the South of more than half the vast territory acquired from France.

The same hostility dismembered Texas and seized upon all the territory acquired from Mexico.

It has grown until it denies the right of property in slaves, and refuses protection to that right on the high seas, in the Territories, and wherever the government of the United States had jurisdiction.

It refuses the admission of new slave States into the Union, and seeks to extinguish it by confining it within its present limits, denying the power of expansion.

It tramples the original equality of the South under foot.

It has nullified the Fugitive Slave Law in almost every free State in the Union, and has utterly broken the compact which our fathers pledged their faith to maintain.

It advocates negro equality, socially and politically, and promotes insurrection and incendiarism in our midst.

It has enlisted its press, its pulpit and its schools against us, until the whole popular mind of the North is excited and inflamed with prejudice.

It has made combinations and formed associations to carry out its schemes of emancipation in the States and wherever else slavery exists.


...

The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution...

For twenty-five years this agitation has been steadily increasing, until it has now secured to its aid the power of the common Government. Observing the forms of the Constitution, a sectional party has found within that Article establishing the Executive Department, the means of subverting the Constitution itself. A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that "Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free," and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction.

This sectional combination for the submersion of the Constitution, has been aided in some of the States by elevating to citizenship, persons who, by the supreme law of the land, are incapable of becoming citizens; and their votes have been used to inaugurate a new policy, hostile to the South, and destructive of its beliefs and safety.

On the 4th day of March next, this party will take possession of the Government. It has announced that the South shall be excluded from the common territory, that the judicial tribunals shall be made sectional, and that a war must be waged against slavery until it shall cease throughout the United States.

The guaranties of the Constitution will then no longer exist; the equal rights of the States will be lost. The slaveholding States will no longer have the power of self-government, or self-protection, and the Federal Government will have become their enemy.





Link Posted: 10/26/2013 10:41:37 AM EDT
[#25]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

The guaranties of the Constitution will then no longer exist; the equal rights of the States will be lost. The slaveholding States will no longer have the power of self-government, or self-protection, and the Federal Government will have become their enemy.
View Quote


It almost sounds as if they are talking about the Voting rights Act, doesn't it?
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 10:44:35 AM EDT
[#26]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Why would I give a flying fuck what CNN thinks or says?
View Quote


Winna!!!!!!!!
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 10:46:29 AM EDT
[#27]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


It almost sounds as if they are talking about the Voting rights Act, doesn't it?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

The guaranties of the Constitution will then no longer exist; the equal rights of the States will be lost. The slaveholding States will no longer have the power of self-government, or self-protection, and the Federal Government will have become their enemy.


It almost sounds as if they are talking about the Voting rights Act, doesn't it?


It definitely shows that such rhetoric has been used to mask heinous crimes against individual rights for some time.

It almost sounds like you are avoiding the realities that led to such things.

None of the seceding states supported a State's rights to outlaws slavery on it's own territory, or to treat fugitive slaves as human beings deserving rights.  To the contrary, they fought vehemently against such things.  And, frankly, continued having problems treating all humans as equally under the law long after the war.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 10:47:05 AM EDT
[#28]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
We have many here who say the same thing, and believe the War of Northern Aggression was fought for the sole purpose freeing the slaves.
View Quote


The South lost.

Get over it.



























please don't ban me.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 10:48:12 AM EDT
[#29]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


The South lost.

Get over it.



























please don't ban me.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
We have many here who say the same thing, and believe the War of Northern Aggression was fought for the sole purpose freeing the slaves.


The South lost.

Get over it.



























please don't ban me.


Link Posted: 10/26/2013 10:52:33 AM EDT
[#30]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


I had ancestors on both sides. Born in the South, moved up here, had people from Missouri and Kentucky, others whose line came over with William Penn and owned a massive piece of Bucks County.

Anyone who thinks it was about something as simple as slavery needs to be beaten with an uncensored history book, then made to read it. And anyone who denigrates that flag that way is just un-American.

Which sums up CNN pretty well.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
NORTH VS SOUTH GO GO!


I had ancestors on both sides. Born in the South, moved up here, had people from Missouri and Kentucky, others whose line came over with William Penn and owned a massive piece of Bucks County.

Anyone who thinks it was about something as simple as slavery needs to be beaten with an uncensored history book, then made to read it. And anyone who denigrates that flag that way is just un-American.

Which sums up CNN pretty well.

The civil war was as much about slavery as obama care is about helping poor people. Sadly this isn't being taught. I was at Manassas battlefield reading some of the signs. The site of the cabin owned by a free black man had a plaque telling us about how those horrible racist bastards from the South marched through his yard and trampled his garden as they were retreating, oh yeah the Union troops later burnt it to the ground in their noble efforts to free the slaves (for those that miss it, yes there is a sarcastic tone to my paraphrased version of this plaque, it is meant to highlight the irony of the portrayal of both sides).
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 10:55:02 AM EDT
[#31]
Let's do it again and see what happens this time around.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 10:58:30 AM EDT
[#32]
The pot stirrer:

Link Posted: 10/26/2013 10:58:44 AM EDT
[#33]
The pot stirrer:

Dean Obeidallah (born 1969; Arabic:) is an American comedian of Palestinian-Italian descent.

Obeidallah is part of a small but growing number of Arab-American comedians who have increasingly received media attention in the past few years, as they use comedy to both entertain and dispel negative stereotypes of Arab-Americans and Muslims.

He produced a documentary with comedian/filmmaker Negin Farsad entitled The Muslims Are Coming! focusing on freedom of religion for all Americans. The film focuses on a free stand up comedy tour by American-Muslim comedians across the South and West. It also features celebrity interviews with a wide range of people including The Daily Show's Jon Stewart, MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, CNN's Soledad O'Brien and Ali Velshi, Congressman Keith Ellison, comedians Lewis Black, David Cross, Colin Quinn

There you have it...he is a flaming, screaming  ??? ?????????  liberal.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 11:04:35 AM EDT
[#34]
The North thought they won. The future was to prove them wrong.  Look around.  They won nothing.  The Northerners gave up their lives to overthrow state's rights and destroy the United States Constitution.  What a pathetic waste of lives.  

The pathetic plight of the inner cities is the fruit of their sacrifice. The takers outnumber the earners, all because of the over-whelming, un-restricted power of the Federal Government.

What a mindless, fruitless, waste.  They gave everything for nothing.


Link Posted: 10/26/2013 11:06:30 AM EDT
[#35]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Not a single slave ever came to the US on a Confederate ship.

They all came on USA flagged ships and European countries.

View Quote


Weak.

Who bought  the slaves?
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 11:10:02 AM EDT
[#36]
I'll bet he has a commie flag tacked up in his garage.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 11:10:25 AM EDT
[#37]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
The North thought they won. The future was to prove them wrong.  Look around.  They won nothing.  The Northerners gave up their lives to overthrow state's rights and destroy the United States Constitution.  What a pathetic waste of lives.  

The pathetic plight of the inner cities is the fruit of their sacrifice. The takers outnumber the earners, all because of the over-whelming, un-restricted power of the Federal Government.

What a mindless, fruitless, waste.  They gave everything for nothing.


View Quote


That's an interesting perspective.

I never thought of it quite that way.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 11:12:17 AM EDT
[#38]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Fuck Lincoln.
View Quote

This, so many Americans fail at history!
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 11:29:23 AM EDT
[#39]
This.

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
We have many here who say the same thing, and believe the War of Northern Aggression was fought for the sole purpose freeing the slaves.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
We have many here who say the same thing, and believe the War of Northern Aggression was fought for the sole purpose freeing the slaves.


And this.

Quoted:
By that logic, the American flag is also a flag of traitors. It comes down to whether you believe that breaking off and establishing your own country is treason.


The CSA were doing exactly as the founders instructed them to do when government became to overbearing. And in fact, they were trying to do so in a peaceful manner.


Link Posted: 10/26/2013 11:32:11 AM EDT
[#40]
If yankee soldiers could see the mess they are resposible for wih inner city crime, rape, robbery, murder, gun crimes flash mobs whatever, they would be spinning in their graves.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 11:33:46 AM EDT
[#41]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Fuck Lincoln.
View Quote


And this.

War Criminal. Set the precedent of presidents trampling liberty and using war as a means to that end.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 11:35:32 AM EDT
[#42]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
This.



And this.



The CSA were doing exactly as the founders instructed them to do when government became to overbearing. And in fact, they were trying to do so in a peaceful manner.


View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
This.

Quoted:
We have many here who say the same thing, and believe the War of Northern Aggression was fought for the sole purpose freeing the slaves.


And this.

Quoted:
By that logic, the American flag is also a flag of traitors. It comes down to whether you believe that breaking off and establishing your own country is treason.


The CSA were doing exactly as the founders instructed them to do when government became to overbearing. And in fact, they were trying to do so in a peaceful manner.




Yup. It was so horribly overbearing for the Republican President-Elect to oppose the expansion of slavery in the territories. God forbid someone oppose the institution of human slavery.

Many of the Confederate states seceded before Lincoln ever took office. It's amazing that the acts of Lincoln which allegedly precipitated Southern secession actually occurred after the Southern states voted to secede.

Granted, Lincoln did illegal and unconstitutional things. But those things were done in response to secession. Secession could not be a response to those acts because it came first!
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 11:37:10 AM EDT
[#43]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
If yankee soldiers could see the mess they are resposible for wih inner city crime, rape, robbery, murder, gun crimes flash mobs whatever, they would be spinning in their graves.
View Quote


So, what are you trying to say here?

I fail to see how Yankee soldiers are in any way responsible for these things unless you are attempting to say that somehow they would not have occurred had the South been able to secede and retain slavery.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 11:37:54 AM EDT
[#44]
CNN poking with a sharp journalistic stick,  at a time in our history where we killed one-another over our differences.

Now, they use this prodding for tactical reasons.

1.Distractions.

2. Division.

3. Derisiveness.

4. Defense.

Link Posted: 10/26/2013 11:39:52 AM EDT
[#45]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Weird.  I've read most of the civil war threats and I've never seen anybody write that "<blathering traitor talk> was for for the sole purpose of freeing the slaves"

I don't run around with a Union Jack to celebrate my ancestors' service to the Royal Army that was a lot more recent than those who fly the flag of the people who were born as US citizens then fought against their fellow citizens and had their slaves freed against their will....but are not to be confused with people who were traitors to their country because owning human beings and their children was that important to them than the United States of America....
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
We have many here who say the same thing, and believe the War of Northern Aggression was fought for the sole purpose freeing the slaves.

Weird.  I've read most of the civil war threats and I've never seen anybody write that "<blathering traitor talk> was for for the sole purpose of freeing the slaves"

I don't run around with a Union Jack to celebrate my ancestors' service to the Royal Army that was a lot more recent than those who fly the flag of the people who were born as US citizens then fought against their fellow citizens and had their slaves freed against their will....but are not to be confused with people who were traitors to their country because owning human beings and their children was that important to them than the United States of America....


You have to keep in mind, the country hasn't always had the national identity we have now. The way most Americans see our country and take pride in being American was born in the early 1900's and was set in stone after WW2.

Before that, especially around and before the civil war, America was a lot more like Afghanistan with respect to local identities. Most people cared more about their town and then state, and didn't see "The Union" as anything more than a legal and political joining.

There fore, when breaking away from the feds it wasn't treason, they simply wanted to leave. If a citizen moves to france, renounces their US citizen ship and becomes a french citizen, they aren't committing treason, they're simply leaving the country. Same idea.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 11:45:15 AM EDT
[#46]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


So, what are you trying to say here?

I fail to see how Yankee soldiers are in any way responsible for these things unless you are attempting to say that somehow they would not have occurred had the South been able to secede and retain slavery.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
If yankee soldiers could see the mess they are resposible for wih inner city crime, rape, robbery, murder, gun crimes flash mobs whatever, they would be spinning in their graves.


So, what are you trying to say here?

I fail to see how Yankee soldiers are in any way responsible for these things unless you are attempting to say that somehow they would not have occurred had the South been able to secede and retain slavery.


Next thing you know, you'll start to question the parallel existence of the whole "Democrats are the true racists since it was them who built the Jim Crow south and resisted the Civil Rights movement" meme, side by side with the "the forces opposed to the Jim Crow south and the Civil Rights movement were all Communists and the country was better off before their influence" meme.

GD conventional wisdom is a walking contradiction, partly truth... and partly fiction.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 11:45:57 AM EDT
[#47]
Yes.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 11:50:40 AM EDT
[#48]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
CNN is trolling.  Bring back "racism" to the national debate when Zero's signature accomplishment is imploding on rollout?  Obvious to the extent that it's laughable.



Different point:

Since this will inevitably devolve into a fuck Lincoln confederate circle jerk before page 3...., I'll just get this in now:   Those Southerners who sanctify the Confederates to the extent where they will not allow for the fact that there were "some" (at least) honorable and courageous men fighting in the United States Army from 1861-65 are beneath contempt.  There were honorable, and dare I say it, brave men fighting for the Union.  I understand that you honor your heritage, but I also honor mine.
View Quote


I don't think I've ever seen anyone call union soldiers cowards or honorless...

Both sides committed acts and attacks that were less than honorable and both sides had many soldiers who did their duty and went home or died doing it. Many on both sides had no dog in the fight (most southerners didn't own slaves, and most northerners didn't give a rats ass if they did or not) and were simply answering the call/drafted and doing their duty.

I think the only time I've seen the honor questioned of a Union Commander, would be in the cases of Sherman or Lincoln.

As a southerner I abhor what Sherman did, and am disgusted by the trail of death and destruction he weaved. As a Soldier, I think he did absolutely the right thing and should have done more of it, the current brass could learn a lot from him about "total war".

Lincoln was a war criminal and got what he had coming.

Link Posted: 10/26/2013 11:58:24 AM EDT
[#49]
As for Sherman, with Lincolns permission he waged war upon civilians.

We call that Terrorism now days. And our military is fighting a war against it.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 11:58:36 AM EDT
[#50]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
CNN is trolling.  Bring back "racism" to the national debate when Zero's signature only accomplishment is imploding on rollout?  Obvious to the extent that it's laughable.

View Quote



Page / 12
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top