Remembering Robert E. Lee: American Patriot and Southern Hero

[Geaux4it]

Oh please I'm sure he was a gifted general but so the fuck what? He threatened to split the union and caused massive amount of life. It was pointless. He was far from a patriot. Fuck him and the Confederacy.

Long live the South

-Geaux

 

[Unkotare]

China, North Korea are both still Communist.

China, not so much.

Yes much!

May not seem like it, but communist government still rules the day..

Totalitarian for sure, but communist in name more than anything else. 20 years ago it was a lot closer to actual communism.

 

[bripat9643]

Oh please I'm sure he was a gifted general but so the fuck what? He threatened to split the union and caused massive amount of life. It was pointless. He was far from a patriot. Fuck him and the Confederacy.

Says the one that supports Grant as he burned down entire cities..

Apparently General Lee made him do that by failing to lose. The Bastard!

I love the way these Lincoln cultists keep trying to blame the Confederacy for all the people who were killed by the Union army.

It is funny to watch the far left drones support an (R) president..

Well, he was a dictator and a tyrant who wiped his ass on the Constitution, so I can understand why they like him.

 

[kaz]

China, North Korea are both still Communist.

China, not so much.

Really? What is that based on?

 

[kaz]

China, North Korea are both still Communist.

China, not so much.

Yes much!

May not seem like it, but communist government still rules the day..

Totalitarian for sure, but communist in name more than anything else. 20 years ago it was a lot closer to actual communism.

In the end, the government controls the economy. Ask Apple, Microsoft and Google about that. That they allow free market in ways does not mean they have given up their say. If your kids ask you if you they can go next door and play, whether you say yes or no doesn't change it was up to you.

 

[paperview]

Abe did end up by freeing the slaves. His signature rested not only on the Emancipation Proclamation (which freed thousands immediately), but on the 13th Amendment Resolution.

He fought hard for its passage.

He was not even required to place his signature there, yet he did.

It's a rarity for a president to sign Amendments.

It was passed by Congress in January of 1865.

See that signature to the right? :::::::::::: > Abraham Lincoln.

I can't make out any signature by Lincoln.

You're so much in denial, you can even see a plain signature apparently.

Look to the right, under the words 'United States" midway.

Lincoln signed the 13th Amendendent. Surprised you didn't know that (well, not really).

He not only pushed for its passage, he did what few presidents have ever done - He signed a House Passed Constitutional Amendment.!

The claim that he pushed for it's passage is Lincoln cult propaganda. He didn't lift a finger to get it passed. Lincoln was the author of an Amendment in 1860 that would have enshrined slavery into the Constitution forever.

Idiocracy strikes again. Lincoln most certainly worked to get the 13 th Amendment passed, AND HE SIGNED IT!

Bullshit. The source of the claim that he did anything to get the Amendment passed is a confessed plagiarist, Doris Kearns-Goodwin:

Spielberg s Upside-Down History The Myth of Lincoln and the Thirteenth Amendment 8211 LewRockwell.com​

Steven Spielberg's new movie, Lincoln, is said to be based on several chapters of the book Team of Rivals by Doris Kearns-Goodwin, who was a consultant to Spielberg. The main theme of the movie is how clever, manipulative, conniving, scheming, lying, and underhanded Lincoln supposedly was in using his "political skills" to get the Thirteenth Amendment that legally ended slavery through the U.S. House of Representatives in the last months of his life....​

The lying, distorting White Nationalsit DilOrenzo is some kind of god to you, isn't he?

How many distortions can he be caught in before you say, hey, maybe he's not such a great source?

(duh, what am I thinking! The answer to that is *never*) - you're bridpat, after all..

Here, DiLorenzo does what he does best, cherry pick and lie. First, DL doesn't even get his pages right. He notes page 545 that little quote by Donald.

Well, it's pages 553 - 554.

And what do those pages say? Let's have a look.

What Donald actually said:

"In the spirit of conciliation Lincoln reached out for the support of Democrats as well as Republicans. His annual message contained an earnest plea to political opponents to support the proposed constitutional amendment abolishing slavery throughout the United States. In the previous session of Congress his measure had failed to secure the required two-thirds vote in the House of Representatives, because all but four of the Democratic members voted against it. At Lincoln's urging, the National Union convention had made the amendment a central plank in the platform on which he and a heavy Republican majority in the next Congress were elected. He now asked the lame-duck session of the Thirty-eighth congress to reconsider the amendment. "Without questioning the wisdom or patriotism of those who stood in opposition," the President urged the Democrats to rethink their position. "Of course," he admitted, "the abstract question is not changed: but an intervening election shows, almost certainly, that the next Congress will pass the measure if this does not." Since adoption was simply a matter of time, he asked, "may we not agree that the sooner the better?" Arguing that "some deference shall be paid to the will of the majority, simply because it is the will of the majority, " he appealed for support of the amendment now. Not content with rhetorical exhortation, Lincoln used his personal authority and considerable charm to influence Democratic and border-state congressmen whose votes were in doubt. Not since 1862, when he tried hard to persuade border-state congressmen to support his gradual emancipation plan, had the President been so deeply involved in the legislative process. He worked closely with James M. Ashley of Ohio, the principal sponsor of the amendment in the House, to identify members who might be persuaded to support the amendment and invited them to the Executive Mansion. For instance, he had a long talk with Representative James S. Rollins of Missouri, who had voted against the amendment in June, and entreated him as an old Whig and follower of "that great statesman, Henry Clay," to join him now in supporting the measure. When Rollins said that he was ready to vote for the amendment, Lincoln pressed him to use his influence with the other congressmen from his state. "The passage of this amendment will clinch the whole subject," the President assured him: "it will bring the war, I have no doubt, rapidly to a close." If Lincoln used other means of persuading congressmen to vote for the Thirteenth Amendment, his actions were not recorded. Conclusions about the President's role rested on gossip and later recollections like those of Thaddeus Stevens, who remarked, "The greatest measure of the nineteenth century was passed by corruption, aided and abetted by the purest man in America." Lincoln was told that he might win some support from New Jersey Democrats if he could persuade Charles Sumner to drop a bill to regulate the Camden & Amboy Railroad, but he declined to intervene, not on grounds of priciple but because, he said, "I can do nothing with Mr. Sumner in these matters." One New Jersey Democrat, well known as a lobbyist for the Camden & Amboy, who had voted against the amendment in July, did abstain in the final vote, but it cannot be proved that Lincoln influenced his change. Whatever the President's role, in the final ballotting more than two-thirds of the House members voted for the Thirteenth Amendment and submitted it to the states for ratification. Celebrating, the House adjourned after inadvertently sending the resolution to the President, who happily signed it on February 1. He was untroubled when senators pointed out that, according to a Supreme Court decision of 1798, presidential approval was not required for constitutional amendments. He was convinced that, with or without his signature, the Thirteenth Amendment would root out "the original disturbing cause" of the rebellion and would fully settle all questions about the legal validity of the Emancipation Proclamation. Finally the country had "a King's cure for all the evils."

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

- David Herbert Donald, Lincoln, pp. 553 - 554​

Do you see how DiLorenzo deliberatly lies? Do you see?

 

[Kosh]

China, North Korea are both still Communist.

China, not so much.

Yes much!

May not seem like it, but communist government still rules the day..

Totalitarian for sure, but communist in name more than anything else. 20 years ago it was a lot closer to actual communism.

Actually those two are one in the same..

While their is more freedoms in China, the government still rules with an iron fist. Although if they were a government such as ours, would they abolish the one child law?

 

[Kosh]

I can't make out any signature by Lincoln.

You're so much in denial, you can even see a plain signature apparently.

Look to the right, under the words 'United States" midway.

Lincoln signed the 13th Amendendent. Surprised you didn't know that (well, not really).

He not only pushed for its passage, he did what few presidents have ever done - He signed a House Passed Constitutional Amendment.!

The claim that he pushed for it's passage is Lincoln cult propaganda. He didn't lift a finger to get it passed. Lincoln was the author of an Amendment in 1860 that would have enshrined slavery into the Constitution forever.

Idiocracy strikes again. Lincoln most certainly worked to get the 13 th Amendment passed, AND HE SIGNED IT!

Bullshit. The source of the claim that he did anything to get the Amendment passed is a confessed plagiarist, Doris Kearns-Goodwin:

Spielberg s Upside-Down History The Myth of Lincoln and the Thirteenth Amendment 8211 LewRockwell.com​

Steven Spielberg's new movie, Lincoln, is said to be based on several chapters of the book Team of Rivals by Doris Kearns-Goodwin, who was a consultant to Spielberg. The main theme of the movie is how clever, manipulative, conniving, scheming, lying, and underhanded Lincoln supposedly was in using his "political skills" to get the Thirteenth Amendment that legally ended slavery through the U.S. House of Representatives in the last months of his life....​

The lying, distorting White Nationalsit DilOrenzo is some kind of god to you, isn't he?

How many distortions can he be caught in before you say, hey, maybe he's not such a great source?

(duh, what am I thinking! The answer to that is *never*) - you're bridpat, after all..

Here, DiLorenzo does what he does best, cherry pick and lie. First, DL doesn't even get his pages right. He notes page 545 that little quote by Donald.

Well, it's pages 553 - 554.

And what do those pages say? Let's have a look.

What Donald actually said:

"In the spirit of conciliation Lincoln reached out for the support of Democrats as well as Republicans. His annual message contained an earnest plea to political opponents to support the proposed constitutional amendment abolishing slavery throughout the United States. In the previous session of Congress his measure had failed to secure the required two-thirds vote in the House of Representatives, because all but four of the Democratic members voted against it. At Lincoln's urging, the National Union convention had made the amendment a central plank in the platform on which he and a heavy Republican majority in the next Congress were elected. He now asked the lame-duck session of the Thirty-eighth congress to reconsider the amendment. "Without questioning the wisdom or patriotism of those who stood in opposition," the President urged the Democrats to rethink their position. "Of course," he admitted, "the abstract question is not changed: but an intervening election shows, almost certainly, that the next Congress will pass the measure if this does not." Since adoption was simply a matter of time, he asked, "may we not agree that the sooner the better?" Arguing that "some deference shall be paid to the will of the majority, simply because it is the will of the majority, " he appealed for support of the amendment now. Not content with rhetorical exhortation, Lincoln used his personal authority and considerable charm to influence Democratic and border-state congressmen whose votes were in doubt. Not since 1862, when he tried hard to persuade border-state congressmen to support his gradual emancipation plan, had the President been so deeply involved in the legislative process. He worked closely with James M. Ashley of Ohio, the principal sponsor of the amendment in the House, to identify members who might be persuaded to support the amendment and invited them to the Executive Mansion. For instance, he had a long talk with Representative James S. Rollins of Missouri, who had voted against the amendment in June, and entreated him as an old Whig and follower of "that great statesman, Henry Clay," to join him now in supporting the measure. When Rollins said that he was ready to vote for the amendment, Lincoln pressed him to use his influence with the other congressmen from his state. "The passage of this amendment will clinch the whole subject," the President assured him: "it will bring the war, I have no doubt, rapidly to a close." If Lincoln used other means of persuading congressmen to vote for the Thirteenth Amendment, his actions were not recorded. Conclusions about the President's role rested on gossip and later recollections like those of Thaddeus Stevens, who remarked, "The greatest measure of the nineteenth century was passed by corruption, aided and abetted by the purest man in America." Lincoln was told that he might win some support from New Jersey Democrats if he could persuade Charles Sumner to drop a bill to regulate the Camden & Amboy Railroad, but he declined to intervene, not on grounds of priciple but because, he said, "I can do nothing with Mr. Sumner in these matters." One New Jersey Democrat, well known as a lobbyist for the Camden & Amboy, who had voted against the amendment in July, did abstain in the final vote, but it cannot be proved that Lincoln influenced his change. Whatever the President's role, in the final ballotting more than two-thirds of the House members voted for the Thirteenth Amendment and submitted it to the states for ratification. Celebrating, the House adjourned after inadvertently sending the resolution to the President, who happily signed it on February 1. He was untroubled when senators pointed out that, according to a Supreme Court decision of 1798, presidential approval was not required for constitutional amendments. He was convinced that, with or without his signature, the Thirteenth Amendment would root out "the original disturbing cause" of the rebellion and would fully settle all questions about the legal validity of the Emancipation Proclamation. Finally the country had "a King's cure for all the evils."

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

- David Herbert Donald, Lincoln, pp. 553 - 554​

Do you see how DiLorenzo deliberatly lies? Do you see?

I bet you believe that the Civil War as all about slavery..

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

You mean Lincoln, 5 million men, and the entire industrial might of the union kicked Lee's ass.

Big achievement.

last time I checked the history books, and I have a few specifically on the Civil War, Lee wasn't the only southerner up against Lincoln's army and the North's industrial might.

The union had about twice the population, three times the railroad mileage and three times the industrial output of the South. The union kept all the navel vessels of the American navy. Hardly a fair contest.

all that northern victory was due to the North didn't have slaves. Slavary enervated the south moraly and economically. The North had fewer natual resources, but the had the moral and intellectual resources. And that ultimately told.

THe North actually had more natural resources. It had coal and iron ore.

South had Birmingham AL, a lot more resource wise than Pittsburg. Its all right there. In the same place. Pittsburgh gas the Iron on the great lakes, the coal in the mountains. The reason the south couldn'y get it to use was slavery.

Your grasp of history sucks. Real historians are firmly agreed that the South was outmatched in resources, manufacturing capacity, and population.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

last time I checked the history books, and I have a few specifically on the Civil War, Lee wasn't the only southerner up against Lincoln's army and the North's industrial might.

The union had about twice the population, three times the railroad mileage and three times the industrial output of the South. The union kept all the navel vessels of the American navy. Hardly a fair contest.

all that northern victory was due to the North didn't have slaves. Slavary enervated the south moraly and economically. The North had fewer natual resources, but the had the moral and intellectual resources. And that ultimately told.

THe North actually had more natural resources. It had coal and iron ore.

South had Birmingham AL, a lot more resource wise than Pittsburg. Its all right there. In the same place. Pittsburgh gas the Iron on the great lakes, the coal in the mountains. The reason the south couldn'y get it to use was slavery.

Your grasp of history sucks. Real historians are firmly agreed that the South was outmatched in resources, manufacturing capacity, and population.

and the reason they were outmatched in every possible resource was slavery. The should have been there. The reason the coal and Iron staid in the ground was slavery. The reason the railroads couldn't be built was slavery made them impossible.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

The union had about twice the population, three times the railroad mileage and three times the industrial output of the South. The union kept all the navel vessels of the American navy. Hardly a fair contest.

all that northern victory was due to the North didn't have slaves. Slavary enervated the south moraly and economically. The North had fewer natual resources, but the had the moral and intellectual resources. And that ultimately told.

THe North actually had more natural resources. It had coal and iron ore.

South had Birmingham AL, a lot more resource wise than Pittsburg. Its all right there. In the same place. Pittsburgh gas the Iron on the great lakes, the coal in the mountains. The reason the south couldn'y get it to use was slavery.

Your grasp of history sucks. Real historians are firmly agreed that the South was outmatched in resources, manufacturing capacity, and population.

and the reason they were outmatched in every possible resource was slavery. The should have been there. The reason the coal and Iron staid in the ground was slavery. The reason the railroads couldn't be built was slavery made them impossible.

I agree. An economy that predicates on a massive sectore of society being deprived of the fruits of their labor is weaker because it lacks the dynamic, manifest growth only made possible by the individual pursuit of happiness. This is true of communism too. If those who attempted to justify slavery with the Bible truly loved Jesus, they would have with rapt diligence heeded his words, "a laborer is deserving of his pay."

 

[Jarlaxle]

American traitor and worthless piece of shit.

That isn't how the United States of America looks at it. We confiscated Lee's home and estate and turned it into a cemetery for Union troops. It was meant to be an insult to him that would continue forever. We bury our fallen patriots there to this day. To reinforce the insult a Memorial to Lincoln was built directly across the river from the Mansion and the cemetery.

You forgot one critical fact: Lee's son sued over that...and he WON. (Robert E. Lee never actually owned the estate...it was his father-in-law's, and the legal heir was Custis Lee.)

 

[Unkotare]

China, North Korea are both still Communist.

China, not so much.

Yes much!

May not seem like it, but communist government still rules the day..

Totalitarian for sure, but communist in name more than anything else. 20 years ago it was a lot closer to actual communism.

In the end, the government controls the economy. Ask Apple, Microsoft and Google about that. That they allow free market in ways does not mean they have given up their say. If your kids ask you if you they can go next door and play, whether you say yes or no doesn't change it was up to you.

As I said, totalitarian.

 

[Unkotare]

China, North Korea are both still Communist.

China, not so much.

Yes much!

May not seem like it, but communist government still rules the day..

Totalitarian for sure, but communist in name more than anything else. 20 years ago it was a lot closer to actual communism.

Actually those two are one in the same..

Actually they are not, though they do coincide.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

China, North Korea are both still Communist.

China, not so much.

Yes much!

May not seem like it, but communist government still rules the day..

Totalitarian for sure, but communist in name more than anything else. 20 years ago it was a lot closer to actual communism.

In the end, the government controls the economy. Ask Apple, Microsoft and Google about that. That they allow free market in ways does not mean they have given up their say. If your kids ask you if you they can go next door and play, whether you say yes or no doesn't change it was up to you.

As I said, totalitarian.

Yet amazingly, you cheer for totalitarian government when you think it's in the right. Like all Leftists, you're riddled with inconsistencies.

 

[Unkotare]

Yet amazingly, you cheer for totalitarian government when you think it's in the right.

Not amazingly, you're wrong.

 

[Unkotare]

Like all Leftists....

Like 'what'?

 

[bripat9643]

Yet amazingly, you cheer for totalitarian government when you think it's in the right.

Not amazingly, you're wrong.

He's 100% right. Lincoln was the first totalitarian dictator.

 

[Unkotare]

Yet amazingly, you cheer for totalitarian government when you think it's in the right.

Not amazingly, you're wrong.

He's 100% right. Lincoln was the first totalitarian dictator.

Wrong, you bitter little loser.


What country do you live in?

 

[bripat9643]

Yet amazingly, you cheer for totalitarian government when you think it's in the right.

Not amazingly, you're wrong.

He's 100% right. Lincoln was the first totalitarian dictator.

Wrong, you bitter little loser.


What country do you live in?

I'm a subject in of an Empire that used to be a free country until Komrade Lincoln came to power.