SECESSION!!!!

[boilermaker55]

Which just shows that some will see the horrible reasons to have slavery and some never see it.
If you are condoning slavery, which it seems you are, what a sad state of being human.
If and when the tables were turned what would someone like you want to have happen?
Let the south and others use blacks as slave! Gocha!
On another thought, the spoils goes the victor.
To bad that Mr. Lincoln wanted to pacify so many in the south and the rest of the country.
The North should have taken all the land and kicked the plantation owners out and made them fend for themselves.
What a wonderful thought.

Give us the best "real" version of what the south did in 1860!

well, lincoln said in 1848

Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better.
This is a most valuable,— most sacred right—a right, which we hope and believe, is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government, may choose to exercise it.
Any portion of such people that can, may revolutionize, and make their own, of so much of the teritory as they inhabit.

More than this, a majority of any portion of such people may revolutionize, putting down a minority, intermingled with, or near about them, who may oppose their movement.

Such minority, was precisely the case, of the tories of our own revolution. It is a quality of revolutions not to go by old lines, or old laws; but to break up both, and make new ones.

A. Lincoln
in Congress 1848


lincoln's first inaugural address;
March 4, 1861

Apprehension seems to exist among the people of the southern States that by the accession of a Republican Administration their property and their peace and personal security are to be endangered. There has never been any reasonable cause for such apprehension. Indeed, the most ample evidence to the contrary has all the while existed and been open to their inspection. It is found in nearly all the published speeches of him who now addresses you. I do but quote from one of those speeches when I declare that --

I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.

Those who nominated and elected me did so with full knowledge that I had made this and many similar declarations and had never recanted them; and more than this, they placed in the platform for my acceptance, and as a law to themselves and to me, the clear and emphatic resolution which I now read:

Resolved, That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and especially the right of each State to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, is essential to that balance of power on which the perfection and endurance of our political fabric depend; and we denounce the lawless invasion by armed force of the soil of any State or Territory, no matter what pretext, as among the gravest of crimes.



and the south foolishly took him at his word when they tried to peacefully withdraw. lincoln sent troops and ships to invade charleston and the patriotic southerners repelled the invasion....

 

[Rotagilla]

Which just shows that some will see the horrible reasons to have slavery and some never see it.
If you are condoning slavery, which it seems you are, what a sad state of being human.

Strawman. No one condones slavery.

If and when the tables were turned what would someone like you want to have happen?

I don't know..it's your fantasy..you can have it come out however you like.

Let the south and others use blacks as slave! Gocha!

What are you on about now?

On another thought, the spoils goes the victor.

We'll keep that in mind for future reference.

To bad that Mr. Lincoln wanted to pacify so many in the south and the rest of the country.

invading people's home who voted to peacefully withdraw is not "pacifying" anyone.

The North should have taken all the land and kicked the plantation owners out and made them fend for themselves.
What a wonderful thought.

Do you feel the same way about king george and the colonies?

Give us the best "real" version of what the south did in 1860!

well, lincoln said in 1848

Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better.
This is a most valuable,— most sacred right—a right, which we hope and believe, is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government, may choose to exercise it.
Any portion of such people that can, may revolutionize, and make their own, of so much of the teritory as they inhabit.

More than this, a majority of any portion of such people may revolutionize, putting down a minority, intermingled with, or near about them, who may oppose their movement.

Such minority, was precisely the case, of the tories of our own revolution. It is a quality of revolutions not to go by old lines, or old laws; but to break up both, and make new ones.

A. Lincoln
in Congress 1848


lincoln's first inaugural address;
March 4, 1861

Apprehension seems to exist among the people of the southern States that by the accession of a Republican Administration their property and their peace and personal security are to be endangered. There has never been any reasonable cause for such apprehension. Indeed, the most ample evidence to the contrary has all the while existed and been open to their inspection. It is found in nearly all the published speeches of him who now addresses you. I do but quote from one of those speeches when I declare that --

I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.

Those who nominated and elected me did so with full knowledge that I had made this and many similar declarations and had never recanted them; and more than this, they placed in the platform for my acceptance, and as a law to themselves and to me, the clear and emphatic resolution which I now read:

Resolved, That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and especially the right of each State to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, is essential to that balance of power on which the perfection and endurance of our political fabric depend; and we denounce the lawless invasion by armed force of the soil of any State or Territory, no matter what pretext, as among the gravest of crimes.



and the south foolishly took him at his word when they tried to peacefully withdraw. lincoln sent troops and ships to invade charleston and the patriotic southerners repelled the invasion....

[/QUOTE]

 

[reconmark]

Just four years later in 1854, new statehood controversies arose and forced the issue of slavery back into Congress. Kansas and Nebraska were both large territories petitioning for statehood. However, southerners opposed their admittance because the Missouri Compromise mandated that these two territories would enter as Free states.
To satisfy southern states already threatening session, Congress passed the Kansas-Nebraska Act. ((Kennedy, The American Pageant, 412-413)) This new act repealed the Missouri Compromise; instead, the people living in Kansas and Nebraska would vote to determine the fate of the states. ((ibid, 406-407)) When voters from nearby Missouri snuck into Kansas in order to vote to make the territory a slave state, tensions between the two sides exploded. War broke out in Kansas between pro-slavery sympathizers and abolitionists, earning it the nickname “bleeding Kansas.”
Westward Expansion the American Civil War US History Scene

1856 - 1858: The Slavery Debate Escalates

The violence erupting in Kansas as a result of the Kansas-Nebraska Act spilled over into the halls of Congress. In 1856, South Carolina Representative Preston Brooks beat Massachusetts Senator Charles Sumner with a cane because he condemned the pro-slavery views of Brooks’s relative, Senator Andrew Butler. Two years later in a late night House session, a brawl involving more than 50 representatives broke out over the expansion of slavery into Western territories. The fight ended in comedy when one member snatched an opponent’s wig, exclaiming “I’ve scalped him!” Despite the levity, the brawl was seen as a foreboding sign of conflicts to come.

The Wilmot Proviso
At the end of the Mexican War, many new lands west of Texas were yielded to the United States, and the debate over the westward expansion of slavery was rekindled. Southern politicians and slave owners demanded that slavery be allowed in the West because they feared that a closed door would spell doom for their economy and way of life. Whig Northerners, however, believed that slavery should be banned from the new territories. Pennsylvanian congressman David Wilmot proposed such a ban in 1846, even before the conclusion of the war. Southerners were outraged over this Wilmot Proviso and blocked it before it could reach the Senate.


Texas abandoned her separate national existence and consented to become one of the Confederated States to promote her welfare, insure domestic tranquility [sic] and secure more substantially the blessings of peace and liberty to her people. She was received into the confederacy with her own constitution, under the guarantee of the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits--a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time. Her institutions and geographical position established the strongest ties between her and other slave-holding States of the confederacy. deral constitution and the compact of annexation, that she should enjoy these blessings. She was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery--the Those ties have been strengthened by association. But what has been the course of the government of the United States, and of the people and authorities of the non-slave-holding States, since our connection with them?

I can supply much more, but undoubtedly you will ignore it...such is the case with revisionists...

 

[boilermaker55]

That is the furthest it is from is a strawman argument, that is what the south was all about then.
State's rights was the disguise used to hide behind their cheap labor, Which I hesitate to call it "cheap" because it was
morally wrong.
So use all the deflections you choose but the south was morally and disgustingly wrong.
This concept bleeds today with corporations worldwide.
Exploitation of those that have no power or education.
Again, the North should have raided and ruined all the plantation owners after the war.

Which just shows that some will see the horrible reasons to have slavery and some never see it.
If you are condoning slavery, which it seems you are, what a sad state of being human.

Strawman. No one condones slavery.

If and when the tables were turned what would someone like you want to have happen?

I don't know..it's your fantasy..you can have it come out however you like.

Let the south and others use blacks as slave! Gocha!

What are you on about now?

On another thought, the spoils goes the victor.

We'll keep that in mind for future reference.

To bad that Mr. Lincoln wanted to pacify so many in the south and the rest of the country.

invading people's home who voted to peacefully withdraw is not "pacifying" anyone.

The North should have taken all the land and kicked the plantation owners out and made them fend for themselves.
What a wonderful thought.

Do you feel the same way about king george and the colonies?

Give us the best "real" version of what the south did in 1860!

well, lincoln said in 1848

Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better.
This is a most valuable,— most sacred right—a right, which we hope and believe, is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government, may choose to exercise it.
Any portion of such people that can, may revolutionize, and make their own, of so much of the teritory as they inhabit.

More than this, a majority of any portion of such people may revolutionize, putting down a minority, intermingled with, or near about them, who may oppose their movement.

Such minority, was precisely the case, of the tories of our own revolution. It is a quality of revolutions not to go by old lines, or old laws; but to break up both, and make new ones.

A. Lincoln
in Congress 1848


lincoln's first inaugural address;
March 4, 1861

Apprehension seems to exist among the people of the southern States that by the accession of a Republican Administration their property and their peace and personal security are to be endangered. There has never been any reasonable cause for such apprehension. Indeed, the most ample evidence to the contrary has all the while existed and been open to their inspection. It is found in nearly all the published speeches of him who now addresses you. I do but quote from one of those speeches when I declare that --

I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.

Those who nominated and elected me did so with full knowledge that I had made this and many similar declarations and had never recanted them; and more than this, they placed in the platform for my acceptance, and as a law to themselves and to me, the clear and emphatic resolution which I now read:

Resolved, That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and especially the right of each State to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, is essential to that balance of power on which the perfection and endurance of our political fabric depend; and we denounce the lawless invasion by armed force of the soil of any State or Territory, no matter what pretext, as among the gravest of crimes.



and the south foolishly took him at his word when they tried to peacefully withdraw. lincoln sent troops and ships to invade charleston and the patriotic southerners repelled the invasion....

[/QUOTE]

 

[reconmark]

Your statement is so filled with the lies of historical revisionists and those ignorant of history it looks like swiss cheese.

Good...you won't have any trouble refuting them, right?

There was never a period of time when the Southern states weren't part of the U.S.

Yes there was

Traitors attempted to subvert the Nation and were dealt with accordingly.

That's what the british said about the colonists who tried to peacefully withdraw from england.

The South tried to peacefully and legally withdraw. lincoln wanted war, though.

The South attempted to strong arm the legitimate and recognized Government of the U.S. to not allow continue to allow chattel slavery but allow it's expansion into the Western Territories.

The south tried to peacefully withdraw..not "strongarm" anyone. lincolns unprovoked act of aggression is what caused the shooting when patriots repelled invaders.

Farm Animals, machinery and the Industrial Revolution are all attempts at distorting factual history as it pertains to the south's refusal to abolish slavery.

Slavery was dying out because machines were lower maintenance to own than farm animals or negroes.

So I have already refuted your fairy tales but you want to pretend otherwise...how typical.

Did the South refuse to abolish slavery???...yes or no???

Did the South want to expand slavery to the expanding Western Territories???...yes or no???

Revisionism isn't history.

Link?

Proof?

just kidding..I know you don't have any...

A link to what...now you are deflecting...answer the questions, or is it that revisionism can't stand up to facts.
Just to make you appear even more stupid, I'll post links. You could use some "real" history.

So you failed to answer the question....

 

[Rotagilla]

That is the furthest it is from is a strawman argument, that is what the south was all about then.

No it wasn't.

State's rights was the disguise used to hide behind their cheap labor, Which I hesitate to call it "cheap" because it was
morally wrong.

The south knew slavery was coming to an end....but not the way the union wanted.
lincoln couldn't have cared less about the slaves...he used them..like obama uses illegals...for political gain.

So use all the deflections you choose but the south was morally and disgustingly wrong.

Slaves were held in the north and border states, too...

This concept bleeds today with corporations worldwide.
Exploitation of those that have no power or education.

Good call...that's EXACTLY why the left wants the border open..to exploit people for cheap labor and keep fair wages for american citizens low...which spreads poverty...which spreads government dependency...which leads to votes for th eparty that gives away the most free stuff..

The left should stop exploiting illegals for their cheap labor. Shame!

Close and enforce the border.

Again, the North should have raided and ruined all the plantation owners after the war.

for trying to peacefully withdraw and forming their own independent nation?
So, if your wife asks for a divorce you should be allowed to beat her some more?

but lincoln said;


Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable,— most sacred right—a right, which we hope and believe, is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government, may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can, may revolutionize, and make their own, of so much of the teritory as they inhabit.
More than this, a majority of any portion of such people may revolutionize, putting down a minority, intermingled with, or near about them, who may oppose their movement. Such minority, was precisely the case, of the tories of our own revolution. It is a quality of revolutions not to go by old lines, or old laws; but to break up both, and make new ones.

A. Lincoln
in Congress 1848

..and lincoln also said;

Apprehension seems to exist among the people of the Southern States, that by the accession of a Republican Administration, their property, and their peace, and personal security, are to be endangered. There has never been any reasonable cause for such apprehension. Indeed, the most ample evidence to the contrary has all the while existed, and been open to their inspection. It is found in nearly all the published speeches of him who now addresses you. I do but quote from one of those speeches when I declare that "I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so." Those who nominated and elected me did so with full knowledge that I had made this, and many similar declarations, and had never recanted them. And more than this, they placed in the platform, for my acceptance, and as a law to themselves, and to me, the clear and emphatic resolution which I now read:

Resolved, That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and especially the right of each State to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, is essential to that balance of power on which the perfection and endurance of our political fabric depend; and we denounce the lawless invasion by armed force of the soil of any State or Territory, no matter what pretext, as among the gravest of crimes."


You're right, though.the north should have continued to murder civilians and steal their property, wreck the infrastructure, destroy their businesses....the guerilla war that would have ensued would have toppled the government and re drawn new borders.

 

[bripat9643]

They were kicking some filthy trespassing Yankees off of their territory, which is something every sovereign nation has a right to do.

You've been told this about 100 times, but you keep repeating this same imbecile argument.

 

[bripat9643]

They were kicking some filthy trespassing Yankees off of their territory, which is something every sovereign nation has a right to do.

You've been told this about 100 times, but you keep repeating this same imbecile argument.

 

[Siete]

all of you so called patriots must be wearing an anchor on your ass that's holding back that motor on your mouth. Break away from the rest of the country or STFU. Should be easy enough to do for a band of MORONS.

 

[Rotagilla]

all of you so called patriots must be wearing an anchor on your ass that's holding back that motor on your mouth. Break away from the rest of the country or STFU. Should be easy enough to do for a band of MORONS.

all governments fail/collapse eventually and patriots rebuild and correct past mistakes.It's coming.

What's your hurry?

 

[Rotagilla]

all of you so called patriots must be wearing an anchor on your ass that's holding back that motor on your mouth. Break away from the rest of the country or STFU. Should be easy enough to do for a band of MORONS.

all governments fail/collapse eventually and patriots rebuild and correct past mistakes.It's coming.

What's your hurry?

 

[Siete]

all of you so called patriots must be wearing an anchor on your ass that's holding back that motor on your mouth. Break away from the rest of the country or STFU. Should be easy enough to do for a band of MORONS.

all governments fail/collapse eventually and patriots rebuild and correct past mistakes.It's coming.

What's your hurry?

whats my hurry?

for RW idiots to shut their damn mouth OR DO SOMETHING ..

Kill SS
Kill Health Care
Become an independent state

bla bla bla ...

NOTHING AND I MEAN NOTHING the loudmouth RW's carp about has never happened and will never happen ... every one of you dipshits live I a pipe dream. Wake up.

 

[Siete]

all of you so called patriots must be wearing an anchor on your ass that's holding back that motor on your mouth. Break away from the rest of the country or STFU. Should be easy enough to do for a band of MORONS.

all governments fail/collapse eventually and patriots rebuild and correct past mistakes.It's coming.

What's your hurry?

whats my hurry?

for RW idiots to shut their damn mouth OR DO SOMETHING ..

Kill SS
Kill Health Care
Become an independent state

bla bla bla ...

NOTHING AND I MEAN NOTHING the loudmouth RW's carp about has ever happened and will never happen ... every one of you dipshits live I a pipe dream. Wake up.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Folks, I'm tired of getting reports on this thread. If the flaming, personal attacks, and general antics that even my 12 year old son would be too mature to engage in don't stop I'm just going to shut this down altogether like Todd Akin's legitimate rape.

 

[bripat9643]

A bunch of inbred hicks were too stupid to realize they were no better than the Africans and allowed the Southern wealthy to dupe their stupid asses into a ass whipping of historical proportions.

Here are your genetically superior ancestors:

Did you not see that I deleted these earlier? So why are you posting them again?

 

[reconmark]

all of you so called patriots must be wearing an anchor on your ass that's holding back that motor on your mouth. Break away from the rest of the country or STFU. Should be easy enough to do for a band of MORONS.

all governments fail/collapse eventually and patriots rebuild and correct past mistakes.It's coming.

What's your hurry?

"....shall rise again and all that batshit..."

 

[bripat9643]

The southern patriots...

They were anything but "patriots," and when they realized the cause was lost, they deserted even each other.

no they didn't.

They sure as hell did. They deserted in droves. In the end, that is what forced Lee to go have a chat with Grant.

Yankees deserted in far greater number because they didn't give a damn about freeing the slaves, and they sure as hell didn't want to die for it.

 

[Rotagilla]

The southern patriots...

They were anything but "patriots," and when they realized the cause was lost, they deserted even each other.

no they didn't.

They sure as hell did. They deserted in droves. In the end, that is what forced Lee to go have a chat with Grant.

Yankees deserted in far greater number because they didn't give a damn about freeing the slaves, and they sure as hell didn't want to die for it.

There were draft riots in new york...northern men didn't want to fight lincolns war of aggression against fellow citizens and countrymen and (like lincoln) they couldn't have cared less about negroes.

 

[bripat9643]

slavery was a fading practice.
The people in the south and the leaders knew it would end ...

If they "knew it would end," why were they working so hard to get a Constitutional Amendment guaranteeing it?


Strike 23....

They weren't. That was Saint Lincoln's idea.

 

[Rotagilla]

slavery was a fading practice.
The people in the south and the leaders knew it would end ...

If they "knew it would end," why were they working so hard to get a Constitutional Amendment guaranteeing it?


Strike 23....

They weren't. That was Saint Lincoln's idea.

you can't have a mature discussion with him.eventually he'll get frustrated when you keep backing him into a corner (like you just did) and he'll start calling all of us names

...you made all of your points.