List the 5 Presidents you most admire and the reason

What response did the South expect when they fired at Ft Sumter?

A shrug?
They expected them to leave. Which they did.

Not too bright were they?

Firing on a US installation and you just expected them to leave? Southerners were not too bright were they?
But what do you expect from a people that would form a new country just so they could own other human beings?
 
What response did the South expect when they fired at Ft Sumter?

A shrug?
They expected them to leave. Which they did.

Not too bright were they?

Firing on a US installation and you just expected them to leave? Southerners were not too bright were they?
But what do you expect from a people that would form a new country just so they could own other human beings?
Speaking of owning other human beings.. what about that 16th amendment. What about that civil war amendment that lets government take your life, your liberty, and your property for the good of the cause.
 
What response did the South expect when they fired at Ft Sumter?

A shrug?
They expected them to leave. Which they did.

Not too bright were they?

Firing on a US installation and you just expected them to leave? Southerners were not too bright were they?
But what do you expect from a people that would form a new country just so they could own other human beings?
Speaking of owning other human beings.. what about that 16th amendment. What about that civil war amendment that lets government take your life, your liberty, and your property for the good of the cause.

You obviously have no idea about what you are babbling about
 
What response did the South expect when they fired at Ft Sumter?

A shrug?
They expected them to leave. Which they did.

Not too bright were they?

Firing on a US installation and you just expected them to leave? Southerners were not too bright were they?
But what do you expect from a people that would form a new country just so they could own other human beings?
Speaking of owning other human beings.. what about that 16th amendment. What about that civil war amendment that lets government take your life, your liberty, and your property for the good of the cause.

You obviously have no idea about what you are babbling about
What's the difference between government taking your income, property, and life via "due process" of law, and a slave owner taking your income, property, and life via "due process" of law? Can you elaborate on the difference?
 
What response did the South expect when they fired at Ft Sumter?

A shrug?
They expected them to leave. Which they did.

Not too bright were they?

Firing on a US installation and you just expected them to leave? Southerners were not too bright were they?
But what do you expect from a people that would form a new country just so they could own other human beings?
Speaking of owning other human beings.. what about that 16th amendment. What about that civil war amendment that lets government take your life, your liberty, and your property for the good of the cause.

You obviously have no idea about what you are babbling about
What's the difference between government taking your income, property, and life via "due process" of law, and a slave owner taking your income, property, and life via "due process" of law? Can you elaborate on the difference?
Constitution says Congress has authority to levy taxes. Your state signed up to it

The "difference" is you have a right to vote....a slave doesn't
 
Lincoln did not have to invade the South.


The Confederate traitors started the war. Everything that followed is on their unworthy heads.

Using that logic, Truman's dropping two a-bombs on a defenseless nation, killing thousands of women and children, was justified because Japan started the war by attacking US military bases....

If you want to go to extremes, by your reasoning every single death of any Japanese person during ALL of WWII was "bloodthirsty murder" committed by the US President, whoever that may have been.

Do you dispute that the attack on Pearl Harbor marks the point where Japan instigated war with the US?

You have stated Lincoln was justified in committing total war against the South, because the South attacked first. ...

I didn't say that. I said that the war and all it entailed was on the heads of the traitors. As for the "murderous tyrant" bit, read the Gettysburg Address, Lincoln's 2nd Inaugural, or look at his stance on Reconstruction before he was assassinated.

Damned white of him to want to clean up the mess he created.
 
What response did the South expect when they fired at Ft Sumter?

A shrug?

Bigger than a breadbox, but something short of total destruction.

Seriously, arrogance was rampant on both sides. Each side expected the other to capitulate once they showed themselves to be "serious". Nobody expected the scale of the war they got.
 
They expected them to leave. Which they did.

Not too bright were they?

Firing on a US installation and you just expected them to leave? Southerners were not too bright were they?
But what do you expect from a people that would form a new country just so they could own other human beings?
Speaking of owning other human beings.. what about that 16th amendment. What about that civil war amendment that lets government take your life, your liberty, and your property for the good of the cause.

You obviously have no idea about what you are babbling about
What's the difference between government taking your income, property, and life via "due process" of law, and a slave owner taking your income, property, and life via "due process" of law? Can you elaborate on the difference?
Constitution says Congress has authority to levy taxes. Your state signed up to it

The "difference" is you have a right to vote....a slave doesn't
Why can't a slave vote?
 
Not too bright were they?

Firing on a US installation and you just expected them to leave? Southerners were not too bright were they?
But what do you expect from a people that would form a new country just so they could own other human beings?
Speaking of owning other human beings.. what about that 16th amendment. What about that civil war amendment that lets government take your life, your liberty, and your property for the good of the cause.

You obviously have no idea about what you are babbling about
What's the difference between government taking your income, property, and life via "due process" of law, and a slave owner taking your income, property, and life via "due process" of law? Can you elaborate on the difference?
Constitution says Congress has authority to levy taxes. Your state signed up to it

The "difference" is you have a right to vote....a slave doesn't
Why can't a slave vote?
Not worthy of a response
 
Speaking of owning other human beings.. what about that 16th amendment. What about that civil war amendment that lets government take your life, your liberty, and your property for the good of the cause.

You obviously have no idea about what you are babbling about
What's the difference between government taking your income, property, and life via "due process" of law, and a slave owner taking your income, property, and life via "due process" of law? Can you elaborate on the difference?
Constitution says Congress has authority to levy taxes. Your state signed up to it

The "difference" is you have a right to vote....a slave doesn't
Why can't a slave vote?
Not worthy of a response
Is that why women couldn't vote... they were slaves?
 
Washington: Established the office as it was intended to be.
Lincoln: Preserved the Union.
FDR: Wartime president record outweighs any concerns over the expansion of government
Reagan: Cold war ended on Bush 1's tour, but he started the fire
Eisenhower: Highways and the start of the Civil rights movement.
 
There are many good Presidents. Here are my top five:

George Washington: Started it all. Humble, intelligent, unbelievably gifted. Imagine how fragile everything was at the beginning.
Abraham Lincoln: The very definition of courage and leadership.
Franklin Roosevelt: The right man at the right time. Remember his words to the Joint Chiefs before they come up with Doolittle's raid?
Ronald Reagan: Turned around the disaster that was Jimmy Carter. Started the fire that destroyed the Soviet Union.
Theodore Roosevelt: Talked tough and backed it up right when we needed it. Colonial Europe feared this man.

Honorable Mentions: Dwight Eisenhower, Andrew Jackson, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson.
 
The Confederate traitors started the war. Everything that followed is on their unworthy heads.

Using that logic, Truman's dropping two a-bombs on a defenseless nation, killing thousands of women and children, was justified because Japan started the war by attacking US military bases....

If you want to go to extremes, by your reasoning every single death of any Japanese person during ALL of WWII was "bloodthirsty murder" committed by the US President, whoever that may have been.

Do you dispute that the attack on Pearl Harbor marks the point where Japan instigated war with the US?

You have stated Lincoln was justified in committing total war against the South, because the South attacked first. ...

I didn't say that. I said that the war and all it entailed was on the heads of the traitors. As for the "murderous tyrant" bit, read the Gettysburg Address, Lincoln's 2nd Inaugural, or look at his stance on Reconstruction before he was assassinated.

Damned white of him to want to clean up the mess he created.


The "mess" was the fault of the traitorous dogs who were brought to heel.
 
You obviously have no idea about what you are babbling about
What's the difference between government taking your income, property, and life via "due process" of law, and a slave owner taking your income, property, and life via "due process" of law? Can you elaborate on the difference?
Constitution says Congress has authority to levy taxes. Your state signed up to it

The "difference" is you have a right to vote....a slave doesn't
Why can't a slave vote?
Not worthy of a response
Is that why women couldn't vote... they were slaves?


There are not many posters here as hostile to logic as you are, champ.
 
Using that logic, Truman's dropping two a-bombs on a defenseless nation, killing thousands of women and children, was justified because Japan started the war by attacking US military bases....

If you want to go to extremes, by your reasoning every single death of any Japanese person during ALL of WWII was "bloodthirsty murder" committed by the US President, whoever that may have been.

Do you dispute that the attack on Pearl Harbor marks the point where Japan instigated war with the US?

You have stated Lincoln was justified in committing total war against the South, because the South attacked first. ...

I didn't say that. I said that the war and all it entailed was on the heads of the traitors. As for the "murderous tyrant" bit, read the Gettysburg Address, Lincoln's 2nd Inaugural, or look at his stance on Reconstruction before he was assassinated.

Damned white of him to want to clean up the mess he created.


The "mess" was the fault of the traitorous dogs who were brought to heel.

Obama signs an executive order that is so draconian and tyrannical that some of the people rise up and resort to armed resistance, demanding independence.

In your world, Obama is justified in killing them all and destroying their property because they are traitorous dogs...who dared to try leaving the beloved Union.

Do you fail to see how preposterous your position is?

All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state. - Fascist Il Duce
The Union of these States is perpetual. - Statist Abe
 
Last edited:
Obama signs an executive order that is so draconian and tyrannical that some of the people rise up and resort to armed resistance, demanding independence.

Or else you could use the courts to invalidate the order

Your choice I guess
 
Obama signs an executive order that is so draconian and tyrannical that some of the people rise up and resort to armed resistance, demanding independence.

Or else you could use the courts to invalidate the order

Your choice I guess

Good Lord you are ignorant.

Yeah...the South should have used the courts to grant them secession.
 
Obama signs an executive order that is so draconian and tyrannical that some of the people rise up and resort to armed resistance, demanding independence.

Or else you could use the courts to invalidate the order

Your choice I guess

Good Lord you are ignorant.

Yeah...the South should have used the courts to grant them secession.

The south should have used Congress to represent their political views. They should have used the courts to defend their so called "property rights". They should have used a free press to convince Americans that owning other human beings was good for the country

That is what patriotic Americans do

If you fail, you accept the fact that slavery is not acceptable in your country
 
Obama signs an executive order that is so draconian and tyrannical that some of the people rise up and resort to armed resistance, demanding independence.

In your world, Obama is justified in killing them all and destroying their property because they are traitorous dogs...who dared to try leaving the beloved Union.

Do you fail to see how preposterous your position is?

All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state. - Fascist Il Duce
The Union of these States is perpetual. - Statist Abe


a) Those last two quotes are absolutely NOT equivalent, and you know it, you dishonest POS.

b) Lincoln signed no such executive order (quite the contrary), so your analogy is childishly false.

c) Do not attempt to put words in my mouth, you dishonest POS. You are not qualified.
 

Forum List

Back
Top