Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
"Number one, Charleston is in SOUTH Carolina, not North. NC hadn't even seceded yet."
Sooo....as a self-proclaimed spokesperson for buffoons everywhere, you're making an argument that firing on a federal facility is peachy keen if you live nearby.
Nnnnnnnnnnnnnnope. I'm pointing out that your "research" is so shoddy you can't even find the right state. Charleston is nowhere near North Carolina. You don't have a clue what you're talking about. Or as the rest of us call it --- "Wednesday".
3. "Number three (a), the KKK (which was founded AFTER, not DURING, the Civil War) was founded by ex-Confederate soldiers with no political connections..."
Now watch me ram this lie back down your throat:
Liberal historian Eric Foner writes that the Klan was “…a military force serving the interests of the Democratic Party…” Foner, “Reconstruction: America’s Unfinished Revolution, 1863-1877,” p. 425
Once again, as ever before, you edited out part of Foner's text. And the text you edited out was the phrase "in effect". Which means something that has the effect of --- not a direct relationship. And why did you edit that phrase out? Because you're a dishonest lying hack bent on keeping myths on life support.
Now here's the reality --- the Klan was founded on Christmas 1865 by six twentysomething ex-Confederate soldiers, their names being Capt. John B. Kennedy, Capt. John Lester, James Crowe, Richard Reed, Calvin Jones and Frank McCord, in the law office building of Thomas Jones at 205 West Madison Street in Pulaski Tennessee. None of them had any known political affiliations (and Tennessee was at the time disenfranchised anyway). Nor did they found it with a political purpose; in fact they consciously took pains to avoid such connotations.
There it is--- names, dates and places. Go ahead --- just TRY to prove me wrong.
You won't.
4. "Number three (b) Bill Clinton did not "suggest Barack O'bama should be carrying his bags". Prove me wrong,"
Sure....I'll prove you wrong for the fourth time:
"Bill Clinton on Obama: 'A Few Years Ago, This Guy Would Have Been Carrying Our Bags'"
Bill Clinton on Obama: 'A Few Years Ago, This Guy Would Have Been Carrying Our Bags'
And once again the Illiterati regurgitate their illiteracy.
What does the conditional modal auxillary "would have" mean? Does it mean something the speaker actually personally prefers? Do you actually not understand the difference between "would" (Clinton's word) and "should" (yours)? Are you that stupid?
Or just that degree of dishonest lying hack?
Perhaps both.
You can run, but you can't hide.
So saith the Brown Bomber
Jefferson Davis....Democrat
KKK....created to serve Democrats
Bill 'the rapist' Clinton....wished for darkies carrying his bags.....but not getting the nomination over his wife, the congenital liar.
Those are the fact....
Oh....one more fact: you're a dunce.
To you christians maybe...not me.no thanks. god doesn't exist so it shall stay like it is.The ego on this one is HILARIOUS. She thinks she is gods gift to the world because she can write long posts and put lots of goofy links in them....LOLNothing funnier than a YANKEE trying to tell us who the War for Southern Independence started. Hilarious.
Now....how the Civil War began?
a. Major Robert Anderson and 85 men were stranded in Fort Sumter.
b. Surrounding him were hundreds of militiamen and coastal guns.
c. Lincoln refused to give the fort up, but the fort was running out of food: if he sent a supply convoy into Charleston Bay, he would be blamed for starting the war.....but how could he give in, and give up the fort?
d. William Seward tried to undermine Lincoln....telling Lincoln to give up the fort for 'goodwill.'
e. On April 5, Lincoln dispatched a fleet of supply ships with the proviso that was relayed to Jefferson Davis: the vessels would be unarmed, with the only cargo "food for hungry men."
f. Firing on the defenseless ships would have been an act of war by the Confederacy.
g. On Tuesday, April 9, Davis held a cabinet meeting, deciding on war. Three days later, and hours before the ships would arrive....the Southern forces attacked the fort.
"Double Death: The True Story of Pryce Lewis, the Civil War's Most Daring Spy,"by Gavin Mortimer, p.70-71
The First Battle of Fort Sumter opened on April 12, 1861, when Confederate artillery fired on the Union garrisonhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Sumter
Wipe the drool off your chin, and take notes.
Capitalize 'God' and you come closer to being accurate than any of your other posts.
It's "God" and just about all participants in The Civil War recognized that much. Maybe not Sherman.
What's that movie? "Of Gods and Generals" I hope my memory serves me right.
no thanks. god doesn't exist so it shall stay like it is.The ego on this one is HILARIOUS. She thinks she is gods gift to the world because she can write long posts and put lots of goofy links in them....LOLNothing funnier than a YANKEE trying to tell us who the War for Southern Independence started. Hilarious.
Now....how the Civil War began?
a. Major Robert Anderson and 85 men were stranded in Fort Sumter.
b. Surrounding him were hundreds of militiamen and coastal guns.
c. Lincoln refused to give the fort up, but the fort was running out of food: if he sent a supply convoy into Charleston Bay, he would be blamed for starting the war.....but how could he give in, and give up the fort?
d. William Seward tried to undermine Lincoln....telling Lincoln to give up the fort for 'goodwill.'
e. On April 5, Lincoln dispatched a fleet of supply ships with the proviso that was relayed to Jefferson Davis: the vessels would be unarmed, with the only cargo "food for hungry men."
f. Firing on the defenseless ships would have been an act of war by the Confederacy.
g. On Tuesday, April 9, Davis held a cabinet meeting, deciding on war. Three days later, and hours before the ships would arrive....the Southern forces attacked the fort.
"Double Death: The True Story of Pryce Lewis, the Civil War's Most Daring Spy,"by Gavin Mortimer, p.70-71
The First Battle of Fort Sumter opened on April 12, 1861, when Confederate artillery fired on the Union garrisonhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Sumter
Wipe the drool off your chin, and take notes.
Capitalize 'God' and you come closer to being accurate than any of your other posts.
Well, then....all of your posts are equally inaccurate.
When your IQ reaches 50 you should sell.
The reason the South seceded was, indeed, over slavery.The Yankees did with their tariffs. They gonna tax people in country to buy a product that they need.
That's really the main reason.
Pay no attention to the secession documents of most of the Southern states, which specifically stated they were seceding over slavery.
Yes, there was an economic issue, concerning an economy based on slavery. It always comes back to the slavery, no matter how you try to get away from it.
Not at all. Just curiously observing you go nuts on the Internet.Take a Midol, dear. You'll feel better. Perhaps then you'll stop making death threats to people who disagree with you.What you try to hide behind 'name-calling' is more correctly described as correctly identifying dunces like you.
Before you next post, you should consider asking yourself” Do I really want the word ‘moron’ in my obituary?”
Shaking in your paper slippers, huh?
I learned a long time ago that a common mistake modern people make is assuming more ancient people think just like their modern selves. That's not true. When watching Marshall Dillon on "Gunsmoke", we aren't watching a 19th Century man, but a 20th Century man in a 19th Century setting.Whose premises would those be? You mean the Federal installation build and maintained by Federal funds? I suppose you would be ok with our current Federal government just freely handing over our installations today, eh?
Whose premises would those be? You mean the Federal installation build and maintained by Federal funds? I suppose you would be ok with our current Federal government just freely handing over our installations today, eh?Who refused to vacate the premises first? Who invaded whom?Who fired first?The tyrant Lincoln started it. Plain Simple Fact!
http://iahushua.com/hist/lincoln.html
DOPL: Why The War Was Started
Lincoln Provoked the War
You've got it ass backwards, the Democratic party is the party of slavery.Conservatives make excuses for their ongoing support of the slavers. Film at 11.
Oh, there was a treaty to give up federal installations in the South? Can you link to said treaty, plz?Whose premises would those be? You mean the Federal installation build and maintained by Federal funds? I suppose you would be ok with our current Federal government just freely handing over our installations today, eh?Who refused to vacate the premises first? Who invaded whom?Who fired first?The tyrant Lincoln started it. Plain Simple Fact!
http://iahushua.com/hist/lincoln.html
DOPL: Why The War Was Started
Lincoln Provoked the War
You mean like the Panama Canal?
AKA The War of Northern Aggression.
Yet I just proved that the South started it.
Try again.
You didn't prove jack shit, except that you are a damn idiot. And the rant about the Democratic party was beyond stupid. But two can play that game. Yep, Lincoln's Republican party is the same as the Republican party of today. The whole slavery issue and the idea that the North supported the freedom of slaves is historical revisionism at it's worse and just as accurate as the claim the Republican party of today is for the working man. Five years after the war, Lysander Spooner, an abolitionist,
“All these cries of having ‘abolished slavery,’ of having ‘saved the country,’ of having ‘preserved the Union,’ of establishing a ‘government of consent,’ and of ‘maintaining the national honor’ are all gross, shameless, transparent cheats—so transparent that they ought to deceive no one.”
That was five years after the war and here you are. more than 150 years later attempting to perpetuate the same bullshit. Don't like Spooner, how about Charles Dickens--a strong opponent of slavery.
“The Northern onslaught upon slavery is no more than a piece of specious humbug disguised to conceal its desire for economic control of the United States.
It was all about economic control. The North was more than happy to allow slavery as long as the North got the bulk of the value of the slave's production. Just as the Republican party is happy to allow legal abortion as long as the wealthy get to continue to manipulate the tax code. Lincoln was not about the "will of the people". Lincoln was all about the POWER of the federal government. He famously jumped out of a second story window to avoid a quorum call in order to protect railroad subsidies while serving in the Illinois legislature. He suspended Habeas Corpus, locked up dissenting newspaper editors, and even attempted to have a justice of the Supreme Court arrested simply for ruling against him. He was a despot and, more than any other individual, he DESTROYED the nation that the founders established and returned it back to England.
Clean up your language and re-submit this, and I'll rip you to shreds.
"is"? Then the GOP is the party of scandal and crooks like Grant, Harding and Nixon. This is fun. Can we play some more?You've got it ass backwards, the Democratic party is the party of slavery.Conservatives make excuses for their ongoing support of the slavers. Film at 11.
Oh, there was a treaty to give up federal installations in the South? Can you link to said treaty, plz?Whose premises would those be? You mean the Federal installation build and maintained by Federal funds? I suppose you would be ok with our current Federal government just freely handing over our installations today, eh?Who refused to vacate the premises first? Who invaded whom?Who fired first?The tyrant Lincoln started it. Plain Simple Fact!
http://iahushua.com/hist/lincoln.html
DOPL: Why The War Was Started
Lincoln Provoked the War
You mean like the Panama Canal?
But you bring up a good point...if the con-federates hadn't been so amazingly stupid, they might have, over time, negotiated thru treaty to get Sumter for themselves.
Why the Civil War ended:
Sherman's brutality. Lincoln condoned it, too. I know black people whose relatives told them all about it. They're not real accommodating to Northeners.
AKA The War of Northern Aggression.
Yet I just proved that the South started it.
Try again.
You didn't prove jack shit, except that you are a damn idiot. And the rant about the Democratic party was beyond stupid. But two can play that game. Yep, Lincoln's Republican party is the same as the Republican party of today. The whole slavery issue and the idea that the North supported the freedom of slaves is historical revisionism at it's worse and just as accurate as the claim the Republican party of today is for the working man. Five years after the war, Lysander Spooner, an abolitionist,
“All these cries of having ‘abolished slavery,’ of having ‘saved the country,’ of having ‘preserved the Union,’ of establishing a ‘government of consent,’ and of ‘maintaining the national honor’ are all gross, shameless, transparent cheats—so transparent that they ought to deceive no one.”
That was five years after the war and here you are. more than 150 years later attempting to perpetuate the same bullshit. Don't like Spooner, how about Charles Dickens--a strong opponent of slavery.
“The Northern onslaught upon slavery is no more than a piece of specious humbug disguised to conceal its desire for economic control of the United States.
It was all about economic control. The North was more than happy to allow slavery as long as the North got the bulk of the value of the slave's production. Just as the Republican party is happy to allow legal abortion as long as the wealthy get to continue to manipulate the tax code. Lincoln was not about the "will of the people". Lincoln was all about the POWER of the federal government. He famously jumped out of a second story window to avoid a quorum call in order to protect railroad subsidies while serving in the Illinois legislature. He suspended Habeas Corpus, locked up dissenting newspaper editors, and even attempted to have a justice of the Supreme Court arrested simply for ruling against him. He was a despot and, more than any other individual, he DESTROYED the nation that the founders established and returned it back to England.
Clean up your language and re-submit this, and I'll rip you to shreds.
Yeah, and if you didn't have your good shirt on you would whoop my ass. What a joke. How about you just provide a rebuttal to Charles Dickens.
The Northern onslaught upon slavery is no more than a piece of specious humbug disguised to conceal its desire for economic control of the United States.
And honestly, it takes a damn fool to make the argument that the Republican Party of the middle 19th Century is the same as the Republican Party today. What about tariffs? Who is for free trade now. is it the democrats? The Republican platform of 1860 said nothing about banning slavery, only about containing it. However it did provide strong support for the Transcontinental Railroad--so is the Republican Party supporting bullet trains today? NO. That same 1860 Republican platform also strongly advocated a Homestead Act giving FREE LAND to settlers. Today's Republican party believes in taking land from settlers and giving it to industry.
You want more?
yer looking at a complete redo, but the model is so old, no reusable parts are available, eh...April 12, 1861....the bloodiest war in our history began.
1. 1861 Civil War begins as Confederates fire on Fort Sumter, Charleston, NC, capturing it on April 14. Lincoln calls for 75,000 volunteers on April 15. General P. G. T. Beauregard led the attack on Ft. Sumter. The fort’s commander was Major Robert Anderson, a former slave owner who stayed loyal to the USA. The fort fell in 34 hours.
2. The President of the Confederacy, Jefferson Davis served as a Democratic U.S. senator from Mississippi and as Secretary of War under Franklin Pierce before his election as the president of the secessionist Confederate States of America.
Although he was later indicted for treason, he was never tried.
3. As a Democrat, he represents the personification of the political views of his party up to and including today.
The Republican party was created to resist, and remove, the stain of slavery from America. While the Democrats have always supported and advanced slavery, segregation and second-class citizenship for black Americans, they have been able to convince the less astute of the very opposite.
a. The KKK was a Democrat subsidiary....FDR made a KKKer his first Supreme Court nominee
b. Bill Clinton enforced flying the Confederate Flag during his entire Arkansas governorship.....and even suggested that Barack Obama should be carrying his bags in 2008.
4. Now....how the Civil War began?
a. Major Robert Anderson and 85 men were stranded in Fort Sumter.
b. Surrounding him were hundreds of militiamen and coastal guns.
c. Lincoln refused to give the fort up, but the fort was running out of food: if he sent a supply convoy into Charleston Bay, he would be blamed for starting the war.....but how could he give in, and give up the fort?
d. William Seward tried to undermine Lincoln....telling Lincoln to give up the fort for 'goodwill.'
e. On April 5, Lincoln dispatched a fleet of supply ships with the proviso that was relayed to Jefferson Davis: the vessels would be unarmed, with the only cargo "food for hungry men."
f. Firing on the defenseless ships would have been an act of war by the Confederacy.
g. On Tuesday, April 9, Davis held a cabinet meeting, deciding on war. Three days later, and hours before the ships would arrive....the Southern forces attacked the fort.
"Double Death: The True Story of Pryce Lewis, the Civil War's Most Daring Spy,"by Gavin Mortimer, p.70-71
The First Battle of Fort Sumter opened on April 12, 1861, when Confederate artillery fired on the Union garrisonhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Sumter
Number one, Charleston is in SOUTH Carolina, not North. NC hadn't even seceded yet.
That would be the same South Carolina where upstarts were crying for secession as far back as 1828 due to what they called the "Tariff of Abominations".
Number two, while Jefferson Davis had been a Democrat before that time, that party's 1860 convention was disrupted to the point of suspension (in that same city, Charleston SOUTH Carolina) resulting in a schism where the party went on without the South and nominated Stephen Douglas (of the famed Lincoln-Douglas debates). When the dust settled and the 1860 votes were counted, Douglas the Democrat had won the same number of electoral votes in the South as had Lincoln --- which was zero.
After coming in fourth in that election Douglas actively worked with the President-elect to try to hold the Union together, though he didn't live much longer.
So it's more than disingenuous to pretend Davis or anyone else in the Confederate cause were representative of a political party they had already split from. Moreover in the next election, held after the war began, Lincoln chose a Democrat as his running mate and the two of them declared themselves affiliates of the National Union Party, which stood for Union. Johnson's home state of Tennessee had voted for the Constitutional Union Party candidate John Bell, which stood for the same thing.
Number three (a), the KKK (which was founded AFTER, not DURING, the Civil War) was founded by ex-Confederate soldiers with no political connections and became essentially a continuation of "night patrols" which had been running since at least the 18th century. One of literally dozens of such groups to spring up at the same time.
Number three (b) Bill Clinton did not "suggest Barack O'bama should be carrying his bags". Prove me wrong,
Care to start all over, or you wanna just go with a complete engine overhaul?
Great American Hero, why do you ask?AKA The War of Northern Aggression.
Yet I just proved that the South started it.
Try again.
So, what's your opinion of General Sherman?
Great American Hero, why do you ask?AKA The War of Northern Aggression.
Yet I just proved that the South started it.
Try again.
So, what's your opinion of General Sherman?
Except for Tammany political machine affiliation, it actually did help to pass some of the new reform by regulations(a word the GOP extremist like to disassociate with now) In the latter 1900's till their demise..and the Tammany political machine included dems and GOP, more GOP than dems since dems were the conservative side of the coin then.AKA The War of Northern Aggression.
Yet I just proved that the South started it.
Try again.
You didn't prove jack shit, except that you are a damn idiot. And the rant about the Democratic party was beyond stupid. But two can play that game. Yep, Lincoln's Republican party is the same as the Republican party of today. The whole slavery issue and the idea that the North supported the freedom of slaves is historical revisionism at it's worse and just as accurate as the claim the Republican party of today is for the working man. Five years after the war, Lysander Spooner, an abolitionist,
“All these cries of having ‘abolished slavery,’ of having ‘saved the country,’ of having ‘preserved the Union,’ of establishing a ‘government of consent,’ and of ‘maintaining the national honor’ are all gross, shameless, transparent cheats—so transparent that they ought to deceive no one.”
That was five years after the war and here you are. more than 150 years later attempting to perpetuate the same bullshit. Don't like Spooner, how about Charles Dickens--a strong opponent of slavery.
“The Northern onslaught upon slavery is no more than a piece of specious humbug disguised to conceal its desire for economic control of the United States.
It was all about economic control. The North was more than happy to allow slavery as long as the North got the bulk of the value of the slave's production. Just as the Republican party is happy to allow legal abortion as long as the wealthy get to continue to manipulate the tax code. Lincoln was not about the "will of the people". Lincoln was all about the POWER of the federal government. He famously jumped out of a second story window to avoid a quorum call in order to protect railroad subsidies while serving in the Illinois legislature. He suspended Habeas Corpus, locked up dissenting newspaper editors, and even attempted to have a justice of the Supreme Court arrested simply for ruling against him. He was a despot and, more than any other individual, he DESTROYED the nation that the founders established and returned it back to England.
Clean up your language and re-submit this, and I'll rip you to shreds.
Yeah, and if you didn't have your good shirt on you would whoop my ass. What a joke. How about you just provide a rebuttal to Charles Dickens.
The Northern onslaught upon slavery is no more than a piece of specious humbug disguised to conceal its desire for economic control of the United States.
And honestly, it takes a damn fool to make the argument that the Republican Party of the middle 19th Century is the same as the Republican Party today. What about tariffs? Who is for free trade now. is it the democrats? The Republican platform of 1860 said nothing about banning slavery, only about containing it. However it did provide strong support for the Transcontinental Railroad--so is the Republican Party supporting bullet trains today? NO. That same 1860 Republican platform also strongly advocated a Homestead Act giving FREE LAND to settlers. Today's Republican party believes in taking land from settlers and giving it to industry.
You want more?
Indeed. The RP of that time was the party of big gummint, a legacy it inherited from the Whigs that largely populated it. And it was the haven of Liberalism by virtue of its sympathy to Abolition. All that changed by the turn of the century when it started taking on the interests of the wealthy and the corporations while the Democrats absorbed the Populist party and movement.
Armchair wags on this site like to sit and pretend a term like "Republican" or "Democrat" means the same things today that it did in 1865. Not even close.
So there was welfare back then..Why the Civil War ended:
Sherman's brutality. Lincoln condoned it, too. I know black people whose relatives told them all about it. They're not real accommodating to Northeners.
Sherman swept through the South freeing slaves as he went. 40 acres and a mule--that is what those newly freed slaves got, until after the war. In fact, all the land east of I-95 from the Carolina border through most of Florida was granted to those newly freed slaves, and then promptly taken away and returned to the slaveholders after the war. No damn wonder the descendants are not accommodating, it was Yankees that took away their land. Yeah, the war was all about slavery. What a freakin joke. Look in to those newly freed slaves, look at what they wrote after the war--most of them openly admitted to being better off under the Confederacy.
Here is the deal. In 1910 Blacks owned around 15 million acres of farmland in the United States. They own less than half that amount today.
