Celebrating Robert E. Lee's Birthday Today Brings Out Southern Pride And Patriotism

[JakeStarkey]

more lies and once again jake can't produce the post....because it doesn't exist he knows i attacked his lie, not his position

Since there was no lie, you are lying about not attacking my position.

Every day in every way when you post you validate my sig.

see post 97

and i love your sig, it only proves daily you're a liar

You can't win for losing. This is just too easy.

 

[Whig_Out]

I didn't want to kill any brain cells so I didn't read anything past the first post in the thread....but someone please tell me that the racist scumbag that posted this thread with the obviously racist avatar is arguing that they are not racist and it's all about Southern Pride. That'd be a good chuckle.

 

[Yurt]

Since there was no lie, you are lying about not attacking my position.

Every day in every way when you post you validate my sig.

see post 97

and i love your sig, it only proves daily you're a liar

You can't win for losing. This is just too easy.

how did i lose? i just showed that i attacked your lie, not your position....

 

[Whig_Out]

You are both arguing on the internet with out sources or any debating skills. Pretty sure both of you fucking idiots are losing right now.

 

[Yurt]

You are both arguing on the internet with out sources or any debating skills. Pretty sure both of you fucking idiots are losing right now.

pssssssst...i actually linked to the post he is referring to.

you just proved you're a fucking idiot

 

[Whig_Out]

You are both arguing on the internet with out sources or any debating skills. Pretty sure both of you fucking idiots are losing right now.

pssssssst...i actually linked to the post he is referring to.

you just proved you're a fucking idiot

Sheesh. Sources, you know from articles, academic journals, etc. God damn you people are pathetic here.

 

[Yurt]

You are both arguing on the internet with out sources or any debating skills. Pretty sure both of you fucking idiots are losing right now.

pssssssst...i actually linked to the post he is referring to.

you just proved you're a fucking idiot

Sheesh. Sources, you know from articles, academic journals, etc. God damn you people are pathetic here.

him and i are arguing about a post in this thread moron. he made a claim i said something and his claim is false. why would i cite academic articles? next time pay attention.

 

[JakeStarkey]

see post 97

and i love your sig, it only proves daily you're a liar

You can't win for losing. This is just too easy.

how did i lose? i just showed that i attacked your lie, not your position....

You are my chew toy, programmed to say "you lie, you lie, you lie" at everything I post.

 

[BlindBoo]

Lee's strategy lost the South their bid for independence. He should have taken a lesson from Gen. Washington who knew that his greatest challenge was not victory on the battlefield but in maintaining a fighting force that would eventually wear down the will of the North to continue to fight. Instead he was responsible for death and dishonor.

He lacked the resources to do so and knew it...his best hope (and he came VERY close to pulling it off) was to win the PR fight and cause Lincoln and/or the Republicans to get booted in the 1862 or 1864 elections.

I disagree in that they needed support(resources) from a foreign country. After his humiliating defeat at Gettysburg those chances faded away.

 

[Whig_Out]

him and i are arguing about a post in this thread moron. he made a claim i said something and his claim is false. why would i cite academic articles? next time pay attention.

And it never dawns on you that that makes you two even more pathetic? Arguing about a post on the internet. Golden. Please keep the entertainment coming.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Whig Out has found a new playmate, Yurt.

 

[Yurt]

You can't win for losing. This is just too easy.

how did i lose? i just showed that i attacked your lie, not your position....

You are my chew toy, programmed to say "you lie, you lie, you lie" at everything I post.

at least you admit you lied.

that's all needed, thanks.

 

[Yurt]

him and i are arguing about a post in this thread moron. he made a claim i said something and his claim is false. why would i cite academic articles? next time pay attention.

And it never dawns on you that that makes you two even more pathetic? Arguing about a post on the internet. Golden. Please keep the entertainment coming.

and you're adding so much value whining about it.

hilarious.

 

[BlindBoo]

State Sovereignty is immoral now?



Fucking history flunkies. Jeebus.

If the Civil War was fought, as you claim, over state's rights, why did the constitution of the CSA not support state's rights?

In fact, that constitution allowed no state the right to emancipate slaves. In fact, no state could even be admitted into the CSA unless it agreed to maintain slavery always.

And the idea of a state's right to secede was specifically and emphatically denied by that constitution.

Dude, you really need to read a history book.

Did you know that Gen. Ulysses Grant owned slaves even after the war? And he didn't free them until the 13th Amendment was passed.

Bottom line the war was fought over money.

Slaves were about three times as expensive as a good horse. So in that aspect you are correct. However the South seceded over their rights to enslave an entire race of people.

 

[Asclepias]

If the Civil War was fought, as you claim, over state's rights, why did the constitution of the CSA not support state's rights?

In fact, that constitution allowed no state the right to emancipate slaves. In fact, no state could even be admitted into the CSA unless it agreed to maintain slavery always.

And the idea of a state's right to secede was specifically and emphatically denied by that constitution.

Dude, you really need to read a history book.

Did you know that Gen. Ulysses Grant owned slaves even after the war? And he didn't free them until the 13th Amendment was passed.

Bottom line the war was fought over money.

Slaves were about three times as expensive as a good horse. So in that aspect you are correct. However the South seceded over their rights to enslave an entire race of people.

I thought the hill billy traitors lost the war. Why are people celebrating traitors?

You are dead on that the south seceded over slavery. It's in their articles of secession and the corner stone address for all to see.

Cornerstone Speech - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Stephens' March 1861 speech declared that African slavery was the "immediate cause" of secession, and that the Confederate Constitution had put to rest the "agitating questions" as to the "proper status of the negro in our form of civilization".

Declaration of Causes of Secession

 

[BlindBoo]

The confederates had no intention of allowing slavery to extinguish itself.

90% of every dollar was directly or indirectly tied up with the cotton industry, which rested on slavery.

And any day that slavery existed in North America was an extra day of sordid infamy.

Fake, i realize you're a dumb fuck, but technology was already creating the conditions for outdating slave labor. Whether the confederacy liked it or not, it was well established that slavery was a dying institution.

The first patent on a Cotton Picker machine was 1933…


Who's the dumbfuck now?

Just a cotton picking minute...........

They would have used slaves to run'em if they could. Just like the Cotton Gin.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

If the Civil War was fought, as you claim, over state's rights, why did the constitution of the CSA not support state's rights?

In fact, that constitution allowed no state the right to emancipate slaves. In fact, no state could even be admitted into the CSA unless it agreed to maintain slavery always.

And the idea of a state's right to secede was specifically and emphatically denied by that constitution.

Dude, you really need to read a history book.

Did you know that Gen. Ulysses Grant owned slaves even after the war? And he didn't free them until the 13th Amendment was passed.

Bottom line the war was fought over money.

Slaves were about three times as expensive as a good horse. So in that aspect you are correct. However the South seceded over their rights to enslave an entire race of people.

I guess the black slave owners wanted that too.

 

[Asclepias]

Dude, you really need to read a history book.

Did you know that Gen. Ulysses Grant owned slaves even after the war? And he didn't free them until the 13th Amendment was passed.

Bottom line the war was fought over money.

Slaves were about three times as expensive as a good horse. So in that aspect you are correct. However the South seceded over their rights to enslave an entire race of people.

I guess the black slave owners wanted that too.

Believe it or not there were sellouts back then as well as now. Also not all Black slave owners wanted this. Most black slave owners owned family members to keep them from being claimed by white southerners.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

Happy birthday Gen!

 

[BlindBoo]

Dude, you really need to read a history book.

Did you know that Gen. Ulysses Grant owned slaves even after the war? And he didn't free them until the 13th Amendment was passed.

Bottom line the war was fought over money.

Slaves were about three times as expensive as a good horse. So in that aspect you are correct. However the South seceded over their rights to enslave an entire race of people.

I guess the black slave owners wanted that too.

The fact that there were black slave owners does not negate the fact that the South seceded from the Union to protect the Institution of Slavery.