100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Why do Democrats deny their direct ties to slavery and take | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
From The Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union
The people of the State of South Carolina, in Convention assembled, on the 26th day of April, A.D., 1852, declared that the frequent violations of the Constitution of the United States, by the Federal Government, and its encroachments upon the reserved rights of the States, fully justified this State in then withdrawing from the Federal Union; but in deference to the opinions and wishes of the other slaveholding States, she forbore at that time to exercise this right. Since that time, these encroachments have continued to increase, and further forbearance ceases to be a virtue this was absolutely initiated by a common pro slavery sentiment It was about states rights , at that time the right in danger was to have slaves... I dont know why people cant tie the two together or wont |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When Lincoln finally wrote the emancipation Proclamation it was for use as a weapon and only pertained to the slaves in southern states at first. He hoped it would cause an uprising of slaves in the south to disrupt the confederate army at their rear. It didnt work. it's quite a talent to read the mind of a dead man! LOL It's factual history. You won't find any of that on a Republican blog which caters to the opinion of Ann Colder. 
You should try reading history. American history. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seriously, does anyone really believe the uprising,, civil war, had nothing to do with the threat against slavery? Most southerners didnt even own slaves. Esp the poor ones who volunteered to fight. Besides, slavery was still legal in the North. Wow,,, ok and Ronny,,,this statement "Republicans are not racists, poeple are racists" is 100 percent correct. I believe that racism is not political but personal and can be found on both sides. I just think that most people are under the impressiont that social programs mostly benefit minority groups and therefore the taxpayers who do happen to be racists against these groups are more likely to align themselves with the republican party which generally opposes such programs. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From The Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union The people of the State of South Carolina, in Convention assembled, on the 26th day of April, A.D., 1852, declared that the frequent violations of the Constitution of the United States, by the Federal Government, and its encroachments upon the reserved rights of the States, fully justified this State in then withdrawing from the Federal Union; but in deference to the opinions and wishes of the other slaveholding States, she forbore at that time to exercise this right. Since that time, these encroachments have continued to increase, and further forbearance ceases to be a virtue this was absolutely initiated by a common pro slavery sentiment It was about states rights , at that time the right in danger was to have slaves... I dont know why people cant tie the two together or wont That was SC. And slavery was entitled under the Constitution then. SC and the 2 others could not have iniated a Civil war by themself. NC, Tenn, VA, and many other southern states did not secede until Fed troops fired their first shots at Ft Sumter, SC. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seriously, does anyone really believe the uprising,, civil war, had nothing to do with the threat against slavery? Most southerners didnt even own slaves. Esp the poor ones who volunteered to fight. Besides, slavery was still legal in the North. Wow,,, ok and Ronny,,,this statement "Republicans are not racists, poeple are racists" is 100 percent correct. I believe that racism is not political but personal and can be found on both sides. I just think that most people are under the impressiont that social programs mostly benefit minority groups and therefore the taxpayers who do happen to be racists against these groups are more likely to align themselves with the republican party which generally opposes such programs. It's fact! Less than 25% owned slaves. Most Southerners were too poor to own them. Only the rich could afford them. Check it out if you don't believe it! Those poor Southern soldiers marching and fighting without shoes did not own slaves and did not fight for slavery. If you're going to tell someone they're right you should at least know the facts. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Slaves were not freed, even in the North until the war was over. 1865! the slaves where not freed at all! abraham lincoln was assisinated and his vice president a Democrat took over and un did much of what lincoln acheived, so blacks where left to fend for their selves for another 100 years under oppression! Not to mention an ignorant republican party gave in to the democrat party and allowed them to begin passing laws that further enslaved blacks they just called it something different! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It would be historically inaccurate to say that slavery was not a part of the conflict.
The ideology of slavery, which is complex, was ingrained deeply in people even if they did not own slaves. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOL
Don't tell me you thought all southerners were plantation owners like in the movies. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
damn i wont argue anymore your not gonna admit your wrong but here is an actual interveiw with him! http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Interview_with_Nathan_Bedford_Forrest Nathan Bedford Forrest's own words! Geez democrats just won't admit when they are wrong, if you can't see your wrong There really is not anything left to say!  
He did not say he was a democrat...lol So you proved nothing yet again. Why do you want to lie anyway? My word set down the koolaid for a second please! I quote! Feeling towards Uncle Sam "What are your feelings towards the federal government, general?" "I loved the old government in 1861. I loved the old Constitution yet. I think it is the best government in the world, if administered as it was before the war. I do not hate it; I am opposing now only the radical revolutionists who are trying to destroy it. I believe that party to be composed, as I know it is in Tennessee, of the worst men on Gods earth-men who would not hesitate at no crime, and who have only one object in view-to enrich themselves." Who could he possibly be talking about? Keep in mind he is a confederate General! Take a deep breath and except it! Do you want the actual registartion slip to know that he was a registered democrat? Evidence is just that evidence so who is lying? He says "that party" Which party is he refering to? The republican party obviously! The founder of the KKK you stated he was! A confederate general! so whom is he refering too? Who does the KKK founder mean when he says he hates that party? 2+2 equals 4 so you stop lying! You haven't proven your point yet. I am still waiting. Democrats did not start the KKK. Yes i did exactly that! The ties of the democrat party to the creation of the KKK is quite abundant. But last I checked the KKK wasn't giving up documents! The relization the accused founder states he is a democrat prior to the war and after kinda points that out! Not to mention the legislation they passed after the war! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
damn i wont argue anymore your not gonna admit your wrong but here is an actual interveiw with him! http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Interview_with_Nathan_Bedford_Forrest Nathan Bedford Forrest's own words! Geez democrats just won't admit when they are wrong, if you can't see your wrong There really is not anything left to say!
He did not say he was a democrat...lol So you proved nothing yet again. Why do you want to lie anyway? My word set down the koolaid for a second please! I quote! Feeling towards Uncle Sam "What are your feelings towards the federal government, general?" "I loved the old government in 1861. I loved the old Constitution yet. I think it is the best government in the world, if administered as it was before the war. I do not hate it; I am opposing now only the radical revolutionists who are trying to destroy it. I believe that party to be composed, as I know it is in Tennessee, of the worst men on Gods earth-men who would not hesitate at no crime, and who have only one object in view-to enrich themselves." Who could he possibly be talking about? Keep in mind he is a confederate General! Take a deep breath and except it! Do you want the actual registartion slip to know that he was a registered democrat? Evidence is just that evidence so who is lying? He says "that party" Which party is he refering to? The republican party obviously! The founder of the KKK you stated he was! A confederate general! so whom is he refering too? Who does the KKK founder mean when he says he hates that party? 2+2 equals 4 so you stop lying! You haven't proven your point yet. I am still waiting. Democrats did not start the KKK. Yes i did exactly that! The ties of the democrat party to the creation of the KKK is quite abundant. But last I checked the KKK wasn't giving up documents! The relization the accused founder states he is a democrat prior to the war and after kinda points that out! Not to mention the legislation they passed after the war! No you did not show that the KKK was started by the democrats. You did not prove it, show it or demonstrate it at all. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Slaves were not freed, even in the North until the war was over. 1865! the slaves where not freed at all! abraham lincoln was assisinated and his vice president a Democrat took over and un did much of what lincoln acheived, so blacks where left to fend for their selves for another 100 years under oppression! Not to mention an ignorant republican party gave in to the democrat party and allowed them to begin passing laws that further enslaved blacks they just called it something different! Exactly! So how can the North claim they were fighting to free the slaves without even freeing their own? It's a case of the victor trying to write their version of history. Thank God the Republicans couldn't take away free speech. The history and truth is still there. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know after reading through the original post again. The original Republicans would be ASHAMED of their descendents today, wouldn't they have???? So sad to see the degeneration of a good party like that. well my sentiment is the same! However you made my point! The party is completely the same, no changes have been made really. The only difference is they don't follow thru with their promises! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seriously, does anyone really believe the uprising,, civil war, had nothing to do with the threat against slavery? Most southerners didnt even own slaves. Esp the poor ones who volunteered to fight. Besides, slavery was still legal in the North. Yeah and most slaves where sold by balck men in africa right? why do you justify the south's sin of killing and inslaving a race of people? The civil war was about two countries one beleived in slavery and one did not. White America did not want to go to war for it thats why Lincoln was such an unpopular president! But the reality was at least the north was moving away from slavery and the south resisted and it became a point where War had to come! the North would have withered away with a border country with free labor and the south would have conquered the north if given time. It was all about slavery! Man you missed all the history classes. Northerners owned slaves too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There was more to the civil war than just slavery, yes.
But slavery was a catalyst too. The people who believed in slavery, whether they owned slave or not, felt that people were trying to force change. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOL Don't tell me you thought all southerners were plantation owners like in the movies. lol... no thats just your complete fabrication as in your opinion of the facts! I also know this is not your idea! It is part of the communist propaganda of the sixties and you read it and decided to drink the koolaid! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know after reading through the original post again. The original Republicans would be ASHAMED of their descendents today, wouldn't they have???? So sad to see the degeneration of a good party like that. well my sentiment is the same! However you made my point! The party is completely the same, no changes have been made really. The only difference is they don't follow thru with their promises! The party is completely different now and a shame to the original party. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The OP source,
About us, HUMAN EVENTS is the news source President Reagan called his "favorite newspaper" and we still hold high the Reaganesque principles of free enterprise, limited government and, above all, a staunch, unwavering defense of American freedom. HUMAN EVENTS gives voice to the great conservative thinkers of our era -- Newt Gingrich, Michelle Malkin, L. Brent Bozell, Terence Jeffrey, Bruce Bartlett, Thomas Sowell, David Limbaugh, Oliver North, Pat Buchanan and many more. HUMAN EVENTS is the periodical in which the peerless Ann Coulter, author of the smash bestseller, Guilty, drives multicultural defeatists up the wall. (Recent sample: "Baby formula doesn't kill people. Islamic fascists kill people.") HUMAN EVENTS is the home of Jihad Watch - the fearless watchdog column that alerts you to the true intentions and deadly plots of the greatest threat to world peace since the fall of the Soviet Union. "Page 3" confronts liberal lawmakers with the kind of tough questions the Big Media won't ask -- and then puts their outrageous answers on record. There's fair and accurate reporting!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Slaves were not freed, even in the North until the war was over. 1865! the slaves where not freed at all! abraham lincoln was assisinated and his vice president a Democrat took over and un did much of what lincoln acheived, so blacks where left to fend for their selves for another 100 years under oppression! Not to mention an ignorant republican party gave in to the democrat party and allowed them to begin passing laws that further enslaved blacks they just called it something different! Exactly! So how can the North claim they were fighting to free the slaves without even freeing their own? It's a case of the victor trying to write their version of history. Thank God the Republicans couldn't take away free speech. The history and truth is still there. well you are mixing the north with republicans and vise versa thats why you keep getting confused! you said exactly as if i was right this time because it fit your agenda but it was not the north that didnt release there slaves it was the democrat politicians that started inacting laws to allow racist white men ways around the laws in the north and the south! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Fanta46
on
Mon 12/07/09 06:20 PM
|
|
It would be historically inaccurate to say that slavery was not a part of the conflict. The ideology of slavery, which is complex, was ingrained deeply in people even if they did not own slaves. No, it wasn't. Most southerners were so poor that other than being held in slavery they related to the slaves plight. Here in the Appalachians they even helped them escape. Many times giving them refuge. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Favorite words used by the uninformed to invoke fear is communist, socialism, fascism and terrorism.
So when you hear those words or read them beware who is telling you because it is usually fear mongering to achieve an underhanded goal. |
|
|
|
|
