what do you mean northen agggression

[williamlayton]

I find no taxes on exported goods---Northern textile mills bought Southern cotton.
Blessings

[Buckskin]

There is very little real truth in this world anymore. Everyone has an agenda or is biased one way or another and interprets the "written proven documents" as they see fit. Otherwise there would be no discussion on this subject.

For instance "THEN AS NOW, THE NORTHERN BUSINESSES WERE RUNNING THE GOVERNMENT."  If that's not a biased opinion, I'm from Pluto.  In my opinion the government and even worse the courts are sliding into a spiraling doom of liberalism and socialistic trends, and in no way do I see Northern Businesses or any businesses controlling our fate.  Because if they were I would expect that our dependence on foreign oil and gas would have been addressed long ago. I assume that "Northern Businesses" would prefer cheaper energy costs and less regulation, no unions, less corporate tax, etc.  If Northern Businesses were in control of the government we wouldn't have the insane amount of waste in government programs and wouldn't be $14,198,839,390,320 (when I checked).

And what's with the CAP'S???

[williamlayton]

Caps are not always shouting. I took the caps as emphasis, not shouting.
I always cap my Subject. Just the way I was taught.
Blessings

[Dee]

There is very little real truth in this world anymore. Everyone has an agenda or is biased one way or another and interprets the "written proven documents" as they see fit. Otherwise there would be no discussion on this subject.

For instance "THEN AS NOW, THE NORTHERN BUSINESSES WERE RUNNING THE GOVERNMENT."  If that's not a biased opinion, I'm from Pluto.  In my opinion the government and even worse the courts are sliding into a spiraling doom of liberalism and socialistic trends, and in no way do I see Northern Businesses or any businesses controlling our fate.  Because if they were I would expect that our dependence on foreign oil and gas would have been addressed long ago. I assume that "Northern Businesses" would prefer cheaper energy costs and less regulation, no unions, less corporate tax, etc.  If Northern Businesses were in control of the government we wouldn't have the insane amount of waste in government programs and wouldn't be $14,198,839,390,320 (when I checked).

And what's with the CAP'S???

As William stated, CAPS are there to be used. Otherwise they wouldn't exist. I use them to zero in on emphasis. As far as the NORTH not running the government. Whom got the GOVERNMENT bailouts THIS TIME? None of us down south got them. The INDUSTRIALISED NORTHERN BUSINESSES, i.e the unions auto workers, and banks, got them. Oops! There go those caps again.

[williamlayton]

Old dogs just hunt by instict.
The winner in all wars profit. Would you have expected the South to benefit. Remember they were as mad as the South.
The most amazing part of the Souths illogic was that the North would just walk away.
Blessings

[Dee]

William, we can beat this one to death, but ME won't. The original agreement with the UNION and the states was they could opt out, if they desired to. What Lincoln did, was dictatorial. Thousand of innocents were slaughtered in the name of Lincoln's war, AND! The number of "white southern non-combative innocents killed, far out numbered the number of blacks freed".
The north SHOULD HAVE WALKED AWAY. The ONLY reason the north did what they did was for GREED OF THE SOUTH'S RESOURCES. I have now said, and made all points to be made in my opinion regarding the issue, according to my personal research on the matter regarding facts. There is nothing else I can say, and it would not change anyone's mind anyway.

[williamlayton]

Now that is what disagreement is all about.
Blessings

[Buckskin]

And I suppose none of the south got any of the obama stimulus money....  I didn't know the south didn't have banks???  Yes, the unions got bailed out, because of the union greed.  If the Northern Businesses really ran things do you think there would be unions???

You have proven my point about opinions being twisted which ever way is necessary...

[Cabin4]

You mean obama's union payback and political pay back money? He stole the tax payers money and gave it to those who supported his bid for the WH.

[Spanky]

You mean obama's union payback and political pay back money? He stole the tax payers money and gave it to those who supported his bid for the WH.

I actually agree with you 100% Avery. It made me wanna puke when the unions held their hand out for their cut. Far as I'm concerned they shouldn't have gotten a thing.



Spanky

[williamlayton]

No nation is going to leave its flanks exposed to a beligerant.
Blessings

[SHOOTALL]

And I suppose none of the south got any of the obama stimulus money....  I didn't know the south didn't have banks???  Yes, the unions got bailed out, because of the union greed.  If the Northern Businesses really ran things do you think there would be unions???

You have proven my point about opinions being twisted which ever way is necessary...

We work close with our bank. We were told they were made to take bail out monet or face audits for many years to come. They put money in safe and returned it as soon as possible un used. OPEN YOUR EYES !

[Buckskin]

You mean obama's union payback and political pay back money? He stole the tax payers money and gave it to those who supported his bid for the WH.

Exactly what I mean.  See we can agree on some things!

[Buckskin]

And I suppose none of the south got any of the obama stimulus money....  I didn't know the south didn't have banks???  Yes, the unions got bailed out, because of the union greed.  If the Northern Businesses really ran things do you think there would be unions???

You have proven my point about opinions being twisted which ever way is necessary...

We work close with our bank. We were told they were made to take bail out monet or face audits for many years to come. They put money in safe and returned it as soon as possible un used. OPEN YOUR EYES !

I have been taught to not believe everything I'm told.  I hold that in high regard, especially when it comes to bankers, lawyers, union members and the likes...  And maybe your bank did the right thing, doesn't mean they all did.  EYES OPEN...

[Cabin4]

Your right, we can agree on some things. There are banks that were literally threatened by the Obama administration that if they did not take the money, they would be faced with a litany of endless red tape. The administration needed to buttress its Union bail out programs and the rhetoric we heard on how evil the bankers are. So they literally forced banks to take money so they could tell the American people, see, even the banks needed a bail out, not just the GM and alike. They were simply trying to run a smoke screen in front of us. And yes, not all banks returned the money yet. We do know that many took large sums and handed it our as bonuses to their employees. There is an excellent record on this with Senator Dodd. He wrote parts of the legislation that allowed the banks to do this. When the Feds approached many of these banks, they told them we don’t need the money so Congress had to give them a means of getting rid of it. This entire bail out project is mostly a complete rape of the tax payer. It was a theft from us, plain & simple. Nothing more than legislative stealing.

[Buckskin]

From the looks of this map, it doesn't look like the south is turning a blind eye to the "free money".

http://www.recovery.gov/Transparency/MapGallery/Pages/inprogress.aspx?status=inProgress&jobsCol=0

This is another site that will probably make you sick, or should anyway.  I picked on Texas, but you can check out any state.

http://stimuluswatch.org/project/by_state/TX

[Cabin4]

I'm not surprised. If you were a governor facing huge budget deficits and either you or your legislature were unwilling to cut spending, you would take it too. A state cannot go bankrupt under our system. BTW: There are politician criminals in the south as well. They are all aver this country raping the American people of not just our treasure, but our Rights.

[Buckskin]

I would do just as Gov. Walker is doing by cutting spending (1.4 billion), dismantling the unions, etc.  He also sent back 860 million to Obama that was going to be used for a train that from Madison to Milwaukee nobody would have used.  Unfortunately instead of putting it back where it came from ZerObama gave it to another state for the same thing.

[SHOOTALL]

We should watch what goes on , it is what is going to happen when more people get on the govt dole and there are not enough workers to support it.

[deronw@gmail.com]

There are so many facts in this thread that are wrong that it should be named a comedy or work of fiction. The civil war absolutely was about slavery. The South has tried to deny that since the civil war but the southern politicians at the time did not.

Slavery was the biggest National issue in the 1840's and 1850's. The idea that the civil war was about state's rights or anything else is fiction. It was about slavery and everyone at the time understood it to be so. In recent times, people embarrassed about that fact have created other reasons for the conflict.

[Cabin4]

There are so many facts in this thread that are wrong that it should be named a comedy or work of fiction. The civil war absolutely was about slavery. The South has tried to deny that since the civil war but the southern politicians at the time did not.

Slavery was the biggest National issue in the 1840's and 1850's. The idea that the civil war was about state's rights or anything else is fiction. It was about slavery and everyone at the time understood it to be so. In recent times, people embarrassed about that fact have created other reasons for the conflict.

All you anti-broke budget tea baggers that are looking out for the countries best interest, your facts are wrong. So lets talk about the civil war! You people in the private sector as tax payers are stupid! Shut up and give me your money! Stop asking questions about how much money I steal from you all! lol

Only from a Union thug could you get that.

[teamnelson]

I actual prefer the term "2nd War for American Independence", since it was ultimately about states rights as PROTECTED (not provided) by the Constitution. For those that think its about slavery, show me where in the Constitution slavery was prohibited? It was up to the states to determine for themselves per the Constitution. Don't let emotivism revise history in your own mind.

If SC refused to recognize Gay marriages performed in other states, would you condone economic sanctions and basing US troops along the SC border to get them to conform? Why was it okay for the issue of slavery, it that was the issue?

[SouthernByGrace]

Great point TN. And it was indeed a 2nd War of American Independence.
If this war was about slavery, Why did it still exist in 9 Northern states DURING the War? If it was about slavery, WHY didn't the Emancipation Proclamation free ALL slaves, instead of NONE? That's right, I said None. It even EXCLUDES those slaves in the North FROM freedom. It couldn't free any slaves in the South because the South was a totally separate country, with its OWN Constitution, (which Forbade the importation of slaves- the US Constitution never has), its own fully functioning government. Read it for yourself, Deron. Don't take my word for it. Look at the 1860 Census to see which states held slaves... If the South had seen the War as being fought over slavery, they never needed to fire a single shot. Slavery had already been legal for 200 years, and as TN stated, was PROTECTED by the Constitution.

Why would the Union invade the Southern states to free their slaves when they held them at the same time? And when only about 6% of Southerners held slaves? I think somebody else needs to read their history.

SBG

[Bugflipper]

Also why was Lincoln's wife Marry allowed to keep slaves until 1882 under executive order if the real issue for war was slavery?

[Cabin4]

"As I was unaware until today, the First Civil War Confiscation Act, signed by Lincoln in 1861, declared that all Confederate property was owned by the Union Government. As discussed by Michael Lindfield in his work, Freedom Under Fire: U.S. Civil Liberties in Times of War (pg 23 and 30-32),
"Property was confiscated from pro-slavery whites; slaves, rather than being freed, originally became the property of the U.S. government [...] To remedy this bizarre situation, General Hunter, Union military commander of Georgia, South Carolina and Florida, issued an order on May 9, 1862 freeing all slaves in areas under his command. Upon hearing of General Hunter's action one week later, President Lincoln immediately revoked the order, thus returning the slaves to their former status as property of the federal government."

Thus, Lincoln - as head of the Union executive branch - played the central role in securing his own share in ownership of confiscated slaves. I would wager to bet that this slice of history was never taught to you in public school?"

[williamlayton]

Slavery was not unprotected by the Constitution--but it was not protected either---it was allowed.
There was a great movement by the people to disallow slavery--by the majority of the people.
England had just gone through this and slavery was banned.
Lincoln had no great zeal for abolishment but he had no great love for it either.
The question is what to do with it---the people were against it.
The turning point in Lincoln's thinking came after he saw how bravely the Negroe units fought against it.
How can anyone demand what the people---and I ma speaking of many in the South also wanted also--wanted to abolish.
It is my opinion that only a limited number in the South wanted to keep slavery and they wanted to expand it.
The problem comes from the perception of what slaves were. Most had been raised to believe that Slaves were inferior and lacking in mental capacity to be free.
It was just the same propaganda in WWII about Jews,poles, Cheks---all southern and eastern Europeans.
Blacks are not inherently inferior morally or mentally just as whites are automatically superior morally and mentally.
Many were led by a few---that is always the case.
Blessings

[SHOOTALL]

good post William , 100 make a profit a million pay the price.

[SouthernByGrace]

The most explicit recognition of private property rights comes in the Fifth Amendment which states "Nor shall [anyone] be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; Nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.

Slaves were private property so ownership of slaves (just one form of private property) is indeed protected by the Constitution. The last time I checked, the Fifth Amendment hadn't been rescinded at the time of the War. And no slaveholder, North or South, ever got compensated for the government taking their private property without due process.

The federal government claimed it didn't owe Robert E. Lee for seizure of Arlington because Mrs. Lee owed $92.07 in property taxes (on property that they illegally occupied). Remember,  Virginia was not part of the United States, but Mrs. Lee sent an agent to pay the taxes anyway. The government refused payment from an agent, requiring Mrs. Lee pay the taxes in person (also an illegal act by the gov't.).
Neither Robert E. Lee, nor his wife, as title holder, ever attempted to publicly recover control of Arlington House. They were buried at Washington University (later renamed Washington and Lee University) where Lee had served as president. The couple never returned to the home George Washington Parke Custis had built and treasured.
After General Lee's death in 1870, George Washington Custis Lee brought an action for ejectment in the Circuit Court of Alexandria (today Arlington) County, Va. Custis Lee, as eldest son of Gen. and Mrs. Lee, claimed that the land had been illegally confiscated and that, according to his grandfather's will, he was the legal owner. In December 1882, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, returned the property to Custis Lee, stating that it had been confiscated without due process.
In 1883, Custis Lee sold the mansion and property to the U.S. government for $150,000 at a signing ceremony with Secretary of War, Robert Todd Lincoln, son of Abraham Lincoln. How ironic is that?   


SBG

[SHOOTALL]

So do you hang your hat on the 5th or the parts where All men ...........

[williamlayton]

Let's be correct on these points---it is the points I was raised on.
Blacks were an inferior race, incapapable of any good sound philosopy or morals and were in need of sound white leadership. Ownership was good for them.
Stonewall felt so as did many white educated people of the South.
I was raised to not say yes ma'am, no ma'am, yes sir or no sir to any black. They were inferior.
Now that we have brought honesty to the front row.
Yes that is why many fought for the South---Why most retain that/those thoughts today- Look at the Jim Crow laws of the South.
You would also be correct to point out that this was not just in the South and you would be correct. the North had no blacks to speak of but they had each other---Irish, Catholic, polish, Italians to pick on and they were treated with the same disdain---each by each other.
Predjudice hasno boundries.
My personal feelings on the subject is that there are far too many whites whose only claim to fame is that they are white.
Blessinngs