When will it stop?

To the Editor:

The liberal press wants to doom PRESIDENT Trump for not speaking out against the KKK and White groups that feel they have the right to free speech.  I don’t remember him forced to say we have evil with the Black Lives Matter or the Black Panthers etc. Hate and evil are demonstrated by all races.  He tried to make it sound that we are all Americans first and need to stop this violence but that was not good enough.  We have people destroying public property and it is okay even though it is our HISTORY.
Sorry to say the North and South did have a long and heavy death count on both sides during the Civil War.  Why aren’t we taking down statues of the North leaders?  They had slaves also and continued to have slaves after the Civil War.  They didn’t give them freedom and make them equal to the White man, so let’s tear them down also.

Gary Wilkinson
Village of Del Mar

Share

SPONSORED STORIES

SPONSORED STORIES

Columbia ParCar_575x300_Jun17

Latest News

Read More News...

Opinions

Rich Sobieray

Marsha, Marsha, Marsha

I knew it would not be long before someone would take advantage of our two recent tragedies to create another poisonous anti-Trump diatribe. … Read More

Entertainment

JimmysMoving_575x300_June17

Comments

  1. Mary Wilson McDaniel says

    Tell you what — it will not stop until we, as Americans, wise up to the fact that there is a faction in this Country that will NOT REST until the “fundamental change” that began 8 years ago is completed. After taking down the “offensive” Confederate monuments and memorials, they’ll go after the Founding Fathers, the majority of whom were slave holders as was discussed with Jacques DeGraff, a self-described social justice activist interviewed last night by Tucker Carlson (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wshcnpoIil8 — listen to that specific interview beginning at 20:23). Although DeGraff deflected that somewhat, it’s my opinion that will be next with the goal of ultimately de-ligitimizing the Constitution of this Country. If you are not aware, protesters/rioters are being recruited by companies similar to “Protests & Rallies (https://crowdsondemand.com/political-services/) so some of these people protesting are paid to do it! The wide spread censorship that’s happening on our college campuses and across the country has to stop! I used to think back in the 1980’s that political correctness was a joke. I see now it was a long-term plan to stifle speech in this Country. With the very real threat from ISIS, North Korea, and some within our very borders, what is happening with the Russia investigation and the daily onslaught of our duly elected President is obfuscating the real dangers we are facing in this Country. We are all Americans! It’s time to pull together as one.

    • phil fulco says

      In case anyone misssed it, the North won the war. The South was the loser, therefore we don’t need any monuments, flags or groups glorifying the losers. We honor the winning side and its leaders. Germany rightly outlawed anything and everything about Hitler and the Nazis.

      • Lloyd Barchers says

        This ain’t Germany, Phil. Apparently, some of you need reminding.

        In case you don’t understand it, Nazis and Hitler were not fighting there own. America was divided and a lot of good people on both sides died. All were American, generally speaking. We do not just hide our embarrassment. We live and learn from it.

        This is NOT about racism. This is about those that lost that last election, in denial and attempting some form of redemption via violent behavior. Acting out like petulant children. Where will the line be drawn? Destruction of property needs to have strong consequences.

          • Lloyd Barchers says

            Dan, I doubt that is entirely true. it’s been a long time since that war and the losers are ALL gone, as well as the winners. Now, it is just us, all of us together. We are one country. There are laws in this country and if you want them changed, you go to the poll on election day. You do not destroy. That is the same as vigilantism, if that. The majority says, leave the statues alone. Even if they did not, the LAW says leave the statues alone.

            Personally, I do not care whether the statues are there or not. I am only concerned with those that believe they can circumvent law and do as they please because they think they are right and the majority is wrong. I do not fly the Confederate flag and think it is ridiculous to do so. I do not support extremists on either side, the KKK, Nazis, BLM or Occupy Wall St cretins.

            If you wish to continue to push the idea of winners make the decisions, then fine….the right won so back off.

        • Nabila Patel says

          “Nazis and Hitler were not fighting their own”… Tell that to the millions of German Jews he slaughtered. You are worse than an idiot. You are a fool.

          • Lloyd Barchers says

            You know Nabila (or whomever you think you are), little twerps ought to mind their manners and be civil if they wish to be taken seriously. You know exactly what I meant about WWII. The war was NOT about Jews, even though Hitler slaughtered them. It was about his need to conquer and dominate the world. You really should be careful about allowing your mouth (your fingers in this case) overload your ability to have civil discourse. You are liable to attempt to write a check that you aren’t good for. My first response was to call you a “peckerhead” but I am not going to allow myself to be TROLLED by some lefter loser that doesn’t have an original thought in his head.
            Now, let’s summarize so that even you can understand. Hitler murdered Jews. Hitler was at war with many countries, thus the term World War is used. He was not at war with his own, period. Got it? I typed real slow so that even you could understand my comment.

            And nothing I said was meant to demean the Jews’ plight during that horrific time.

      • Ed Magenheimer says

        If that’s the principle we now live by, Phil, then let’s practice it right now. Conservatives won and liberals lost. That means, as you indicate, liberals, shut up and go away. We don’t want to hear anything from or about the losers…Clinton, Pilosi, Shumer, Waters, Schiff and all the other Democrat losers. It’s a deal.

    • Larry Vervack says

      A black Democratic state senator from Missouri just posted on Facebook that she hoped President Trump would be assassinated! This is the level of hate to which the the Democratic Party and some black Americans have sunk. A Democratic elected official actually publishing such hatred is astounding and very disturbing. What would the liberal mainstream media have done had a similar statement been made against Obama? Those of you who subscribe to the hatred, obstructionism, and lies of the current Democratic Party should be ashamed of what you have become. You are doomed to wallow in the scum and muck you have created. You and your part have no agenda, no vision and no ideas. You lure uninformed and uneducated people into your ideology with free stuff (where’s my Obama phone?) and more and more welfare dooming them to stay there forever. You are truly pitiful people. I hope this Democrat is put where she truly belongs, in jail. Maybe she can share a cell with Hillary. They both belong there.

      • DianaLantana says

        You are in the minority now Larry. No, that won’t lady Democrat won’t spend any time with Hillary because Hillary is not going to jail. The government is way too busy in thinking of ways to get rid of Trump without chasing after Hillary. Besides they are still out there looking for those 3 million illegal voters that Trump said voted for Hillary instead of him.
        Someone will start a “Go Fund Me” account for her defense. I think a “Go Fund Me” account should also be started to pay for his wall which by the way Trump said the Mexicans were going to pay for it. You can think of it like a “curse” jar. Every time you call a Democrat a bad name you can contribute money to it. Heck, I bet you could pay for a big chunk of that wall yourself Larry.

          • DianaLantana says

            I thought I was being very thoughtful to put some humor into my response of Larry’s hateful rant! 😎

          • Lloyd Barchers says

            Well Diana, at least Larry had a point. Where’s yours?

            By the way, humor is only funny if someone laughs. It doesn’t count when you are the sole individual laughing.

    • Ed Magenheimer says

      Mary, I sincerely appreciate your writing. When you watch the skirmish in Charlottesville and hear liberals twist President Trump’s remark, “there was fault on both sides,” into “Trump supports white supremacists,” there’s a motivation far more sinister than winning an argument. I watched Chris Mathews tonight and he said, “Trump is not only supporting the KKK, he is promoting it.” He proves you are totally correct. The liberal agenda will stop at nothing to get back to Obama’s, “fundamental change” path. It’s frightening.

  2. Bob Cochran says

    Just wait, after the Liberals get finished tearing down everything related to the Confederate states, they will go after George Washington and Thomas Jefferson by tearing down The Washington Monument and the Jefferson Memorial. After all, these two presidents, and actually the first 12 presidents owned slaves. We should probably rename Washington DC to Redskins DC, as it is not as offensive.

  3. Earle Russell says

    The word anarchy refers to a person or society “without rulers” or “without leaders”. Anarchism as a political philosophy advocates self-governed societies. These are often described as stateless societies, Anarchism holds the state to be undesirable, unnecessary, or harmful While anti-statism is central, anarchism entails opposing authority or hierarchical organization in the conduct of all human relations, including, but not limited to, the state system. There are many types and traditions of anarchism, not all of which are mutually exclusive. Anarchist schools of thought can differ fundamentally, supporting anything from extreme individualism to complete collectivism. Anarchism is often considered to be a radical left-wing ideology, and much of anarchist economics and anarchist legal philosophy reflect anti-statist interpretations of communism, collectivism, syndicalism. Some individualist anarchists are also socialists or communists while some anarcho-communists are also individualists or egoists. Anarchists support the use of militant measures, including revolution and propaganda of the deed, on the path to an anarchist society.
    The removing of the confederate statues has more than slavery as an end-all, there are many sheep following along spouting the words of the far left not even thinking what a society without history is. It’s all about a political system that is being attacked from underground by the twisted far left. If you believe that the University and college students know what they are doing you are dreaming. Most don’t even know what year the civil war began or ended. This is a political movement. It is Anarchy at its finest. The Soros Antifa is using it beautifully twisting the thinking of an entire country. This is not going to turn out well. In the end, all freedom will be on the brink. Trump is being used as the pawn in a vicious game the far left is playing with the destruction of freedom of this country as the overall goal.
    Read George Orwell — 1984.

  4. Jim Kinley says

    I had a friend who has passed but he always talked about his church of “What’s happening now”. The point being none of us can change history. We can debate it and argue about what “really” happen but we can’t change anything. The on;y thing we can change and have any control of is what’s happening now.

    Yes, there is slavery today right here in America. It’s well know and documented. Few care but its happening in my friends church of “What’s happening now”. “We can never plan the future by the past.” Anonymous. The one thing that has never changed here in the U.S. or elsewhere is the golden rule which says “he who has the gold rules”.

      • Gerry Sherman says

        I’m not listening to what he says . . . I’m watching what he is doing. As a reporter stated today “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me 80 million times, I need to seriously consider what the f**k is wrong with me.”

        • Lloyd Barchers says

          And exactly “what is he doing”, Gerry? You seem a bit hysterical and merely parroting liberal talking points. Perhaps you are getting a direct feed from the democrat puppet master, Soros?

  5. Gerry Sherman says

    This is not about monuments, not about the Civil War, not about free speech, not about Robert E. Lee, not about who had a permit, etc., . . . . this is about the President of the United States demonstrating racism and anti-Semitism by his comments and, by extension, whether those who still support him, should also be called racists. The details are irrelevant . . . if you, like Trump, see wiggle room in condemning the KKK and Nazis, you are a racist. If you still think Trump is a great guy after hearing him so clearly express his racist views, you are a racist. If you still describe Trump as “our magnificent president”, you are a racist. If your only response to this situation is to criticize President Obama and/or Hillary Clinton, you are a racist. If you don’t see a problem with the leaders of the KKK and the alt-Right praising Trump’s comments, you are a racist. I’m sure there will be many replies to this post from Trump supporters in The Villages screaming that they are not racists – but if it walks like a duck . . . .

    • Larry Vervack says

      Gerry, your entire post is a stupid, uninformed bunch of nonsense common with socialist/lberals like you. This IS about free speech and the absolute right of any group to protest when they want. Let’s not forget that these “hate groups” had a legal permit to stage a protest that they obtained with the help of the ACLU, not a conservative organization. Those counter-protesters had no permit. Would there have been violence had these liberals/ anachists not shown up, probably not. President Trump has done nothing but tell the truth, a concept liberals like you are unfamilar with. He has never said anything as President that would lead any fair minded person to see him as a racist. You support destroying part of our history to appease a small minority of people who have wanted to tear this country apart for a long time. What an idiotic comment to condemn President Trump for what some idiot said. You need to,wake up and see what people like you and your politicians like the incompetent Obama and the criminal Hillary have done to this country. They have succeeded in dividing us through their economic, racial, and immigration policies. They have stoked the fires of racial hatred and the false narrative of white privilege. Now they want to appease groups like Black Lives Matter, Black Panthers, and the NAACP by destroying our history. So typical of you liberals. I am not a racist, but you definitely are stupid.

        • Bob Cochran says

          Typical liberal response when they are discredited. Always shout, “racist”. Trump said exactly what was needed to be said the first time. Both sides were idiots. That is, unless you think the antifa protesters just came to sing Kombaya. It was a set up, the cops were told to stand down as soon as the two groups got together. Use your brains.

      • Ed Magenheimer says

        What’s truly amazing, Larry, is that these left wing nut cases have self-appointed themselves not only the jury to interrupting what’s included in the First Amendment, they are now the nation’s historical police as to what history stays or is erased. As President Trump said, very correctly, “what’s next?”

          • Ed Magenheimer says

            Gerry, you’ve already established yourself as a complete moron. You post anything you wish, without one iota of fact or backup. Now, you post, “Racist” after every conservative writing. Brilliant. Really displaying your I.Q…you’re certainly one of the gems of the liberal movement. Thank God you’re on their side.

        • Ed Magenheimer says

          Another little tidbit thrown out by one of the Ding-Dong Girls, Absolutely brilliant, Paula. Your thought provoking posts are always a welcomed contribution to the discussion.

    • Sandy Maerten Zellner Tortorete says

      Agreed Larry. I’m just glad that the white hoods have come off these people in TV. At least I now know who I am dealing with!

  6. mark clifford says

    I’m originally from New York so I am considering northerner but I do believe in history I think it’s important for everybody to know that and for the younger students to learn it also. Tearing down these statues is an absolute disgrace to America even though I don’t believe in what it stands for I do understand that they will put up a long time ago for the South. And for what it stands for there is a lot of Heritage here and it’s not right for anybody to disturb or to say what’s right or wrong for them. And I say again these have been up for a very long time how come all the sudden is it a big deal is it just something else for people to complain about how about going online Facebook Twitter or what not express your feelings there instead of tearing down these beautiful statues. The violence in America is disgusting I can’t believe it in 2017 that we are degrading ourselves to that level just like those country that do not have any beliefs like Americans do. I do not believe in Nazis or white supremacist but they do have a right to express how they feel just like how the blacks have their rights when they do their own marches they also don’t have very nice clubs either. This is just my thought about it all both sides are wrong and what happened and some people paid the price of dying if one side just didn’t show up none of this would have happened. Just leave the statues and flags where they’ve been for centuries this is go home to our families and live in peace.

  7. Ann Eggleston says

    If Trump comments, he’s criticized. If Trump doesn’t comment, he’s criticized. After five police officers in Dallas were murdered protecting people at a BLM demonstration, Obama said that we must not rush to judgement and that we need to wait for the investigation to be completed before commenting. In other words–he said nothing. No one criticized him.

    • jamessmith says

      When are they going to start taking George Washington’s’ picture out of all the classrooms in the country because he used to be a slave owner .
      Our country is going nuts with this free speech thing

      you can please some of the people all of the time
      you can please all of the people some of the time but
      you can’t please all of the people all of the time .

      • LiZa Adkison says

        you’re right jamessmith… don’t forget all those dollar bills too… thank God obummer is not still in office, he’d put the ugly face of Valerie Jarret in Washingtons’ place, or maybe her girlfriend, Michelle

        • Nabila Patel says

          You. Are. One. Sick. Disgusting. Idiot. You are a fool…a lost cause. It’s people like you whose absolute stupidity and hatred is destroying this country.

          • Lou Card says

            And there hundreds of people on this site that agree with you. Liza is in first place in the bitch category.

          • Ed Magenheimer says

            Lou, when are you going to answer my two questions:

            What did the President say or do that allows you to call him a racist?

            You use the terms, “racist and bigot” to describe many conservatives (Joe, Larry, LLoyd and myself to name a few). What have we said that permits you to place us in these categories?

            Answer me.

          • LiZa Adkison says

            nice talk Lou, but i do not expect any better from a drunken sot… and nabla, me thinks the hate and bigotry is coming off your keyboard, or is that what you call tolerance, sweetness and light???

          • Paula Russo says

            I second that thought Nabila. Liza just loves to stir the pot and see all her hateful words in print.

        • dan hopwood says

          You should remember that Washington, Jefferson and other founders were slaveholders, but none of them renounced their U.S. citizenship or waged war against their country. Big difference.

          • Lloyd Barchers says

            OH? Hey Dan, news flash. Washington and the other founders were considered traitors to the country they renounced. Remember? If they would have lost, they would have faced the gallows. So yes, they did renounce their citizenship from their country and yes they did WAR against said country.

            So dan, you will have to come up with some other argument.

    • Sheila Sanders says

      Although I abhor the policies and beliefs of the Neo-Nazis and White Supremacists, I defend their right to demonstrate. Defending our rights, I.e. The First Amendment, should not ONLY be defended when it’s easy to defend, but to defend it when it’s hard as well, like in this case. They had a permit, ergo they had the right to protest. The terrorist BLM and Antifa groups that showed up ARMED, did not have a permit and came explicitly to cause havoc. I also do not believe we should be destroying the Democrats’ history by removing these statues. The Southern Democrats fought FOR slavery and AGAINST equal rights for African Americans as late as the 1960s. I say LEAVE the Democrat’s history in place. It is part of America’s history. For those that want to argue with me…Please watch this video FIRST by an African American Professor in regards to the Inconvenient Truth About the Democrat Party and their racist history. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=g_a7dQXilCo

  8. Marsha Shearer says

    What is wrong with those of you who do not condemn, without exception, the hatred spewed by Nazis and white supremacists? Watch the HBO tape and you will hear precisely what their goal is…from them. If you choose not to believe what they say, then shame on you.

    For those of you saying this is free speech…that’s ridiculous! SCOTUS made it clear that the First Amendment right to free speech did NOT include the freedom to incite…i.e yelling fire in a crowded theatre. Those torch-carrying schumcks were there precisely to incite.

    And for those who use the excuse that you’re preserving precious history, then let’s raise a statue to Al Quada! That horrendous event reflects our history too. In both cases the aim is/was the same … to destroy this country…one from without and one from within. Our domestic terrorists are doing a far better job of it and unbelievably those of you who have shown yourselves to be apologists for them need to seriously consider the consequences of your actions.
    Unbelievable. Just stunningly unbelievable.

    • Charles Smith says

      It also amazes me that so many people from the villages fail to criticize the Alt-Right who are either Nazi’s or KKK. These are hate groups and if you don’t denounce them you are supporting them. So many people are closet racists and now they are coming out of the closet.

      • Hunter Hampton says

        They are coming out of the closet because Trump has led them to believe that he stands with them. They believe he will make things the way they used to be, when America was lily white and black people couldn’t drink out of the same water fountains. He actually said there were “fine people” on both sides. Those carrying the Nazi flag I wouldn’t say were nice people. Those carrying the Confederate flag? Nice? They weren’t wearing their sheets because it’s against the law in Virginia to mask your face. These are the people who elected Trump, because they knew he shared their racist beliefs, or if he didn’t he sure acted like he did. He has embolden them, I hope we don’t have another civil war about it. Imagine how the WWII vets feel watching this. If my father, who spent three years in Stalag Luft III was alive, he would say we fought a world war over this Nazi business, and won in 1945, I would hate for him to see Nazis marching in the USA.

        • Ed Magenheimer says

          Unfortunately, you’ll never get an answer to your question, Jan, because when an opinion is manufactured in thin air, there IS no backup. Research? Please…liberals on this site have actually told their challengers to prove their false statements wrong. Try that for a research project.

          • Lloyd Barchers says

            You’re right, ED. Their only motive is to generate mass political hysteria, because they have NO AGENDA to run on next year. They are in a panic because they are about to lose hundreds more of political positions of power. They know that this may be the demise of the Democrat party. You would think that after the last election, they would have learned that false accusations do not go over well to convince anyone to their ideology of social control. They call us ignorant, uneducated and stupid, but they still haven’t learned yet. And yes, we beat them. They cannot accept this fact that they have been beaten by the ones that they demean. What makes it even harder for them to accept is that Trump is doing a good job. So, they attack his character.

    • Ed Magenheimer says

      Marsha, I truly appreciate your post because it presents, to perfection, what I call, “inventive news.” Just say (invent) anything you want to make your case, brush your two hands together, say “that’s the final verdict, let’s move on.”

      According to you, First Amendment rights are only available to those who have your left wing, liberal viewpoint. Though I abhor all forms of hatred and violence, it’s not O.K. for white supremacist to protest the taking down of a Civil War Statue but it is fine for Black Lives Matter to chant, “Pigs in a blanket, fry em like bacon.” It’s not permitted for members of Unite the Right to protest, with a permit, the removal of monuments, but it’s perfectly fine for Black Live Matter to protest chanting, “What do we want,,,dead cops…when do we want them…now.” And, it’s not permitted to display a historic Civil War battle flag but it’s fine to burn Old Glory. Who are you to be the judge of these issues? Who gave you the power to interpret anyone’s First Amendment rights?

      Conservatives completely understand that liberals and the media will NEVER approve of ANYTHING President Trump says or does. That’s a given. But, armed with the ability to use, “inventive news,” you have completely twisted what the President said about the Charlottesville protest and that’s atrocious. Trump condemned, in the strongest terms, the display of hatred, bigotry and violence. He specifically called out neo-nazies and white supremacists. He called the driver who killed Heather Heyer a murderer and a disgrace to his family. Trump called on the country to stop the violence and respect/love each other. That was apparently not good enough for the left wing liberals or their media allies. Remember, the left agenda is to NEVER condone ANYTHING Trump says or does….criticism is the only acceptable response.

      Now here is the part that made the liberals totally apoplectic. He said, God forbid, there was fault on both sides. “Oh my God,” chanted the inventive news wolf pack, “man the keyboards…we’ve got news to invent.” The accusations started to fly. Trump supports the KKK. Trumps base (nazies, skinheads and bigots) are encouraged by the President. Trump exposes his racist agenda. I even read this morning some liberal nut case lawyer wrote that Trump’s Charlottesville comments qualified as an impeachable offense. Scary, but no more frightening than your statements, Marsha.

      I believe Trump’s “both sides” comment asked the questions, if the liberal anti-protesters never showed up there would not have been a conflict. Unite the Right had the gathering permit, the liberals had nothing. The alt-left was committing a crime by assembling. Both sides where armed and ready to do battle.

      I ask this. What did President Trump say that was not obvious and totally truthful? Why is the truth so offensive to the liberals?

      PS: I don’t expect an answer because I’ve learned the liberals who participate on this site believe they have no responsibility to explain their “inventive news” statements.

      • LiZa Adkison says

        Ed, am disappointed in you… you actually read Marsha’s rant of FAKE, FOOLISH FACTS???

        at the end of the day, the mother of the victim was very appreciative , comforted and blessed by the words of our MAGNIFICENT PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP… far as i am concerned, she is the ONLY person who matters here… if she believes his comments were correct and fit for this horrendous situation, EVERYBODY else can and should SHUT UP

    • Lloyd Barchers says

      Marsha, if you were to read the comments, I think that you would know that NO one is defending the Nazis and KKK. Do your homework and read the comments BEFORE making your accusations.

      I will make it simple for you. Here’s the facts as they have been posted:

      We do NOT support the KKK and Nazis.
      We do NOT support those that illegally protested against them, creating a volatile and then violent situation.
      We do NOT support the illegal act of tearing down the Confederate statues.
      The statues should be moved or taken down by the will of the people. The majority, not a few disgruntled children.

      Now, for your edification, 66% of Americans polled do NOT want the statues removed. This is from a NPR/PBS polling.

      In my opinion, the person that ran down and killed one of the protesters, should be convicted of murder and receive the death penalty. I bet not one of you liberals on here would go that far, even though you talk real tough and work real well in crowds.

      You can make up all the venomous rhetoric you wish, but no matter how much you lefters troll, you simply make yourselves look more ridiculous.

      There has been no reason for your accusations of racism, and to generalize so blatantly and wrongly, suggesting that Villagers are racist is typical petulant leftist tantrum-like behavior. You lefters are agitators and are a riot looking for a crowd.

  9. Steve Roberts says

    The winners get to write the history and the South lost, so get over it. But more importantly, the statues represent slavery and repression to a very large segment of our population and should be removed from GOVERNMENT buildings. Let the modern day Confederats pay to move the statues to private museums.

      • Bill Williams says

        As a liberal and a Trump hater can make it up as he goes along, just like fake news. These people that destroy history do it in the name of ‘political correctness’ because they can do it with impunity; it’s really a sad time our country and makes me sick. Reminds me of ISIS tearing down all remnants of history in Iraq just because they could.

          • Hunter Hampton says

            Okay, lets erect a statue to Bin Laden….. he’s a part of our history and fought against the USA just like the Confederate soldiers.

          • LiZa Adkison says

            Hunter, i would expect such stupidity from lou card, stan jones, ed demassi, maybe chip or rainbow Fred… but you??? unless i am wrong, those that receive a statue have CONTRIBUTED something, fought FOR our country (north or south)… since when do you get a legacy/statue for killing nearly 4,000 innocent people… you are better than that Hunter, been out in the sun too long???

        • Joseph Bailey says

          I agree, Bill. If they erected a statue for our past “president’ could the white, soon to be the minority, have the right to tear it down for the destruction he did to “OUR” country. The Dimms and libs would go crazy…H was and still is a BUM !!! And he above all should keep his two faced apologizing mouth shut…History is HISTORY….Let sleeping dogs lie…Are they going to erect a stauue to sharpie, holderemup, jackoff,clinton and the rest of those liberal bastards that give our country away…Get a job you lazy bastards and get off the public dole…!!!

  10. Barbara Twedt Zinn says

    How to successfully debate a Yankee or Scalawag on the Issues of the Confederacy by Christopher Rice
    See more at:
    http://confederaterising.com/article.php?article=1441216671-How+to+successfully+debate+a+Yankee+or+Scalawag+on+

    the+Issues+of+the+Confederacy+-+Part+I#sthash.vayybcMY.JPfe0mSe.dpuf

    1. Confederates are/Secession is for traitors.
    In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson, in the second paragraph, penned the following: “… governments are
    instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” [Author emphasis] The key word in this
    statement is consent. The British government recognized each of the thirteen colonies as a free and independent state is
    possession of its own sovereignty. The states did not intend to create a superior to sit in judgment of them, but rather intended to,
    and did, create a co-ordinate government. This federal government was to only have these powers the states did specifically
    delegate to it.

    In the Virginia Act of Ratification of the United States Constitution “We, the delegates of the people of Virginia, duly elected,…
    in behalf of the people of Virginia, declare and make known, that the powers granted under the Constitution, being derived from
    the people of the United States, may be resumed by them, whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression;
    and that every power not granted thereby, remains with them and at their will: that, therefore, no right, of any denomination,
    can be canceled abridged, restrained or modified.”

    John C. Calhoun, from the senate floor stated that “It declares that all powers granted by the Constitution, are derived from the
    people of the United States; and may be resumed by them when perverted to their injury or oppression; and that every power not
    granted remains with them, and at their will; and that no right of any description can be canceled, abridged, restrained or modified
    by Congress, the Senate, the House of Representatives, the President, or any department, or officer of the United States.
    Language cannot be stronger.”

    Each state held its own power, and under their own approval, consented to the government additional powers not held by the state itself. Each state held the right to revoke that power as they saw fit.

    Simply put, secession was quite legal and right held in power of the states. This was even taught at West Point.
    In a textbook used at West Point from 1826 until 1865, written by James Kent and titled “Commentaries on American Law.”
    It stated “No one nation had a right to force the way of the liberation of Africa, by trampling on the independence of other states; or to procure an eminent good by means that were unlawful; or to press forward to a great principle, by breaking through other
    great principles that stood in the way.”

    2. Slavery was the cause for the war.
    First it must be asked that if the south was fighting to keep slavery then who was trying to end it that would have caused the
    south to exercise their desire to secede? The answer is quite simple– no one.

    The Corwin Amendment would have allowed, among other things, the rights of individual states to continue slavery forevermore.
    This amendment, which is still pending ratification, was passed by both the House of Representatives and the Senate and was set forth by northern legislatures. It was signed by then President James Buchanan, and endorsed later by President Abraham
    Lincoln. Three Northern states ratified this amendment but zero southern states.

    Lincoln stated, in a September 18, 1858 debate in Illinois, that “I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, that I am not nor ever have been
    in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people;
    and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever
    forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And in as much as they cannot so live, while they do
    remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the
    superior position assigned to the white race.”

    Additionally, in another debate, Lincoln states, “Such separation, if ever effected at all, must be effected by colonization; and no
    political party, as such, is now doing anything directly for colonization. Party operations at present only favor or retard colonization
    incidentally. The enterprise is a difficult one; but “when there is a will there is a way;” and what colonization needs most is a hearty will. Will springs from the two elements of moral sense and self-interest. Let us be brought to believe it is morally right,
    and, at the same time, favorable to, or, at least, not against, our interest, to transfer the African to his native clime, and we
    shall find a way to do it, however great the task may be.”

    Depending on the source, only between four and six percent of white southerners owned slaves. The south also had a higher
    population of free men and women of color then the north. Additionally, three northern states still held slaves; both facts coming
    from the 1860 census records. Part of this reason is that several states in the north made it illegal for blacks or Indians to live within the boundaries of the state including Illinois; Lincoln voted for this. Virginia, a southern state, on the other hand, spoke out
    against, and made illegal the slave trade very soon after becoming a state—the first to do so in the civilized world. In New York
    City, Yankees kidnapped free blacks and sold them into slavery. There were 33 such cases in one year alone. Free states indeed.

    3. In the cornerstone speech given by Vice-President Stephens, he says slavery was the cause for seccession.
    This is actually an untrue misconception. Stephens actually named many changes to the Confederacy as opposed to the Union.
    One of the changes, which he does state lastly as the cornerstone, is the right to slavery. He did not, however, state this was a
    reason for seccession. One has to remember that no one was trying (other then abolitionists) to officially end slavery. The
    sentiment that he expressed was not different then others of his day. Many people believed in the right of slavery, however unjust
    it may have been. Take for example the northern states that still held legal slavery. Another example is the legislatures that passed the Corwin Amendment. Stephens did say that the negro was not equal to the white man; Lincoln did say the
    same exact thing.

    Most southerners did have the idea that slavery should end through eventual emancipation, exactly as some northern states had
    done. This would allow time for education, job creation, etc. to allow blacks to not be left “high and dry” and be able to provide for
    themselves. Very few had the fire-eater stance.

    Do not also forget that other states, namely Missouri and Maryland wanted to join the Confederacy even after this speech. These
    states are now considered free states in history.

    4. The Southern economy could not support a nation.
    In 1860, if the South would have been an independent nation their economy would have ranked as the third highest in the
    European and American continents. The south had one-third of the nation’s railroad mileage, plus streams and rivers that did not
    freeze. The south was behind the north in railroad mileage, but still higher than any other nation in the world. The south had a
    per capita income ten percent higher than all states west of New York and Pennsylvania. This was partly due to the income of the
    slave trade/kidnapping in the New England states.

    5. Confederate monuments celebrate slavery
    This is an issue that currently plagues the politically correct of the nation. But here is a fun fact. Did you know that during the
    Civil War, black soldiers (free and slaves) earned the same pay as their white counterparts?

    The Confederate States of America were in fact the first to give equal pay for equal work! This doesn’t sound like discrimination
    to me. In the north, however, blacks were paid almost half of what white counterparts were paid; they protested and after
    eighteen months finally received equal pay (in 1864).

    Many confederate leaders never owned slaves. A partial list of these leaders includes: Gen. Robert E. Lee, Gen. Joseph
    Johnston, Gen. A. P. Hill, Gen. Fitzhugh Lee, Gen. J. E. B. Stuart. Recent attacks on confederate monuments have attempted
    to remove monuments of these men and others. They are U. S. veterans under an act of Congress in 1954. Remember, the war,
    even according to Lincoln, was not about slavery until late in the war in an effort to renew the spirit of the north and to harm the
    south.

    Even if this were true, however, it is important to remember history, for those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. It seems as if the union sympathizers don’t mind that.

    The Confederacy had slaves; this is not something that is news. The Union held slaves as well through the end of the Civil War.
    The Confederacy was about more then that. They wished to follow the Constitution as it was written and that includes the states
    having supreme power as guaranteed in the tenth amendment. The Confederacy was tired of giving up rights to a government
    that was already trying to become more powerful then was already intended. They were showing reverence for a Union that
    ran as originally intended.

    Removing monuments will not change the way people think, it will not change the way they feel, and it will certainly not end
    racism and bigotry (by any race). What then is the purpose of removing these monuments? Politico Magazine calls the south
    “Jesusland” and says that we keep the U.S. down because of our faith in God. What ever happened to first amendment rights?
    They go on to say they hope the south will be culturally and ethnically cleansed and hope that immigrants and liberals from other
    parts of the U.S. would integrate to make that happen. Apparently they have no knowledge that the south was the first part of the
    United States to have permanent settlement and was mixed with Europeans, Africans, Spaniards, French, Canadians, and more.
    Why do you think it is that we have such abundance to different foods, music, and dialects? We have been culturally mixed; a
    great deal of this happened even before the War of Northern Aggression. These are the reasons that, as much as they complain
    about us, make us great. After all, how many southerners retire and move north? How many southerners go on vacations in the
    north? I don’t know about where you are from, but here 70% of license plates on the road are northern for the summer months
    and part of the winter months.

    In New Orleans, they are calling for the removal of four confederate statues because they are reminders of slavery. But only
    two months before calling for this the city council voted to build a slave museum complete with a full size slave ship to remember
    slave trade (in May, 2015). One cannot have it both ways; either you want to remember slave trade or you don’t.

    Further stated, many roads, schools, parks, monuments, etc are named for members of other races then white, or from other
    times in history as well. No one calls for these to be taken down. Let us call this what it is. Let us just be honest and say this
    monument hasn’t offended me for the past 80 years; it didn’t bother me to walk past it until someone told me to be bothered. I
    didn’t speak about it until now because there is an opportunity to take away from the southern culture. I wish only to promote
    one race, one party, or one agenda. At least then you would be honest.

    6. The North wished to preserve the Union
    The north did want the Union, but not for unity. We weren’t their brothers; we were their banks. The north and south were so
    completely different in beliefs, thoughts, morals, and culture that the two should never have really been joined (and before anyone
    forgets—the Constitution was written by a southerner, and the first five presidents were southern as well). This does not change
    history, of course. In 1828, Senator Thomas H. Benton said “Before the revolution [the South] was the seat of wealth, as well as
    hospitality….Wealth has fled from the South, and settled in regions north of the Potomac: and this in the face of the fact, that the
    South, in four staples alone, has exported produce, since the Revolution, to the value of eight hundred millions of dollars; and the
    North has exported comparatively nothing. Such an export would indicate unparalleled wealth, but what is the fact? … Under
    Federal legislation, the exports of the South have been the basis of the Federal revenue…..Virginia, the two Carolinas, and
    Georgia, may be said to defray three-fourths of the annual expense of supporting the Federal Government; and of this great sum,
    annually furnished by them, nothing or next to nothing is returned to them, in the shape of Government expenditures.
    That expenditure flows in an opposite direction – it flows northwardly, in one uniform, uninterrupted, and perennial stream. This is
    the reason why wealth disappears from the South and rises up in the North. Federal legislation does all this.”

    This shows the greed of the Union government and the north in general. It is noted that in 1833 there was surplus revenue of
    many millions in the public tresasury, which by an act of legislation unparalleled in history of nations was distributed among the
    Northern States to be used for local public improvements. This was not shared with states in the south. Some argue that this

    wealth of the south came from using free labor, but remember too slavery was rampant in the north as well. Remember it was
    the New England states the benefited the majority from the slave trade. Secession not only kept cheap goods from going to the
    north but also cut off high tariffs and other monies being made at New York harbors.

    When the northern president Lincoln was asked why he didn’t just let the south go, he answered, “Let the south go? Let the
    South go! Then where shall we get our revenues?” Some northern newspapers predicted “grass would grow in the streets of
    New York, while the port of New Orleans would flourish.” President Lincoln wished only to continue living in ‘high cotton’.

    7. [Fill in the blank] is racist
    Racist is defined as:
    a.) A person who believes that a particular race is superior to another.

    b.) Having or showing the belief that a particular race is superior to another.

    Apparently, racist is the new buzzword. It is to 2015 as bigot was to the late 70s. Not everything that people view as racist is racist.

    For example, hoop skirts, statues or monuments, flags, music videos, and even Peanut Butter & Jelly sandwiches have recently
    been called racist. I’m not sure how a piece of clothing or a sandwich can even be racist! Neither are persons nor do they show
    superiority. This week a Taylor Swift music video was deemed racist simply because it had no minorities within it. Guess what?
    Not having inclusion in something does not make it racist. It is the overused politically correct buzzword that will lose all
    effectiveness and meaning must like other words have in the past. If you want the word to have mean, if you want it to be taken
    seriously you cannot be the boy who cried wolf! Make sure you are using it correctly.

      • Lloyd Barchers says

        I got to the part where he mentioned Thomas Jefferson. But then I started thinking about his statement that went something like “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” I wonder if any that fought for the South actually considered themselves “tyrants.”

        My family came over here from Europe AFTER the civil war and never owned any slaves. We do not believe in slavery and we do not support the KKK or the Nazis. As a matter of fact, my family fought the Nazis in WWII. So, next time some of the liberals on here throw around the “racist” accusation, you might want to think exactly what your contribution to this country is.

    • Kevin Costello says

      Great post Barbara. Isn’t it funny how the left refuse to read an article rebutting their point and choose to believe PC talking points spewed out by the media.

  11. Barbara Twedt Zinn says

    The Forgotten White Slaves of America – by – Nehesy
    – The Redemptioners (specially the Germans who came with all their family but the family members were frequently sold to different masters)
    – The Indentured Servants who sold themselves for a better life and a better place to live; they were lured with false promises i.e. “A land of milk and Honey is waiting for you in the new world”; and London was characterized by high poverty, famine and was “infested” with plagues…
    – The kidnapped people of London, Bristol and Liverpool (Men, Women, and Children); it was a Royal policy: POOR RELIEF
    – The poor’s and vagrants (Men, Women, Children) of the United Kingdom
    – The loose or lewd women (prostitutes)
    – The convicts and criminals; who were highly preferred by planters because they were bound for 14 years at least; the child servants were praised for the same reason (long period of bondage)…Maryland and Virginia were convicts’ states…
    – The war prisoners ie Irish and Scottish (Monmouth Rebels, Covenanters etc.); the “Irish slave trade” is hidden into our history books but it’s a reality of the past …
    – Apprentices, which was the best form of “bondage” (with the Redemptioners) because they could learn a job
    – Many indentured servants came from Europe (Italy and Greece) as well;
    – Seamen impressed in ships (they were bound to the master’s ship and could whipped in case of mutiny). They were often kidnapped in British Taverns; many cases of desertions occurred in the Royal and Continental navies. As Richard Brandon Morris said they were the “last slaves” to be emancipated in 1915…Their hand could be cut off in a case of aggression against the ship’s captain…

    It must be said that London (Liverpool, Bristol) Merchants and British authorities ( Royalty; Mayor etc.) were responsible for their temporary enslavement, and made huge profits in selling them to the colonies …London (Liverpool, Bristol) Merchants with British Authorities ( specially the Royalty) were also involved in the African slave trade…When the supply of white servants happened to be insufficient in order to match the labor demand in the colonies, they created the Royal Company of Africa in order to import (kidnap) more Africans…When you have a look at the first census in the American colonies, white servants or temporary slaves, outnumbered African slaves in all the British colonies (America and West Indies).

    The African slave trade and the possession of black slaves happened to be more profitable to the former servant’s traders/drivers and to the former servant’s masters in the colonies. This is why, we African or afro descendants suffered so much…Planters were really harsh on them: many servants’ deaths were due to maltreatment…After the American Revolution, British turned to Australia, as a convict colony. The Jails ships in London (called “HULKS” were overcrowded).

    When the African slave trade has been abolished, they turned to Asia for the “Pig” Trade or Coolie Trade, (China and India). The same suffering, the same maltreatments, the same riots (in the plantations and the slave ships)….Only the European poor and the middle class went to the new world, the richest stayed in Europe. Many white servants and black slaves married together because they suffered the same pains and maltreatments. Many white servants were involved in slave riots like in the New York Plot (see Pr. Richard Brandon Morris and Pr. Abbott Emerson Smith), and some even fled to the Indians with their black brethren.

    They suffered the “middle passage” as well, because they died like flies in the ships that brought them to the colonies, they were packed like “herring”….With the time, white servants became overseers, and hatred was installed between the two communities, by the planters who divided them in order to ruled them…Some white servants were used in the militia in order to defend the colony from French and Spanish, but also to kill Indians or suppress slaves insurrections. The “Divide and Rule” technique was used against the Indians (first slaves in America) in order to get allies and slaves. Europeans would give guns to their Indian allies in order to enslave other Indians. They used this technique in Canada, North America, South America (Mexico), the West Indies (Cuba) and in Africa as well… But the Indians slaves in North America died like flies, and could flee easily because after all it was their country. Europeans kidnapped Indians, or caused wars between Indians tribes in order to response to their labor demand.
    The American used the race card in order to ally with the white servants (or former servants), even if they really despised them, by calling them names: “White Trash”; “Redneck”; “Hillbillies”; “White niggers” etc. It must be said that white servant preceded the black slave into the South plantations. And the system which was imposed to them (punishment, tortures, rapes, separation of families etc.) was ready to absorb the black Africans slaves (See Pr. Ulrich B Phillips). It was really “A NASTY” period for poor whites and anything colored (Blacks, Indians etc.). The European rich class caused a lot of suffering to these people, even if they were white like them ….
    Nothing better could happen to blacks, Chinese or Indians who were bound to that same class!!! The seeds and the framework of their suffering can be found in the story of the white “slaves” who peopled American and West Indies colonies. The racial card and segregation was played against them, and the white colonists had any mercy for them: Burned alive, Emasculation; Cutting the limbs; Extreme cases of torture …
    This is stories they won’t tell you at school, or in Hollywood movies. In order to know a little research process is compulsory…

  12. Barbara Twedt Zinn says

    The 10 Causes of the War Between the States – by James W. King
    (The only cause of the war was that the South was invaded and responded to Northern aggression)
    -A war almost occurred during 1828-1832 over the tariff when South Carolina passed nullification laws. The U.S. congress had increased the tariff rate on imported products to 40% (known as the tariff of abominations in Southern States).
    -This crisis had nothing to do with slavery. If slavery had never existed–period–or had been eliminated at the time the Declaration of Independence was written in 1776 or anytime prior to 1860 it is my opinion that there would still have been a war sooner or later.
    -On a human level there were 4 causes of the war–New England Greed–New England Fanatics–New England Zealots–and New England Hypocrites.
    -During “So Called Reconstruction” (1865-1877) the New England Industrialists got what they had really wanted for 40 years–THE SOUTH’S RESOURCES FOR PENNIES ON THE DOLLAR. It was a political coalition between the New England economic interests and the New England fanatics and zealots that caused Southern secession to be necessary for economic survival and safety of the population.
    1. TARIFF–Prior to the war about 75% of the money to operate the Federal Government was derived from the Southern States via an unfair sectional tariff on imported goods and 50% of the total 75% was from just 4 Southern states–Virginia- North Carolina–South Carolina and Georgia. Only 10%–20% of this tax money was being returned to the South. The Southern states were being treated as an agricultural colony of the North and bled dry. John Randolph of Virginia’s remarks in opposition to the tariff of 1820 demonstrates that fact. The North claimed that they fought the war to preserve the Union but the New England Industrialists who were in control of the North were actually supporting preservation of the Union to maintain and increase revenue from the tariff. The industrialists wanted the South to pay for the industrialization of America at no expense to themselves. Revenue bills introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives prior to the War Between the States were biased, unfair and inflammatory to the South. Abraham Lincoln had promised the Northern industrialists that he would increase the tariff rate if he was elected president of the United States. Lincoln increased the rate to a level that exceeded even the “Tariff of Abominations” 40% rate that had so infuriated the South during the 1828-1832 era (between 50 and 51% on iron goods). The election of a president that was Anti-Southern on all issues and politically associated with the New England industrialists, fanatics, and zealots brought about the Southern secession movement.
    2. CENTRALIZATION VERSUS STATES RIGHTS—The United States of America was founded as a Constitutional Federal Republic in 1789 composed of a Limited Federal Government and Sovereign States. The North wanted to and did alter the form of Government this nation was founded upon. The Confederate States of America fought to preserve Constitutional Limited Federal Government as established by America’s founding fathers who were primarily Southern Gentlemen from Virginia. Thus Confederate soldiers were fighting for rights that had been paid for in blood by their forefathers upon the battlefields of the American Revolution. Abraham Lincoln had a blatant disregard for The Constitution of the United States of America. His War of aggression Against the South changed America from a Constitutional Federal Republic to a Democracy (with Socialist leanings) and broke the original Constitution. The infamous Socialist Karl Marx sent Lincoln a letter of congratulations after his reelection in 1864. A considerable number of European Socialists came to America and fought for the Union (North).
    3. CHRISTIANITY VERSUS SECULAR HUMANISM–The South believed in basic Christianity as presented in the Holy Bible. The North had many Secular Humanists (atheists, transcendentalists and non-Christians). Southerners were afraid of what kind of country America might become if the North had its way. Secular Humanism is the belief that there is no God and that man, science and government can solve all problems. This philosophy advocates human rather than religious values. Reference: Frank Conner’s book “The South Under Siege 1830-2000.”
    4. CULTURAL DIFFERENCES- -Southerners and Northerners were of different Genetic Lineages. Southerners were primarily of Western English (original Britons), Scottish, and Irish linage (Celtic) whereas Northerners tended to be of Anglo-Saxon and Danish (Viking) extraction. The two cultures had been at war and at odds for over 1000 years before they arrived in America. Our ancient ancestors in Western England under King Arthur humbled the Saxon princes at the battle of Baden Hill (circa 497 AD –516 AD). The cultural differences that contributed to the War Between the States (1861-1865) had existed for 1500 years or more.
    5. CONTROL OF WESTERN TERRITORIES- -The North wanted to control Western States and Territories such as Kansas and Nebraska. New England formed Immigrant Aid Societies and sent settlers to these areas that were politically attached to the North. They passed laws against slavery that Southerners considered punitive. These political actions told Southerners they were not welcome in the new states and territories. It was all about control–slavery was a scapegoat.
    6. NORTHERN INDUSTRIALISTS WANTED THE SOUTH’S RESOURCES–The Northern Industrialists wanted a war to use as an excuse to get the South’s resources for pennies on the dollar. They began a campaign about 1830 that would influence the common people of the North and create enmity that would allow them to go to war against the South. These Northern Industrialists brought up a morality claim against the South alleging the evils of slavery. The Northern Hypocrites conveniently neglected to publicize the fact that 5 New England States (Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and New York) were primarily responsible for the importation of most of the slaves from Africa to America. These states had both private and state owned fleets of ships.
    7. SLANDER OF THE SOUTH BY NORTHERN NEWSPAPERS–This political cause ties in to the above listed efforts by New England Industrialists. Beginning about 1830 the Northern Newspapers began to slander the South. The Industrialists used this tool to indoctrinate the common people of the North. They used slavery as a scapegoat and brought the morality claim up to a feverish pitch. Southerners became tired of reading in the Northern Newspapers about what bad and evil people they were just because their neighbor down the road had a few slaves. This propaganda campaign created hostility between the ordinary citizens of the two regions and created the animosity necessary for war. The Northern Industrialists worked poor whites in the factories of the North under terrible conditions for 18 hours a day (including children). When the workers became old and infirm they were fired. It is a historical fact that during this era there were thousands of old people living homeless on the streets in the cities of the North. In the South a slave was cared for from birth to death. Also the diet and living conditions of Southern slaves was superior to that of most white Northern factory workers. Southerners deeply resented this New England hypocrisy and slander.
    8. NEW ENGLANDERS ATTEMPTED TO INSTIGATE MASSIVE SLAVE REBELLIONS IN THE SOUTH–Abolitionists were a small but vocal and militant group in New England who demanded instant abolition of slavery in the South. These fanatics and zealots were calling for massive slave uprisings that would result in the murder of Southern men, women and children. Southerners were aware that such an uprising had occurred in Santa Domingo in the 1790 era and that the French (white) population had been massacred. The abolitionists published a terrorist manifesto and tried to smuggle 100,000 copies into the South showing slaves how to murder their masters at night. Then when John Brown raided Harpers Ferry, Virginia in
    1859 the political situation became inflammatory. Prior to this event there had been five times as many abolition societies in the South as in the North. Lincoln and most of the Republican Party (64 members of congress) had adopted a political platform in support of terrorist acts against the South. Some (allegedly including Lincoln) had contributed monetarily as supporters of John Browns terrorist activities. Again slavery was used as a scapegoat for all differences that existed between the North and South.
    9. SLAVERY– Indirectly slavery was a cause of the war. Most Southerners did not own slaves and would not have fought for the protection of slavery. However they believed that the North had no Constitutional right to free slaves held by citizens of Sovereign Southern States. Prior to the war there were five times as many abolition societies in the South as in the North. Virtually all educated Southerners were in favor of gradual emancipation of slaves. Gradual emancipation would have allowed the economy and labor system of the South to gradually adjust to a free paid labor system without economic collapse. Furthermore, since the New England States were responsible for the development of slavery in America, Southerners saw the morality claims by the North as blatant hypocrisy. The first state to legalize slavery had been Massachusetts in 1641 and this law was directed primarily at Indians. In colonial times the economic infrastructure of the port cities of the North was dependent upon the slave trade. The first slave ship in America, “THE DESIRE”, was fitted out in Marblehead, Massachusetts. Further proof that Southerners were not fighting to preserve slavery is found in the diary of an officer in the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia. He stated that “he had never met a man in the Army of Northern Virginia that claimed he was fighting to preserve slavery”. If the war had been over slavery, the composition of the politicians, officers, enlisted men, and even African Americans would have been different. Confederate General Robert E. Lee had freed his slaves (Custis estate) prior to 1863 whereas Union General Grant’s wife Julia did not free her slaves until after the war when forced to do so by the 13th amendment to the constitution and court action. Grant even stated that if the abolitionists claimed he was fighting to free slaves that he would offer his services to the South. Mildred Lewis Rutherford (1852-1928) was for many years the historian for the United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC). In her book Truths of History she stated that there were more slaveholders in the Union Army (315,000) than the Confederate Army (200,000). Statistics also show that about 300,000 blacks supported the Confederacy versus about 200,000 for the Union. Clearly the war would have been fought along different lines if it had been fought over slavery. The famous English author Charles Dickens stated “the Northern onslaught upon Southern slavery is a specious piece of humbug designed to mask their desire for the economic control of the Southern states.”
    10. NORTHERN AGGRESSION AGAINST SOUTHERN STATES– Proof that Abraham Lincoln wanted war may be found in the manner he handled the Fort Sumter incident. Original correspondence between Lincoln and Naval Captain G.V. Fox shows proof that Lincoln acted with deceit and willfully provoked South Carolina into firing on the fort (A TARIFF COLLECTION FACILITY). It was politically important that the South be provoked into firing the first shot so that Lincoln could claim the Confederacy started the war. Additional proof that Lincoln wanted war is the fact that Lincoln refused to meet with a Confederate peace delegation. They remained in Washington for 30 days and returned to Richmond only after it became apparent that Lincoln wanted war and refused to meet and discuss a peace agreement. After setting up the Fort Sumter incident for the purpose of starting a war, Lincoln called for 75,000 troops to put down what he called a rebellion. He intended to march Union troops across Virginia and North Carolina to attack South Carolina. Virginia and North Carolina were not going to allow such an unconstitutional and criminal act of aggression against a sovereign sister Southern State. Lincoln’s act of aggression caused the secession of the upper Southern States.

    The WAR BETWEEN THE STATES 1861-1865 occurred due to many complex causes and factors as enumerated above. Those who make claims that “the war was over slavery” or that if slavery had been abolished in 1776 when the Declaration of Independence was signed or in 1789 when The Constitution of the United States of America was signed, that war would not have occurred between North and South are being very simplistic in their views and opinions.

    The Union victory in 1865 destroyed the right of secession in America, which had been so cherished by America’s founding fathers as the principle of their revolution. British historian and political philosopher Lord Acton, one of the most intellectual figures in Victorian England, understood the deeper meaning of Southern defeat. In a letter to former Confederate General Robert E. Lee dated November 4, 1866, Lord Acton wrote “I saw in States Rights the only available check upon the absolutism of the sovereign will, and secession filled me with hope, not as the destruction but as the redemption of Democracy. I deemed you were fighting the battles of our liberty, our progress, and our civilization and I mourn for that which was lost at Richmond more deeply than I rejoice over that which was saved at Waterloo (defeat of Napoleon). As Illinois Governor Richard Yates stated in a message to his state assembly on January 2, 1865, the war had “tended, more than any other event in the history of the country, to militate against the Jeffersonian Ideal (Thomas Jefferson) that the best government is that which governs least.

    Years after the war former Confederate president Jefferson Davis stated “I Am saddened to Hear Southerners Apologize for Fighting To Preserve Our Inheritance”. Some year’s later former U.S. president Theodore Roosevelt stated “Those Who Will Not Fight For The Graves Of Their Ancestors Are Beyond Redemption”.

    I’m a Northerner (Minneapolis, MN 25+ years), with a Southern (FL for 22 years) heart.

    • Paula Russo says

      Whoa! You don’t have anything original to post? You must be exhausted from all that…and we are clueless as to why you felt you needed to share it all.

    • dan hopwood says

      Barbara, your premise that the only cause of the Civil War was that the United States invaded the confederacy is bogus. The confederacy started the war by firing on and capturing Fort Sumter. You can read about it in history books if you can pry yourself away from spreading revisionist history from the right wing.

  13. charles thompson says

    News you won’t see on the MSM:

    Well, well. One of Mueller’s crooked lawyers has been caught. Peter Strzok the conflicted FBI lawyer involved in the coverup of Hillary’s email scandle. Strzok has been removed from active FBI dutys and placed in an administrative hold by moving him to a Human Resources position, which is the FBI’s next step to prosecution or removal. Mueller’s team is (almost?) entirely conflicted. Lawyers previously charged with forging evidence, illegally hiding evidence.from the defense, and (almost?) all of them active Democrat functionarys and contributors to Hillary’s campaign. Can you spell S*W*A*M*P? Do you understand “Dirty Cop?”

    • charles thompson says

      NEXT? It’s been going on for 50 years. Pick up one of your Grandchildren’s history books and check out what they say vs what YOU learned in school.

  14. Jeff Osterman says

    KKK, White supremacy, Neo-Nazi are all a form of terrorism that should not be allowed in America. We are a democracy that treats all of its citizens equally (as it should). I am a white male and I am not Supreme. I am equal to all humans on this planet as people entitled to equal rights. Our President is supposed to be a moral compass for our country and he is failly miserably at that…it is an embarrassment.

    • Don Baldwin says

      “We are a democracy that treats all of its citizens equally (as it should)”

      NO…we do NOT treat all the citizens equally. White males are institutionally discriminated against EVERY time affirmative action or a quota is used. Who do you think gets bumped? We literally take the #15 finisher and “promote them” via a quota…to the winners circle. It’s not right and it’s dragging down the country. 20% of the workforce is dead weight MANDATED by government regulations.

    • LiZa Adkison says

      Jeff, agree with most except “all citizens being treated equally”… Bill and KilLIARy and obummer got a pass on EVERYTHING… no equal treatment about any of the MAJOR and minor offences they committed

    • Larry Vervack says

      Jeff, can we also ban, Black Lives Matter, the Black Panthers, the NAACP, or the Congressional Black Caucasus? Or do we only ban “White” groups so you can feel better about yourself. The most discriminated group in America today is the white male. I say “white privilege” is BS made up by black groups and white liberals. Here’s the facts, mainstream America doesn’t resist, protest, burn cars, or prevents those whose with whom they disagree from speaking. We don’t stand on top of cars yelling “burn this MF down”. This is what socialist/liberal/anarchists and Black hate groups do. What mainstream America does do is vote, and when they have taken all the crap that people like you dish out, they vote for a President who is not PC, and has the leadership and the strength to tell the truth. Thanks God for President Trump! By the way, when was the last time you and people like you even won an election. Get ready to lose and lose and lose as your own intolerance and hatred continues to ruin you and your politicians.

  15. Nicole Benedict says

    He dooms himself. Anytime he is not scripted he speaks ugliness or evil.

    You might be interested to know that the Civil War Vets from the South were PARDONED so they could be Vets. They were pardoned for TREASON. The confederate flag represents TREASON.

    Your inability to call out nazism as a bad thing is horrifying. Your inability to decry white supremacy is horrifying. Trump’s inability to acknowledge the nazis at Charlottesville is beyond disgusting. His blaming of the antifa defies explanation. He is supporting fascists over anti-fascists.

    Do you really not get this?

    • Billy Howard Penix says

      The Confederate soldiers were NEVER pardoned to be made Veterans as many apologists who cite the 1958 NDA law. This claim was being made even before the violence in Charleston and now Charlottesville. . The Sons of Confederate Veterans cited the 1958 law to make the case that all Americans should honor Confederate veterans. An undated official history of the Department of Veterans Affairs that covers the period up to 2006 goes so far as to claim that the law “pardoned” Confederate service members. A 1997 article in VFW Magazine also referred to the “congressional pardon” of 1958.

      Since the Charleston massacre, the claim has resurfaced on conservative websites. In fact, it has circulated so widely of late that a petition has been launched calling on the Obama administration to take action to repeal the law.

      But in fact, the law does not do what Confederate apologists say it does. It certainly does not “pardon” Confederate veterans, nor does it generally give them status “equal to” U.S. veterans.

      The original legislation was introduced to raise pensions for widows and former widows of deceased veterans of the Spanish-American War. In committee, it was amended to include widows of deceased U.S. veterans of the Civil War and Indian War, as well as widows of Confederate veterans.

      “It is my understanding that the Senator from Louisiana [Mr. Long] is the author of the amendment providing for pensions for the approximately 1,000 widows of Confederate veterans,” Sen. Lyndon Johnson (D-Texas), the Senate’s majority leader and presiding officer, said during floor debate over the measure, according to the Congressional Record. “The bill was unanimously reported by the Committee on Finance. There is much interest in it, and I hope the Senate will act on it unanimously.”

      The “Senator from Louisiana” would be Russell B. Long, at the time a pro-segregation Democrat. The Congressional Record clearly shows there was no discussion on the Senate floor of Confederate “pardons” or any general change in the status of Confederate veterans.

      The section of the law that Confederate apologists seem to be misconstruing is this one:

      “(e) For the purpose of this section, and section 433, the term ‘veteran’ includes a person who served in the military or naval forces of the Confederate States of America during the Civil War, and the term ‘active, military or naval service’ includes active service in such forces.”
      “For the purpose of this section” is referring to Section 432 of the Veterans’ Benefits Act of 1957, which set pensions for widows of U.S. veterans of the Civil War; Section 433 of that act pertains to pensions of Civil War veterans’ children. There is nothing in U.S. Public Law 85-425 or the law it amends that says anything about making Confederate veterans U.S. veterans or “pardoning” them.

      As Confederate history researcher, author and blogger Andy Hall of Texas noted recently in a discussion at another blog when someone claimed that “Congress passed a law making any and all confederate soldier [sic] a US veteran” (emphasis Hall’s):

      If you’re referring to the 1958 legislation, all it did was make Confederate veterans eligible for the same VA benefits as Union soldiers were. It did not make them U.S. veterans, make any other official change in their status, or extend any particular protections to graves or monuments.

      It’s really amusing how the same heritage folks who, generally speaking, have nothing but disdain and mockery for the federal government, cling desperately to this particular bit of legislation as an endorsement of their ancestors’ integrity. Is your faith in them and their cause genuinely so weak that you have to have the official imprimatur of the U.S. government to justify their cause? Apparently so.

    • LiZa Adkison says

      nichole, you left another HORRIFYING group off your list when you mentioned nazism and white supremacy>>>what about
      BLACK LIVES MATTER??? now that’s HORRIFYING

    • Lloyd Barchers says

      Nicole, would you provide a few examples of his “he speaks ugliness or evil.” I know you won’t, because no one has provided that information for you. Only accusations and insults. But, I thought I would give you a chance to provide us some of the so-called “ugliness and evil” that Trump says. Maybe I missed it or forgot it and you can refresh my memory. Thank you in advance, Nicole.

  16. Don Baldwin says

    Telling line….

    “They didn’t give them freedom and make them equal to the White man”

    WE have to MAKE them equal…because they aren’t. THAT is the REAL “racial problem”.

    • Chuck Tortorete says

      Don, you are the real cancer facing America. I guess the good thing is you took off your hood. Our fathers also gave there lives fighting the Nazis and here you are defending them and their ideas. They tried to wipe out all Jews, people of any color other than the perfect race and even any children with handicaps. How soon we forget what we are really about. Your hate has blinded you just as the hate in pre war Germany blinded them. Well you finally got your leader. I will always oppose you and people like you. God help us!!

  17. James Hare says

    I agree and here is some proof for those who are going to attack you over this issue.

    JUST CHECK U.S. PUBLIC LAW 85-425
    Confederate soldiers ,sailors, and Marines that fought in the Civil war were made U.S. Veterans by an act of Congress in in 1957, U.S. Public Law 85-425, Sec 410, Approved 23 May, 1958. This made all Confederate Army/ Navy/ Marine Veterans equal to U.S. Veterans. Additionally, under U.S. Public Law 810, Approved by the 17th Congress on 26 Feb 1929 the War Department was directed to erect headstones and recognize Confederate grave sites as U.S. War dead grave sites. Just for the record the last Confederate veteran died in 1958. So, in essence, when you remove a Confederate statue, monument or headstone, you are in fact, removing a statue, monument or head stone of a U.S. VETERAN.

Leave a Reply