Some Texans Have Prepared a Petition to Secede from the USA

[CuteOldGuy]

You really can't judge a 19th century culture with 21st century values. It was a different time. The entire world was just waking up to the horrors of slavery, and the fallacy of racism.

It's been reported that Robert E. Lee had been asked by Lincoln to fight for the North, but Lee refused, not because he supported slavery, but that he couldn't bring himself to fire upon his fellow Virginians. I suspect many who fought for the South were not pro-slavery, but they were pro-Georgia, pro-Tennessee, pro-Arkansas, etc. State's rights and state identity were much stronger then.

I further think that had not Lincoln pressed the issue, slavery would have died a natural death in the South, as it had in England, over the next few years, and the Union could have reunited without having to bow to the supremacy of Washington, DC. That's just an opinion. Who knows what would have happened. What I do know is that the Civil War was a disaster not only in lives lost, but with the resulting concentration of power at the federal level. Of course it was wonderful to end slavery, but I'm still not convinced that slavery was the real impetus for the war.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Old-T

Wrong, as usual, IB. You cannot find a single place I have denied any such thing. I just don't create a delusional would in my head where I try to argue the Confederates were the good guys.

All were guilty, some (Southerners mostly) were substantially more guilty.

Not at all wrong, Old-goat. You are as pretentious in your divine ignorance as ExNYer. Your comment here in no manner mitigates your pretentiousness, and you need to study your history more closely, Old-goaT. Check out how your "morally unimpeachable heroes in blue", such as U.S. Generals Benjamin "Spoons" Butler and Nathaniel Banks and U.S. Admiral Porter and his "Cotton Stealing Association of the United States Navy", personally profited off of slave labor during the Civil War. Then mutiply them by 10 . . . 20 . . . 30 thousand -- actually no one knows how many others. One thing is fairly certain however, the number of textile merchants and workers in Massachusetts outnumbered the number of plantation slave owners in the South.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

You really can't judge a 19th century culture with 21st century values. It was a different time. The entire world was just waking up to the horrors of slavery, and the fallacy of racism.

+1 And that is the kernel fact of the truth!

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

One thing is fairly certain however, the number of textile merchants and workers in Massachusetts outnumbered the number of plantation slave owners in the South.

Thus the Union won.

And you're still upset over it, aren't you?

[JD Barleycorn]

You have to admit that slavery was a central issue of the war. The Confederate Constitution was almost identical to the US Constitution except for the one paragraph guaranteeing slavery for now and later.

Article I Section 9(4)No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Old-T

Thus the Union won.

And you're still upset over it, aren't you?

Oh! you are an enourmously ignorant old fool, Old-goaT, and your attempt to deflect with the above errant and obviously off topic post is proof. So let the following be a pin-prick of reality for your over-inflated and pretentious sense of self:

http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=956872&postcount=27

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8th_Reg...nteer_Infantry


"There is a scent of sweet victory in the air", as my gggrandpappie might have said. ExNYer's gggrandpappie could not make that claim, could yours, Old-goaT? Maybe you are descended from Edmund Ruffin, and you're pretentious airs are nothing more than camouflage as you try to assuage your ancestral guilt, Old-goaT. Is that what's going on, Old-goaT?

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Oh! you are an enourmously ignorant old fool, Old-goaT, and your attempt to deflect with the above errant and obviously off topic post is proof. So let the following be a pin-prick of reality for your over-inflated and pretentious sense of self:

http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=956872&postcount=27

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8th_Reg...nteer_Infantry


"There is a scent of sweet victory in the air", as my gggrandpappie might have said. ExNYer's gggrandpappie could not make that claim, could yours, Old-goaT? Maybe you are descended from Edmund Ruffin, and you're pretentious airs are nothing more than camouflage as you try to assuage your ancestral guilt, Old-goaT. Is that what's going on, Old-goaT?

I try to ne nice to you IBuffoon because I know you are a bit slow on the mental agility scale, but you really do make it hard to be nice to you.

So, your lineage passed through KY. Is that suposed to impress me, scare me, or explain why you are brain dammaged? Do you think that means you get some brownie points? OK, I erroneously misinterpreted when you said:

Originally Posted by I B Hankering
Was not born nor raised in the South, and my forebears wore Yankee blue fighting against the Stars and Bars.


I didn't realize you equated "Yankee" and "Kentucky" My bad. Your logic and use of the English language is clearly far superior to mine.

That's probably why you rebut my comment that the Union won by telling me your gggrandpappie fought for the Union. Somehow I don't see how that contradicts my saying that the Union won (which, if you recall, is what you were responding to). Or are you saying the Union won BECAUSE he fought for them? Good for him. Still bad for you and your inability to actually answer questions asked of you.

As to what my ggg...etc did, are you somehow saying that whether HE fought in the US Civil War affects something here in the 21st century? Since you seem so smug in your knowledge of me, please tell me what my "ancestral guilt" is? WHAT EXACTLY ARE YOU ACCUSING MY ANCESTORS OF, YOU ASSININE BLOATED, IGNORANT, LIEING BLOWHARD? No buffoonery about how many barrels of moonshine your ggggggggggpapi smuggled, no diverting of the accusation to say "you're a liberal therefore you suck!".

Just answer the damn question: YOU accused MY family of having ancestral guilt, so now back that up with specifics! You may well be correct (but I doubt it). The point is, until you clarify your statement we can't intelligently discuss it, can we? So tell me, what evil did my family support? What attrocity did they commit? What "ancestral guilt" do you know is in my blood? Speak up with SPECIFICS, of shut the hell up and be labled an assinine, bloated, ignorant, lieing, blowhard forever!

have a great day you slanderous bastard! :mf_laughbounc e:

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Not at all wrong .

That is the biggest fucking joke on the board. IBMassa, you are CONSISTENTLY WRONG, and perhaps the most hard headed dipshit on the board. You're going to wind up advocating slavery rather than concede any of your contentions.

Just dumber than a bag of rocks, aren't you?

LMASO @ Cracker Dipshit.

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Just dumber than a bag of rocks, aren't you?

Yes he is. And unfortunately, louded too!

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Old-T

I try to ne nice to you IBuffoon because I know you are a bit slow on the mental agility scale, but you really do make it hard to be nice to you.

So, your lineage passed through KY. Is that suposed to impress me, scare me, or explain why you are brain dammaged? Do you think that means you get some brownie points? OK, I erroneously misinterpreted when you said:

Originally Posted by I B Hankering
Was not born nor raised in the South, and my forebears wore Yankee blue fighting against the Stars and Bars.


I didn't realize you equated "Yankee" and "Kentucky" My bad. Your logic and use of the English language is clearly far superior to mine.

That's probably why you rebut my comment that the Union won by telling me your gggrandpappie fought for the Union. Somehow I don't see how that contradicts my saying that the Union won (which, if you recall, is what you were responding to). Or are you saying the Union won BECAUSE he fought for them? Good for him. Still bad for you and your inability to actually answer questions asked of you.

As to what my ggg...etc did, are you somehow saying that whether HE fought in the US Civil War affects something here in the 21st century? Since you seem so smug in your knowledge of me, please tell me what my "ancestral guilt" is? WHAT EXACTLY ARE YOU ACCUSING MY ANCESTORS OF, YOU ASSININE BLOATED, IGNORANT, LIEING BLOWHARD? No buffoonery about how many barrels of moonshine your ggggggggggpapi smuggled, no diverting of the accusation to say "you're a liberal therefore you suck!".

Just answer the damn question: YOU accused MY family of having ancestral guilt, so now back that up with specifics! You may well be correct (but I doubt it). The point is, until you clarify your statement we can't intelligently discuss it, can we? So tell me, what evil did my family support? What attrocity did they commit? What "ancestral guilt" do you know is in my blood? Speak up with SPECIFICS, of shut the hell up and be labled an assinine, bloated, ignorant, lieing, blowhard forever!

have a great day you slanderous bastard! :mf_laughbounc e:

Matched slander against your slander and you folded, Old-goaT. It's you and ExNYer who wanted to make a slanderous issue out of who won what and what whose forebears did when, you dumb ignorant fuck. It's obvious you can't take the shit you so willingly dish out can you, Old-goaT, you pretentious fucking hypocrite.

BTW, in the parlance of the time "Yankee blue" was "Yankee blue", you ignorant moron, and Kentucky cast its allegiance with the North. Sit on a Zouave bayonet and rotate, you dumb, pretentious hypocrite.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

That is the biggest fucking joke on the board. IBMassa, you are CONSISTENTLY WRONG, and perhaps the most hard headed dipshit on the board. You're going to wind up advocating slavery rather than concede any of your contentions.

Just dumber than a bag of rocks, aren't you?

LMASO @ Cracker Dipshit.

It's a good thing you have a voice activated computer, Assup. Typing on a keyboard is problematical when your coat sleeves fasten in the back. Giggle and laugh all you want, Assup. It's a common symptom of genetic idiocy exhibited by morons like you.

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Wrong again, you pretentious prick. Spent this entire thread telling you you are a dumb, ignorant fuck, ExNYer -- not defending the Confederacy!

It's you lefty-loons that are the ignorant bunch, Old-goaT. You ignorant fucks hypocritically deny the North's role in perpetuating slavery. Those New York banker types profited off of slave labor. For over 200 years, New York had slaves introduced a slave market into the city and traded slaves publicly. Massachusetts textile merchants and workers profited off of slave labor in the South. New England rum runners profited from the cane product harvested by slaves in the Caribbean. Those tainted "profits" helped make the New England seaboard a vigorous, commercial success -- and those ill-begot commercial profits continued to pour into the North even after the first guns at Ft Sumter quit firing in 1861.

So the next time you ignorant fucks want to pretentiously peer down your condescending noses at the South, you damn well better wipe the shit off your own noses so you doesn't block your view of reality.

You seem to be obsessed with the use of the word "pretentious" You use it in every post against everyone that disagrees with you. Did you buy a thesaurus recently? Do you think that is a winning argument?

You have done nothing BUT defend the Confederacy in this thread. You chimed in on the side of the Texas secessionists and have ranted about Lincoln like he was Pol Pot. Anyone reading your posts knows exactly where your sympathies lie. We are not obligated to believe your bullshit denials.

You keep telling me that I am trying to ignore NY history despite the fact that I have openly acknowledged NY's history.

You even slam the Scots and the Irish because of shipping companies that made money off the slave trade. What you leave out is that Ireland and Scotland were both owned and controlled by England in the 1800s. The Celtic folks of Ireland didn't gain independence until the 1920s. The Scots are still part of England. Those shipping companies in Belfast and Cork were all English enterprises, like the East India companies. The Irish and Scots never saw any of that money, the British kept it all. The native Irish were just cheap labor. Even when the English finally got tired of Irish rebellions, they cut loose only the poor agrarian south that was overwhelmingly Catholic, Celtic, poor and uneducated. They kept Belfast and the rest of the industrial north because that was predominantly Protestant and had a much smaller percentage of native Irish.

But you google some articles about British companies operating in Ireland and point to some Irish surnames of ship captains and suddenly it's Irish profiteering instead of the same old English profiteering. And the same goes for the Scottish articles you googled as well. You are blaming the occupied for the sins of the occupiers.

You somehow believe that if you can trace one dime of slave trade profit to a NY resident or Scottish citizen or cite a race riot in NY, then everyone living in NY or Scotland or Ireland or where ever, is just as guilty as some slave owner in Mississippi having a black man whipped for trying to escape.

But the point that you are willfully avoiding discussing is that nearly two generations earlier, most of the rest of the Anglo-Saxon world had given up on slavery by the popular will of the people. And that is true even if individual merchants and bankers continued to trade with the South. That applies not only to your oh-so-hated NY, it also applies to New England, the upper midwest, the British Isles, and the other British holdings. In the entire English speaking world, only the South decided to draw the line in the sand and fight a bloody war to maintain slavery. The Enlightenment never made it past the Mason-Dixon line.

For whatever reason, you are obsessed with dragging everyone else down to the level of the Confederates, so that no one can judge - at least in your mind. And 600,000 people died between 1861 and 1865 for no good reason. Southern obstinancy and racial superiority beliefs were not good reasons.

Your moral equivalence is disgusting.

You remind me of Holocaust deniers and Nazi sympathizers. Say something bad about the Nazis, and suddenly they start telling you the communists were even worse and "explain" how Lenin was responsible for Hitler and that all that Third Reich shit never would have happened if Woodrow Wilson hadn't looked the other way when the communists were climbing into power. As if German racial anxiety and Jew hatred had nothing to do with it.

And, of course, they will point out that this business man or that banker had business dealings with German industries right up until 1937. So America was profiteering and therefore we are in no position to blame the Nazis. Meanwhile, the half million Americans who died fighting Nazis mean nothing.

If, in fact, one part of your family fought with Kentucky against the South, then good for them. You, however, are a disgrace to their legacy.

And I doubt that every great and/or grandparent you have had in the last 150 years hailed from Kentucky. So I suspect when you are jaw-boning with other Confederate sympathizers about the good ole' days, you only talk about the family branches from Georgia or South Carolina or elsewhere.

I hope that is not too pretentious sounding.

[Old-T]

It is a simple question. Since you missed it, I'll ask it again.

"Just answer the damn question: YOU accused MY family of having ancestral guilt, so now back that up with specifics! You may well be correct (but I doubt it). The point is, until you clarify your statement we can't intelligently discuss it, can we? So tell me, what evil did my family support? What attrocity did they commit? What "ancestral guilt" do you know is in my blood? Speak up with SPECIFICS, of shut the hell up and be labled an assinine, bloated, ignorant, lieing, blowhard forever!"

have a great day you slanderous bastard! :mf_laughbounc e:

Unfortunately your post does not adress it at all. Not that I'm shocked. You are 0 for 1 and counting. Last time we got you up to about 0 for 24 before I lost interest. Let's see how many posts you can make and not answer the question. I'm guessing the over/under is about 12.

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Matched slander against your slander and you folded, Old-goaT. It's you and ExNYer who wanted to make a slanderous issue out of who won what and what whose forebears did when, you dumb ignorant fuck. I wasn't referring to ExNYer, he's a big boy who can respond on his own--and has. If you forget--and I'm sure you are trying to--YOU slandered MY family and I called you on it. That is simple. You are trying to deflect the question (I know, how could I possibly accuse YOU of THAT!). Answer my question you sniveling, assinine, bloated, ignorant, lieing, blowhard. It's obvious you can't take the shit you so willingly dish out can you, Old-goaT, you pretentious fucking hypocrite. Sorry, THAT doesn't answer my question either.

BTW, in the parlance of the time "Yankee blue" was "Yankee blue", you ignorant moron, and Kentucky cast its allegiance with the North. Sit on a Zouave bayonet and rotate, you dumb, pretentious hypocrite. But we're not in the 1860s, are we? You said Yankee in about the year 2012, and 2012 Kentucky folk generally do not associate themselves as Yankees. Oh, and in your typical fashion, that wasn't the question, was it? The question was: "YOU accused MY family of having ancestral guilt, so now back that up with specifics! You may well be correct (but I doubt it). .... So tell me, what evil did my family support? What attrocity did they commit? What "ancestral guilt" do you know is in my blood?"

Pretty map! Want to tell me where on there my ancestors were in 1865? That might help you answer the question you were asked, but I doubt it.

Until proven otherwise, you have YET AGAIN demonstrated IBH is a sniveling, assinine, bloated, ignorant, lieing, blowhard. All you have to do is answer my simple question--back up your slander, and prove me wrong--and I will retract all those words. But pretty maps and other non-related hate talk from you doesn't work.

Sorry! :mf_laughbounc e:

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

You have to admit that slavery was a central issue of the war. The Confederate Constitution was almost identical to the US Constitution except for the one paragraph guaranteeing slavery for now and later.

Article I Section 9(4)No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.

Quite true, JD.

But you erred at the part where you wrote: "You have to admit..."

IB is incapable of that. ALL the rest of the world is wrong, not him.

He is obsessed with "proving" that there was nothing particularly wrong with the Confederacy. But, of course, we are wrong to conclude he sympathizes with the Old South.

To him, it's all a perfectly constructed logical argument whereby the folks who fought and died to end slavery were just as guilty as the folks who died to perpetuate slavery. Go figure.

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

You have to admit that slavery was a central issue of the war. The Confederate Constitution was almost identical to the US Constitution except for the one paragraph guaranteeing slavery for now and later.

Article I Section 9(4)No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.

Yay! I get post #300!

BTW, I love that part about "right of property in negro slaves".

That is a one sentence summation of what the Confederacy was about. In fact, the ONLY thing the Confederacy was about.