JSleezy44 
Member since Oct 4, 2010


Stats

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “The Rant

In 1862, after a year of fighting, several Republican senators urged Lincoln to take action to free the slaves. His response was: “Gentlemen, I can’t do it, But I’ll tell you what I can do, I can resign in favor of Mr. Hamlin. Perhaps Mr. Hamliln could do it.” Lincoln himself stated many times that the war was to preserve the Union, not to free the slaves. Freeing the slaves only became an issue when Lincoln decided to use it as a war measure, such as freeing slaves to deprive the South of a valuable asset that was helping the South in it's war effort.
Again, apologies for clogging up this opinion stream with cumbersome facts and actual history.

Posted by JSleezy44 on 10/07/2010 at 1:21 PM

Re: “The Rant

"Slavery wasn't incidental. Tariff's weren't incidental. It was all about the fetid gentile oligarchy maintaining their wealth without working up a sweat."

I didn't just say "slavery is incidental.", I provided evidence for the reason I believe it to be incidental. Just saying something doesn't make it true. Please show me some evidence that I'm wrong.

Posted by JSleezy44 on 10/07/2010 at 1:18 PM

Re: “The Rant

Abraham Lincoln wrote to Alexander H. Stephens of Georgia on 22 December 1860, just 2 days after South Carolina seceded, “ Do the people of the South really entertain fears that a Republican administration would, directly or indirectly, interfere with their slaves, or with them about their slaves? If they do, I wish to assure you, as once a friend, and still, I hope, not an enemy, that there is no cause for such fears.” Later at his inaugural address in March 1861 Lincoln said: “I declare that I have no intention, directly or indirectly, to interfere with slavery in the states where it exists.”

So both sides agreed that there was nothing wrong with owning slaves, and yet I'm wrong to assume that the war wasn't fought over slaves?
That seems illogical.

Posted by JSleezy44 on 10/07/2010 at 1:16 PM

Re: “The Rant

Abraham Lincoln to Greeley in a public letter, which appeared in the September 6 issue of Harper’s Weekly (published August 27). Lincoln asserted that his goal was to save the Union, disagreeing with those who placed either preserving or abolishing slavery above it. “If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save the Union by freeing all the slaves I would do it. And if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that.” He ended by repeating his “oft-expressed personal wish that all men every where could be free.”
Maybe there is some truth to the notion that neither side saw the civil war as a fight for slavery. According to everything I've ever read regarding the civil war leads me to believe that state's rights was the issue, and slavery was incidental.
Otherwise, why would so many black southerners fight for the confederacy?
But I don't mean to bore everyone with a bunch of facts and history. Sorry.

Posted by JSleezy44 on 10/04/2010 at 5:03 PM
ADVERTISEMENT

Collections

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.
ADVERTISEMENT
 
© 1996-2017

Contemporary Media
460 Tennessee Street, 2nd Floor | Memphis, TN 38103
Visit our other sites: Memphis Magazine | Memphis Parent | Inside Memphis Business
Powered by Foundation