In response to:

Parting Company

Steelpony Wrote: Nov 29, 2012 7:06 AM
It can be said that any offense against the state less grave than insurrection or treason is no small matter, it is sedition. Can a person be tried for sedition? Lincoln, Sheridan and other of his generals are surely guilty of such. Orders were given by Lincoln to destroy the Southern States, burn to the ground after you have pillaged,plundered anything of value from southern homes and farms and take it back to the union states. Then comes the carpetbaggers during reconstruction scaming, stealing what may be left behind It began with the idea of Southern independence, the freedom to sell commercial goods to Europe where better prices were paid than those of the north. Government representation in the North was much more stronger
annfan_777 Wrote: Nov 29, 2012 8:27 AM
You are clueless. Lincoln was a great man and an even greater president.

The Civil War happened because the South wanted to maintain its cash cow, slavery. They wanted to continue owning other people and making money from their labors.
richard2911 Wrote: Nov 29, 2012 10:19 AM
Please read "The Real Lincoln" and then see if it was about freeing the slaves he did not except in territories and States that the Feds did not control. No Slaves were freed in New Orleans and surrounding parishes parts of federal controlled Arkansas, Tenn. and other states. Lincoln even admitted it was not about ending slavery but about Centralized Government with all control in Washington. More newspapers in the North opposed Lincoln and some were jailed or imprisoned just for writing editorials about his true goal. Even the abolitionists opposed Lincoln because he was not interested in freeing the slaves. Lincoln would make an excellent Democrat today.
WestTexan Wrote: Nov 29, 2012 10:55 AM
I'll disagree with you Annfan, Lincoln violated the very spirit of the Consitution, as well as the letter of it. Your history isn't correct, slavery was one issue among many, and it was the club used by the north to justify invasion of a sovereign State.

Slavery dear was LEGAL at the time, morally reprehensible yes (just like abortion today), but it was legal. The industrial north had colonized the southern States economy with tariffs and price controls. The addition of none slave holding States was another issue, which was a political tool to further isolate the south and marginalize them in Washington. No defense of slavery but it wasn't the only reason for secession.
Idahoser Wrote: Nov 29, 2012 2:03 PM
Whatever you might think of Lincoln, you cannot refute that he ended the Constitutional Republic and instituted the dreaded Democracy. If states are not free to leave then it is NOT a union at all.
Steelpony Wrote: Nov 29, 2012 7:09 AM
due to population numbers and the way representative government was set up.

Thus the South had enough of the George III type mandates of how the business of doing business with the northern area.
For decades, it has been obvious that there are irreconcilable differences between Americans who want to control the lives of others and those who wish to be left alone. Which is the more peaceful solution: Americans using the brute force of government to beat liberty-minded people into submission or simply parting company? In a marriage, where vows are ignored and broken, divorce is the most peaceful solution. Similarly, our constitutional and human rights have been increasingly violated by a government instituted to protect them. Americans who support constitutional abrogation have no intention of mending their ways.

Since Barack Obama's re-election, hundreds...