In response to:

When General Grant Expelled the Jews

Stormvetprime Wrote: May 14, 2012 7:17 AM
So many forget that it was a white male Republican, Abe Lincoln, who freed the slaves. Grant was instrumental in that fight. Republicans have been consistent from then until now - blacks should be free and equal in the eyes of the law, and no need for social programs remains be a part of that, as Lincoln-era Republicans and modern-era Republicans both agree. We have not changed in our reasonable support of racial equality.
VaSteve Wrote: May 14, 2012 7:59 AM
Sorry to bust your bubble but Lincoln did NOT free the slaves. Granted,he did free the slaves in DC but with,and I quote,"great reservations". Abe's Emancipation Proclamation freed the slaves that were not under his authority,those in the seceded states. Slaves that were under Union control,such as in KY,MO,MD,DE,and soon to be West VA,and ALL Union Occupied ares of the South(Tidewater VA,New Orleans,eastern TN) were to remain in bondage. Meanwhile,Abe,a member of the Illinois and
VaSteve Wrote: May 14, 2012 8:02 AM
the United States Colonization Societies was feverishly looking for a way to rid this country of free Blacks. Slavery was abolished Dec 1865,Lincoln had been dead for over eight months.
Joe1947 Wrote: May 14, 2012 8:19 AM
Lincoln led the campaign that resulted in the destruction of the slave-holding aristocracy of the south. In that sense, he did free the slaves, in a way similar to saying that Ronald Reagan won the Cold War. And yes, it *was* about slavery. If you read the statements by Jeff Davis and his so-called Vice President Andrew Stephens, from before the war and early during the war, it's quite clear precisely which "state's right" they wanted to protect. If they were as fervently in favor of states' rights in general as it was claimed after they'd lost, they'd not have argued so passionately for the Fugitive Slave Act - which allowed - nay, *required* - federal authorities to trample on the rights of the northern states that had laws declaring...
Joe1947 Wrote: May 14, 2012 8:21 AM
that any blacks who made it into the state were considered free. "The heck you say!" was the southern response. "Federal forces *MUST* help retake those slaves, when asked to do so, and your "states' rights" don't mean a bloody thing!" Only later - after over 600,000 deaths and the defeat and wreckage of the south, did southern apologists decide it was all really only about "states' rights" after all. States rights for me, but not for thee....
Dave M Wrote: May 14, 2012 1:02 PM
Joe- there have always been revisionists on this- even at the time. The Civil War simply could not have happened without slavery. Secession happened because the Southern States themselves knew slavery was doomed in the Union.- and Lincoln's election was the point of no return. Slavery could not exist as an institution in the territories which would form future states.

IN DECEMBER 1862, from his military headquarters in Mississippi, Major General Ulysses S. Grant issued a directive expelling "Jews as a class" from the immense war zone known as the Department of the Tennessee. General Orders No. 11 was the most notorious anti-Jewish edict ever issued by an official of the US government, and it was overruled by the commander-in-chief -- President Abraham Lincoln -- as soon as he learned of it in Washington.

Notwithstanding its sweeping terms, the order turned out to have little immediate impact on the thousands of Jews living in the area under Grant's command. Only about...