Abe is said to have been smart. Then he turns around and asks for troops for a mere 3 months. He asks for a tiny fraction of his needs and too short a term. If Bush did that in Iraq, somebody would call him stupid. http://civilwartalk.com/threads/lincoln-call-for-troops-1861-1862.84035/
First, a comment about the actual thread topic: Slavery has always been an obnoxious and odious institution, but most scholars agree that the American slavery was one of the most horrendous that has ever existed. The truth about slavery...is that it sucks. Now...as to your comment, Ted: American conservatives are FOLLOWERS...period. They do not know how to lead...have little aptitude for it. Their best role seems to be as the loyal opposition...needed to keep the excesses of the liberal in check. It appears they cannot even do that right. For the good of our nation, I hope the Republican Party finally rids itself of the anvil of American conservatism...and becomes the force it needs to be.
Here is an interesting read about Lincoln calling for 75,000 troops to invade the South. South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas have already seceded from the Union. Lincoln has his Secretary of War, Simon Cameron, send telegrams to each states Governor asking for volunteer soldiers. Here are the actual replies from Southern Governors... North Carolina- John W. Ellis, Governor of North Carolina, to Simon Cameron, U.S. Secretary of War, 15 April 1861... "Your dispatch is received, and if genuine, which its extraordinary character leads me to doubt, I have to say in reply that I regard the levy of troops made by the Administration for the purpose of subjugating the States of the South as in violation of the Constitution and a gross usurpation of power. I can be no party to this wicked violation of the laws of the country and to this war upon the liberties of a free people. You can get no troops from North Carolina." Kentucky- B. Magoffin, Governor of Kentucky, to Cameron, 15 April 1861... "Your dispatch is received. In answer I say emphatically Kentucky will furnish no troops for the wicked purpose of subduing her sister Southern States." Virginia- John Letcher, Governor of Virginia, to Cameron, 16 April 1861... "I received your telegram of the 15th, the genuineness of which I doubted. Since that time I have received your communication, mailed the same day, in which I am requested to detach from the militia of the State of Virginia 'the quota designated in the table' which you append, 'to serve as infantry or riflemen for the period of three months, unless sooner discharged.' In reply to this communication I have only to say that the militia of Virginia will not be furnished to the powers at Washington for any such use or purpose as they have in view. Your object is to subjugate the Southern States, and a requisition made upon me for such an object--an object, in my judgement, not within the purview of the Constitution or the act of 1795--will not be complied with. You have chosen to inaugurate civil war, and having done so, we will meet it in a spirit as determined as the Administration has exhibited toward the South." Tennessee- Isham G. Harris, Governor of Tennessee, to Cameron, 17 April 1861... "Your dispatch of 15th instant, informing me that Tennessee is called upon for two regiments of militia for immediate service, is received. Tennessee will not furnish a single man for purpose of coercion, but 50,000, if necessary, for the defense of our rights and those of our Southern brethren." Missouri- C.F. Jackson, Governor of Missouri, to Cameron, 17 April 1861... "Your dispatch of the 15th instant, making a call on Missouri for four regiments of men for immediate service, has been received. There can be, I apprehend, no doubt but the men are intended to form a part of the President's army to make war upon the people of the seceded States. Your requisition, in my judgement, is illegal, unconstitutional, and revolutionary in its object, inhuman and diabolical, and cannot be complied with. Not one man will the State of Missouri furnish to carry on any such unholy crusade." Arkansas- H.M. Rector, Governor of Arkansas, to Cameron, 22 April 1861... "In answer to your requisition for troops from Arkansas to subjugate the Southern States, I have to say that none will be furnished. The demand is only adding insult to injury. The people of this Commonwealth are freemen, not slaves, and will defend to the last extremity their honor, lives, and property against Northern mendacity and usurpation."
There are more people enslaved today than at any other time in the history of slavery It's very prevalent in Russia and India, these are part of the civilized world, yes? It's illegal in more places today and it's for sex, not work, but that is about the only real differences
Kenneth Stampp, "The Peculiar Institution" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Peculiar_Institution http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/13/AR2009071303130.html
For the heck of if, suppose today NY State seceded. Who posting would sign up with the Army to kill those citizens?
I'm not a liberal; I did not make stuff up; if you want to know more about the odious nature of American slavery...read about it.
Let me find this out. Do you brand the first dozen slave owning presidents as obnoxious? As to the claim we are followers. What we are not is prone to work at congress with the explicit aim of ruling your life. That seems to anger you that we do not want to rule lives. We want cooperation, not rule. We can't stand how Democrats tell us they are for our best interests but we wake up year upon year bound even more tightly in rules of your making. You even turn health care into a Federal law, that mandates we be punished unless we submit to your will to purchase an insurance policy. Though you treat illegals just fine, we have yet to feel that same warm embrace. We get the hate.
Uhhh, just in case you missed it, Colin was not complaining about untold history lessons. He was complaining about current social issues. Try again.
Robert, allow me once again to start my reply by actually addressing the topic of this thread. The truth about slavery is that it damages both the people enslaved...and the people doing the enslaving. There is a mental penalty that must be paid by both. Glad that the institution no longer exists in the form it did from the inception of our nation until after the American Civil War. I hope you are also. Now...to your comments and questions: Nope. Thank you for agreeing that you guys are followers. We need leaders...every country does. We agree we will not find them in your ranks. I did that? When did I do it? I love you, Robert. You are a fellow human being...dealing with the problems humans deal with. I love you. Be happy to embrace you if you were here. You seem to thrive on the hate. I wish you didn't...but getting away from the hate is something you will have to do on your own.
I believe Donald Trump will be the leader you so crave. GW Bush led you but were you happy that he led? We lead today in congress. We lead in many states as Governors. But we don't lead to shove. We recall the story of a rope. You can lead it and it will follow. If you shove at it, it gets all balled up. As to the claims made over slavery, you sound to me as if you really do condemn the first dozen slave owning presidents. But if you really liked them, why not like it they provided a job, shelter, food and kept them off the streets of Detroit?
What is so amusing to me is how Democrats bemoan slavery yet when they get the chance to brand as hateful men, the first dozen slave owning presidents, they to a man will refuse. I have yet to see any Democrat condemn any of those slave owning presidents. But at that time, slavery was just a group of workers that got paid in shelter, food and even love by the plantation owner. I mean those presidents with slaves had plantations, correct?
Colin is performing poorly as a Quarterback. Given a new chance, he left up where he had left off, not doing well. Many blacks have come out to criticize him. It won't be amusing if he has a hand in making sure people won't watch football games as a Pro.
Damn. And I thought we had agreed that leaders would not be found among the people you support. That certainly died a quick death. Well...agree or not...the American conservative is NOT A LEADER. Not in any way. Mostly, American conservatives are moaners and groaners...people dissatisfied with everything, including, it appears, their own lives. And, they are followers. Leaders LEAD! They do not watch to see which way the crowd is running and then run to the front in a pretense. And leaders...OFTEN shove. That is a trait of being a leader. Leaders will cajole, entreat, threaten (if necessary), and do whatever must be done to LEAD. Trite...and besides the point. A leader WILL LEAD. And a leader will resort to ass-kicking if necessary...in order to get things done. American conservatives never seem to get things done. The institution of slavery was an abomination; an affront to humanity. Slavery, showed that the founders, in many ways, were just using words that sounded pretty rather than making reality statements about the situation. The "all men are created equal" is laughable...considering the reality of the time. For you to suppose that because I feel that way about the institution of slavery, I have to find the first dozens slave owning presidents to be obnoxious...is an absurdity...and an illogical conclusion. Fact is, I dare to suppose that several of the first presidents (the ones who were slave owners) probably felt the same way as I about slavery...that it was an abomination. So they owned slaves. Big deal. They may have been a bit hypocritical...but they were politicians...and politicians often have to hide deeply held convictions in order not to alienate people...or they will not be electable and will never get to do any of the good things they want to do. They make trade-offs. Every politician does. Slavery, particularly the American brand of slavery, should disgust anyone and everyone. A slave could have his/her children or spouse sold out...and could do NOTHING about it. The slave could be sould away from spouse and family...and could do NOTHING about it. Wake up!
When GW Bush led, all I heard from Democrats were whines. And lies, man they told so many lies about the man that were lies paper currency, most of them were rich. As to your whining over slavery, been gone a long long time. And since you won't condemn presidents who owned slaves, to me your caterwauling is called whining.
I'm sorry. You must be mistaking me for someone who cares what you think of my comments about slavery. Fact is, slavery is an abomination...and anyone pretending it is anything more than that simply is not thinking very clearly...or deeply. As for the presidents...if you want to think I am being inconsistent because I honor someone like George Washington even though he owned slaves...knock yourself out. Matters not to me.
Yup. You are a fellow human being. Be glad to have a beer with you...and to shoot the breeze. I do not do hate. And, yes, I do love ya.
it means that both blacks and whites were responsible, not just whites. And, beyond that we have to recognize that liberalism has been worse for blacks than slavery. Again, blacks are responsible too since they are liberals.
I pulled up the slave trade map the other day. Found it so very very interesting that slaves were sold at ports in the North and not the south. I recall in books how the founders discussed slavery. They spent a very short time in discussion. And put the issue to rest. Made slavery legal in these United States of then America. Actually when I saw actual slave quarters, I realized they had it better than they had it when in Africa. Meals were there for the taking. I doubt clothing was purchased for them while in Africa. I know for certain the houses in Aftica were really poor compared to those the slaves lived at in the USA. I noted the slaves were called servants on some slave quarter plans. Also they had a fireplace inside. I realize that today blacks loath having jobs in far too many cases, but back then they had maybe close to 100 percent employment. Not too bad. George Washington housed them here. http://dc.about.com/od/photos/ss/MtVernonPhotos.htm Bear in mind this was in the 1700's.
Imagine the daily lie told by Democrats that they will fix it for blacks. Were I black, I would many years back demanded they start fixing it then. If they won't fix it, stop making promises.
Contempt for Lincoln's actions wasn't limited to the South. Here's some snippets from Northern newspapers regarding Lincoln and his Fort Sumter scheme. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Mr. Lincoln saw an opportunity to inaugurate civil war without appearing in the character of an aggressor." ~ Providence Daily Post, April 13 1861 "We are to have civil war, if at all, because Abraham Lincoln loves a [the Republican] party better than he loves his country.... [He] clings to his party creed, and allows the nation to drift into the whirlpool of destruction." ~ The Providence Daily Post, April 13 1861 "If this result follows and follow civil war it must the memory of ABRAHAM LINCOLN and his infatuated advisors will only be preserved with that of other destroyers to the scorned and execrated.... And if the historian who preserves the record of his fatal administration needs any motto descriptive of the president who destroyed the institutions which he swore to protect, it will probably be some such as this: Here is the record of one who feared more to have it said that he deserted his party than that he ruined the country, who had a greater solicitude for his consistency as a partisan than for his wisdom as a Statesman or his courage and virtue as a patriot, and who destroyed by his weakness the fairest experiment of man in self-government that the world ever witnessed." ~ The American Standard, New Jersey, April 12, 1861, the very day the South moved to reclaim Fort Sumter. "The affair at Fort Sumter, it seems to us, has been planned as a means by which the war feeling at the North should be intensified, and the administration thus receive popular support for its policy.... If the armament which lay outside the harbor, while the fort was being battered to pieces [the US ship The Harriet Lane, and seven other reinforcement ships], had been designed for the relief of Major Anderson, it certainly would have made a show of fulfilling its mission. But it seems plain to us that no such design was had. The administration, virtually, to use a homely illustration, stood at Sumter like a boy with a chip on his shoulder, daring his antagonist to knock it off. The Carolinians have knocked off the chip. War is inaugurated, and the design of the administration accomplished." ~ The Buffalo Daily Courier, April 16, 1861. "We have no doubt, and all the circumstances prove, that it was a cunningly devised scheme, contrived with all due attention to scenic display and intended to arouse, and, if possible, exasperate the northern people against the South.... We venture to say a more gigantic conspiracy against the principles of human liberty and freedom has never been concocted. Who but a fiend could have thought of sacrificing the gallant Major Anderson and his little band in order to carry out a political game? Yet there he was compelled to stand for thirty-six hours amid a torrent of fire and shell, while the fleet sent to assist him, coolly looked at his flag of distress and moved not to his assistance! Why did they not? Perhaps the archives in Washington will yet tell the tale of this strange proceeding.... Pause then, and consider before you endorse these mad men who are now, under pretense of preserving the Union, doing the very thing that must forever divide it." ~ The New York Evening Day-Book, April 17, 1861.
