Another Traitor Monument Comes Down

MASON said:
Why was there a Northern and Southern Democrat on the ballot in 1860 dipshit?
Click to expand...

More intellectual discussion? On the ballot? LMAO :laugh: A "false premise" the first thing that comes from that peanut brain that rests between your ears? Just how stupid to you believe others to be as compared to your self professed great intellect.....the Atypical leftist American pretending to be representative of the majority when your social communist roots represent but less than 20% of the population.

As was pointed out.....the civil war was not "the" south v. "the" north, it was a battle between "R" (anti-slavery) v. "D" (pro-slavery). That is the reason the current (wink, wink) PROGRESSIVE LIBERALS have began a "book burning" err......statue destroying historical re-adjustment claiming that the stars and bars is the reason for the book burnings across this nation. There is some "semi-truth/half truth" with that mission statement. The stars and bars was a symbol of hate......with a "D" painted all over that particular flag.
 
CFM said:
Losing didn't change that secession took place.

One of the biggest debates after the war was over was how to RE-admit the States that had seceded. If the Congress of the U.S. was involved in such a debate, even they acknowledged secession took place. You can't let someone RE-join if they didn't leave.

Perhaps you've heard the term REconstruction.
Click to expand...

I'd recheck your history, and what reconstruction was while your at it.
 
Ralph said:
More intellectual discussion? On the ballot? LMAO :laugh: A "false premise" the first thing that comes from that peanut brain that rests between your ears? Just how stupid to you believe others to be as compared to your self professed great intellect.....the Atypical leftist American pretending to be representative of the majority when your social communist roots represent but less than 20% of the population.

As was pointed out.....the civil war was not "the" south v. "the" north, it was a battle between "R" (anti-slavery) v. "D" (pro-slavery). That is the reason the current (wink, wink) PROGRESSIVE LIBERALS have began a "book burning" err......statue destroying historical re-adjustment claiming that the stars and bars is the reason for the book burnings across this nation. There is some "semi-truth/half truth" with that mission statement. The stars and bars was a symbol of hate......with a "D" painted all over that particular flag.
Click to expand...

Deflection from the question!
 
Ralph said:
More intellectual discussion? On the ballot? LMAO :laugh: A "false premise" the first thing that comes from that peanut brain that rests between your ears? Just how stupid to you believe others to be as compared to your self professed great intellect.....the Atypical leftist American pretending to be representative of the majority when your social communist roots represent but less than 20% of the population.

As was pointed out.....the civil war was not "the" south v. "the" north, it was a battle between "R" (anti-slavery) v. "D" (pro-slavery). That is the reason the current (wink, wink) PROGRESSIVE LIBERALS have began a "book burning" err......statue destroying historical re-adjustment claiming that the stars and bars is the reason for the book burnings across this nation. There is some "semi-truth/half truth" with that mission statement. The stars and bars was a symbol of hate......with a "D" painted all over that particular flag.
Click to expand...

you might want to read a book, although I agree that TDS is the cause of wanting to destroy inanimate objects,
the civil war was an act of Northern aggression, nothing more

the South was more than willing to free the slaves, just needed more money for their cotton if they were to pay the people picking the cotton for their labor

cotton was the cash crop, and the North was reaping the profit, to industrialize "the North",
The South said, do your thing, we'll do ours, we will sell OUR cotton to England and use OUR profits for OUR prosperity, pretty American concept really
 
MASON said:
Deflection from the question!
Click to expand...

Yep.....its deflection. :laugh: You got's me. I give up....your great intellect of not documenting a single thing was just too much for my weak mind to overcome. How many SOCKS do you have? :(

Clearly....there were no slaves owned by "D"s in the north......and all of the slave owners were really "R"s at heart as they would relocate to the south just to prove your subjective BS correct. Oh...it was a great plan and it has taken only 150 years to implement.
 
Getin the ring said:
you might want to read a book, although I agree that TDS is the cause of wanting to destroy inanimate objects,
the civil war was an act of Northern aggression, nothing more

the South was more than willing to free the slaves, just needed more money for their cotton if they were to pay the people picking the cotton for their labor

cotton was the cash crop, and the North was reaping the profit, to industrialize "the North",
The South said, do your thing, we'll do ours, we will sell OUR cotton to England and use OUR profits for OUR prosperity, pretty American concept really
Click to expand...

LOL! Talk about historical pig-ignorance. Nothing you posted is based in reality.
 
Getin the ring said:
you might want to read a book, although I agree that TDS is the cause of wanting to destroy inanimate objects,
the civil war was an act of Northern aggression, nothing more

the South was more than willing to free the slaves, just needed more money for their cotton if they were to pay the people picking the cotton for their labor

cotton was the cash crop, and the North was reaping the profit, to industrialize "the North",
The South said, do your thing, we'll do ours, we will sell OUR cotton to England and use OUR profits for OUR prosperity, pretty American concept really
Click to expand...

Hell.....NO ONE....not one of the slave owners were "willing" to free the slaves before the war...even the "D"s in the north demanded that the laws be enforced concerning slavery during the conflict known as the CIVIL WAR. It was only after the "proclamation" that slave holders in the north decided to give up their personal property. I agree.....that war was fought on UNCONSTITUTIONAL GROUND with the south being the actual government that followed the constitution in a correct manner. As Slave ownership was a state's issue....not a BIG BROTHER up your ass matter.

If anyone wanted slavery to end......they should have addressed THE PEOPLE who made it legal in the first place. Slavery could have ended in the same manner as THE PEOPLE allowed civil rights to come into existence. At the ballot box. Slavery existed in the US....not because "ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL" was a lie.....slavery existed because the MAJORITY of the people wanted it to exist.

When society was ready for change.....the same majority that allowed slavery demanded CIVIL RIGHTS for those former slaves. No right in this nation has ever existed without consent of the MAJORITY. Its the method by which freedom truly exists. If you allow the minority to dictate policy to the majority....are you truly living in a FREE STATE? No....you are accepting TOTALITARIANISM as normal.

I defy anyone...….ANYONE.....to locate the tenet.....TYRANNY OF THE MAJORITY anywhere in our founding documents. Its a made up buzz phrase used by the left to justify their acceptance of TOTALITARIANISM.
 
Last edited:
Getin the ring said:
you might want to read a book, although I agree that TDS is the cause of wanting to destroy inanimate objects,
the civil war was an act of Northern aggression, nothing more

the South was more than willing to free the slaves, just needed more money for their cotton if they were to pay the people picking the cotton for their labor

cotton was the cash crop, and the North was reaping the profit, to industrialize "the North",
The South said, do your thing, we'll do ours, we will sell OUR cotton to England and use OUR profits for OUR prosperity, pretty American concept really
Click to expand...

Your drugs and alcohol are making your mind a cloudy Haze regarding history. England was getting its cotton from the south before the civil war. Have you ever heard of Egyptian cotton? When the union blockade cut off shipments of cotton to England the English went to Egypt to grow their cotton.
 
Ralph said:
As was pointed out.....the civil war was not "the" south v. "the" north, it was a battle between "R" (anti-slavery) v. "D" (pro-slavery).
Click to expand...

Yes, back in the 1860's Conservatives were Democrats and liberals were Republicans.

There are no liberal Republicans today, but there are plenty of Conservative Democrats.
 
Ralph said:
That is the reason the current (wink, wink) PROGRESSIVE LIBERALS have began a "book burning" err......statue destroying historical re-adjustment claiming that the stars and bars is the reason for the book burnings across this nation.
Click to expand...

The only purpose the monuments serve is to give you comfort because you share the same values as the traitors, racists, and losers the monuments glorify and sanitize.
 
Getin the ring said:
the civil war was an act of Northern aggression, nothing more
Click to expand...

It was the South that seceded from the union. An aggressive act.


Getin the ring said:
the South was more than willing to free the slaves, just needed more money for their cotton if they were to pay the people picking the cotton for their labor
Click to expand...

"Look what you made me do...you made me have to use slaves so I could make a profit"

Boo-hoo, poor Plantation owners weren't making as much money as they wanted because of the North. Cry me a river. Maybe pick your own fucking cotton, then?


The South said, do your thing, we'll do ours, we will sell OUR cotton to England and use OUR profits for OUR prosperity, pretty American concept really
Click to expand...

Except that's not what they said.

Instead, what they said was...we won't give up the means by which we preserve our wealth, so we are just going to leave the country because our feelings are hurt.
 
katzgar said:
Your drugs and alcohol are making your mind a cloudy Haze regarding history. England was getting its cotton from the south before the civil war. Have you ever heard of Egyptian cotton? When the union blockade cut off shipments of cotton to England the English went to Egypt to grow their cotton.
Click to expand...

So….according to you....its perfectly acceptable to use one totalitarian nation (Egypt) and its child and slave labor to replace the slave produced cotton from the south? :dunno: Its not like the supposed father of modern Egypt (Muhammad Ali) ever endorsed slavery or had anyone assassinated.
 
LV426 said:
It was the South that seceded from the union. An aggressive act.




"Look what you made me do...you made me have to use slaves so I could make a profit"

Boo-hoo, poor Plantation owners weren't making as much money as they wanted because of the North. Cry me a river. Maybe pick your own fucking cotton, then?




Except that's not what they said.

Instead, what they said was...we won't give up the means by which we preserve our wealth, so we are just going to leave the country because our feelings are hurt.
Click to expand...

We beat their asses. Just another vanquished foe of the USA. Hitler, the Kaiser, the South, Saddam, all the same. LOSERS
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top