- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Haley declines to say slavery was cause of Civil War
Posted on 12/28/23 at 9:48 am to SUJagsfan
Posted on 12/28/23 at 9:48 am to SUJagsfan
Our ancestors are rolling in their graves laughing at the idiots trying to run this country
Politicians need to go back in time and walk a mile in their shoes
They might actually learn a thing or two instead of worrying about rewriting history
Politicians need to go back in time and walk a mile in their shoes
They might actually learn a thing or two instead of worrying about rewriting history
This post was edited on 12/28/23 at 9:49 am
0
Posted on 12/28/23 at 9:51 am to SUJagsfan
quote:
States rights to do what exactly?
For example... Today Louisiana would have the right to govern themselves as they saw fit, and not be told what to do by Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.
A good case in point here is Marijuana. In Oklahoma you can buy it, smoke it, have it... Because Oklahoma voted for it. But then Joe Biden can come in and arrest you for because it is still illegal under Federal Law. Therefore Federal law is Suppercedding the laws voted in by the people of Oklahoma.
This post was edited on 12/28/23 at 9:52 am
Posted on 12/28/23 at 9:53 am to Fun Bunch
quote:Rights ... all of them.
What right in particular
quote:
If not for slavery, there would have been no secession and war.
---
But slavery was a thing. Evil? yes. Morally reprehensible? Yes. But it was nonetheless, a component of the United States national foundation and union.
If not for Northern attempts to sublimate Southern rights in accordance with the Constitution, there would have been no secession and war.
It is an important distinction, because there were numerous issues at hand. Southerners felt if a Constitutional guarantee could be vaporized, they could be decimated in other less certain issues like differential tariffs/taxation as well.
Posted on 12/28/23 at 9:56 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Rights ... all of them.
But in particular, slavery. As clearly stated by their own documents.
This isn’t hard guys.
Posted on 12/28/23 at 9:56 am to Auburn1968
quote:
"Slavery was the cause of the Civil War" is the remedial elementary school version of history.
Sure if you leave it like that.
But it’s clear to us today as it was in 1860 that the cited reason for secession was the election of Lincoln and the anti-slavery sentiment.
Posted on 12/28/23 at 10:01 am to rmnldr
quote:
But in particular, slavery. As clearly stated by their own documents.
This isn’t hard guys.
Even if that's not the case:
its the answer you give in 2023 in NH in a Presidential Primary.
THAT'S what this is about
Posted on 12/28/23 at 10:02 am to rmnldr
quote:That is not responsive. Though slavery was the main issue, it certainly was not the only issue.
But in particular
Again, IAW states' rights vis-a-vis the US Constitution as written, the fact threats against slavery were an issue at all in 1860 is telling.
Posted on 12/28/23 at 10:07 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Though slavery was the main issue,
So that's the answer you give at a townhall. This isn't hard
Posted on 12/28/23 at 10:07 am to rmnldr
The mental gymnastics on this topic by this board has always been worthy of a gold medal.
Posted on 12/28/23 at 10:13 am to Fun Bunch
quote:It's the answer you give at a townhall if you don't anticipate motive for the question, and view the electorate as comprised of simpletons undeserving of thoughtful dialogue.
So that's the answer you give at a townhall. This isn't hard
Posted on 12/28/23 at 10:14 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
and view the electorate as comprised of simpletons undeserving of thoughtful dialogue.
I have some news for you, man.
Posted on 12/28/23 at 10:18 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
view the electorate as comprised of simpletons undeserving of thoughtful dialogue.
A person is smart.
People are dumb.
Posted on 12/28/23 at 10:30 am to rmnldr
Some of those East Indians sure seem to be "racist."
But this question appears periodically. Presently, the only thing that means anything is how it's being presented in the propaganda mills.
Slavery was the ancillary wedge used to coax the South into "doing something" which they ultimately did, but also as a military assist.
In tandem with the harassing tariffs placed on commodities shipped to the north ostensibly, solely via the Atlantic coast.
What wasn't told the South is that they would be used on commodities being shipped across to the mills in Europe, which was the real purpose for them from the start.
Which would allow North authoritarians to board the Southern ships and fine, and even seize the cargoes conveniently were it decided upon.
The North was not about to allow the South to become both an agrarian and an industrial giant.
They knew all the potential was down here for it, with just the accommodating weather giving us longer periods for production.
But an ambience that all around is superior to the North.
So if there were no blacks and no slavery, skirmishes would've been inevitable.
There have been wars fought for far less.
The Dutch even fought a war over spices.
The above reasons were more than intimated by T. Harry Williams whose two-volume book on American history was the texts used for the course across Louisiana's colleges for at least two generations.
Is it still used? Or has it been discreetly replaced because it doesn't give the full modern narrative that's now been decided upon by progressive revisionists.
Plus, victimhood has been big business in this nation, and will continue to be.
And property destruction, mayhem, injury, and death will continue unabated as one of the residuals we've been gifted with because of it all.
But this question appears periodically. Presently, the only thing that means anything is how it's being presented in the propaganda mills.
Slavery was the ancillary wedge used to coax the South into "doing something" which they ultimately did, but also as a military assist.
In tandem with the harassing tariffs placed on commodities shipped to the north ostensibly, solely via the Atlantic coast.
What wasn't told the South is that they would be used on commodities being shipped across to the mills in Europe, which was the real purpose for them from the start.
Which would allow North authoritarians to board the Southern ships and fine, and even seize the cargoes conveniently were it decided upon.
The North was not about to allow the South to become both an agrarian and an industrial giant.
They knew all the potential was down here for it, with just the accommodating weather giving us longer periods for production.
But an ambience that all around is superior to the North.
So if there were no blacks and no slavery, skirmishes would've been inevitable.
There have been wars fought for far less.
The Dutch even fought a war over spices.
The above reasons were more than intimated by T. Harry Williams whose two-volume book on American history was the texts used for the course across Louisiana's colleges for at least two generations.
Is it still used? Or has it been discreetly replaced because it doesn't give the full modern narrative that's now been decided upon by progressive revisionists.
Plus, victimhood has been big business in this nation, and will continue to be.
And property destruction, mayhem, injury, and death will continue unabated as one of the residuals we've been gifted with because of it all.
Posted on 12/28/23 at 10:31 am to rmnldr
quote:
quote:
"Slavery was the cause of the Civil War" is the remedial elementary school version of history.
Sure if you leave it like that.
But it’s clear to us today as it was in 1860 that the cited reason for secession was the election of Lincoln and the anti-slavery sentiment.
The first trigger was not slavery, but tariffs that caused a decade long deep depression in the South while creating an economic boom in the North. Southern disaffection then struggled with Northern greed for a couple more decades.
VA was not going to join the Confederacy but then Lincoln announced he was raising 75,000 troops to "suppress the rebellion." Yeah, state's rights were real.
Posted on 12/28/23 at 10:33 am to rmnldr
Pretty much every other country abolished slavery without a civil war except one. Thanks Abe.
Posted on 12/28/23 at 10:35 am to rmnldr
quote:
When the questioner said it was “astonishing” to hear her respond
I find it astonishing 93% of Blacks vote democrat today after Democrats fought civil war to keep slavery.
Posted on 12/28/23 at 10:35 am to rmnldr
quote:
Therefore, slavery was the root cause
Then explain to me all the slaves owned by Northern owners? This continued after that as well. So, NO, it wasn't about slavery. Open up and stretch your mind a wee bit.
This post was edited on 12/28/23 at 10:41 am
Posted on 12/28/23 at 10:36 am to rmnldr
quote:So frickin' what?!?
Haley declines to say slavery was cause of Civil War
Posted on 12/28/23 at 10:37 am to rmnldr
Bless her heart. She's trying to appeal to MAGA voters. Good luck wirth that!
Posted on 12/28/23 at 10:41 am to rmnldr
Page 8 of 15
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News