President Trump Is Wrong On This One.

Tiny - 'I read a book, A Disease in the Public Mind:" Its' title is Das Kapital. The disease is Marxism.

Tiny - 'I read a book, A Disease in the Public Mind:" Its' title is Das Kapital. The disease is Marxism. Originally Posted by oeb11

Well Oeb, I admire your self discipline being able to get through that one. Yes, a couple of the 60's radicals I mentioned suffered from the disease, until they found God, capitalism and the Republican party.

Thank You - good Sir - it was arduous.

First- 'Know thine enemy"!


Soliloquy from 'the Witches of Eastwick " - slightly modified for current day situation


Daryl Van Horne : [Daryl has been forced into a church]. Can I ask you something? You're all churchgoing folk. I really want to ask you something. Do you think God knew what He was doing when He created Liberals? Huh? No shit! I really want to know.
[takes a tissue from one of the congregation]
Daryl Van Horne : Or do you think it was another one of His minor mistakes like tidal waves... earthquakes... FLOODS?
[kicks the floor]
Daryl Van Horne : You think Liberals are like that?
[their magic makes him vomit into a woman's lap]
Daryl Van Horne : What's the matter? You don't think God makes mistakes? Of course He does. We all make mistakes. Of course, when WE make mistakes they call it evil. When God makes mistakes, they call it nature.
[chuckles]
Daryl Van Horne : So, what do you think? Liberals.
[starts yelling]
Daryl Van Horne : A mistake... or did He do it to us on purpose? Because I really want to know! Because if it's a mistake maybe we can do something about it! Find a cure! Invent a vaccine! Build up our immune systems.
[starts laughing hysterically]
Daryl Van Horne : Get a little exercise. You know... 20 push-ups a day... and you NEVER have to be afflicted with Liberals ever again!



Thanks to Jack Nicholson for a memorable performance - even though a Liberal.

retrospectoscope - perhaps I should have written "Marxists" for Liberals.

Liberals have good points.

Unfortunately - many have morphed into Marxists.

Actually OEB, I believe that you realized after making the Jack Nicholson post that you made it all the way through the post without even one time typing the word "Marxist", and it was eating at you so bad that you had to crawfish on it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...enaming-trump/

This is a no win situation. These Bases, whether you agree are not, are named after men who lead an armed revolt against the United States of America in order to preserve the institution of Slavery.

This is NOT an issue worth defending. In fact, the President needs to support the renaming. Originally Posted by Jackie S

This shows you really don't know what you are talking about, and you do not know American History. A really stupid comment made from emotion rather than knowledge of the civil war.

A little education in American history is suggested.

The following are facts, not opinions:

After the Revolution between the American States and England the peace treaty specifically stated that the various states were considered to be separate and independent Nations. They got together and drew up an agreement that assigned certain functions to a central group of leaders, but the states were still in charge, and they could leave the group if they so desired.

That had some problems, so several years later, the United States was born by another agreement. Look at the US constitution. The individual states were still considered to be independent, and could leave.

Mexico's war of independence pushed out Spain in 1821. Texas became a country, called the Republic of Texas, from 1836 until it agreed to join the United States in 1845. Sixteen years later, it seceded along with 10 other states to form the Confederacy.

When the southern states desired to leave and form a different country, the main reason was because of economic mistreatment by the Industrial Northern States. Slavery was not the only difference between the North and the South. But it is now said to be so because of propaganda that ignores the actual history. The winner of a war usually gets to write the history about the war.

The fact is that economics was the major driving factor for the war. (by the way I wrote a long paper (much longer than this) for college that was titled: "The Economic causes of the Civil War".

The North had completed the Erie Canal built between 1817 and 1825, the original Erie Canal traversed 363 miles from Albany to Buffalo. It was the longest artificial waterway and the greatest public works project in North America. The canal put New York on the map as the Empire State. The leader in population, industry, and economic strength was now connected by ships west to Chicago by the inner ocean called the Great Lakes.

The completion in 1825 of the Erie Canal, connecting Lake Erie with the Hudson River, was an event of major importance in Michigan history because it greatly facilitated the transportation of passengers and freight between the eastern seaboard and Michigan ports. There were with other connections to bring iron ore and turn it into steel. Portions of the Erie Canal are still operable for tourism, the main source of boat traffic along the Erie Canal. Commercial and shipping traffic declined abruptly after the completion of the St. Lawrence Seaway in 1959.

With the northern output of steel, railroad construction began in earnest in the North but not the South. The South was left with very few miles of track when the Civil War started. That fact alone meant that they never had a chance to compete with the industrial North. Once President Lincoln said that they could not become a separate nation, they never had a chance because they were a geographical area that grew cotton, tobacco and sugar; all very labor intensive.

Before the Civil War, the southern states has developed a trading partnership with England by sending their cotton to England to be turned into clothing at the English mills. Hatred of the North for the South resulted in charging expensive railroad freight rates from the South to the North for cotton and cheap railroad freight rates from the North to the South for industrial goods. The South could, and did, send their cotton by ships to England cheaper than sending it North to the mills in New England. That really pissed the Northern people off. How dare the South trade with England and not them, after they built the railroad lines south to get their cotton: you do understand that the North didn't give a tinker's damn about the slaves that picked the cotton.

In 1794 Eli Whitney (1765-1825) patented the cotton gin, a machine that revolutionized the production of cotton by greatly speeding up the process of removing seeds from cotton fiber. The demand for cotton went up, and the black families were caught by the worldwide economic demands. By the mid-19th century, cotton had become America’s leading export. His invention offered Southern planters a way to produce more cotton with less labor as a a growing number of Americans, including Southern Americans, supported the abolition of slavery. More than a few history scholars have made the point that slavery would have ended within a short time if the cotton Gin had been invented only a few years earlier because there would no longer be a need for it. Interesting point, and it is a long study and a longer discussion. What if?

There was a problem with expanding cotton production to the West: the South had very few miles of rail that would transport the cotton from the West to the sea ports in the East: The North would not invest in Railroads for use by only the South that would have helped to developed to Southern states. When the North blockaded the sea ports, that cut off the supply of money from England for the Cotten it wanted and needed the was almost over.

Just follow the money, the trail of money explains a lot.

At the beginning of the war, very few people even considered the slaves; except John Brown who attacked Harper's Ferry with the hope of giving the slaves an opportunity to rise up and rebel: none did, and they knew they could have. He was hanged: "John brown's body lies a mouldering in the grave".

The South, to this day, understands the discrimination of the North against it. Slaves were common long before and during the 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 and into the 1800s. Not all slaves were black and in some parts of the world they exist today. The drive for money does tell us something.

Today, in America, farming is not as labor intensive, and there is no need for slaves to do the work: I wish that these changes could have been brought sooner. We can not change the past: it is what it is. We should learn from history, and honor our past success as well as our past mistakes. Pulling down statues and confederate flags will not change anything. It does limit our understanding and substitute emotion for thoughts. We need those reminder of who and what we were.

The real problem today: the Democrat party still tries to hold the black man back. They intentionally limit the education of black young people in the inner city schools to an inadequate education. The wasted time on sports in our schools prevents the serious training of our students in math and science. Forget the watered down play time classes and the fake social study courses. Let's get serious about what needs to be done now to train the black students. Without an education, the chances for a better income and life is severely limited.

The Democrat party was the party of the South before and after the Civil war. It was the party of the KKK, and it has NEVER wanted the Negro to develop socially and economically. Look at the large cities controlled by the Democrat party, there has been almost nothing done to raise up the black family. Trump has tried, and been viciously attacked. The democrats want the jobs to go the the immigrant workers who cross our borders and take the jobs from the black people. Today's Wall Street Journal had a feature article about how President Trump has now closed some of the programs that allow foreign workers to come into our country for work. Those jobs should go to Americans. The training programs that draw foreign workers should go to Americans, and our black neighbors need those training programs more than any of us. The Democrats object: what the hell is this? They object? The Corona Virus has hurt the black families more than any other part of our society. This is just another attempt, by the Democrats, to keep the black people in our society down.

There is a chance with the next election to really make a difference in America. But many blacks do not understand that the only way to make any real changes is to help Trump "drain the swamp". If we don't re-elect Trump, I believe that the threat of the Democrat Party to pull the black man back into perpetual slavery is real.

According to the latest wikipedia estimate, there were 755,000 American deaths in the Civil War, nearly all white. That's an astounding 2.4% of the entire population. It would be equivalent to 8 million deaths today! By far our nation's bloodiest war. Even WW2 "only" saw 405,000 US fatalities.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...ualties_of_war

I think it is legitimate to ask - if the Union soldiers who shed their blood so profusely found it in their hearts afterwards to forgive and reconcile with their Southern counterparts, and if the Yankee descendants of those dead Union soldiers were not offended by the erection of statues and monuments depicting the generals their forefathers fought and died fighting against, then what gives these phony sanctimonious assholes in the streets today the moral right to act offended 150 fucking years later? Originally Posted by lustylad

No one is willing to punch the faggots in the mouth and stop them...

No one is willing to punch the faggots in the mouth and stop them... Originally Posted by friendly fred

Why don't you, Big Shooter?

Trumptards hate their racist heritage fucked with.

Trumptards hate their racist heritage fucked with.



Originally Posted by JCM800

if yous say so

Historical Revisionist started propagating “The Cause” propaganda during reconstruction.

The truth lies elsewhere.

https://portside.org/2013-11-04/abso...-about-slavery

I’m not sure if is a true quote, but in the movie Gettysburg, General Longstreet said.....”the South should have freed the slaves, and THEN fired on Ft Sumner”.

Historical Revisionist started propagating “The Cause” propaganda during reconstruction.

The truth lies elsewhere.

https://portside.org/2013-11-04/abso...-about-slavery

I’m not sure if is a true quote, but in the movie Gettysburg, General Longstreet said.....”the South should have freed the slaves, and THEN fired on Ft Sumner”.

As usual, all of you who spend your entire waking hours for fresh meat to post in this hallowed forum are way off base. Doesn't being wrong all the time ever get tired for any of you? Obviously not.

The goal of the North at the beginning of the Civil War was to preserve the Union. Admittedly a rather abstract concept. Lincoln himself said "If I could preserve the Union by freeing all the slaves I would do it tomorrow. If I could preserve the Union by freeing none of the slaves I would also do that tomorrow." He only issued the Emancipation Proclamation after realizing the Union needed a stronger rally cry and he finally got his first battle victory at Antietam. Also notice said proclamation did not free the slaves in states that were still loyal to the union.

Lincoln was, in my opinion, the greatest president we have ever had. He was also a flawed human being and a product of his times. All white people back then truly believed black people were beneath them. Lincoln himself was shocked and amazed at how intelligent and articulate Fredick Douglas was. You no life Trump tards need to go find a dictionary and look up the meaning of those words.

The reason the South fought was more to preserve their way of life, which yes, slavery was a part of. But it did not have to come to that.

I will go to my grave believing the Civil War could have been avoided with effective leadership in the 15 to 20 years before Lincoln was elected. But we did not have it. Just like we don't have it right now with Trump. See how dangerous ineffective leadership can be.

Slavery would have died a natural death on it's own in the coming decades because the upcoming technological advancements would have rendered slavery economically unsustainable. So yes, I do think the Civil War was totally unnecessary.

It's too bad we did not have effective leadership in the years leading up to the Civil War or in the years after it ended.

There's the book you should read Gremlin Driver. A historical lesson in the dangers of Trump and his failed leadership. A president that intentionally attempts to divide the country is a very dangerous thing.

But of course you will never admit that.

As usual, all of you who spend your entire waking hours for fresh meat to post in this hallowed forum are way off base. Doesn't being wrong all the time ever get tired for any of you? Obviously not.

The goal of the North at the beginning of the Civil War was to preserve the Union. Admittedly a rather abstract concept. Lincoln himself said "If I could preserve the Union by freeing all the slaves I would do it tomorrow. If I could preserve the Union by freeing none of the slaves I would also do that tomorrow." He only issued the Emancipation Proclamation after realizing the Union needed a stronger rally cry and he finally got his first battle victory at Antietam. Also notice said proclamation did not free the slaves in states that were still loyal to the union.

Lincoln was, in my opinion, the greatest president we have ever had. He was also a flawed human being and a product of his times. All white people back then truly believed black people were beneath them. Lincoln himself was shocked and amazed at how intelligent and articulate Fredick Douglas was. You no life Trump tards need to go find a dictionary and look up the meaning of those words.

The reason the South fought was more to preserve their way of life, which yes, slavery was a part of. But it did not have to come to that.

I will go to my grave believing the Civil War could have been avoided with effective leadership in the 15 to 20 years before Lincoln was elected. But we did not have it. Just like we don't have it right now with Trump. See how dangerous ineffective leadership can be.

Slavery would have died a natural death on it's own in the coming decades because the upcoming technological advancements would have rendered slavery economically unsustainable. So yes, I do think the Civil War was totally unnecessary.

It's too bad we did not have effective leadership in the years leading up to the Civil War or in the years after it ended.

There's the book you should read Gremlin Driver. A historical lesson in the dangers of Trump and his failed leadership. A president that intentionally attempts to divide the country is a very dangerous thing.

But of course you will never admit that. Originally Posted by Jam3768

Cliff notes version..............

Define "effective leadership" - and what should have been differently before the war between the States.



Define Your plan for "effective leadership" now - what should be done . Define how trump "intentionally divides the country" - when it is the DPST persecution of the POTUS , their refusal to honor the Constitution,
and descent into rejection of the values which made out country great in favor of racism for OBLM Marxism, and hatred for All who believe in equal opportunity, freedom of speech, and equal rights under the Law for All.


all of which the DPST's are intent on destroying.

welcome to the united socialist States of amerika - foolish DPST!