Comments about ‘Obama will observe Confederate Memorial tradition despite petition’

Don't be silly. It's a constituency.
The man is preparing for the next election.

need more information before passing judgement on this issue. we are not hearing all the facts from this story.

The biggest statement Obama can make is that the actions of the Confederacy aren't as simplistic as some would have us believe. It is a historical fact that the south didn't rebel over slavery. That was the least of their concerns. The issues leading to civil war were economic, and states rights.

If we were to think of this in modern terms.

It would be like a President being elected based on the platform that he is going to teach some states a lesson by imposing higher taxes on them while at the same time lowering taxes in other states.

Breckenridge got 72 electoral votes compared to Abe Lincoln's 180 and Abraham Lincoln won didn't win a single southern state yet he won the election.

Breckenridge won 11 states all of which were in the South while Lincoln won 18 all of which were in the north except for California and Oregon in the west but even if Breckenridge had won Oregon, California and the other southern states won by Stephen Douglas and Bell he would still have had only 127 electoral votes compared to Lincoln's 173.

So the north decided every election.

The South didn't rebel over slavery? Why then is the defense of slavery the key rationale of several state secession documents? Why then did the Confederate Vice President say in his Cornerstone Speech:

>> The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. <<

We Need To "Honor" These Fallen Heroes Just Like Any Other Veteran of This Country, They fought for a cause they believed in, Tyranny from Washington,DC.

The Drums of the 47th
By Robert J. Burdette
(After Corinth)

Chapter XI GOOD FIGHTING ON POOR FOOD
..I was detailedtogo over the field, , succoring the living, burying the dead...
We found a dead Confederate ... one of Rogers' Texans. Fifty-seven of them we had found lying in the ditch of Battery Robinette.
I took off the haversack slung to his neck that it might not swing as we carried him
"Empty, isn't it?" asked the soldier working with me. I drew forth a handful of roasted acorns. I showed them to my comrade. "That's all," I said.
"And he's been fighting like a tiger for two days on that hog's forage," he commented. We gazed at the face of the dead soldier with new feelings. my comrade said:
"I hate this war and the thing that caused it. I was taught to hate slavery before I was taught to hate sin. I love the Union as I love my mother better. I think this is the wickedest war that was ever waged But this"and he took some of the acorns from my hand"this is what I call patriotism.
So do I.

Blades,if you would take a moment to reread the quote you have cited,you will see that Vice President Stephens stated the new Constitution puts to rest questions relating to slavery. He never stated slavery was the root cause of the War of Northern Agression. Only a fool would say it had nothing to do with the war at all. But it was hardly the root cause. Here is a quote you may find interesting. It is by Union general U.S. Grant. "If I thought this war was about slavery,I would lay down my sword and fight for the other side" I hope you have a wonderful day,sir.

The Confederate monument at Arlington features a uniformed Black Confederate soldier marching in the ranks and was designed in 1912 by a Jewish Confederate veteran, Moses Ezekial. The Confederate military was more diverse and multiracial than the strictly segregated Union Army.

6,500 Hispanics, 6,000 Jews, 13,000 Indians (including a Cherokee Confederate General), an undetermined number of Black soldiers and even Filipino Confederate Zouaves out of New Orleans made the CS military more diverse.

McPherson and the other so-called "scholars" have a simple means of "research" - they construct their conclusion and then disregard anything that contradicts them no matter what the source or how credible it is - including first-hand eyewitness accounts of Union soldiers and officers contained in the Federal Official Records.

Research regarding the "Forgotten Confederates" can be found by simply searching the web for "Black Confederates" or "37th Texas Cavalry."

President Obama was correct to continue the proud tradition. Southerners fought and died to defend their country from Lincoln's unlawful invasion and the war wasn't about slavery but tariff and government revenues. Washington's unlawful invasion of Utah a few years earlier was just a trial run for Lincoln's war. We should celebrate the bravery of all Americans who have fought against tyranny in wars abroad and here at home.

U.S. Grant made his comment, referenced above, a year into the war, not at it's end. Also, before the War, the states in the Confederacy had historically supplied between 75% and 90% of the total funds to fill the coffers of the U.S. Treasury, but only received 25%-30% of the funds back for improvements. Most of the funds in the Treasury went to Northern states and cities. Northern concerns immediately following secession of the Southern states were related to the loss of Southern funds, and where would these funds now be found.

Thanks to each of you ...my southern brothers and sisters for always being ready to defend our southern people and especially our Confederate ancestors...our children are depending on us...again thank you...my heart swells with pride.
Deo Vindice.

The monument is a peace monument, not a war monument. A woman representing the Confederacy offers a wreath while holding a plowshare. Both symbols of peace. On the base there is homage that might be considered a war monument, but it is restricted to the base. The academics who wrote the letter need learn to use google.

There is a inscription to the troops, the only questionable part is the inscription where conscripts are said to have not been "goaded by necessity".

Please read The Real Lincoln by Thomas DiLorenzo to learn why what you "know" aout the "Civil War" is probably wrong.

Confederate Soldier/Vietnam Vet

Oh fair, young men with thoughts now stilled,
your farms are gone, and we're now skilled
in changing channels on TV,
in teaching kid's black history;
of killing children before birth,
unwanted children have no worth.
Depopulation is their goal,
we call it funded birth control.

Oh fair young men, who gave their life,
a man takes man to be his wife
and prayer should never have a part
in cleaning up a child's heart.
We're taxed on this and taxed on that
and never question all the fat
that goes to countries we should corn,
but fill their barns with wheat and corn.

Oh fair, young men that went to war,
if we were brave we would restore
the jobs for us, take back the con,
bring back our factories from Taiwan.
tomatoes here would overflow,
not ship them in from Mexico.
We'd have our farmers grow them fresh,
and pass a law to speak english.

A uniformed soldier is just that, a soldier. He/she deserves respect even from the cowards who ran to Canada during Vietnam to avoid the draft. I do not like war, but it is old men who make war and send young men to fight them. My GG Grandfather fought with his five brothers in the War of Northern Agression (Civil War) which was fought over succession and states rights, not slavery. One of them brother did not survive. My father and his brother fought in WW II. Uncle Jim was in the Marines before our involvement in the war, discharged and re-enlisted. He was killed six months later. My brother did two tours of Vietnam, the second one voluntary. I currently have a son in law in Iraq fighting terrorists who want to kill you.

Robert E. Lee once said "there is a true glory and true honor. The glory of duty done and the honor of the integrity of principle." Chew on that one for a bit.

God bless our troops and especially those who gave the ultimate sacrifice. The freedoms they gave us are priceless, even the freedom for some to run their big mouthes.

The idea that the war was fought over slavery is an over used tactic of those who need a reason to justify the deaths of 650,000 Americans and those in need of a good history lesson. Regardless of why the South seceded, the war was fought because Abraham Lincoln was absolutely opposed to secession. That opposition had nothing to do with slavery and he said so. Had the South seceded over the price of tea or slavery, Lincoln would have invaded the South to prevent it. Even if the South seceded over slavery had Lincoln not been so opposed to secession there would have been no war. The South did not want a war they simply wanted to secede. The war was fought because Lincoln refused to accept secession, regardless of the reason. Period!

Meteor Blades

"The South didn't rebel over slavery? Why then is the defense of slavery the key rationale of several state secession documents? Why then did the Confederate Vice President say in his Cornerstone Speech:

>> The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. <<"

What part of "that was the least of their concerns" don't you understand? While slavery played a role in their decision to secede it wasn't the "REASON" they seceded and if you had read the original documents like I have you would understand that.

The fact that Lincoln had no problem with slavery and he said in his First Inaugural address "I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so."

Anyone with even a basic knowledge of history would recognize that the roots of the Civil War began in Philadelphia in 1787 when one side won.

Abe Lincoln,

"Blades,if you would take a moment to reread the quote you have cited,you will see that Vice President Stephens stated the new Constitution puts to rest questions relating to slavery. He never stated slavery was the root cause of the War of Northern Agression."

Of course it doesn't say that slavery was the cause of the civil war. This guy doesn't have even have a basic grasp of our history. He fails to realize that slavery was never the central issue of the American Civil War.

"Only a fool would say it had nothing to do with the war at all. But it was hardly the root cause."

I wholeheartedly agree with this. Every historian understands that slavery played a minor role in the Civil War. Most often it was used as propaganda by both sides.

"Here is a quote you may find interesting. It is by Union general U.S. Grant. "If I thought this war was about slavery,I would lay down my sword and fight for the other side" I hope you have a wonderful day,sir."

The ignorance of history of people like Blade never ceases to shock me.

To add to the issues. From the book WHEN IN THE COURSE OF HUMAN EVENTS. "Author Charles Adams sites Charles Dickens.Dickens wrote that the South seceded in spite of slavery, not because of it. Mr. Adams states, "The thesis that the solid South seceded to protect slavery just does not make sense. The institution of slavery had never been more secure for the slave owners, with the Supreme Court in their back pocket; with the Constitution itself expressly protecting slaver and mandating the return of fugitive slaves every where-a mandate that Lincoln would enforce; with Lincoln also declaring he no right to interfere with slavery and no personal inclination to do so; with Lincoln personally supporting a new constitutional amendment protecting slavery for ever-an amendment expressly made irrevocable." This amendment was known as the Corwin Amendment. The South was aware of this and if slavery was the sole reason the South would have stayed in the Union. The causes of the war are far more complicated than putting a single issue in a bottle. Slavery cover up a multitude of sins of a war waged on the civilian population of the South.

It's too bad McPherson outed himself as an enemy of Confederate ancestors and their traditions and desire to celebrate their heritage. One would think a supposed professional historian would at least attempt to maintain impartiality in his public judgments. McPherson ought to know well that the War for Southern Independence involved slavery as only an ancillary issue.

The hypocrisy of McPherson is underscored by his presence at a dedication a few years ago honoring General U.S. Grant, who owned slaves, even after the Civil War, right up to the time that the anti-slavery amendment to the Constitution was actually ratified. Well, thank god, McPherson is out of academia now, and no longer foisting on the public his tired, boring tomes that "allude" to history, ala a Yankee perspective.