Civil War Interactive Discussion Board Home
Home Search search Menu menu Not logged in - Login | Register


Seriously? - Introductions - About this Forum - Start Here - Civil War Interactive Discussion Board
 Moderated by: javal1 Page:    1  2  Next Page Last Page  
 New Topic   Reply   Printer Friendly 
 Rate Topic 
AuthorPost
 Posted: Wed Aug 3rd, 2011 10:02 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
1st Post
Seriously
Member
 

Joined: Wed Aug 3rd, 2011
Location:  
Posts: 7
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

It seems that all we care about is the past. Joining the SCV, telling of what my family went through, and or "pissing and moaning" about what the North did to our country. What does it really matter when we allow them to do it? When do we get serious and have the passion of a Jeff Davis after all other avenues have been exhausted. Didn't our President say that even though we lost the war the issues of the war will come back again? Aren't they here? NO! I'm not advocating something horrible but can't we be much more outspoken than only speaking on discussion boards inside websites that only we read?
I say "Jeff was Right!" Will we really rise again?



 Posted: Wed Aug 3rd, 2011 10:25 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
2nd Post
javal1
Grumpy Geezer


Joined: Thu Sep 1st, 2005
Location: Tennessee USA
Posts: 1503
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Didn't our President say that even though we lost the war the issues of the war will come back again?

"our President"? Who might that be? Unless you're 150 years old, it's not Jefferson Davis.

 "can't we be much more outspoken than only speaking on discussion boards inside websites that only we read?"

Perhaps you don't appreciate the irony of you expressing this by posting on a discussion board inside a websites that only we read?

On another thread you moan that a certain topic received 6500 views. You expressed this by making a post, which obviously would have made it 6501. Congrats.

Chill out.




 Posted: Wed Aug 3rd, 2011 10:39 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
3rd Post
Seriously
Member
 

Joined: Wed Aug 3rd, 2011
Location:  
Posts: 7
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Yes you are right. By the way; Do you think that if John B. Hood had more of a backing from the Southern States could the South have lasted a bit longer? What do you think would have happened if Lee would have prevailed?
I'm chilled...



 Posted: Wed Aug 3rd, 2011 10:46 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
4th Post
javal1
Grumpy Geezer


Joined: Thu Sep 1st, 2005
Location: Tennessee USA
Posts: 1503
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

We have a John Bell Hood category elsewhere on the board. Feel free to post your question there. While I don't do "what if's", someone may.



 Posted: Thu Aug 4th, 2011 12:57 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
5th Post
pender
Member


Joined: Wed Jun 8th, 2011
Location: North Carolina USA
Posts: 148
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Seriously wrote: It seems that all we care about is the past. Joining the SCV, telling of what my family went through, and or "pissing and moaning" about what the North did to our country. What does it really matter when we allow them to do it? When do we get serious and have the passion of a Jeff Davis after all other avenues have been exhausted. Didn't our President say that even though we lost the war the issues of the war will come back again? Aren't they here? NO! I'm not advocating something horrible but can't we be much more outspoken than only speaking on discussion boards inside websites that only we read?
I say "Jeff was Right!" Will we really rise again?


Seriously, I really like this Discussion Board. That is why I am here to discuss the the war of 1861-1865. Talk about my ancestors that fought in the war. I do believe the title of this board is Civil War Interactive Discussion Board. That is what we do around here, since I have been on. Yes some of us like football. But how does liking football turn one northern? I and my family is as southern as they come. But if you want to get down to it. My good ol southern ancestors served beside some good northern ones in WW1, WW2, Korea and Vietnam. Proud to be an American, and southern by the grace of God. Yes I believe Jefferson Davis was right. So do I believe that the cause the average confederate soldier fought for was right. But the issue was settled by force one hundred and fifty years ago. After the war most southerners swore allegiance back to the United States. I do believe history shows that they paid in blood in all of this countrys wars to give you the right to have free speech in what you believe.

Pender



 Posted: Thu Aug 4th, 2011 02:01 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
6th Post
Seriously
Member
 

Joined: Wed Aug 3rd, 2011
Location:  
Posts: 7
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Pender,
Thank you for taking the time to respond to my nonsense. I like you have a family that have fought in most if not all our countries wars. I was shocked to find that my fathers family came to this country from the country we now call Germany to fight against the colonists. They later moved from New York to an area called Tejas (Texas). In my arrogance I wish I could find an a family connection to the Battle of the Alamo, Goliad, or something else. The Germans largely sat out out those battles and the most of struggles against Santa Ana. Actually it was not until the war of northern aggression that my families name found itself in another battle for it's independence. Reading you'll find that most folks of German ancestry in Texas voted against succession.
So we both love our families history and communicating it on educational and enjoyable websites such as this. Perhaps I chose the incorrect day or website to wonder, "When is Jeff Davis correct"? When do those that love our history embody the passions or our ancestors at the voting box? Do we continue to allow the ideals of Chicago (Lincoln/Obama)to bomb and burn our families into submission of oath again? I believe in that oath as my father did when he took it before joining the military and fighting in WWII. I believe it as my brother did who remains somewhere in Southeast Asia. I do not think that Lincoln believed it the same as I (Yes, I know it was not the same words to the pledge) nor do I believe our current president believes it.
When are the ideals of a Jeff Davis correct?



 Posted: Thu Aug 4th, 2011 03:17 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
7th Post
javal1
Grumpy Geezer


Joined: Thu Sep 1st, 2005
Location: Tennessee USA
Posts: 1503
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Modern politics are not allowed on this board. Please read the rules:

3) Modern politics are off-limits. Period. Don't try to sneak it in sideways or any other way.




 Posted: Thu Aug 4th, 2011 02:23 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
8th Post
HankC
Member


Joined: Tue Sep 6th, 2005
Location:  
Posts: 517
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

What are the major differences between the United States and the Confederate Constitutions?

Does the CSA Constitution allow for free elections where the majority rules?


HankC



 Posted: Thu Aug 4th, 2011 03:25 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
9th Post
Texas Defender
Member


Joined: Sat Jan 27th, 2007
Location: Texas USA
Posts: 920
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

  In the case of presidential elections, the US Constitution does not mandate majority rule, at least in the popular vote. As seen in the elections of 1824, 1876, and 2000, the winner does not always win the popular vote. In more than a dozen other presidential elections, the winner had less than 50% of the popular vote. The only majority mandated is the majority of votes in the Electoral College.



 Posted: Thu Aug 4th, 2011 03:48 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
10th Post
HankC
Member


Joined: Tue Sep 6th, 2005
Location:  
Posts: 517
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

the population determines the electors.

The majority of electors determine the president.

At every level the majority rules.

The percentage of popular vote skews the electoral vote share. 53% or higher of the popular vote typically translates into an electoral college landslide...



 Posted: Thu Aug 4th, 2011 04:12 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
11th Post
Texas Defender
Member


Joined: Sat Jan 27th, 2007
Location: Texas USA
Posts: 920
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

  Those who would prefer a pure democracy where the winner of the popular vote would win the presidency (And I am not one of those) would disagree that : "At every level the majority rules".



 Posted: Thu Aug 4th, 2011 04:38 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
12th Post
HankC
Member


Joined: Tue Sep 6th, 2005
Location:  
Posts: 517
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

probably so, but it's a multi-level process:

the Missouri ballot wording reminds one that your vote is for the 'Presidential Electors for John Doe'.

The electors receiving the most popular votes then get together and vote. The person receiving the majority of their votes becomes president.

there are two bases of a democratic republic:
1) 'one man - one vote' and
2) committees (Senate, Congress, City Council, Board of Supervisors, et al) are elected to do the heavy lifting, again using the 'one man - one vote' principle...



 Posted: Thu Aug 4th, 2011 05:42 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
13th Post
pender
Member


Joined: Wed Jun 8th, 2011
Location: North Carolina USA
Posts: 148
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

IMO, I don't see how you can argue democracy. When the majority of the southern population is forced to stay in the union at the point of a bayonet. The majority of the south clearly wanted out of the union.

Pender



 Posted: Fri Aug 5th, 2011 12:27 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
14th Post
barrydancer
Member


Joined: Wed Apr 23rd, 2008
Location: Norwalk, Connecticut USA
Posts: 135
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

pender wrote:
IMO, I don't see how you can argue democracy. When the majority of the southern population is forced to stay in the union at the point of a bayonet. The majority of the south clearly wanted out of the union.

Pender


A majority of white Southerners, maybe. When you consider the four millions of newly emancipated freedmen and the significant numbers of Southern Unionists, the majority of Southerners might have been perfectly fine staying in the Union.



 Posted: Fri Aug 5th, 2011 12:35 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
15th Post
Texas Defender
Member


Joined: Sat Jan 27th, 2007
Location: Texas USA
Posts: 920
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

barrydancer-

  If the majority of southerners had been in favor of staying in the Union in 1861, there wouldn't have been millions of freedmen, because the institution of slavery would have continued for awhile longer. As Mr. Lincoln said many times, he wasn't inclined to interfere with slavery where it already existed.



 Posted: Fri Aug 5th, 2011 01:26 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
16th Post
barrydancer
Member


Joined: Wed Apr 23rd, 2008
Location: Norwalk, Connecticut USA
Posts: 135
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Texas Defender wrote:
barrydancer-

  If the majority of southerners had been in favor of staying in the Union in 1861, there wouldn't have been millions of freedmen, because the institution of slavery would have continued for awhile longer. As Mr. Lincoln said many times, he wasn't inclined to interfere with slavery where it already existed.


True. I was assuming that Pender's comment was referring to the Reconstruction South.



 Posted: Fri Aug 5th, 2011 01:43 am
   PM  Quote  Reply 
17th Post
pender
Member


Joined: Wed Jun 8th, 2011
Location: North Carolina USA
Posts: 148
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Barrydancer, I was referring to the 1861 south. When thier wish was to just be left alone. But also I would argue the post war white south could find no democracy in reconstruction.

Pender

Last edited on Fri Aug 5th, 2011 01:48 am by pender



 Posted: Fri Aug 5th, 2011 01:56 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
18th Post
HankC
Member


Joined: Tue Sep 6th, 2005
Location:  
Posts: 517
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

One wonders how long the 11 confederate states would have remained together until they split again...and again...and again...



 Posted: Fri Aug 5th, 2011 02:42 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
19th Post
pender
Member


Joined: Wed Jun 8th, 2011
Location: North Carolina USA
Posts: 148
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Yes one does. They never had the chance, due to Lincolns aggression.

Pender



 Posted: Fri Aug 5th, 2011 05:04 pm
   PM  Quote  Reply 
20th Post
HankC
Member


Joined: Tue Sep 6th, 2005
Location:  
Posts: 517
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Perhaps a third item should be included:

3) defeated parties accept the election results

but I thought that was obvious ;)



 Current time is 06:59 pmPage:    1  2  Next Page Last Page  
Top




UltraBB 1.17 Copyright © 2007-2008 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.2188 seconds (13% database + 87% PHP). 28 queries executed.