I once answered that question with "Their problems started when Reagan invited the religious right to join the Party and they were numerous enough to make "compromise" a dirty word."

I've since read some of the Party's history and now wonder if their problems began:

1. In 1948 when Dem Harry Truman defeated Eastern Repub Tom Dewey for the presidency,

2. In the 1950s when Birchers called President Eisenhower a communist because he was too liberal, or

3. In 1964 when they nominated Barry Goldwater and tossed moderates from the Party.

It's certainly no longer the Repub Party of Lincoln that freed the slaves.

How long before the Party splits or dies, or the Red States secede?

Tags: conservation, environmental, issues, politics, rationality, reason, reproductive, rights

Views: 460

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

RE: "that's just my way of dealing with people" - I can verify that, Scott --

pax vobiscum,
archaeopteryx
www.in-His-own-image.com

Scott, Chandra Manning, in "What This Cruel War Was Over" (2007), told of finding in the letters, diaries and regimental newspapers of Union and Confederate soldiers, black and white, that they "identified slavery as the root of the war." (Manning, PhD Harvard, in 2007 teaching at Georgetown Univ.)

I'm not arguing that slavery wasn't the root cause of the war. It was. The south seceded to keep their slaves because they were afraid that Lincoln and this new Republican party was going to get a constitutional amendment outlawing slavery passed. They couldn't stomach that. 

That being said, slavery was not the cause of the hostilities. Lincoln did not have to go to war and, in fact stated that he didn't go to war to free slaves. 

I think this explains the pointless Emancipation Proclamation. IMO, he issued it for one of two reasons. First, in an attempt to incite the slaves to rise up in rebellion against the south (which failed). Second, an attempt to keep England from officially recognizing the Confederate government, which it was seriously contemplating (that worked).

did the states have the "rights" to keep people in bondage (along with tariff questions etc), so which came first the chicken or the egg?

Scott:

Further Lincoln wanted to compromise with the south but they wanted no part of it.  I think (I'm not sure) that there were factions in the south that wanted to control power and the would have done anything to break away from the Union.

This also give you some insight into "our emancipator"..he talks about keeping blacks enslaved, or freeing them as a consequence of white unity, not their right as people to be free.  Then he says "ALL" men "EVERYWHERE" should be free, as his personal wish He was freaking POTUS his duty, personal or not, was to have all people free not rhetorically free.

 

August 22, 1862
My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.

I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft expressed personal wish that all men everywhere could be free.

What has politics got to do with any of it, I thought it was all about whatever gets everyone the most wealth, the rest is just sheeple pandering

Nina van der Roos

"You see it was a "COMMON BELIEF" in that day"-Scott

Has anyone read the book, What's the Matter with Kansas? I just heard about it a couple of days ago and am curious if anyone has any thoughts on it.

I haven't read it Scott, but having lived in Kansas for a time, I could write my own book in answer to that question - Dorothy and Toto had no idea how well off they were!

Actually it's wrong of me to say that - there's nothing the matter with Kansas, beautiful forested hills on the Missouri end, giving way to majestic sweeping plains where it borders Colorado - the problem lies with Kansans.

Remember the scene at the end of "Wizard," where unconscious Dorothy is surrounded by Auntie Em and the farm hands? Imagine how quickly that room would have cleared if upon awakening, little Dorothy had looked up with saucer-sized eyes and said, "I just realized Auntie Em, that Oz is God and Parson Brown is the man behind the curtain - I think that makes me an atheist!"

pax vobiscum,
archaeopteryx
www.in-His-own-image.com

ROFL!!

Dorothy ultimately became accustomed to her new accomodations in the Kansas State Home For Wayward Girls, but they wouldn't take pets, so Toto had to be put down.

pax vobiscum,
archaeopteryx
www.in-His-own-image.com

RSS

Blog Posts

What do you do with the anger?

Posted by dataguy on September 20, 2014 at 5:12pm 3 Comments

Aftermath

Posted by Belle Rose on September 20, 2014 at 2:42am 5 Comments

Ads

Services we love!

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

In need a of a professional web site? Check out the good folks at Clear Space Media

© 2014   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service