Church Shooting

[Rob's House]

I'm arguing that in the months before Lincoln ever took office, there were seizures by the confederacy of federal military installations and equipment, ammunition, and other government property along with the defection of thousands of armed US servicemen previously under oath to the United States of America. In the face of public outcries in the North, President Buchanan swore to uphold his Constitutional duty and protect and defend this property from this insurrection through all the powers granted him and then promptly passed the buck to the incoming Lincoln.

 

What this has to DO with it, as we've been discussing all along, is what "started" the war. The above, plus the 31,000 Tennesseans under occupation, compelled ANY president to perform his Constitutional duty. Any president would have been remiss and subject to charges if he didn't. Any president would have called for troops to quell the insurrection.

 

Yeah, yeah, I know. This was no insurrection. The states were merely exercising their "states rights" to help themselves to federal property.

 

Except that they weren't states at that point and the property wasn't theirs, regardless.

 

In what fairy tale is the seizure of military installations, ammunition, and equipment at the hands of thousands of defecting soldiers no longer loyal to their oath, considered anything less than a threatening act?

 

Never mind. I know.

How is this related to any of the arguments of mine you responded to?

 

Arguing with you is like arguing with an angry girlfriend who just keeps on changing the subject so she can be right. And then when I don't discuss your new topic you claim it's because you were right all along and therefore, because I won't discuss that time last year when I got too wasted to drive home and crashed at my friend's house it must mean I was !@#$ing that other girl last week.

 

You win, dude. I concede. The Samurai were the greatest swordsmen the East has ever known.

[unbillievable]

How is this related to any of the arguments of mine you responded to?

 

Arguing with you is like arguing with an angry girlfriend who just keeps on changing the subject so she can be right. And then when I don't discuss your new topic you claim it's because you were right all along and therefore, because I won't discuss that time last year when I got too wasted to drive home and crashed at my friend's house it must mean I was !@#$ing that other girl last week.

 

You win, dude. I concede. The Samurai were the greatest swordsmen the East has ever known.

 

Give me back my jacket!!

[Rob's House]

 

Give me back my jacket!!

How could it be your jacket when everyone knew that EJ was a project?

[K-9]

How is this related to any of the arguments of mine you responded to?

 

Arguing with you is like arguing with an angry girlfriend who just keeps on changing the subject so she can be right. And then when I don't discuss your new topic you claim it's because you were right all along and therefore, because I won't discuss that time last year when I got too wasted to drive home and crashed at my friend's house it must mean I was !@#$ing that other girl last week.

 

You win, dude. I concede. The Samurai were the greatest swordsmen the East has ever known.

Now you're just being deliberately obtuse.

 

How's it related to any of your arguments? It's ENTIRELY related to the one argument you've been making: what started the war. Period. There's been no diversion, no going off point. It's just that you can't be intellectually honest in answering a few simple questions.

 

Like I said earlier, perhaps it's best you do concede. You can't even keep up with your own statements, let alone anyone else's.

 

And the girl comparisons. Really? How many is that now? Your game is weak. Silly. Childish in every regard.

Edited June 29, 2015 by K-9

[boyst]

hey rob, you're an idiot

 

shut it.

 

there is no winning this game with these players.

 

how about a nice game of chess?

[/dev/null]

hey rob, you're an idiot

 

shut it.

 

there is no winning this game with these players.

 

how about a nice game of chess?

later, let's play global thermonuclear war

[Rob's House]

Now you're just being deliberately obtuse.

 

 

How's it related to any of your arguments? It's ENTIRELY related to the one argument you've been making: what started the war. Period. There's been no diversion, no going off point. It's just that you can't be intellectually honest in answering a few simple questions.

 

Like I said earlier, perhaps it's best you do concede. You can't even keep up with your own statements, let alone anyone else's.

 

And the girl comparisons. Really? How many is that now? Your game is weak. Silly. Childish in every regard.

Sure Sparky. I still have no idea what your "intellectually honest" questions are. I must have missed them. Feel free to present them. I'll be happy to answer if they're remotely relevant.

 

The only thing I find interesting about whatever it is you're trying to do here is that you already agreed with my point (said everyone knew it to be true since 7th grade in fact) And yet here you are, still arguing.

 

So far you've used a lot of words to establish that Lincoln opposed slavery and that he (arguably) had constitutional footing to invade due to TN putting down a pro-union insurgency and the attack on Ft. Sumter. That's all fine and dandy, but it has absolutely dick **** to do with what you were responding to, so I'm still wondering what your point is.

 

And FTR the girl analogy was spot on. And if "childish" and "weak" are all you got we should wrap this up because your routine is getting tiresome.

[Max Fischer]

Lincoln didn't want secession, but once it happened he could either allow it to happen or he could could take military action to stop it. If you think he went to war primarily to end slavery rather than preserve the union (empire) then, sorry for being blunt, but you're a !@#$ing fool, and few of any respected historians of any persuasion agree with you.

 

You continue to ignore that protecting slavery was the motivation for Southern secession. Thus, the trigger for Civil War. Mind boggling.

 

BTW, which respected historians agree with you? I can't think of one that's not a slavery apologist.

[K-9]

Sure Sparky. I still have no idea what your "intellectually honest" questions are. I must have missed them. Feel free to present them. I'll be happy to answer if they're remotely relevant.

 

The only thing I find interesting about whatever it is you're trying to do here is that you already agreed with my point (said everyone knew it to be true since 7th grade in fact) And yet here you are, still arguing.

 

So far you've used a lot of words to establish that Lincoln opposed slavery and that he (arguably) had constitutional footing to invade due to TN putting down a pro-union insurgency and the attack on Ft. Sumter. That's all fine and dandy, but it has absolutely dick **** to do with what you were responding to, so I'm still wondering what your point is.

 

And FTR the girl analogy was spot on. And if "childish" and "weak" are all you got we should wrap this up because your routine is getting tiresome.

OK, I get it. You're just not up to the task. Either because you didn't bother reading my questions, they escape you totally, or you're simply afraid of having to confront a lifetime of propagandized education. My apologies for expecting more.

 

Let's see, you've insulted my parents teachings, my elementary education, and called me a girl a couple times. What's next? C'mon, reach deep down into your bag of debate tactics and call me a name, insult my lineage, make fun of my mother, call me a fag. How about mom's basement jokes, those are always original. Surely there's a readily available supply of snide, snarky rejoinders just waiting to be let loose.

[Rob's House]

OK, I get it. You're just not up to the task. Either because you didn't bother reading my questions, they escape you totally, or you're simply afraid of having to confront a lifetime of propagandized education. My apologies for expecting more.

 

Let's see, you've insulted my parents teachings, my elementary education, and called me a girl a couple times. What's next? C'mon, reach deep down into your bag of debate tactics and call me a name, insult my lineage, make fun of my mother, call me a fag. How about mom's basement jokes, those are always original. Surely there's a readily available supply of snide, snarky rejoinders just waiting to be let loose.

Why don't we skip the foreplay and jump straight to calling me a bigot? Oh yeah, you already did that in the other thread.

 

You know what, you've been trying to draw me into an argument I never started, attributed comments to me that I never made, accused me of dodging questions you repeatedly refuse to present (why is the condescending tough guy too big a pu$$y to say what these supposed questions are?), and then you talk **** because I don't take the sucker bait, then you whine when I make fun of you by accurately describing your ridiculous behavior. And then to top it off, despite the fact that I've said absolutely nothing that a rational man could construe as racist you call me a bigot? Go Fu©k yourself.

Edited June 30, 2015 by Rob's House

[K-9]

Why don't we skip the foreplay and jump straight to calling me a bigot? Oh yeah, you already did that in the other thread.

Let it go, son. It's a lost cause.

[TakeYouToTasker]

Let it go, son. It's a lost cause.

Hardly.

 

Go on with your statist faux-Hero Making.

 

Were all racist for presenting facts anyway.

Edited June 30, 2015 by TakeYouToTasker

[3rdnlng]

Let it go, son. It's a lost cause.

I 've read your repartee with Rob and for the first part thought it was a fairly good debate. Lately it's been a turnoff, and Rob who is a great poster here, has shown you the door. That's OK, post more, you have a modicum of promise.

[K-9]

Hardly.

Go on with your statist faux-Hero Making.

Were all racist for presenting facts anyway.

My discussion has nothing to do with racism but I understand the knee-jerk response. It is, after all, the most challenging aspect of the history to revise and re-write. Perhaps the movement could introduce 'Davis Logs' to southern toy stores while quietly removing the original product instead.

 

"Statist faux- hero making." That's rich. I guess that's what it looks like after 150 years of orchestrated demonizing by a society that rushed to sanitize its history. I don't need a hero, but you certainly need your demon. It's essential to the story.

[K-9]

I 've read your repartee with Rob and for the first part thought it was a fairly good debate. Lately it's been a turnoff, and Rob who is a great poster here, has shown you the door. That's OK, post more, you have a modicum of promise.

 

This had me laughing. Thanks.

 

Always nice to get a rebuke from the gatekeeper. I keep thinking of Rick Moranis in 'Ghost Busters.'

 

Your defense of Rob, while cute in a cuddly sort of way, was probably not necessary. He's intelligent and can certainly hold his own. I hope he appreciates your effort here, though.

 

Thanks for the compliment, too. "Modicum of promise " has a nice ring to it.

[TakeYouToTasker]

My discussion has nothing to do with racism but I understand the knee-jerk response. It is, after all, the most challenging aspect of the history to revise and re-write. Perhaps the movement could introduce 'Davis Logs' to southern toy stores while quietly removing the original product instead.

 

"Statist faux- hero making." That's rich. I guess that's what it looks like after 150 years of orchestrated demonizing by a society that rushed to sanitize its history. I don't need a hero, but you certainly need your demon. It's essential to the story.

There's no use in lying, your posts are preserved here, and we can all read them. You've made many thinly veiled charges of racism against anyone taking umbrage to your psychohistorical revision of history in this thread, often as the focal point of your argument every time you get cornered; which is only slightly more hysterical than it is absurd, given Lincoln's own well documented racism.

 

In fact, the only time you bothered to stop with your absurd charges of bigotry was to engage in logical fallacy. The "meat" of your argument, if the garbage you've been posting can be called meat, amount to nothing more than appeals to the authority of court psychohistorians and well-poisoning tactics.

 

But again, feel free to continue circling your wagons around your American Deity. As you pointed out earlier, we're all just racists anyway.

[3rdnlng]

This had me laughing. Thanks.

 

Always nice to get a rebuke from the gatekeeper. I keep thinking of Rick Moranis in 'Ghost Busters.'

 

Your defense of Rob, while cute in a cuddly sort of way, was probably not necessary. He's intelligent and can certainly hold his own. I hope he appreciates your effort here, though.

 

Thanks for the compliment, too. "Modicum of promise " has a nice ring to it.

You can think of moranis all you want but there are more appropriate threads right here in PPP for you to come out of the closet.

[K-9]

There's no use in lying, your posts are preserved here, and we can all read them. You've made many thinly veiled charges of racism against anyone taking umbrage to your psychohistorical revision of history in this thread, often as the focal point of your argument every time you get cornered; which is only slightly more hysterical than it is absurd, given Lincoln's own well documented racism.

 

In fact, the only time you bothered to stop with your absurd charges of bigotry was to engage in logical fallacy. The "meat" of your argument, if the garbage you've been posting can be called meat, amount to nothing more than appeals to the authority of court psychohistorians and well-poisoning tactics.

 

But again, feel free to continue circling your wagons around your American Deity. As you pointed out earlier, we're all just racists anyway.

I think you mean "Confederate Demon" vs American Deity.

 

You have me confused with others who introduced racism to the original discussion. I am not interested in projecting 21st century politics onto 19th century issues. Not sure why you yourself played the racist card with your string of out of context quotes by Lincoln in order to prove that he was. Actually, I know precisely why. It is right out of the neo-confederate playbook. But you ignore the decades worth of speeches, letters, diaries, government documents, etc., by Lincoln and others that make very clear his position on the issue. Again, I understand your requirement to ignore context and shoehorn the history, but it is intellectually dishonest. Ironically, that does more to hurt your cause than bolster it.

 

Psychohistorians. That's a hoot. Is that a group of scholars studying Hitchcock?

You can think of moranis all you want but there are more appropriate threads right here in PPP for you to come out of the closet.

Thanks for the invitation, but I find most of the subject matter around here boring. Been that way for 15 years.

[TakeYouToTasker]

I think you mean "Confederate Demon" vs American Deity.

 

You have me confused with others who introduced racism to the original discussion. I am not interested in projecting 21st century politics onto 19th century issues. Not sure why you yourself played the racist card with your string of out of context quotes by Lincoln in order to prove that he was. Actually, I know precisely why. It is right out of the neo-confederate playbook. But you ignore the decades worth of speeches, letters, diaries, government documents, etc., by Lincoln and others that make very clear his position on the issue. Again, I understand your requirement to ignore context and shoehorn the history, but it is intellectually dishonest. Ironically, that does more to hurt your cause than bolster it.

 

Psychohistorians. That's a hoot. Is that a group of scholars studying Hitchcock?

No, I meant American Deity, as you continue to assert your false narrative. And, no, I've confused you with no one. Your words are preserved here, even as you add charges of neo-confederacy in your last post. Own them.

 

The quotes I provided were to counter the absurd narrative attempted by several participants in this thread, that Lincoln sought to provide equality to blacks as full citizens, and equal participants in the government, and that this righteous moral positioning was the reason he fought a defensive war in order to eradicate slavery. An argument you were quick to piggy-back onto.

 

And yes, psychohistorians. If you don't know what psychohistory is, and what it's role has been in perpetuating the American Lincoln myth, then you have even less business participating in this thread than I though.

 

By all means, protect your false god. It doesn't matter since we're all just racists anyway.

Edited June 30, 2015 by TakeYouToTasker

[K-9]

No, I meant American Deity, as you continue to assert your false narrative. And, no, I've confused you with no one. Your words are preserved here, even as you add charges of neo-confederacy in your last post. Own them.

 

The quotes I provided were to counter the absurd narrative attempted by several participants in this thread, that Lincoln sought to provide equality to blacks as full citizens, and equal participants in the government, and that this righteous moral positioning was the reason he fought a defensive war in order to eradicate slavery. An argument you were quick to piggy-back onto.

 

And yes, psychohistorians. If you don't know what psychohistory is, and what it's role has been in perpetuating the American Lincoln myth, then you have even less business participating in this thread than I thought.

 

By all means, protect your false god. It doesn't matter since we're all just racists anyway.

Get back to me when you can spout anything other than your neo-confederate talking points. The next time you post an idea not directly from their discredited dogma will be your first.

 

No business posting in this thread? Is there no end to the self-appointed gatekeepers here? I will gladly continue to piggyback onto any argument that seeks to deliberately infuse your particular brand of history. I can only tolerate lies and other falsehoods to a point. And I gladly "own" my words in that effort.

 

Instead of creating demons, perhaps you and your ilk should focus on the REAL demons in the story; the wealthy elite that led the South on a path to its own destruction. The same wealthy elite that wasted no time in trying to sanitize the history almost immediately after playing their parts in creating it.