Waynesboro Museum Remembers Civil War Generals

Full story: NBC29 Charlottesville

"When you have your history, you know where you came, you know where you're going," Bridgeforth said.
Comments
21 - 32 of 32 Comments Last updated Feb 10, 2013
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
OMG

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Jan 21, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

sez you wrote:
<quoted text>States right to engage in slavery. The US was behind the curve in human rights then and still behind the curve in social progression. Its perseption that is the question and perseption in the south is in the sewer.
ARE YOU FROM THE NORTH? THE VILE COMING FROM YOUR MOUTH WREAKS OF NORTHERN RHETORIC... BECAUSE TRUE SOUTHERN GENTS AND LADIES ALIKE DO KNOW THE TRUE HISTORY....
OMG

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22
Jan 21, 2013
 
G Luv

Charlottesville, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#23
Jan 21, 2013
 
OMG wrote:
<quoted text>
BECAUSE TRUE SOUTHERN GENTS AND LADIES ALIKE DO KNOW THE TRUE HISTORY....
Your circular argument has me dizzy.
huck

Charlottesville, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24
Jan 21, 2013
 
OMG wrote:
<quoted text>
The war was not fought over slavery.. It was fought for independance state rights from a tyrannical gvt. who were being imposed a tax on the farming South..
who were being imposed a tax on the farming south???

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/...

http://americanhistory.about.com/od/civilwarm...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._Calhoun
Dude

Bumpass, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25
Jan 21, 2013
 
huck wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T ariff_of_1828
huck

Charlottesville, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26
Jan 21, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dude wrote:
An example of northern hypocrisy, not unlike our buying cheap chinese goods, but slavery was the main reason for the war.
Dude

Bumpass, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#27
Jan 21, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

huck wrote:
<quoted text>
An example of northern hypocrisy, not unlike our buying cheap chinese goods, but slavery was the main reason for the war.
Not exactly, it's much more complicated than that, and it's not simply semantics. The North did not go to war because of slavery, the South did. There is plenty of evidence that Lincoln was willing to compromise, but the hothead secessionists wouldn't have it. It's no different than the no compromise Tea Partiests. Lincoln would have been just as happy to round up all the Black Americans, as most were by that time (the importation of slaves was outlawed in 1807,) and have Henry Clay's ACS ship them to Liberia. James C. Calhoun did say that the issue that would eventually drive the South into succession, and the nation into war would be slavery (in the 20s), but it was the fact that the federal government wanted to dictate what was property and what was not; that property being slaves. It was an issue that was recognized 78 years earlier at the ratification of the Constitution.
.
It must have sucked to have been Wilber McLean, at any rate.
.

“I am exceedingly distressed at the proceedings of the Convention—being ... almost sure, they will ... lay the foundation of a Civil War.”
— Elbridge Gerry
.
No matter which side one is, they should understand the importance of the monuments, and if nothing else, recognize it for the history that it is, and the testament to how far we've come. When people start talking about those that want to efface history, I think of the most violent and brutal leaders’ and revolutionaries history has ever seen, and of all the knowledge lost.
huck

Charlottesville, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#28
Jan 21, 2013
 
I don't know if Lincoln would have been 'happy' to round them up. He may have viewed colonization as an alternative to war. I believe there is enough evidence to demonstrate he was not in favor of slavery.
Dude

Bumpass, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#29
Jan 21, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

huck wrote:
I don't know if Lincoln would have been 'happy' to round them up. He may have viewed colonization as an alternative to war. I believe there is enough evidence to demonstrate he was not in favor of slavery.
Near the end the war, yes; at the beginning, he was more apathetic of it, but not in favor of it. He was, without a doubt, a devout federalist. There is a reason that England sided with the South. It's tough to image the US as a world power had the South won, but eventually, with perhaps the exception of maybe a few states (and even then I doubt it) the USA would have reformed. Texas' mistrust of Davis led to battles in Tennessee being lost, and Tariffs in between states cost much needed supplies to be delayed.
.
The point remains...

from the article
.
"When you have your history, you know where you came, you know where you're going," Bridgeforth said.
OMG

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30
Jan 22, 2013
 
huck wrote:
yankee rhetoric... not of true historical significance...
somethin to read

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31
Jan 22, 2013
 
joey

Livonia, LA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33
Feb 10, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

red neck-sez you wrote:
<quoted text>Oh heel no.(desperate people do desperate things). The North "enlisted blacks" for a somewhat similar reason but whos motive I'm sure was entirely different.
youre too stupid to know that many free blacks owned slaves?read about camp douglas before you shoot your yankee mouth again?

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••