Ohio Candidate Dresses Up Like Nazi

[Compatriot G]

So, the Confederacy was evil and the War was only about slavery? I thought you were a little smarter than that, Kirk. My own family is a perfect example of why it wasn't, "just about slavery". My Confederate ancestors owned no slaves. They were a members of the 2nd Kentucky Cavalry Regiment, which was a part of Gen. John H. Morgan's command. My Yankee ancestors owned 4 slaves and belonged to the 53rd Kentucky Mounted Infantry. So, if the War was "only" about slavery, why did my slave-owning ancestors fight for the North and my non-slave owning ancestors fight for the South?

While President Jefferson Davis was a slave-owner, he adopted a black child that his wife saw being beaten on the streets of Richmond, Virginia. This young man's name was Jim Limber. President Davis had a plan that called for the gradual emancipation of the slaves in the South. Davis said they needed to educated before they were emancipated, otherwise he feared they would be taken advantage of by unscrupulous individuals. If you read about the history of Reconstruction, you will find that this is exactly what took place. Compare this to Lincoln. Lincoln said in one of his speeches that the white race and the black race couldn't co-habitat the same continent and since he knew the white race was superior to the black race, blacks needed to be sent back to Africa.

Kirk, I am a Confederate reenactor. I am the First Sergeant of Co. D, 5th Virginia Infantry Regiment. There are plenty of pictures floating around the internet of me in a Confederate uniform. I am not ashamed of any of them. If I ran for political office, I would not be afraid of these pictures surfacing. I am also a life member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans. I am the current 1st Lt. Commander of the A.J. Ringo Camp #1509, SCV located in New Castle. If you would like to learn some real history, PM me. You are more than welcome to attend one of our monthly meetings. I can also put you in contact with some very fine historians that can help you with your understanding of the War and its causes.

 

[CarmelHP]

Did you really have to write that? Do you know what you just started?

Just let him get himself out of this one. That was worse than telling someone how butt-ugly their mother really is.

 

[NordicHeathenVinlander]

Now, that said, you can dress up like a CSA soldier, but understand that there will be political consequences for showing such judgment.

Kirk, it's more appearant that you view slavery in a different light than the people of the era.

Slaves, white or black were not free, therefore they were farm owned tools. It's more appearant that this succession was more economical than anything.

If the economical power of the South derives from slavery, then it's fair to say the succession was not just "slavery", but the infringement by the North onto the South.

and subject (pun intended) ourselves to more of your ignorant lies? I think not.

The victor writes the history and the slavery was a side issue. I wouldn't expect someone like you to have any real clue about that though.

Lincoln did not want blacks to be free. He didn't support slavery but he was bigot in every sense of the word. That tyrannical nut job was planning on loading them all onto boats and shipping them back to Africa before he got shot.

What about the genocide not just condoned but encouraged by Lincoln and carried out by Sherman... I wouldn't expect you've heard much about that little march have you?

Honestly, you've made yourself look like a fool here tonight.

Victors do write the history, fortunately oral history exist within the South, and having lived there for stint, I've learned that what I was specifically told of slavery in the South is a historical inaccuracy.

Lincoln did want Blacks free; But not in America.
America went so far as to purchase land in Africa, free for the slaves to rebuild.

Slavery in NOT AMERICAN HERITAGE, IT IS NOT. It was horrid Elitist agenda; Similar to the problem of immigration in America and Europe, with once again the open borders, the Elitist dont want to pay the citizens, so they get cheap slave labor.

Lincoln was a bigot, but then so was Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Jackson, Monroe etc. I think Lincoln, like the rest of the founders had many thing's right, and hindsight being 20/20, I cant see how they could ever be suggested to be wrong in they're idea of what America was to represent.

 

[Compatriot G]

When the issue of slavery comes up, many of us view it from a 21st Century perspective. We all know owning another individual is wrong. Hindsight is 20/20. You have to view from a 19th Century perspective.

One of the best ways to view slavery in its proper perspective is to compare it with abortion. Today, we have people vehemently opposed to abortion. We also have people just as vehement in its defense. Then we have a large number of people that may personally oppose abortion, but feel it is a personal decision and one in which they have no right telling another person it is wrong. From what I have read in 19th Century sources, this seems to be the case with slavery.

NHV has brought up a very important point. Slavery WAS an economic issue. The South was an agrarian society built upon manual labor. I have read that while Robert E. Lee was opposed to slavery, he understood it was the engine that drove the Southern economy. The issue many Southerners faced was how to eliminate slavery, yet not destroy the economy of the South.

Slavery was an institution that the whole country was guilty of, not just the South. Northern ship owners in New England made a lot of money transporting slaves from Africa before the African slave trade was abolished in 1808. After the slave trade was officially abolished, Northern mills made a lot of money off of Southern cotton. The mills in England benefited from Southern cotton as well. The federal government collected a lot of tax and tariff money from the South. Southrons provided roughly 70-80% of all revenues coming into the federal treasury just before the War.

 

[Doug]

Wasn't this thread about a Republican who dressed as a German soldier for a WW II re-enactment?

Oh, yeah, that's just terrible!

Robert Byrd dressed in bedsheets when he was a recruiter for the KKK, but HE was a good Democrat, so it is unfair to mention that.

 

[Compatriot G]

Wasn't this thread about a Republican who dressed as a German soldier for a WW II re-enactment?

Oh, yeah, that's just terrible!

Robert Byrd dressed in bedsheets when he was a recruiter for the KKK, but HE was a good Democrat, so it is unfair to mention that.

I think it was about an individual from Ohio that dressed as a German for a WWII re-enactment. However, it could a little sidetracked when somebody compared the Confederacy to Nazi Germany.

 

[Lucas156]

sorry someone had to say it

 

[dross]

I'm going to help Kirk out, even though he's the one who threw the rock at the hornet's nest.

Was the Civil War about slavery? The question is too broad to be answered without easy counter, regardless of the position you take. The average Confederate soldier wasn't motivated by upholding slavery, true. Lincoln didn't really care about ending slavery at the beginning of the war, true.

Now that I've agreed with the two major points I'm going to read, here's the other part.

Look at the reasons given for secession give by the seceding states. Start with South Carolina, the first to secede. In the document they wrote - South Carolina's declaration of independence if you will - they first give a justification based on U.S. history and the U.S. DOI, then they name as their reason, slavery and the U.S. not living up to their constitutional obligation to support slavery, specifically the fugitive slave act.

To say the Civil War isn't about slavery is the same as saying the American Revolution wasn't about taxation without representation, or quartering soldiers, or the relatively petty tyrannies King George inflicted on the colonies. The Declaration of Independence would be referenced to prove otherwise. The official documents of secession prove anyone wrong who says the Civil War was not about slavery.

 

[PatriotPride]

^^^My point was that SLAVERY, in and of itself, was not the core issue. The RIGHTS of the States to do what they damn well pleased was the core issue. The line in the sand was slavery. Slavery was A cause of secession, not THE cause. It was used as an example by the States to show that the government was infringing upon States' Rights.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

So, the Confederacy was evil and the War was only about slavery?

Correct, but the war was about slavery for the South. For the North it was about several things.

So, if the War was "only" about slavery, why did my slave-owning ancestors fight for the North and my non-slave owning ancestors fight for the South?

Don't know, you would have to ask them, but we know why the CSA was formed and why it fought. It's right there in the petitions, speeches, books, inter alia--slavery and white supremacy.

There were many Southerners who fought for the Union and not just in Kentucky after being attacked by the South. Southern Unionists were most common where the land was too bumpy to support slavery.

nd subject (pun intended) ourselves to more of your ignorant lies? I think not.

The only lies are the lies of the Lost Causers and I can give you books on that too if you wish. The CSA existed to perpetuate a great evil--slavery.

If you dress up as a Nazi or a CSA solider and then run for office, there will be political consequences about your judgment. It is a "what were you thinking?" advertisement.

 

[JetGirl]

Oh good lord. The guy CLEARLY has dressed up for the role of either side...didn't anybody ever play cops & robbers or cowboys & Indians? SOMEbody has to be the bad guy to play!
Sheeeeesh, what a stupid thing to parade out into "the news".

 

[femurphy77]

Some idiot is just trying to get their 5 minutes by casting an otherwise innocuous act as "EVIL" and "BIGOTED". It all goes back to they don't have a legitimate issue to debate so they will create an "incident" to mislead the sheep majority of our pathetic population. Name-calling doesn't cost any money, gets free airtime and is easily believed by those too lazy to do their own research or understand that not all people live in a box!


Cantor Sir, you are an idiot!!

 

[Doug]

I heard his opponent went to elementary school with a girl who knew a boy whose best friend dated a girl whose third cousin was a child molester.
So, there's no good candidate in this race.

 

[Ramen]

I guess Eric Cantor doesn't like Historical Reenactments unless we get people who actually believe in Nazism to play the Nazis.

I wonder, does he think every actor who plays a Nazi character in a movie is a despicable person?

Seriously, what a sleazeball.

 

[Compatriot G]

Wow Kirk, I thought you were just misinformed. I didn't realize you are apparently illiterate to a certain degree. The CSA was formed to perpetuate slavery and white supremacy. You just keep thinking that way.

 

[Eddie]

I'm going to help Kirk out, even though he's the one who threw the rock at the hornet's nest.

Was the Civil War about slavery? The question is too broad to be answered without easy counter, regardless of the position you take. The average Confederate soldier wasn't motivated by upholding slavery, true. Lincoln didn't really care about ending slavery at the beginning of the war, true.

Now that I've agreed with the two major points I'm going to read, here's the other part.

Look at the reasons given for secession give by the seceding states. Start with South Carolina, the first to secede. In the document they wrote - South Carolina's declaration of independence if you will - they first give a justification based on U.S. history and the U.S. DOI, then they name as their reason, slavery and the U.S. not living up to their constitutional obligation to support slavery, specifically the fugitive slave act.

To say the Civil War isn't about slavery is the same as saying the American Revolution wasn't about taxation without representation, or quartering soldiers, or the relatively petty tyrannies King George inflicted on the colonies. The Declaration of Independence would be referenced to prove otherwise. The official documents of secession prove anyone wrong who says the Civil War was not about slavery.

I think that saying what almost any war is "about" is as difficult as saying what any social upheaval is "about" because there are so many different opinions and nuances of opinion. We may as well ask what the 60's were about or what the industrial revolution was about. I would agree that slavery was probably one of the major issues though.

"About" is just too vague of a starting point. I bet if you could ask a group of enlisted men back in 1863 what the war was about that you would hear complaints about the food and the mud and the dust and the hot and the cold and the lack of pay.

I tried to think of the simplest statement that I could that would answer the question "What was the Civil War about?" Here is what I have so far:

"A bunch of powerful men got into an argument. They settled it by paying a bunch of not so powerful men to fight each other to the death."

Sounds about like most wars.

 

[88GT]

But the British are not evil, the Nazis and the CSA were.



Is not one man owning another evil? The CSA fought and died to defend this practice.

Time to leave this thread...

 

[dross]

Again to Kirk's rescue (and this is beginning to be a metaphor for the way the U.S. has rushed to help Britain so many times in the past) what he's saying is true. He's not saying the guy did anything wrong by dressing as a Nazi, he's saying the guy should have known the real world consequences.

If you're a Republican, or any kind of conservative, a libertarian even, there's some things you're never allowed to do. You can't own Nazi memorabilia, even if your father brought it home from the war, after haven personally taken from the SS prison camp guards he captured. You can't toast a guy at his birthday party if he was ever on the wrong side of one of our protected issues. You can't put a sheet over your head, even if it's to dress as a ghost for a Halloween party. In fact, it's best if you don't even own any white sheets.

If you're Democrat, you can actually have been a Nazi, or a Klan member, as long as you declared your contrition, embrace socialism, and consistently beat the Republican candidate in your district.

Those are the actual real world rules. Kirk didn't make them up nor does he subscribe to them. That's just the way it works.

 

[CarmelHP]

^^^My point was that SLAVERY, in and of itself, was not the core issue. The RIGHTS of the States to do what they damn well pleased was the core issue. The line in the sand was slavery. Slavery was A cause of secession, not THE cause. It was used as an example by the States to show that the government was infringing upon States' Rights.

As much as I hate to help Kirk out since he knowingly, recklessly and negligently stirred this up, READ THE SOUTHERN STATES' OWN WORDS. tHE "RIGHTS" that they wanted to protect was the power to decide who was a man and who was chattel. The "RIGHTS" that were held so dear were the "RIGHTS' to uphold slavery. By the 1860's, the debate over slavery was well over a century old and had been decided in every civilized land, except the American South, that slavery was an evil institution. Does that mean that every single rebel soldier held slavery dear, no, but those politicians that led them to war most certainly did.

And concerning Nazi re-enacting, that's no different than playing a part in a play in my opinion.

 

[Eddie]

As much as I hate to help Kirk out since he knowingly, recklessly and negligently stirred this up, READ THE SOUTHERN STATES' OWN WORDS. tHE "RIGHTS" that they wanted to protect was the power to decide who was a man and who was chattel. The "RIGHTS" that were held so dear were the "RIGHTS' to uphold slavery. By the 1860's, the debate over slavery was well over a century old and had been decided in every civilized land, except the American South, that slavery was an evil institution. Does that mean that every single rebel soldier held slavery dear, no, but those politicians that led them to war most certainly did.

And concerning Nazi re-enacting, that's no different than playing a part in a play in my opinion.

Do you mean to tell me that when Ronald Reagan dressed up as a mob boss in The Killers that he wasn't really a mob boss? Yeah right. Next thing ya know you'll be telling us that Arnold Schwarzenegger isn't really a killer robot from the future. Come on man.