<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Guest editorial: Déjà vu (Understanding the War for Southern Independence and the the TEA Party explosion)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.schillingshow.com/2010/09/07/guest-editorial-deja-vu-understanding-the-war-for-southern-independence-and-the-the-tea-party-explosion/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.schillingshow.com/2010/09/07/guest-editorial-deja-vu-understanding-the-war-for-southern-independence-and-the-the-tea-party-explosion/</link>
	<description>Where the News is Made!™ (online)</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 00:46:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: A Patriot</title>
		<link>http://www.schillingshow.com/2010/09/07/guest-editorial-deja-vu-understanding-the-war-for-southern-independence-and-the-the-tea-party-explosion/comment-page-1/#comment-859</link>
		<dc:creator>A Patriot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Sep 2010 15:13:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.schillingshow.com/?p=3741#comment-859</guid>
		<description>A mind really is a terrible thing to waste.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A mind really is a terrible thing to waste.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken</title>
		<link>http://www.schillingshow.com/2010/09/07/guest-editorial-deja-vu-understanding-the-war-for-southern-independence-and-the-the-tea-party-explosion/comment-page-1/#comment-851</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Sep 2010 03:26:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.schillingshow.com/?p=3741#comment-851</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;One must be wiling to open one’s eyes and at least recognize the truth, even if one is either unwilling or unable to accept it.&lt;/i&gt;

I think that what one must do is strive for the humility to recognize that good people can disagree. 

Both here and overseas, I was taught to love my country. (I remember my 5th grade teacher with hurt in his eyes telling me, a mere kid, that he was disappointed Nixon hadn&#039;t visited). I have learned since to respect opposing points of view whenever possible, and to look for points of agreement. Also to recognize people who have yet to learn that lesson. 

&lt;i&gt;You ask what would Jesus do if he were here today, I know he would not try to coerce me by flawed laws and the threat of taxes, to make me do the right thing.&lt;/i&gt;

And you also apparently &quot;know&quot; that Jesus would agree with you on which laws are flawed. As for the &quot;threat&quot; of taxes, every law is an implied threat.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>One must be wiling to open one’s eyes and at least recognize the truth, even if one is either unwilling or unable to accept it.</i></p>
<p>I think that what one must do is strive for the humility to recognize that good people can disagree. </p>
<p>Both here and overseas, I was taught to love my country. (I remember my 5th grade teacher with hurt in his eyes telling me, a mere kid, that he was disappointed Nixon hadn&#8217;t visited). I have learned since to respect opposing points of view whenever possible, and to look for points of agreement. Also to recognize people who have yet to learn that lesson. </p>
<p><i>You ask what would Jesus do if he were here today, I know he would not try to coerce me by flawed laws and the threat of taxes, to make me do the right thing.</i></p>
<p>And you also apparently &#8220;know&#8221; that Jesus would agree with you on which laws are flawed. As for the &#8220;threat&#8221; of taxes, every law is an implied threat.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: A Patriot</title>
		<link>http://www.schillingshow.com/2010/09/07/guest-editorial-deja-vu-understanding-the-war-for-southern-independence-and-the-the-tea-party-explosion/comment-page-1/#comment-842</link>
		<dc:creator>A Patriot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 19:03:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.schillingshow.com/?p=3741#comment-842</guid>
		<description>Ken,
You have illustrated well, the reason that I choose not to defend a position. One must be wiling to open one&#039;s eyes and at least recognize the truth, even if one is either unwilling or unable to accept it. I will attempt to make this as simple to understand as possible, I shall not attempt any further explanation.If you can not or will not fathom it after this, you never will. My point is this, the left leaning liberal elite find the TEA party, and other organizations like it, diffucult to understand. My contention is that whoever said history repeats itself, was right. 

You claim that half of your primary education was obtained overseas. I do not know how old you are, but given the anti-American attitudes of europe these days, I scruple not to consider that a strong point of defense in this debate. Educated in a private university, fantastic. Were you instructed correctly in passing along American exceptionalism to your off-spring, or did they educate you to hate the country? You studied the Civil War in the south under a southerner. So what? Just because he can whistle Dixie and eat grits doe not in any way mean he was immune from the political correctness in the educational system in regards to this point of time in history.

The simnple point is this. There was a time in America, that a corrupting cabal of rich mercantilists influenced and corrupted the federal government into unconstitutional activity. A group of honorable people chose to make a stand, in order to attempt to preserve for themselves and their posterity, the blessings of liberty that were promised by our founding fathers. They stood up against unfair taxation and the lack of real representation, in order to make a difference and try to save their country. They failed. The same sort of mixing bowl of issues are churning in the cement mixer today, causing another set of hard working honorable people to stand up and try to make a difference, for themselves and their posterity. Perhaps you can not or will not see the similarities. However, any person, who is unemployed, or underemployed, who sees the gapping hole in our national borders and understands the significance of the $11 Billion to $22 billion  that is spent on welfare to illegal aliens each year by state governments, who see the $2.2 Billion dollars a year that  is spent on food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches for illegal aliens; who see the $2.5 billion dollars a year that is spent on Medicaid for illegal aliens. Who feel the weight of the $12 billion dollars a year  that is spent on primary and secondary school education for children here illegally and they cannot speak a word of English!, and the subsequent classroom disruption that causes;who are sickened by the $17 Billion dollars a year that is spent for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies. Who work two and three jobs, if possible these days, to support the $3 million dollars a DAY  that is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens. Who can not understand why we spend $90 billion dollars a year  on illegal aliens for Welfare &amp; $200 Billion dollars a year in suppressed American wages reflected in our shrinking paychecks,  caused by  illegal aliens. We ask ourselves why the illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that&#039;s two and a half times that of white non-illegal aliens.  In particular, their children are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the US, and I ask myself, what impact will that have on my sons and their children? I wonder if the legal aliens had not sent home some $45 BILLION in remittances to their countries of origin, would we maybe perhaps be better off, economically right now?

We all know that the failure to close the borders is an attempt to expand a particular party base. The illegal alien issue of today is the slavery issue of yesterday. The health care issue of today is the states rights issue of yesterday, etc. 

You ask what would Jesus do if he were here today, I know he would not try to coerce me by flawed laws and the threat of taxes, to make me do the right thing. As long as we have houses of worship participating in such ridiculous government play alongs such as IMPACT, well, that is a whole other editorial.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ken,<br />
You have illustrated well, the reason that I choose not to defend a position. One must be wiling to open one&#8217;s eyes and at least recognize the truth, even if one is either unwilling or unable to accept it. I will attempt to make this as simple to understand as possible, I shall not attempt any further explanation.If you can not or will not fathom it after this, you never will. My point is this, the left leaning liberal elite find the TEA party, and other organizations like it, diffucult to understand. My contention is that whoever said history repeats itself, was right. </p>
<p>You claim that half of your primary education was obtained overseas. I do not know how old you are, but given the anti-American attitudes of europe these days, I scruple not to consider that a strong point of defense in this debate. Educated in a private university, fantastic. Were you instructed correctly in passing along American exceptionalism to your off-spring, or did they educate you to hate the country? You studied the Civil War in the south under a southerner. So what? Just because he can whistle Dixie and eat grits doe not in any way mean he was immune from the political correctness in the educational system in regards to this point of time in history.</p>
<p>The simnple point is this. There was a time in America, that a corrupting cabal of rich mercantilists influenced and corrupted the federal government into unconstitutional activity. A group of honorable people chose to make a stand, in order to attempt to preserve for themselves and their posterity, the blessings of liberty that were promised by our founding fathers. They stood up against unfair taxation and the lack of real representation, in order to make a difference and try to save their country. They failed. The same sort of mixing bowl of issues are churning in the cement mixer today, causing another set of hard working honorable people to stand up and try to make a difference, for themselves and their posterity. Perhaps you can not or will not see the similarities. However, any person, who is unemployed, or underemployed, who sees the gapping hole in our national borders and understands the significance of the $11 Billion to $22 billion  that is spent on welfare to illegal aliens each year by state governments, who see the $2.2 Billion dollars a year that  is spent on food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches for illegal aliens; who see the $2.5 billion dollars a year that is spent on Medicaid for illegal aliens. Who feel the weight of the $12 billion dollars a year  that is spent on primary and secondary school education for children here illegally and they cannot speak a word of English!, and the subsequent classroom disruption that causes;who are sickened by the $17 Billion dollars a year that is spent for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies. Who work two and three jobs, if possible these days, to support the $3 million dollars a DAY  that is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens. Who can not understand why we spend $90 billion dollars a year  on illegal aliens for Welfare &amp; $200 Billion dollars a year in suppressed American wages reflected in our shrinking paychecks,  caused by  illegal aliens. We ask ourselves why the illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that&#8217;s two and a half times that of white non-illegal aliens.  In particular, their children are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the US, and I ask myself, what impact will that have on my sons and their children? I wonder if the legal aliens had not sent home some $45 BILLION in remittances to their countries of origin, would we maybe perhaps be better off, economically right now?</p>
<p>We all know that the failure to close the borders is an attempt to expand a particular party base. The illegal alien issue of today is the slavery issue of yesterday. The health care issue of today is the states rights issue of yesterday, etc. </p>
<p>You ask what would Jesus do if he were here today, I know he would not try to coerce me by flawed laws and the threat of taxes, to make me do the right thing. As long as we have houses of worship participating in such ridiculous government play alongs such as IMPACT, well, that is a whole other editorial.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken</title>
		<link>http://www.schillingshow.com/2010/09/07/guest-editorial-deja-vu-understanding-the-war-for-southern-independence-and-the-the-tea-party-explosion/comment-page-1/#comment-835</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 16:25:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.schillingshow.com/?p=3741#comment-835</guid>
		<description>Hank,

when you talk about &quot;myths that I have been brainwashed into beliving,&quot; I&#039;m afraid you&#039;re being wildly presumptive. Half of my primary school education took place overseas in foreign schools, I graduated from a private university, and I studied the Civil War in the South under a Southerner. Also, you haven&#039;t told me anything I didn&#039;t already know, or at least hadn&#039;t heard. I know conservatives hate government schools, and I share some of your reasons, but when you cry &quot;government schools!&quot; on cue when someone you know nothing about disagrees with you, you just make yourself out to be an ideologue. 

&lt;i&gt;Out of my entire presentation, you seemingly chose to ignore all of the points that are perscient to today.&lt;/i&gt;

I didn&#039;t choose to rebut your entire editorial. I didn&#039;t even choose to read your entire editorial. And having read it now, I see it doesn&#039;t touch on what I took issue with. 

As for Lincoln being a racist, you are correct inasmuch as he held the same views as most Americans at the time. The word &quot;racist&quot; in contemporary usage suggests fear and hatred and antagonism as well as presumed superiority, and there is no evidence Lincoln was guilty of the former sins. His friendship with Frederick Douglas and his actions in office even suggest the contrary. So calling him racist without qualifying the term is sloppy and misleading rhetoric. It is basically untrue.

As I said, I didn&#039;t choose to rebut your whole piece, and so I don&#039;t feel the need to defend everything Lincoln did, or debate the significance of it. I will say that Lincoln has hardly been the only president, Republican or Democratic, to suspend certain constitutional rights. And I honor him for the good he did, faults and mistakes notwithstanding. 

&lt;i&gt;Another myth is that the north went to war in order to save the constitutional union.&lt;/i&gt;

This is a debatable point, but I didn&#039;t address it one way or another. Again, you sound like an ideologue so eager to press your case that you put words in people&#039;s mouths. 

&lt;i&gt;The south fought the war to preserve slavery.&lt;/i&gt;

Again, like an ideologue, you didn&#039;t read carefully; I didn&#039;t say the war was fought to preserve slavery. But your guys knew preservation would follow victory, just as abolition in fact followed loss. As I said, they may have opposed slavery personally (I&#039;d like to see your evidence for this), but by your own account they fought for states rights despite the fact that victory would preserve slavery. They were more concerned with what they saw as an injustice (I don&#039;t think it was, but that&#039;s another argument) towards themselves than with the horrific injustice of slavery. I&#039;m not here to call them bad men, which would be as shortsighted as your knocking Lincoln is, but I don&#039;t honor them for their selfish choice as you do. 

&lt;i&gt;Thanks to the various inventions of the industrial age and a changing mindset and philosolhy, slavery was already dying a slow death.&lt;/i&gt;

So the other 94% could honorably put their interests first because they believed slavery would die out eventually? That&#039;s tortured and self-serving logic, and you present no evidence they thought that anyhow. 

I can understand and empathize with your anger as a Southerner towards Sherman and Lincoln. I only wish you would choose to empathize with liberals who oppose, say, drone strikes in Pakistan because of the suffering they too impose on civilians. Whether the suffering of civilians in our overseas wars pales besides the suffering of Southerners is entirely beside the point. Injustice is injustice. Yes innocent Southern kids suffered. But the kids in Pakistan aren&#039;t innocent? There were no war crimes committed in Vietnam? Iraq?

&lt;i&gt;All of the hot button topics are just a piece of the central question, that being the one of State Soverignty of WE THE PEOPLE, over the tyranny of an ever encroaching federal government.&lt;/i&gt;

You&#039;re a Christian, right? If Jesus lived in America today, would that be his central issue? Health care, to name just one issue where that argument is raised, is a moral issue, and you can fault liberals on their reasoning about it all you want, but they&#039;re not at fault for not seeing it first of all as a states right issue.

&lt;i&gt;The first war of Independence was America from England. The second, American mercantilists against in the north and the Demorcratic Republic Capitalists in the south. Today, it is the hard working, God fearing middle class, which is rapidly disappearing, against a tyranical elite of well funded secularists.&lt;/i&gt; 

It&#039;s the good guys versus the bad guys, right? The righteous versus the unrighteous swine who don&#039;t deserve your pearls. I&#039;m a Christian myself. I recite the creeds and mean every word. But Solzhenitsyn was correct that &quot;the line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either, but right through every human heart, and through all human hearts.&quot; 

I&#039;m afraid you haven&#039;t rebutted or even addressed the criticisms in my original post.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hank,</p>
<p>when you talk about &#8220;myths that I have been brainwashed into beliving,&#8221; I&#8217;m afraid you&#8217;re being wildly presumptive. Half of my primary school education took place overseas in foreign schools, I graduated from a private university, and I studied the Civil War in the South under a Southerner. Also, you haven&#8217;t told me anything I didn&#8217;t already know, or at least hadn&#8217;t heard. I know conservatives hate government schools, and I share some of your reasons, but when you cry &#8220;government schools!&#8221; on cue when someone you know nothing about disagrees with you, you just make yourself out to be an ideologue. </p>
<p><i>Out of my entire presentation, you seemingly chose to ignore all of the points that are perscient to today.</i></p>
<p>I didn&#8217;t choose to rebut your entire editorial. I didn&#8217;t even choose to read your entire editorial. And having read it now, I see it doesn&#8217;t touch on what I took issue with. </p>
<p>As for Lincoln being a racist, you are correct inasmuch as he held the same views as most Americans at the time. The word &#8220;racist&#8221; in contemporary usage suggests fear and hatred and antagonism as well as presumed superiority, and there is no evidence Lincoln was guilty of the former sins. His friendship with Frederick Douglas and his actions in office even suggest the contrary. So calling him racist without qualifying the term is sloppy and misleading rhetoric. It is basically untrue.</p>
<p>As I said, I didn&#8217;t choose to rebut your whole piece, and so I don&#8217;t feel the need to defend everything Lincoln did, or debate the significance of it. I will say that Lincoln has hardly been the only president, Republican or Democratic, to suspend certain constitutional rights. And I honor him for the good he did, faults and mistakes notwithstanding. </p>
<p><i>Another myth is that the north went to war in order to save the constitutional union.</i></p>
<p>This is a debatable point, but I didn&#8217;t address it one way or another. Again, you sound like an ideologue so eager to press your case that you put words in people&#8217;s mouths. </p>
<p><i>The south fought the war to preserve slavery.</i></p>
<p>Again, like an ideologue, you didn&#8217;t read carefully; I didn&#8217;t say the war was fought to preserve slavery. But your guys knew preservation would follow victory, just as abolition in fact followed loss. As I said, they may have opposed slavery personally (I&#8217;d like to see your evidence for this), but by your own account they fought for states rights despite the fact that victory would preserve slavery. They were more concerned with what they saw as an injustice (I don&#8217;t think it was, but that&#8217;s another argument) towards themselves than with the horrific injustice of slavery. I&#8217;m not here to call them bad men, which would be as shortsighted as your knocking Lincoln is, but I don&#8217;t honor them for their selfish choice as you do. </p>
<p><i>Thanks to the various inventions of the industrial age and a changing mindset and philosolhy, slavery was already dying a slow death.</i></p>
<p>So the other 94% could honorably put their interests first because they believed slavery would die out eventually? That&#8217;s tortured and self-serving logic, and you present no evidence they thought that anyhow. </p>
<p>I can understand and empathize with your anger as a Southerner towards Sherman and Lincoln. I only wish you would choose to empathize with liberals who oppose, say, drone strikes in Pakistan because of the suffering they too impose on civilians. Whether the suffering of civilians in our overseas wars pales besides the suffering of Southerners is entirely beside the point. Injustice is injustice. Yes innocent Southern kids suffered. But the kids in Pakistan aren&#8217;t innocent? There were no war crimes committed in Vietnam? Iraq?</p>
<p><i>All of the hot button topics are just a piece of the central question, that being the one of State Soverignty of WE THE PEOPLE, over the tyranny of an ever encroaching federal government.</i></p>
<p>You&#8217;re a Christian, right? If Jesus lived in America today, would that be his central issue? Health care, to name just one issue where that argument is raised, is a moral issue, and you can fault liberals on their reasoning about it all you want, but they&#8217;re not at fault for not seeing it first of all as a states right issue.</p>
<p><i>The first war of Independence was America from England. The second, American mercantilists against in the north and the Demorcratic Republic Capitalists in the south. Today, it is the hard working, God fearing middle class, which is rapidly disappearing, against a tyranical elite of well funded secularists.</i> </p>
<p>It&#8217;s the good guys versus the bad guys, right? The righteous versus the unrighteous swine who don&#8217;t deserve your pearls. I&#8217;m a Christian myself. I recite the creeds and mean every word. But Solzhenitsyn was correct that &#8220;the line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either, but right through every human heart, and through all human hearts.&#8221; </p>
<p>I&#8217;m afraid you haven&#8217;t rebutted or even addressed the criticisms in my original post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: A Patriot</title>
		<link>http://www.schillingshow.com/2010/09/07/guest-editorial-deja-vu-understanding-the-war-for-southern-independence-and-the-the-tea-party-explosion/comment-page-1/#comment-833</link>
		<dc:creator>A Patriot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 13:55:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.schillingshow.com/?p=3741#comment-833</guid>
		<description>Ken,
   Your response to my editorial is a perfect example of the effectiveness of government run schools to miseducate the citizenry, and perpetuate ignorance. Until one exercises the personal time to UNDERSTAND and actually KNOW the truth, then the perfunctory responses such as the one rendered by you are expected and are of little surprise.
   Out of my entire presentation, you seemingly chose to ignore all of the points that are perscient to today, and, as per the propaganda that has been spewed, chosen to only take issue with the slavery issue. There are a number of myths that have been created over the years, and only if you choose to open your mind to the other side of the truth, will you ever see reality. So lets pull that rip-cord, shall we?
   The myths fabricated by the north to justify the rape, murder and pillaging of a people and a culture are as follows. Lincoln the great emancipator, humanitarian and protector of liberty. By his own recorded words, Lincoln was a racist. In an 1858 debate, Lincoln stated &quot;I will say, then, that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white an black races- that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races....I, as much as any onther man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.&quot; How does Lincold defend that? How would you? For almost the entire time Lincoln was in office, the writ of habeas corpus was suspended. The right to free speech suspended, to the point that an entire hotel was filled with reportes being held for daring to speak against the Lincoln Administration. Lincoln worked to transform the government from the founding ideals of 1776, to the european ideals of the time. Sort of like the manner we seem to be fascinated with copying european ideas and customs today. The constitution of 1776 was forever transformed when Lee stepped down from the stairs at Appatomatax. We went from a representative republic based upon capitalism, towards a corrupting splinter of a democracy based on mercantilism, infested with corruption, such as existed in europe. We hear so much about lobbyists. That term was created immediately after the war by General Grant, describing all of the individuals waiting in Washington, D.C. hotel lobbys, willing to pay bribes.  I am willing to wager that if &quot;Ole Honest Abe&#039;s&quot; position and legacy, were more widely known, many a dumpster would be seeing an increase in discarded paintings. 
   Another myth is that the north went to war in order to save the constitutional union. This was a tremendous ruse, when in fact, the north went to war based on the financial needs of the mercantilists, who would stand to lose a great deal financially, if the south were to become independent. Today&#039;s liberals decry &quot;No War for Oil&quot; and other mantras, well this was the genesis of the notion. There is a difference between maintaining a geographical boundary in which the federal government exercises its authority and the continuance of a voluntary union of Soverign American states within a constitutional framework. They are considerably different concepts.
   The south fought the war to preserve slavery. Most widely accepted myth. Aganin, I can only allow the number to speak for themselves. At the time of the war, only 6% of southern property owners held slaves. Thanks to the various inventions of the industrial age and a changing mindset and philosolhy, slavery was already dying a slow death. So I ask you, what were the other 94% of the southern men fighting for? You go and take the time to research and answer that question. I already know the answer.
   Another myth, the south was better off because they lost the war. Really? Until the war, there were more millionaires in the south than in the north, After the barbaric method that Lincoln encouraged his commanders to conduct the war, against innocent women and children, it took until WWI, for the taxable assets of many of the southern states to equal to or barely surpass the taxable assets of 1860. No, that dog don&#039;t hunt either. Lets also not forget the northern speculators who chartered trains into the south, purchasing fifty million acres of virgin southern forrets for as little as fifty cents an acre. And while we&#039;re at it, lets not forget the huge proffits that had been made in prior years, by northern merchantmen, from the sale of slaves used to purchase that acreage for a song.
   These are just some of the myths that you have been brainwashed into beliving. I do not blame you for that. If I had chosen to be intellectually docile, and accept without question, all the facts that I learned in school, I would probably believe them to. It is not your fault, it is the fault of a system of government that must justify its current form of existence by rewriting history. You see, I saw the look of sickness and contempt upon my grandfathers face when he stood at the feet of Lincoln in the memorial at D.C. He explained to me why all of the chimney&#039;s in Georgia stood alone in the middle of no where, and why they were called &quot;Sherman&#039;s Sentinels&quot;.Each chimney a monument to a displaced family and property needlessly destroyed. We knew of the families torn apart when federal troops sent the women away on one train and the children away on another. We knew of families who were destitute still, because of the massive looting and the personal property destroyed by union forces. You see, I am perplexed beyond measure, that we get all excited by supposed war crimes in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. These pale in comparison to the war crimes taken against INNOCENT southern women and children. We knew of General Benjamin Butler, who instructed his men to rape with inpumity, any southern female they chose. Black or white. Whose men desecrated the graves of southern buried, in order to send back the jewlry and clothes stolen from the corpses. 
  These are facts Ken, I now dare you to try and defend them. By concentrating solely on slavery, you are playing the shell game that the government wants you to play. You&#039;re missing the bigger point. The point that the TEA party sees and is acting upon. The point that terrifies the rich liberal hypocrits. If you read the debates from the Virginia General Assembly, regarding secession, you will see a discussion of states rights, of corrupt coercion by the north, etc. You will not see slavery as the primary issue. Just as today. All of the hot button topics are just a piece of the central question, that being the one of State Soverignty of WE THE PEOPLE, over the tyranny of an ever encroaching federal government. The first war of Independence was America from England. The second, American mercantilists against in the north and the Demorcratic Republic Capitalists in the south. Today, it is the hard working, God fearing middle class, which is rapidly disappearing, against a tyranical elite of well funded secularists. The first two battles being more geogaphical, the latter certainly less geographical and more philosophical. 
   As far as a lack of defense, I have found that over the years, our society does not desire to engage in a true discussion. Liberals typically blow off their misguided and error filled mantras, and then shout down any sort of logical response. So, borrowing from Scripture, I chose not to &quot;Cast pearls before swine&quot; very often. Secondly, one could spend all day at a keyboard, going back and forth with issues. My hat is off to Rob for the hard work he does in researching the issues and in finding credible guests to dialogue with on his show. However, I have other duties as well, none the least of which is attempting to feed my family with the leftovers I have from feeding the overweight federal government. So what is left of my time is somewhat at a premium, as I chose to attempt to exercise those few freedoms I still have left.

                  Hank Martin</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ken,<br />
   Your response to my editorial is a perfect example of the effectiveness of government run schools to miseducate the citizenry, and perpetuate ignorance. Until one exercises the personal time to UNDERSTAND and actually KNOW the truth, then the perfunctory responses such as the one rendered by you are expected and are of little surprise.<br />
   Out of my entire presentation, you seemingly chose to ignore all of the points that are perscient to today, and, as per the propaganda that has been spewed, chosen to only take issue with the slavery issue. There are a number of myths that have been created over the years, and only if you choose to open your mind to the other side of the truth, will you ever see reality. So lets pull that rip-cord, shall we?<br />
   The myths fabricated by the north to justify the rape, murder and pillaging of a people and a culture are as follows. Lincoln the great emancipator, humanitarian and protector of liberty. By his own recorded words, Lincoln was a racist. In an 1858 debate, Lincoln stated &#8220;I will say, then, that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white an black races- that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races&#8230;.I, as much as any onther man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.&#8221; How does Lincold defend that? How would you? For almost the entire time Lincoln was in office, the writ of habeas corpus was suspended. The right to free speech suspended, to the point that an entire hotel was filled with reportes being held for daring to speak against the Lincoln Administration. Lincoln worked to transform the government from the founding ideals of 1776, to the european ideals of the time. Sort of like the manner we seem to be fascinated with copying european ideas and customs today. The constitution of 1776 was forever transformed when Lee stepped down from the stairs at Appatomatax. We went from a representative republic based upon capitalism, towards a corrupting splinter of a democracy based on mercantilism, infested with corruption, such as existed in europe. We hear so much about lobbyists. That term was created immediately after the war by General Grant, describing all of the individuals waiting in Washington, D.C. hotel lobbys, willing to pay bribes.  I am willing to wager that if &#8220;Ole Honest Abe&#8217;s&#8221; position and legacy, were more widely known, many a dumpster would be seeing an increase in discarded paintings.<br />
   Another myth is that the north went to war in order to save the constitutional union. This was a tremendous ruse, when in fact, the north went to war based on the financial needs of the mercantilists, who would stand to lose a great deal financially, if the south were to become independent. Today&#8217;s liberals decry &#8220;No War for Oil&#8221; and other mantras, well this was the genesis of the notion. There is a difference between maintaining a geographical boundary in which the federal government exercises its authority and the continuance of a voluntary union of Soverign American states within a constitutional framework. They are considerably different concepts.<br />
   The south fought the war to preserve slavery. Most widely accepted myth. Aganin, I can only allow the number to speak for themselves. At the time of the war, only 6% of southern property owners held slaves. Thanks to the various inventions of the industrial age and a changing mindset and philosolhy, slavery was already dying a slow death. So I ask you, what were the other 94% of the southern men fighting for? You go and take the time to research and answer that question. I already know the answer.<br />
   Another myth, the south was better off because they lost the war. Really? Until the war, there were more millionaires in the south than in the north, After the barbaric method that Lincoln encouraged his commanders to conduct the war, against innocent women and children, it took until WWI, for the taxable assets of many of the southern states to equal to or barely surpass the taxable assets of 1860. No, that dog don&#8217;t hunt either. Lets also not forget the northern speculators who chartered trains into the south, purchasing fifty million acres of virgin southern forrets for as little as fifty cents an acre. And while we&#8217;re at it, lets not forget the huge proffits that had been made in prior years, by northern merchantmen, from the sale of slaves used to purchase that acreage for a song.<br />
   These are just some of the myths that you have been brainwashed into beliving. I do not blame you for that. If I had chosen to be intellectually docile, and accept without question, all the facts that I learned in school, I would probably believe them to. It is not your fault, it is the fault of a system of government that must justify its current form of existence by rewriting history. You see, I saw the look of sickness and contempt upon my grandfathers face when he stood at the feet of Lincoln in the memorial at D.C. He explained to me why all of the chimney&#8217;s in Georgia stood alone in the middle of no where, and why they were called &#8220;Sherman&#8217;s Sentinels&#8221;.Each chimney a monument to a displaced family and property needlessly destroyed. We knew of the families torn apart when federal troops sent the women away on one train and the children away on another. We knew of families who were destitute still, because of the massive looting and the personal property destroyed by union forces. You see, I am perplexed beyond measure, that we get all excited by supposed war crimes in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. These pale in comparison to the war crimes taken against INNOCENT southern women and children. We knew of General Benjamin Butler, who instructed his men to rape with inpumity, any southern female they chose. Black or white. Whose men desecrated the graves of southern buried, in order to send back the jewlry and clothes stolen from the corpses.<br />
  These are facts Ken, I now dare you to try and defend them. By concentrating solely on slavery, you are playing the shell game that the government wants you to play. You&#8217;re missing the bigger point. The point that the TEA party sees and is acting upon. The point that terrifies the rich liberal hypocrits. If you read the debates from the Virginia General Assembly, regarding secession, you will see a discussion of states rights, of corrupt coercion by the north, etc. You will not see slavery as the primary issue. Just as today. All of the hot button topics are just a piece of the central question, that being the one of State Soverignty of WE THE PEOPLE, over the tyranny of an ever encroaching federal government. The first war of Independence was America from England. The second, American mercantilists against in the north and the Demorcratic Republic Capitalists in the south. Today, it is the hard working, God fearing middle class, which is rapidly disappearing, against a tyranical elite of well funded secularists. The first two battles being more geogaphical, the latter certainly less geographical and more philosophical.<br />
   As far as a lack of defense, I have found that over the years, our society does not desire to engage in a true discussion. Liberals typically blow off their misguided and error filled mantras, and then shout down any sort of logical response. So, borrowing from Scripture, I chose not to &#8220;Cast pearls before swine&#8221; very often. Secondly, one could spend all day at a keyboard, going back and forth with issues. My hat is off to Rob for the hard work he does in researching the issues and in finding credible guests to dialogue with on his show. However, I have other duties as well, none the least of which is attempting to feed my family with the leftovers I have from feeding the overweight federal government. So what is left of my time is somewhat at a premium, as I chose to attempt to exercise those few freedoms I still have left.</p>
<p>                  Hank Martin</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken</title>
		<link>http://www.schillingshow.com/2010/09/07/guest-editorial-deja-vu-understanding-the-war-for-southern-independence-and-the-the-tea-party-explosion/comment-page-1/#comment-832</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 02:54:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.schillingshow.com/?p=3741#comment-832</guid>
		<description>OK, fair point, Rob. But I notice that hardly anyone, Martin and yourself included, ever does defend when they&#039;re pressed. Boy, if Perriello ducked like that, you&#039;d have a few choice words for him.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OK, fair point, Rob. But I notice that hardly anyone, Martin and yourself included, ever does defend when they&#8217;re pressed. Boy, if Perriello ducked like that, you&#8217;d have a few choice words for him.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Schilling Show</title>
		<link>http://www.schillingshow.com/2010/09/07/guest-editorial-deja-vu-understanding-the-war-for-southern-independence-and-the-the-tea-party-explosion/comment-page-1/#comment-831</link>
		<dc:creator>Schilling Show</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 10:19:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.schillingshow.com/?p=3741#comment-831</guid>
		<description>Ken, you&#039;ve missed the point of &quot;guest editorials&quot; on this site. If you review the archive, you&#039;ll see that I welcome all points of view, even yours.

Authors defend their work if they so choose.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ken, you&#8217;ve missed the point of &#8220;guest editorials&#8221; on this site. If you review the archive, you&#8217;ll see that I welcome all points of view, even yours.</p>
<p>Authors defend their work if they so choose.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken</title>
		<link>http://www.schillingshow.com/2010/09/07/guest-editorial-deja-vu-understanding-the-war-for-southern-independence-and-the-the-tea-party-explosion/comment-page-1/#comment-830</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 02:41:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.schillingshow.com/?p=3741#comment-830</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;None of these men owned slaves; indeed, many were barely lucky to own shoes, a rifle and a shack. However, they were like the other 94% of the non-slaveholding residents of the south, who fought for states rights. They could not afford to own slaves, and their own sense of Christian Duty to their Savior, would not have allowed them to if they did. They did however see the threat to their lives, and the lives of their children, given the acts of the Federal Government at the time. For their courage, for their spirit and for their sacrifice, I will not apologize. For we can all now see they were right, for we are all about to become slaves to a tyrannical government.&lt;/i&gt;

So your ancestors were more concerned with being symbolically enslaved to the federal government (wild a stretch as that is) than with the literal enslavement of African-Americans and the enormous suffering that entailed? They really thought that the federal government winning a battle with the Southern states was a worse injustice than men, women and children literally being other men&#039;s property? And you hold them up as examples and think it&#039;s the liberals -- all of us apparently -- who &quot;ignore moral values issues&quot;?

And how is it that abolishing slavery threatened &quot;their lives&quot;?

You posted this attempt at moral reasoning, Rob. I dare you to try to defend it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>None of these men owned slaves; indeed, many were barely lucky to own shoes, a rifle and a shack. However, they were like the other 94% of the non-slaveholding residents of the south, who fought for states rights. They could not afford to own slaves, and their own sense of Christian Duty to their Savior, would not have allowed them to if they did. They did however see the threat to their lives, and the lives of their children, given the acts of the Federal Government at the time. For their courage, for their spirit and for their sacrifice, I will not apologize. For we can all now see they were right, for we are all about to become slaves to a tyrannical government.</i></p>
<p>So your ancestors were more concerned with being symbolically enslaved to the federal government (wild a stretch as that is) than with the literal enslavement of African-Americans and the enormous suffering that entailed? They really thought that the federal government winning a battle with the Southern states was a worse injustice than men, women and children literally being other men&#8217;s property? And you hold them up as examples and think it&#8217;s the liberals &#8212; all of us apparently &#8212; who &#8220;ignore moral values issues&#8221;?</p>
<p>And how is it that abolishing slavery threatened &#8220;their lives&#8221;?</p>
<p>You posted this attempt at moral reasoning, Rob. I dare you to try to defend it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

