<?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: What Can We Learn from 1860?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/what-can-we-learn-from-1860/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/what-can-we-learn-from-1860/</link>
	<description>Whiskey and Gunpowder features articles on gold, oil, currencies, emerging markets, energy, and more.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 May 2012 19:05:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin W</title>
		<link>http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/what-can-we-learn-from-1860/comment-page-2/#comment-20890</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin W</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jun 2011 20:09:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/?p=5795#comment-20890</guid>
		<description>The Civil War was always about Slavery.  Any attempt to claim otherwise complwetely ignors historical fact.  Therefore the above article must be fiction.  I did not even have to look to be sure that the author had no educational background in history. Slavery was the financial engine of the South. 
     Western expansion was the litmus test for the survival of slave labor.  That was the cause of  violence in Kansas - where the emerging state was allowed self-determine their status on the slavery issue. In Lincoln&#039;s election campaign, he did not push for the abolition of slavery but he said he would stop it&#039;s western expansion.  His election signaled slavery&#039;s eventual end to southern slave owners.  That is why state secession began shortly after Lincoln&#039;s election .  Yes, it was about  states&#039; rights - states&#039; rights to remain a Slave State.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Civil War was always about Slavery.  Any attempt to claim otherwise complwetely ignors historical fact.  Therefore the above article must be fiction.  I did not even have to look to be sure that the author had no educational background in history. Slavery was the financial engine of the South.<br />
     Western expansion was the litmus test for the survival of slave labor.  That was the cause of  violence in Kansas &#8211; where the emerging state was allowed self-determine their status on the slavery issue. In Lincoln&#8217;s election campaign, he did not push for the abolition of slavery but he said he would stop it&#8217;s western expansion.  His election signaled slavery&#8217;s eventual end to southern slave owners.  That is why state secession began shortly after Lincoln&#8217;s election .  Yes, it was about  states&#8217; rights &#8211; states&#8217; rights to remain a Slave State.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave King</title>
		<link>http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/what-can-we-learn-from-1860/comment-page-2/#comment-5124</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave King</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2010 21:33:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/?p=5795#comment-5124</guid>
		<description>I always love it when people display their lack of knowledge on the cause of the Civil War. While the author of this pro Confederate /Lincoln hating piece pretends to &quot;know the Southern truth&quot; he is sadly misinformed. When talking history ,it is always best to go directly to the primary sources. In this case it is quite simple. Each of the original 7 seceding states published their reasons for and the of causes of secession. They are available in the &quot;Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies in the Civil War&quot; In this massive 128 volume collection (available on the web) you can find all of the original ,unedited reports,orders and correspondence , as they were written at the time. The beauty of this is you can see the thinking and mindset of 1860-1865 (before the liberal age of political correctness and double speak). In their &quot;Declarations  of Causes&quot; the Southern spokesmen make it clear that the issue of Slavery was number one,two ,three etc. in their grievances. ....Please don&#039;t believe me , a  Civil War Re-enactor who wears the 7 th Tennessee Infantry Regiment&#039;s grey uniform and carries it&#039;s colors proudly ,read for yourself. My southern forbears were honest men and were not afraid to tell the truth. They saw Lincoln&#039;s election as a sign that the new western territories would become non-slave ,or &quot;Free-States&quot; ,tilting the balance of power in the Congress in favor of the North . This would mark the beginning of the end for slavery .In the1860 census there were about 3,500,000 slaves in the South. At an average value of $1,000 each(skilled craftsmen were worth far more and infants and children far less) this was 3.5 Billion Dollars ,in 1860 !!!!. This value of property&quot;would become worth zero to the owners and the banks which had added slave value in their calculations when figuring mortgages and loans etc..........this would spell economic chaos (which would also hurt many in the north just as badly). Without slavery there would have been no Civil War.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I always love it when people display their lack of knowledge on the cause of the Civil War. While the author of this pro Confederate /Lincoln hating piece pretends to &#8220;know the Southern truth&#8221; he is sadly misinformed. When talking history ,it is always best to go directly to the primary sources. In this case it is quite simple. Each of the original 7 seceding states published their reasons for and the of causes of secession. They are available in the &#8220;Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies in the Civil War&#8221; In this massive 128 volume collection (available on the web) you can find all of the original ,unedited reports,orders and correspondence , as they were written at the time. The beauty of this is you can see the thinking and mindset of 1860-1865 (before the liberal age of political correctness and double speak). In their &#8220;Declarations  of Causes&#8221; the Southern spokesmen make it clear that the issue of Slavery was number one,two ,three etc. in their grievances. &#8230;.Please don&#8217;t believe me , a  Civil War Re-enactor who wears the 7 th Tennessee Infantry Regiment&#8217;s grey uniform and carries it&#8217;s colors proudly ,read for yourself. My southern forbears were honest men and were not afraid to tell the truth. They saw Lincoln&#8217;s election as a sign that the new western territories would become non-slave ,or &#8220;Free-States&#8221; ,tilting the balance of power in the Congress in favor of the North . This would mark the beginning of the end for slavery .In the1860 census there were about 3,500,000 slaves in the South. At an average value of $1,000 each(skilled craftsmen were worth far more and infants and children far less) this was 3.5 Billion Dollars ,in 1860 !!!!. This value of property&#8221;would become worth zero to the owners and the banks which had added slave value in their calculations when figuring mortgages and loans etc&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.this would spell economic chaos (which would also hurt many in the north just as badly). Without slavery there would have been no Civil War.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert</title>
		<link>http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/what-can-we-learn-from-1860/comment-page-2/#comment-4681</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 07:30:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/?p=5795#comment-4681</guid>
		<description>We just suffered through eight years of an incompetent Texas /  Southern right-wing government,.  They lost two wars and destroyed the economy, and spent the entire U.S. Treasury in the process.  Now that that is over and we have a President trying to clean up their mess, all the born again fiscal conservatives and  &quot;secessionists&quot; are coming  out of the woodwork calling themselves &quot;patriots&quot; and ranting about &quot;liberty&quot;.  Where were you when those right-wing jerks were trashing our lovely country?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We just suffered through eight years of an incompetent Texas /  Southern right-wing government,.  They lost two wars and destroyed the economy, and spent the entire U.S. Treasury in the process.  Now that that is over and we have a President trying to clean up their mess, all the born again fiscal conservatives and  &#8220;secessionists&#8221; are coming  out of the woodwork calling themselves &#8220;patriots&#8221; and ranting about &#8220;liberty&#8221;.  Where were you when those right-wing jerks were trashing our lovely country?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wilmer McLean</title>
		<link>http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/what-can-we-learn-from-1860/comment-page-2/#comment-4670</link>
		<dc:creator>Wilmer McLean</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Dec 2009 18:59:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/?p=5795#comment-4670</guid>
		<description>This entire post was made of fail. Your concept of history is severely damaged. I suugest picking up The Civil War by Bruce Catton, A Great Civil War by Russel F. Weigley, or Battle Cry of Freedom by James McPherson. You really should read up on it. I&#039;m not sure where you are getting your information (especially if the accepted history is, as you claim, Northern/Leftist propoganda) but you may want to reevaluate your source (or at least provide them when claiming things as fact). A few things:

1) Cotton was not king. In fact, the widespread planting of cotton in the south contributed to the Confederate loss in the subsequent war, as they did not have sufficient farmland to grow food for their armies. In the northwest, they grew wheat and corn, which were much more useful. And when Britain suffered poor harvests, they were much more willing to trade with the North, as the ability to feed their people was much more important than the ability to make trousers.
2) Lincoln may not have freed any slaves personally, but the Union Army sure did, under his direction. Slavery was not a distraction, as you claim. Firstly, the spread of slavery westward was probably the foremost reason for the conflict to begin with. Secondly, the Union war effort was largely uninvolved with the southern slaves until the Emancipation Proclamation, with the exception of some Union Generals like John C. Fremont who took matters into their own hands. And when the decision was finally made to free the slaves, what motivated Lincoln the most was the ability to cripple the South&#039;s economy by undercutting their main industrial force. Also, I shouldn&#039;t have to point this out, but slavery is really, really bad. I can&#039;t help but question the moral foundtion of anyone who would support an institution born from the desire to oppress others, and then further try to defend that practice as, and I&#039;m paraphrasing, not that bad. And no number of your statistics will convince me otherwise.
3) Also I&#039;m a bit confused...you claim that the majority of the wealth was in the South, yet you claim that they were resisting a government who aimed to &quot;impoverish&quot; them? 
4) Oh, and the War of Northern Aggression is a serious misnomer. The South shot first, on April 12th, 1861, on the federally owned Fort Sumter, despite the fact that the North had made no move to keep the South from establishing the Confederacy. Saying that the North was wrong to retaliate is akin to saying the United States should have just let the Japanese attack Pearl Harbor or the terrorists commit the 9/11 attrocities without retribution. And your Lincoln quote, about filling his coffers...again, the North had made no move whatsoever against the South. The Confederacy struck first. 
5) And, as Woodrow Wilson (a native Southerner) has written, the North really did the South a favor by conquering it. The South was sorely lagging behind the rest of the world, caught up in an antiquated and (as you yourself admit) inefficient mode of industrial and social processes that, had the North &quot;let it go,&quot; would have set the Confederacy up for either complete economic failure, or worse, European domination. Don&#039;t forget, Napoleon III had, by this time, established a puppet government in Mexico, and neither the Mexicans nor the French would have had any qualms with taking back the land lost in the Louisiana Purchase or the Mexican War. The Confederacy was a governmental system that could not survive. Each state printed its own money, militias were poorly organized and governors over-controlling, inflation was rampant and, again, they relied on the insitution of slavery for their industrial capabilities. 

Regardless of the inaccuracies of your rant, there is one simple rebuke to your call for secession (which is itself the same sort of overblown sensationalist claim which you rail against). We live in a democratic nation. There is no need for secession, as Lincoln pointed out all those years ago. If you are being oppressed by a monarch or dictator, rebellion is warranted. If you don&#039;t like what your government is doing in a republic, you vote the shmucks out of office. This isn&#039;t exactly czarist Russia here, people. Vote, petition, engage in the democratic process. Change can take place without a full-blown uprising; we as a nation have proved that time and again.  I&#039;m assuming you are all adults here; think reasonably. Take the rebellion elsewhere, it is not needed here.

And really, please, cite your sources if you are going to claim things as fact. I&#039;d imagine someone with your level of supposed education would know that by now. That way, when you deliver misinformation, people can follow through and see for themselves. If you&#039;re interested, anything I have printed can be found in any of the books I mentioned earlier.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This entire post was made of fail. Your concept of history is severely damaged. I suugest picking up The Civil War by Bruce Catton, A Great Civil War by Russel F. Weigley, or Battle Cry of Freedom by James McPherson. You really should read up on it. I&#8217;m not sure where you are getting your information (especially if the accepted history is, as you claim, Northern/Leftist propoganda) but you may want to reevaluate your source (or at least provide them when claiming things as fact). A few things:</p>
<p>1) Cotton was not king. In fact, the widespread planting of cotton in the south contributed to the Confederate loss in the subsequent war, as they did not have sufficient farmland to grow food for their armies. In the northwest, they grew wheat and corn, which were much more useful. And when Britain suffered poor harvests, they were much more willing to trade with the North, as the ability to feed their people was much more important than the ability to make trousers.<br />
2) Lincoln may not have freed any slaves personally, but the Union Army sure did, under his direction. Slavery was not a distraction, as you claim. Firstly, the spread of slavery westward was probably the foremost reason for the conflict to begin with. Secondly, the Union war effort was largely uninvolved with the southern slaves until the Emancipation Proclamation, with the exception of some Union Generals like John C. Fremont who took matters into their own hands. And when the decision was finally made to free the slaves, what motivated Lincoln the most was the ability to cripple the South&#8217;s economy by undercutting their main industrial force. Also, I shouldn&#8217;t have to point this out, but slavery is really, really bad. I can&#8217;t help but question the moral foundtion of anyone who would support an institution born from the desire to oppress others, and then further try to defend that practice as, and I&#8217;m paraphrasing, not that bad. And no number of your statistics will convince me otherwise.<br />
3) Also I&#8217;m a bit confused&#8230;you claim that the majority of the wealth was in the South, yet you claim that they were resisting a government who aimed to &#8220;impoverish&#8221; them?<br />
4) Oh, and the War of Northern Aggression is a serious misnomer. The South shot first, on April 12th, 1861, on the federally owned Fort Sumter, despite the fact that the North had made no move to keep the South from establishing the Confederacy. Saying that the North was wrong to retaliate is akin to saying the United States should have just let the Japanese attack Pearl Harbor or the terrorists commit the 9/11 attrocities without retribution. And your Lincoln quote, about filling his coffers&#8230;again, the North had made no move whatsoever against the South. The Confederacy struck first.<br />
5) And, as Woodrow Wilson (a native Southerner) has written, the North really did the South a favor by conquering it. The South was sorely lagging behind the rest of the world, caught up in an antiquated and (as you yourself admit) inefficient mode of industrial and social processes that, had the North &#8220;let it go,&#8221; would have set the Confederacy up for either complete economic failure, or worse, European domination. Don&#8217;t forget, Napoleon III had, by this time, established a puppet government in Mexico, and neither the Mexicans nor the French would have had any qualms with taking back the land lost in the Louisiana Purchase or the Mexican War. The Confederacy was a governmental system that could not survive. Each state printed its own money, militias were poorly organized and governors over-controlling, inflation was rampant and, again, they relied on the insitution of slavery for their industrial capabilities. </p>
<p>Regardless of the inaccuracies of your rant, there is one simple rebuke to your call for secession (which is itself the same sort of overblown sensationalist claim which you rail against). We live in a democratic nation. There is no need for secession, as Lincoln pointed out all those years ago. If you are being oppressed by a monarch or dictator, rebellion is warranted. If you don&#8217;t like what your government is doing in a republic, you vote the shmucks out of office. This isn&#8217;t exactly czarist Russia here, people. Vote, petition, engage in the democratic process. Change can take place without a full-blown uprising; we as a nation have proved that time and again.  I&#8217;m assuming you are all adults here; think reasonably. Take the rebellion elsewhere, it is not needed here.</p>
<p>And really, please, cite your sources if you are going to claim things as fact. I&#8217;d imagine someone with your level of supposed education would know that by now. That way, when you deliver misinformation, people can follow through and see for themselves. If you&#8217;re interested, anything I have printed can be found in any of the books I mentioned earlier.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jay moses</title>
		<link>http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/what-can-we-learn-from-1860/comment-page-2/#comment-4348</link>
		<dc:creator>jay moses</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 15:34:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/?p=5795#comment-4348</guid>
		<description>Gulliver-
thanks for the support.  our 23 acres is located well away from anywhere and chosen for just that reason.  In the coming years, it isn&#039;t going to be about secession.  That would be rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.  There&#039;s one road into this place and one road out--just the way it should be.
jm</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gulliver-<br />
thanks for the support.  our 23 acres is located well away from anywhere and chosen for just that reason.  In the coming years, it isn&#8217;t going to be about secession.  That would be rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.  There&#8217;s one road into this place and one road out&#8211;just the way it should be.<br />
jm</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Happy Gulliver</title>
		<link>http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/what-can-we-learn-from-1860/comment-page-2/#comment-4346</link>
		<dc:creator>Happy Gulliver</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 02:58:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/?p=5795#comment-4346</guid>
		<description>Stan, I hope you don&#039;t speak for all southerners about succession, here&#039;s one yank who&#039;s been shopping for a rebel flag.  True, we don&#039;t actually need a full on military succession, if we could just get state&#039;s to reassert their 10th amendment rights and tell DC to stuff it.  Maybe one of you Dixie states could assert that the one of the alphabet soups doesn&#039;t have jurisdiction in your borders.  Pick a new one to thumb your nose at every month:
BATF IRS FDA DHS DOE... etc.
Ask yourself this question when you go down the grocery aisle shopping for steak.  &quot;Which seal of approval do I want on my beef?  FDA? Texan Approved? Locally Grown?&quot;  Right now in the &quot;land of the free&quot; we only get the FDA approval and the beef doesn&#039;t always look so pretty.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Stan, I hope you don&#8217;t speak for all southerners about succession, here&#8217;s one yank who&#8217;s been shopping for a rebel flag.  True, we don&#8217;t actually need a full on military succession, if we could just get state&#8217;s to reassert their 10th amendment rights and tell DC to stuff it.  Maybe one of you Dixie states could assert that the one of the alphabet soups doesn&#8217;t have jurisdiction in your borders.  Pick a new one to thumb your nose at every month:<br />
BATF IRS FDA DHS DOE&#8230; etc.<br />
Ask yourself this question when you go down the grocery aisle shopping for steak.  &#8220;Which seal of approval do I want on my beef?  FDA? Texan Approved? Locally Grown?&#8221;  Right now in the &#8220;land of the free&#8221; we only get the FDA approval and the beef doesn&#8217;t always look so pretty.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Happy Gulliver</title>
		<link>http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/what-can-we-learn-from-1860/comment-page-2/#comment-4345</link>
		<dc:creator>Happy Gulliver</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 02:27:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/?p=5795#comment-4345</guid>
		<description>radiofreedixie,  I&#039;m coming to the defense of my cheese cutting neighbor.  23 acres in WI doesn&#039;t sound bad... it just depends where they are located.  (I won&#039;t comment if your 23 acres is too close to Houston, Jackson, or Atlanta.)  My German and Swedish Ancestors who came to this once great land came long after the war of northern aggression happened.  Many of us Yanks by geography are plenty southern in our priorities just with a different accent.  Forgive us for this... we have been subjected to a minimum of 12 years of misinformation by our public screwall system concerning the false Sainting of Lincoln and his warmongering on warmer geographies.  Once you get outside the major cities up here people become a lot more real.  Priorities become God, Family, Neighbor, then Country almost in that order.  Honestly how different is that from down there.  When things go badly, certain roads out of the cities will end up getting blocked if not by the Canadian rent-a-troops, or the National Guard then maybe some of our local Cold Weather Good-ole-boys.  As I see it the Midwest will not lead a modern day succession movement, but if Dixie or TX makes a move we might not be far behind.  East Coast they can have Chicago and Detroit, just let us keep our families land and leave us alone to cut our cheese and pack pickles.
Besides if I still reside in the Midwest when the dominoes of secessionist states fall, I would welcome the opportunity to have strong and positive trading relationships with our Dixie cousins to the south, and our gun toting crazy Canook&#039;s to the north.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>radiofreedixie,  I&#8217;m coming to the defense of my cheese cutting neighbor.  23 acres in WI doesn&#8217;t sound bad&#8230; it just depends where they are located.  (I won&#8217;t comment if your 23 acres is too close to Houston, Jackson, or Atlanta.)  My German and Swedish Ancestors who came to this once great land came long after the war of northern aggression happened.  Many of us Yanks by geography are plenty southern in our priorities just with a different accent.  Forgive us for this&#8230; we have been subjected to a minimum of 12 years of misinformation by our public screwall system concerning the false Sainting of Lincoln and his warmongering on warmer geographies.  Once you get outside the major cities up here people become a lot more real.  Priorities become God, Family, Neighbor, then Country almost in that order.  Honestly how different is that from down there.  When things go badly, certain roads out of the cities will end up getting blocked if not by the Canadian rent-a-troops, or the National Guard then maybe some of our local Cold Weather Good-ole-boys.  As I see it the Midwest will not lead a modern day succession movement, but if Dixie or TX makes a move we might not be far behind.  East Coast they can have Chicago and Detroit, just let us keep our families land and leave us alone to cut our cheese and pack pickles.<br />
Besides if I still reside in the Midwest when the dominoes of secessionist states fall, I would welcome the opportunity to have strong and positive trading relationships with our Dixie cousins to the south, and our gun toting crazy Canook&#8217;s to the north.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stan</title>
		<link>http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/what-can-we-learn-from-1860/comment-page-2/#comment-4344</link>
		<dc:creator>Stan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 01:10:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/?p=5795#comment-4344</guid>
		<description>I find it isn&#039;t worth the trouble to talk to those who are blind, deaf, and ignorant. Most of them think that the War of Northern Aggression was fought for civil rights. They believe that an imagined emancipation justifies the death of hundreds of thousands of people at the hands of a government that proclaimed them to be its own citizens. Why try to talk to those who have no idea what rule by consent means? Secession is expression of nonconsent of rule and should be understood by the children of those who chose to secede from England and create this country. It is however strange to behold a dysfunction which embraces freedoms but is void of desire for liberty.

Lastly, we aren&#039;t going to secede again. We learned that lesson well. However, you ought not to criticize the South because we are doing nothing except going by the book and playing the game the way y&#039;all want it played. We are not the ones who came up with the idea of Big centralized government which gives away money from cradle to grave. We were against it. Look at it this way: we are all one now, just like you wanted, for better or for worse. If we go down, you will be there with us.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I find it isn&#8217;t worth the trouble to talk to those who are blind, deaf, and ignorant. Most of them think that the War of Northern Aggression was fought for civil rights. They believe that an imagined emancipation justifies the death of hundreds of thousands of people at the hands of a government that proclaimed them to be its own citizens. Why try to talk to those who have no idea what rule by consent means? Secession is expression of nonconsent of rule and should be understood by the children of those who chose to secede from England and create this country. It is however strange to behold a dysfunction which embraces freedoms but is void of desire for liberty.</p>
<p>Lastly, we aren&#8217;t going to secede again. We learned that lesson well. However, you ought not to criticize the South because we are doing nothing except going by the book and playing the game the way y&#8217;all want it played. We are not the ones who came up with the idea of Big centralized government which gives away money from cradle to grave. We were against it. Look at it this way: we are all one now, just like you wanted, for better or for worse. If we go down, you will be there with us.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: j.d. moses</title>
		<link>http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/what-can-we-learn-from-1860/comment-page-2/#comment-4343</link>
		<dc:creator>j.d. moses</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 01:04:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/?p=5795#comment-4343</guid>
		<description>dear Linda-
you really must read more carefully.  i wasn&#039;t suggesting that the South would lose in a fight with the North.  I was merely suggesting that if Huck ran for governor of a southern state on a secessionist platform he would lose the election badly since, as far as I know, there are very few people in the South who think that secession is a good idea.
As far as Pearl beer is concerned I&#039;m amazed at your response.  I like Pearl.  Lone Star too. And &quot;Renegade&quot; is one of my favorite songs.
Be well.
jm</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>dear Linda-<br />
you really must read more carefully.  i wasn&#8217;t suggesting that the South would lose in a fight with the North.  I was merely suggesting that if Huck ran for governor of a southern state on a secessionist platform he would lose the election badly since, as far as I know, there are very few people in the South who think that secession is a good idea.<br />
As far as Pearl beer is concerned I&#8217;m amazed at your response.  I like Pearl.  Lone Star too. And &#8220;Renegade&#8221; is one of my favorite songs.<br />
Be well.<br />
jm</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Don a NH Patriot</title>
		<link>http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/what-can-we-learn-from-1860/comment-page-2/#comment-4338</link>
		<dc:creator>Don a NH Patriot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 20:54:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/?p=5795#comment-4338</guid>
		<description>Linda, as a northerner and true patriot  I have been reading more on Lincoln and what the man truly was. You have hit the nail on the head. As much as I despise slavery, and that is what we all will become regardless of race if we don&#039;t fight back now, the South was actually in the right. 

The time is coming near America, wake up before it is to late. If you want to be a slave to the New World Order stay the sheeple that you are. If you want to take back your country speak up, email your congressmen and woman, VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBANTS (except Ron Paul and a few others that abide by the US Contitution) and as a last resort by guns and lots and lots of ammo. True Patriots will not let the country go without a fight and fight we will if we are backed into the corner.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Linda, as a northerner and true patriot  I have been reading more on Lincoln and what the man truly was. You have hit the nail on the head. As much as I despise slavery, and that is what we all will become regardless of race if we don&#8217;t fight back now, the South was actually in the right. </p>
<p>The time is coming near America, wake up before it is to late. If you want to be a slave to the New World Order stay the sheeple that you are. If you want to take back your country speak up, email your congressmen and woman, VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBANTS (except Ron Paul and a few others that abide by the US Contitution) and as a last resort by guns and lots and lots of ammo. True Patriots will not let the country go without a fight and fight we will if we are backed into the corner.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

