150 Year Anniversary of the U.S. Civil War - Something to Remember

Today is the 150th anniversary of the start of the Civil War in the United States. You'll probably see some media coverage about this on CNN and other cable news outlets and other places. I've also seen that PBS is running the Ken Burns documentary on the conflict this week too.

But as you read, listen or watch about this war, there is one thing to remember - the South started it, did so to preserve their slave-based economy and they lost the war.

All of these may seem obvious to the casual observer, but it's not so obvious to some - especially in the South.

For example, you will hear some people say things like:

• Able Lincoln started the war by "forcing" the South to take up hostilities
• The war was not about slavery...it was about state's rights and the control of the Federal government
• The South didn't really lose the war more than they just stopped fighting

I have heard each of these positions articulated in the U.S. South within the last two years. All of this is simple ignorance at best and revisionist history at worst. And, according to recent research, nearly one quarter of American sympathize with the Southern states that were part of the Confederacy and more than 4-in-10 say slavery was not the reason for the Civil War.

But, let the facts speak to the history:

The South started the war. They did. It's a fact. Look it up. The. South. Started. The. War. Period. Upon Lincoln's election in Nov. 1860, South Carolina left the Union. Within three months six other Southern states followed and formed The Confederate States of America. At his inauguration, Lincoln called the Southern secession as "legally void,"but he did not threaten hostilities nor did he advocate eliminating slavery where it already existed. None the less, on April 12, 1861 Confederate forces fired cannons on the U.S. Army garrison holed up in Fort Sumter out in Charleston bay. And from then, the war was on. Claims that somehow Lincoln was to blame are simply bogus. The South wanted out of the Union and would not hear of any other solution...to the degree of starting the war over it. (Above: Fort Sumter. Photo by Marc Osborn)

It was about slavery. The South seceded from the Union and started the war because leaders and wealthy in the southern states felt the very foundation of their economy - slave labor - was under threat by the growing abolitionist movement, emerging Federal law and issues over slavery in new states admitted to the Union. No matter what other issue bitter Southerners can conjure up as the "real" reason for the start of the war - sectionalism, tariffs, state's rights, etc. - the are all are based on the fear of losing slave labor in the Southern economy. It's that simple people. (Right: Slave market building in Charleston, SC. Photo by Marc Osborn) 

The South lost the war. They were beaten and surrendered. Southern Gen. Robert E. Lee's surrender to Union forces under Gen. U.S. Grant in Virginia gets the most play in history, but the South's surrender was actually a series of surrenders by defeated Confederate armies all across the South. While the South initially put up a good fight and had the North on the ropes early in the war, ultimately the industrial power of the North combined with its greater population and economic power overcame Southern successes with the U.S. Army and Navy defeat the South on the field of battle. Based on their inability to sustain their forces and win battles, the Southern armies surrendered in 1865. After nearly four years of war and more than 600,000 dead or wounded, the war was over.

So why care about this today on the 150th anniversary of the start of the war? Why clarify it? Two main reasons:

1) These issues continued to plague the U.S. after the war in the form of civil rights issues and economic development. And, race to this day is still an issue in our country, and prior to the 1960s and civil rights legislation, the status quo down South - while not slavery - was extremely prejudice against people of color. To understand our race issues today, you need to understand why the Civil War started and ended at least at a basic level. Otherwise, you're just spouting off without knowing what you are talking about.

2) Because today a lot of people don't know the above and/or refuse to acknowledge it. This fuels their fantasies about "nullification" or "states rights." Think about those stats I referenced earlier in this post. Right now, we've got a quarter of our population sympathizing with the Confederacy and nearly half thinking slavery was not the primary reason for the war. Hey, if you believe the South was "forced" into the Civil War, was fighting to defend "state's rights," and that they didn't lose as much as stop fighting...then you might be someone who today hates the Federal government and regulation of any kind, still harbor racist attitudes and resents the rest of the nation that is economically better off. Sound familiar?






NOTE: Photos in this article are taken by Marc Osborn and are not authorized for any use without prior written permission from Marc Osborn.

Rs Demonstrate Savvy Negotiating Tactics With Budget Proposal

With the short term Federal budget crisis averted last week, attention in DC will now turn to longer term solutions for the spectacular budget deficit this country has.

And as this debate starts, here's something to ponder...

While the proposal from the Republicans to cut out $6 trillion in spending, together with more tax breaks for the wealthy is WAY, WAY off the deep end of reasonable, it will accomplish one thing even if none of it is exactly adopted. And what is that? It moves the debate over what to cut, what not to cut and what to offer as tax policy radically to the right.

By staking out a position so far on one side, conservatives can "negotiate" away a lot of their official plan, but still end up with what they want - spending cuts or elimination of big domestic programs (but not defense) and big tax cuts for the wealth and corporations. I'll save judgement on how effective that economic recipe will be for the economy (although I think you already know), and just say that I think that's what's going on here. That's what the Rs are up to with this radical initial proposal.

What should the Democrats do? Well, with the White House and Senate in their control, my humble opinion is they should simply say, "No, we reject out of hand what you are proposing. It is a non-starter. The provisions you are proposing have been proven again and again as failures. Try again. And oh by the way, here is our plan." And that plan better be sound, good and promoted big time to the American public. That would at least attempt to cut off the "move the debate to the right" strategy of the Rs and re-establish the debate somewhere near the real middle of the political and economic spectrum.


What will the actually Democrats do? Well, if recent history is any guide, they'll play the game. They'll try to chisel away some of the elements of this Republican plan so they are not as bad as initially proposed, but in the end they'll sign off on legalisation that is very, very conservative.

Wow....that is some bad baseball

Ok so I am watching the Ms home opener tonight as they are getting clobbered 11-0 and...

...exactly how is baseball more exciting than soccer?

At least I can clear my sports watching calendar of baseball this summer...with the exception of the one game I will go to with buddies. That will be fun no matter how pathetic the Mariners are.

Shutdown Debate Comes Down To Funding for Planned Parenthood

Yesterday I wrote that my opinion is that the government shutdown debate is all about politics.

Well, well, well...seems like I am right.

Today, it turns out the issue keeping the sides apart is abortion. Yep, abortion...or more accurately funding for Planned Parenthood. Story HERE.

As part of their budget proposal, the Rs are including a "rider" that defunds Planned Parenthood - an organization that provides a wide, wide range of family health and planning services that includes abortion counseling and services.

This rider is a direct effort by Republican leadership to pay off the support the Tea Party provided in the last election - attempt to reduce the possibility of abortion by defunding an organization that has that as part of their set of services. All red meat for the base if you will.  Reminder: abortion is legal in the U.S.

And this is the thing that Democrats are drawing the line on. Which of course I agree with because many people who cannot afford care rely on the health services from Planned Parenthood (and mostly NOT abortion), but I can also see is a political move too. After all, the Ds are the party of "choice" and if they give that up, they lose a lot of support.

So, we're all being held hostage by the abortion issue. Great.

Why am I not surprised?

I'll leave you with this to ponder when thinking about who to blame more on all this...

The last time the Federal government shut down, the circumstances were very similar. A Democrat had been elected President (1992 election) with a Democratic majority in both houses of Congress. Following a two year bash-o-thon against the President and his healthcare reform plan, the Republicans took both houses of Congress (1994 elections) and within a short period of time (1995) the Rs had forced a government shut down over funding for Medicare, education and public health. Info HERE.

Sound familiar?

All I'm saying is, look at the track record. Which party brings this upon the nation? Which party ran things when budget deficits were run up to historical levels?

Government Shut Down - 100% Politics

If the Federal government shuts down this week because of the inability for the Rs and the Ds to hammer out a budget compromise, it will be because of politics rather than fundamental issues or doing the right thing for the American people.

The Republicans will scream loudly that the Democrats are to blame because they want a shut down in order to make the Republicans look bad (as happened in the 1990s when this situation occured) and/or that Democrats are unwilling to see past their blind devotion to "outdated" and expensive "big government" programs to the degree that they'd rather see the whole government shut down.

Democrats will say that Republicans are to blame because they are trying to shove down Americans' throat massive cuts based on ideological premises instead of seriously addressing budget balancing and/or they are playing to their newly found base of the right wing Tea Party activists who actually want to shut the government down because it's the natural extension of their political beliefs and general dislike for all things government.

There's probably truth to both, and that's the point...it's all politics. It's about the next election. Who comes out of this looking worse? The Republicans for again forcing a shutdown that forces people out of work and cuts off benefits to millions...not to mention stops paying military service men and women? Or, is it the Democrats who will look worse because they will be perceived as not taking budget balancing seriously?

It seems that both parties are deciding this week that they're willing to let the government shut down and then try to make the other party take the blame...all in anticipation of how that will play out in 2012. That's a pretty aggressive and irresponsible strategy if you ask me. But...that's politics in the USA today.

New Republican "Fixes" for the Economy Are A Sham

Today we see what Republicans in the House have in mind when they talk about cutting the budget deficit.

Why? Because they've floated their outline for budget planning over the next 10 years, and it includes slashing spending by $5 billion, privatizing Medicare and cutting big from Medicaid. However, it also includes exactly $0 tax increases or other revenue sources. So, it's only touching one side of the budget ledger - spending. Story HERE.

You may recall a couple recent posts I wrote about the importance of addressing both sides of the ledger (spending and revenue) as a responsible way to balance the budget HERE and HERE.

Not surprisingly, the "new" ideas from the Republicans are exactly the same as their traditional ideas on economy and government. To me, this proves they are not serious about responsibly reducing the budget deficit and/or they are wholly blind to their addiction to"voodoo economics" of tax cuts for the rich and corporations combined with roll-back of government programs. This approach not only does not work but makes things horribly worse.

As evidence of this claim, I give you the entire history of the United States of America from the 1770s to the 1930s. That's right. Our history is one of boom and bust, boom and bust, boom and bust...all with a relatively small middle class, virtually no government programs or regulation and with wealth concentrated at the top among a very few.

Only in the period roughly between 1934 and the early 1980s did we REALLY break out and grow our middle class and society into the unquestioned economic, cultural, military and standard of living leader of the world. And what do you think was one key differentiation in that 40+ period of time from everything that came before? Responsible government programs and laws - Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Civil Rights legislation, regulation of financial markets and banks and others.

None of that stuff existed before 1932 and much of it has been under attack or rolled back since the mid 1980s. Only when government asserted itself responsibly to address the economic disaster of the Great Depression, mobilize the country for World War II and pass Federal civil rights laws did we flourish as a world power with a broad, deep, employed and comfortable middle class the likes of which had not seen by any society before.

Flash forward and back to recent times. Our current budget crisis was created by turning our back on the fundamentals that made us a great nation. Conservative economic theory and leadership over the past 10-12 years has been wickedly efficient of producing wealth for the already rich and big companies, but as it did so it created the massive budget deficits, shrinking middle class, rising unemployment and overall erosion of our society that we see today.

And what to the Republicans propose as of today to fix the problem they created...more of the same thing.

That's why I call "sham" on what they're proposing. It won't work...it never has...and is most likely just a new way to funnel money to corporations or the wealthy. And we know how that always works out for the rest of us.

Nullification? Go Ahead, Make My Day.

It seems some on the right are now more openly talking about something called "nullification." You may not recognize the term, but it basically boils down to a state or states opting out of the USA - secession.

Story HERE.

If that movement gains momentum, here's my suggestion for how to resolve it...

Go ahead, let them leave the Union.

And when they do, we'll be happy to take our armed forces, Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, social programs, access to natural resources, our or healthcare system, student loan program and a WHOLE lot of other things (and the jobs that go with them) those wanting to leave the United States are not even thinking of as connected to the Federal government.

Good luck to those of you espousing this as your big answer. If you ever need help fending off invasion, solving an energy crisis, rolling back disease or even paving your freeways...please feel free to ask some other country to help you out. The USA will be done with you.

Bye.