On a goofy side note, does anybody else like Civil war beardS?
O! smith brothers cough drop boxes, yes...! even though its reet & neat
that bill mckinley is the next clean shaven potus after andy johnson...

Last edited:
On a goofy side note, does anybody else like Civil war beardS?
The South did win many more battles, and many were on the attack, they just didn't them well enough and didn't take good enough advantage of the victories they won.
Let's just look at two battles, with one battle with each side on the defensive equally:
Fredericksburg, Virginia, December 11-15, 1862:
Force Ratio: CSA: ~72,000-USA:~114,000
Casualty Ratio CSA: 5,377-USA 12,653
Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, July 1-3, 1863:
Force Ratio: CSA: 71,699-USA 93,921
Casualty Ratio: CSA: 23,271-USA 23,055
Over similar time frames, and similarly advantageous defensive positions (I have been to both battlefields, and I'd argue that Union positions at Gettysburg were arguably naturally better), the Southerners were able to equal Union casualties at Gettysburg, and that is after some rather bad generalship on the part of General Lee. Whereas, the Yankees were only able to take up to two-to-one at Fredericksburg with many more men than the South, while the South was outnumbered at Gettysburg.
That's demonstrably not true.
The South may have won more of the well known battles, especially early in the war, but if you look at all battles, the south lost more battles than it won in every year (even 1861 and 1862, when the South was having its best luck).
Late in the war ('64 and '65), the North was kicking the south all over the map- the north piling up win after win after win after win.
Given that the south was utterly defeated, this shouldn't really come as a surprise to you.
If you want to start counting, here is a decent PARTIAL list of battles (it doesn't include many of the very small ones- and lumps Sherman's March to the Sea as one battle- when in fact, it was several battles- all won by the North, of course):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_war_battles
There are a lot of reasons you may have varying casualty numbers in different battles. Consider the possibility, in the examples you gave, that the confederates had better leadership at Fredericksburg? Lee vs. Burnside? C'mon, give me a break. Thats like having the Patriots play the Giants, with Tom Brady at QB for the Patriots, and Richard Simmons (of "Sweatin' to the Oldies" fame) at QB for the Giants, then claiming the Patriots were inherently superior because they won the game. Hell, Simmons would probably do better as a General than Burnside did.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5i6rM5EBT5iwVm1ccO0htD_DWip-w
Unity? Wasn't there a civil war during his presidency?
Well, considering that he doesn't intend to uphold his oath anyway . . . does it matter?
If anyone's going to get upset, it's probably God.
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
Liar, liar, pants on fire. I don't consider myself a devoutly religious man, but there is a part of me that hopes the Bible burns off his hand whenever he utters those words.