Page 3 of 3
RE: Richmond Confederate Newspaper
Posted: Sat Oct 01, 2011 12:42 am
by pjwheeling
I'll be out of town for one week.
The presses at the Richmond Confederate will crank back up when I return. [;)]
Patrick
RE: Richmond Confederate Newspaper
Posted: Sat Oct 01, 2011 5:21 pm
by Capt. Harlock
A more violent Anthony Burns incident
A very ingenious bit of altered history -- the actual Anthony Burns incident aroused much ill feeling in Massachusetts as it was, and this would have inflamed the entire North.
But again, I'm interested in the "justifiable Fugitive Slave Law". The historical law was, in this amateur historian's opinion, the vilest law that the U.S. Federal Government has ever carried on its books. Reading it (especially the last part of Section 6), it is hard to avoid the conclusion that it was also meant to allow free blacks to be seized and taken south as slaves.
http://www.nationalcenter.org/FugitiveSlaveAct.html
RE: Richmond Confederate Newspaper
Posted: Sun Oct 02, 2011 12:02 pm
by Dennistoun
This is real interesting, PJ. Keep up the good work. [:)]
RE: Richmond Confederate Newspaper
Posted: Thu Oct 06, 2011 10:00 pm
by pjwheeling
A Republican President four years early.
This will get interesting.[;)]

RE: Richmond Confederate Newspaper
Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2011 12:23 am
by pjwheeling
No surprise here.
Patrick

DTG Issue
Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2011 1:58 am
by bugwar
Uhmmm, you might want to edit the last line of the newspaper. Slight time warp there. [:D]
RE: DTG Issue
Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:14 am
by pjwheeling
Good call, bugwar.
Patrick
RE: DTG Issue
Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:17 am
by pjwheeling
The Southern Ultimatum.
Patrick

Passing Notes
Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:07 am
by bugwar
Did they actually do that in reality? The missive, not the addressing it to Fremont.
RE: Passing Notes
Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:33 pm
by pjwheeling
Mississippi secedes.
Patrick

Flip-flop circa 1860
Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:55 pm
by bugwar
Typical fence straddle. Never giving a straight answer, cuz then he might have to do something.
[:-]
RE: Flip-flop circa 1860
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:40 am
by pjwheeling
Sorry guys. Last post. This was never meant to anything more that a fun project. I'm not a historian and never claimed to be. Critique to your hearts content.
Patrick
RE: Flip-flop circa 1860
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:54 am
by Murat
Well since you are going there, many people have commented on your newsletter, not just me and I tried to do it in private. If you think I am a smart alec for pointing out that you list 34 states (31: CA, 32: NM, 33:KS, 34: AZ) but only held an election with 31, then so be it. You said you were doing an alternate history scenario. Most people like their scenarios to be well written without errors and like to have ideas to aid them in their creation process. I offered a few things to think about, nothing more. You are free to take them or leave them. I know that the "Reverend" Falwell did not really like outside input either and found the Bible to be inconvenient to his goals and you seem to have learned those lessons well there at Liberty. So keep on doing what you wish, ignore your mistakes and have zealous overreactions to offers of help. Just like the muslim terrorists who we fed, clothed, housed, armed so they could defend themselves and then watched as they decided to repay us by bombing our cities and assassinating our people. Great crowd to be with.
RE: Flip-flop circa 1860
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 5:42 pm
by Erik Rutins
Hi Murat,
That is way over the line. No personal attacks, no religion and no politics.
You get a formal warning. If you want to discuss this further, please e-mail me at
erikr@matrixgames.com.
Regards,
- Erik
RE: Flip-flop circa 1860
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 6:17 pm
by bugwar
ORIGINAL: pjwheeling
Sorry guys. Last post. This was never meant to anything more that a fun project. I'm not a historian and never claimed to be. Critique to your hearts content.
Patrick
Pity. I enjoyed the series.
RE: Flip-flop circa 1860
Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2011 6:12 pm
by Gil R.
Agreed. This was definitely one of the more creative -- not to mention labor-intense! -- AAR's we've had, and it would be a shame for one critical exchange to overshadow the silent majority of readers who have enjoyed this alternate take on history (whose presence, of course, can be seen in the number of hits).
RE: Flip-flop circa 1860
Posted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 11:46 pm
by Ugly Guy
Sad that I missed this until now. [:(]
RE: Passing Notes
Posted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 2:31 pm
by Capt. Harlock
Did they actually do that in reality? The missive, not the addressing it to Fremont.
Better *very* late than never department:
What was actually proposed in late 1859, by a group of Senators rather than a convention of states, was the so-called Crittenden Compromise. The main feature would have added six new amendments to the Constitution, which would be permanent and unamendable, guaranteeing the continuation of slavery:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crittenden_Compromise
Very fortunately, it was rejected, especially by president-elect Lincoln.