Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [TalkAntietam] McClellan has the 'fasts'

Expand Messages
  • Jeff Beckner (PWC Magazine)
    Somebody wrote a very sympathetic biography of him. I m sure there s a full chapter of lame excuses there. ... From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
    Message 1 of 90 , Jul 12, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Somebody wrote a very sympathetic biography of him. I'm sure there's a
      full chapter of lame excuses there.

      -----Original Message-----
      From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com]
      On Behalf Of G E Mayers
      Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 7:14 PM
      To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] McClellan has the 'fasts'

      All;

      That is at least a statement I can agree with.........

      Now that I have said that and probably shocked a lot of folks here, I
      have a
      question:

      Did Franklin ever try to adequately explain why, after speedily pushing
      his
      Corps through Crampton's Gap and then down into Pleasant Valley, thereby

      scaring the s*** out of the Confederates in the process, did he stop
      and do
      nothing???

      Very respectfully,
      G E "Gerry" Mayers

      "As an American citizen I prize the Union very highly
      and know of no personal sacrifice that I would not make
      to preserve it, save that of honour."
      --Robt. E. Lee, Letter to Rooney Lee, 3 December 1860

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Jeff Beckner (PWC Magazine)" <jbeckner@...>
      To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 6:34 PM
      Subject: RE: [TalkAntietam] McClellan has the 'fasts'


      > Tardy George will NOT be contained to a single discussion group!
      >
      > That's how fast the man moves.
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com]
      > On Behalf Of Harry Smeltzer
      > Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 5:32 PM
      > To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: RE: [TalkAntietam] McClellan has the 'fasts'
      >
      > Excuse me, the post I referenced was not made to this group, but
      > another.
      >
      >
      >
      > I am aware that this is the TalkAntietam group. I'm just not positive
      > what
      > planet I'm on.
      >
      >
      >
      > Harry
      >
      >
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com]
      > On
      > Behalf Of Harry Smeltzer
      > Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 5:23 PM
      > To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: RE: [TalkAntietam] McClellan has the 'fasts'
      >
      >
      >
      > A) What does Sykes have to do with this?
      >
      > B) The "speed" question has been addressed here many times, and
      > also
      > received the "even if true, so what" treatment. So why would you want
      > to
      > discuss it again?
      >
      > C) Maybe because sometimes spades are more accurately described
      as
      > shovels. Of course, having to make that distinction can cause
      > discomfort
      > for some.
      >
      > D) The main reason I am asking you "why you bother" is that your
      > attitude on this particular issue (I don't know if you have a similar
      > attitude on other issues) is one that I see repeatedly, and yet the
      > holders
      > still semi-involve themselves in discussions (I say semi because,
      given
      > their firm belief that nothing can sway them, they can never truly
      > "participate"). In fact, there was a past several months ago on this
      > group
      > made by someone who stated that everything he reads more or less
      > confirms
      > what he already knows about the Civil War. Truly a bizarre statement
      to
      > make in a group such as the CWDG.
      >
      >
      >
      > Harry
      >
      >
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com]
      > On
      > Behalf Of Jeff Beckner (PWC Magazine)
      > Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 5:09 PM
      > To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: RE: [TalkAntietam] McClellan has the 'fasts'
      >
      >
      >
      > I'm willing to listen to particular points here and there -- as in the
      > now thrice-mentioned MD speed question.
      >
      > However, I do indeed consider an accurate and truthful portrait of
      Tardy
      > George to have been painted long ago, and thus am extremely skeptical
      of
      > "new, improved!" versions. There does not seem to be much ground to
      > plow.
      >
      > There are some CW questions that are more or less beyond dispute. This
      > is one of them, in my opinion. And I bother because it still, even
      after
      > all these years of discussion groups, etc., amazes me that some folks
      > will bend over backwards to avoid calling a spade a spade. Of all the
      > horses to back, why back THIS one?
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com]
      > On Behalf Of Harry Smeltzer
      > Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 5:03 PM
      > To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: RE: [TalkAntietam] McClellan has the 'fasts'
      >
      > I accept your position is as you state. You don't need to explain it
      > further.
      >
      >
      >
      > You have made up your mind and that is that. The expression of any
      > opinion
      > counter to what you know to be the truth is by definition irrelevant.
      I
      > imagine there is a lot of comfort in that.
      >
      >
      >
      > It just makes me wonder why you bother.
      >
      >
      >
      > Harry
      >
      >
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com]
      > On
      > Behalf Of Jeff Beckner (PWC Magazine)
      > Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 4:48 PM
      > To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: RE: [TalkAntietam] McClellan has the 'fasts'
      >
      >
      >
      > It also should indicate to you that your time on this topic
      (McClellan)
      > is
      > misspent, don't you think?
      >
      >
      > I would be encouraged by said reviews if a knowledgeable reader --
      whom
      > I presume Steven Recker to be and know Jim to be -- hadn't said Rafuse
      > "is taking positions contrary to all that's known about McClellan," or
      > whatever his exact wording was. Because, you see, I just don't see any
      > possible way (unless you're pursing a particular agenda) you can take
      a
      > look at McClellan and suddenly find that ALL the conventional wisdom
      is
      > wrong. Undoubtedly, there are some edges that probably need some
      > softening -- for example, maybe he WAS speedier in MD than usually
      given
      > credit for -- but a LOT of things that needed rethinking with new
      > conclusions?
      >
      > There's just no way. It's not there. The evidence is too conclusive on
      > the other side.
      >
      > Someone, 20 years from now, will put out a book "re-examining" the OJ
      > trial, and will hint, without being dumb enough to come out and say
      it,
      > that maybe, somehow, if you look at it this way and that, he was
      > actually innocent after all. And a book would NEED to say that,
      because
      > saying the opposite (aka, the truth) means there's no book worth
      > publishing. And I fear Rafuse falls into the same ocean, if not quite
      > the same boat, as this example.
      >
      >
      >
      > Harry
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com]
      > On
      > Behalf Of Jeff Beckner (PWC Magazine)
      > Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 4:35 PM
      > To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: RE: [TalkAntietam] McClellan has the 'fasts'
      >
      >
      >
      > I'm commenting on reviews of something I've not yet read; reviews I
      > believe to be likely accurate.
      >
      > Sue me.
      >
      > I had hoped the book would be an even-handed treatment. Praise him
      when
      > earned and blame him when culpable. Doesn't seem to have worked out
      > quite that way....because if it had, there would have been no book;
      that
      > book already having been written 200 times over.
      >
      > But let's say, for the sake of obtuse discussion, that Mac DID move
      > faster in MD than is usually supposed.
      >
      > BFD. He's still a general who spent most of his time being afraid, and
      > who, as a result, missed some lovely opportunities to take a year or
      two
      > or three off the war.
      >
      > How do we get around that?
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com]
      > On Behalf Of Harry Smeltzer
      > Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 4:25 PM
      > To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: RE: [TalkAntietam] McClellan has the 'fasts'
      >
      > As you are being typically obtuse, and commenting on something you've
      > not
      > yet read, and again requesting evidence to dispute your facts (which
      > when
      > presented will be predictably deflected by a patently wry rhetorical
      > comment), I'm doing the best I can ;-)
      >
      >
      >
      > I'm glad you're proud. Your affirmation means the world to me. I do
      > still
      > stand in awe of your interest in discussing a topic about which many
      > years
      > ago you had already seen and read enough to be 100% confident that
      what
      > you
      > already know is true.
      >
      >
      >
      > Why do you do it?
      >
      >
      >
      > Harry
      >
      >
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com]
      > On
      > Behalf Of Jeff Beckner (PWC Magazine)
      > Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 4:16 PM
      > To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: RE: [TalkAntietam] McClellan has the 'fasts'
      >
      >
      >
      > Doing yeoman work of being Mac's champion today, Harry. We're all
      proud
      > of you.
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com]
      > On Behalf Of Harry Smeltzer
      > Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 3:31 PM
      > To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: RE: [TalkAntietam] McClellan has the 'fasts'
      >
      > In your mind, I'm sure you will.
      >
      >
      >
      > Harry
      >
      >
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com]
      > On
      > Behalf Of Jeff Beckner (PWC Magazine)
      > Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 10:15 AM
      > To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: RE: [TalkAntietam] McClellan has the 'fasts'
      >
      >
      >
      > Post an excerpt. I'll tear it apart.
      >
      > _____
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > _____
      >
      > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
      >
      >
      >
      > * Visit your group "TalkAntietam
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam> " on the web.
      >
      >
      > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      ><mailto:TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
      >
      >
      > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
      > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.
      >
      >
      >
      > _____
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > _____
      >
      > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
      >
      >
      >
      > * Visit your group "TalkAntietam
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam> " on the web.
      >
      >
      > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > <mailto:TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
      >
      >
      > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
      > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.
      >
      >
      >
      > _____
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > _____
      >
      > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
      >
      >
      >
      > * Visit your group "TalkAntietam
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam> " on the web.
      >
      >
      > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > <mailto:TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
      >
      >
      > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
      > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.
      >
      >
      >
      > _____
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > _____
      >
      > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
      >
      >
      >
      > * Visit your group "TalkAntietam
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam> " on the web.
      >
      >
      > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > <mailto:TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
      >
      >
      > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
      > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.
      >
      >
      >
      > _____
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > _____
      >
      > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
      >
      >
      >
      > * Visit your group "TalkAntietam
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam> " on the web.
      >
      >
      > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > <mailto:TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
      >
      >
      > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
      > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.
      >
      >
      >
      > _____
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      --------
      > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
      >
      > a.. Visit your group "TalkAntietam" on the web.
      >
      > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
      Service.
      >
      >
      >
      ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      --------
      >
      >





      Yahoo! Groups Links
    • Jeff Beckner (PWC Magazine)
      OK. Thanks. ... From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Thomas Clemens Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 2:35 PM To:
      Message 90 of 90 , Jul 12, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        OK. Thanks.

        -----Original Message-----
        From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com]
        On Behalf Of Thomas Clemens
        Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 2:35 PM
        To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: RE: [TalkAntietam] McClellan has the 'fasts'

        I read the book too, and thought the mention of the K-N Act was
        tangental to the theme. Rafuse was discussing McClellan's shift from a
        tradtional Whig to a Douglas Democrat, and IIRC, Jim wanted a discussion
        of the inconsistency of that shift due to Douglas' sponsoring of the K-N
        Act. Rafuse does talk about it later, in the context of Lincoln, but it
        cannot be fairly said that Rafuse ignores or leaves it out. It just was
        not as emphasized as Jim thought it should be. Fair criticism, but not
        an indictment of the author.

        Thomas G. Clemens D.A.
        Professor of History
        Hagerstown Community College


        >>> jbeckner@... 07/12/05 10:53 AM >>>
        OK....are they dealt with in any detail? One of Jim's criticisms (he
        READ the book, you know) was that Rafuse didn't raise some questions on
        some topics that probably should have been raised.




        Yahoo! Groups Links
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.