Posted on 11/04/2013 1:43:45 PM PST by AT7Saluki
Northeastern Illinois needs to be educated on its political heroes. Abraham Lincoln was a Republican, not a Democrat. But the Jacob Carruthers Center for Inner City Studies apparently would prefer to just make up their own version.
(Excerpt) Read more at libertynews.com ...
Maybe it’s just a reference to someone who believes in democracy — a democrat.
In the opinion of some people, including me, the Civil War was sybolically a war between the federal government, represented by the Northern States and state sovereignty, represented by the Southern States. In other words, the federal government fought against its constitutonally limited powers and won.
So in that context, Lincoln was a pro-unconstitutionally big federal government Democrat.
How do I say this politely...
That is not one of Illinois’ “premier” institutions of higher education.
And, of course, the plaque looks like it was cast brass, very expensive...maybe they can get someone to steal it for scrap and try again.
It’s from 1903
I prefer to call it “The War of Secession”. And yes, Lincoln did represent a huge expansion of government. But for the issue at hand - freedom, equality, etc. - Lincoln, Fremont, et al were the ones championing it while Democrats opposed it. And to this very day, Democrats continue to oppose freedom and equality.
Jeff Davis wasn’t Lincoln’s opponent.
nonsense. Lincoln sought to defend the constitution against insurrectionists attempting to tear our nation apart... as any good president would do.
With all due respect, Lincoln wasn’t defending the Constitution. He was trying to restore the Union at the point of many many guns. In retrospect, it was the right call. But please don’t say that it was Constitutional. It wasn’t.
This is in Northeastern Illinois where history is Chicago style.
In retrospect, it was the wrong call.
The right call would have been to recognize their right to secede, then go to war over the slavery issue anyway.
Likely the south would have gone ahead and abolished slavery, and reunited with the north twenty years later (by which time slavery had been rendered un viable by the progression of the industrial revolution.)
Ya. And what was Kennedy by today’s standards.
“It’s from 1903”
So, someone on campus just noticed this NOW?
You would think that would be enough time to fix it.
God knows, Illinois has probably blown tens of billions of 2013 dollars on more trivial matters/graft since then...
“Maybe it’s just a reference to someone who believes in democracy — a democrat.”
This is a plausible explanation.
That doesn’t matter, in this case, because the entire democrat line is that the republican’s were the pro-slavery party, formed the KKK, and enforced Jim Crow laws in the south. Thus Jeff Davis, and all the southern politicians must have been Republicans, since the democrat Abraham Lincoln lead the Democrat party in its war on the south.
This is according to the book of revisionism 101. ;-)
No, stupid.
I agree to an extent about Democrats. My reservation is the following. I question if the federal government's constitutionally limited powers were ever properly taught. If not, then Civil War era Democrats, as well as "Republican" Lincoln, possibly regarded the presidency as a kind of kingship. And if such is the case, then post Civil War Democrats may have targeted winning control of the Oval Office as a means of getting revenge on the North.
Yes, it's a rough theory. The cold war aspect of the Civil War is a challenging jigsaw puzzle.
If you study the discussions at the Constitutonal Convention, you might question if the United States were ever really united. This is evidenced by the strained language in the Constitution concerning slavery.
Also, as I've mentioned in another post, I question if citizens were ever taught the idea of a constitutonally-limited power federal government.
But he was defending the constitution. And I will say that it was constitutional - because it was.
Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 gives control of the militia to the president.
Article II, Section 1, Clause 7 commands an oath of office of a president:
“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.”
Combined with the Uniform Militia Act of 1792 and the Militia Act of 1796 the president is permitted to call out the militia to put down insurrections or rebellions.
The die was already cast before Lincoln assumed office. He did what he could to calm the insurrectionists but they were fixed on a path of destruction. It was Lincoln’s duty to respond to the rebellion and he did his duty.
Thank God.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.