Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Lincoln And The Death Of The Constitution
Wolves of Liberty ^ | 9/7/2010 | gjmerits

Posted on 09/07/2010 12:43:35 PM PDT by gjmerits

The Gettysburg speech was at once the shortest and the most famous oration in American history...the highest emotion reduced to a few poetical phrases. Lincoln himself never even remotely approached it. It is genuinely stupendous. But let us not forget that it is poetry, not logic; beauty, not sense. Think of the argument in it. Put it into the cold words of everyday. The doctrine is simply this: that the Union soldiers who died at Gettysburg sacrificed their lives to the cause of self-determination - that government of the people, by the people, for the people, should not perish from the earth. It is difficult to imagine anything more untrue. The Union soldiers in the battle actually fought against self-determination; it was the Confederates who fought for the right of their people to govern themselves.

(Excerpt) Read more at wolvesofliberty.com ...


TOPICS: Education; Politics
KEYWORDS: blogpimp; lincoln; sicsempertyrannis; statesrights; tyranny
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 641-660661-680681-700 ... 901-904 next last
To: Non-Sequitur

“”I believe the offer extended was sincere, but since you don’t, can you tell me how a sincere offer would read?”

There was a sincere demand for recognition but no offer to negotiate. Do you honestly believe that if Lincoln said he would meet to discuss subject at all if an end to secession was also open to negotiation that the rebel group would have agreed? If not then how can you say there was a sincere offer extended?”

Lincoln’s terms for negotiation by his own admission required that the south bend over and give up their independents to his “benevolent” rule.

That’s not negotiation that’s demanding victory. A demand Lincoln never had any right to make.

You know this, to Lincoln the only acceptable outcome was forced union, and thats simply unacceptable to a free people on face value.

Why would we accept chains even if you offer to make them chains of gold, there still chains..


661 posted on 09/17/2010 6:17:49 PM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 660 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
What is the reason for your pathological hatred of Northerners? Come on, you can tell us.

Look in the mirror...

if I did attend schools and an Ivy League university then how would I have run into enough southerners for them to take my lunch money at any stage?

enough? any young'n fresh out of training pants would be your better, and take yer milk ticket too..

662 posted on 09/17/2010 6:21:18 PM PDT by Idabilly ("When injustice becomes law....Resistance becomes DUTY!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 659 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

“The Union had about 110,000 battle deaths out of an army of between 2.5 and 2.75 million. That’s a loss of 4 to 4.4 percent depending on which figure you use. The confederates had 94,000 battle deaths out of an army of between 750,000 and 1.25 million. That’s a loss of between 7.5% and 12.5% depending on which figure you use. As a percentage of soldiers engaged the Union made the South pay a much higher price for their losing effort.”

Thanks for making my point disproving your assertion that the North wanted victory more then the south.

The South sacrificed a lot more proportionally and fought a lot harder and longer with a lot less again a lot higher odds. That is the measure of southern American devotion to the cause of independents.

“Was it worth it?”
For liberty you bet it was, its just too bad we we’re strong enough to successfully stand up to the tyrant and his Government slaves.


663 posted on 09/17/2010 9:14:51 PM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 657 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
The North won because their cause was just and their people felt that it was worth fighting and winning.

So, according to you, had the Germans prevailed in WWII, the extermination of Jews would have been a just cause. According to you, Stalin's purges were righteous.

It's good to know where you stand.

664 posted on 09/18/2010 5:51:52 AM PDT by cowboyway (Molon labe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 649 | View Replies]

To: Monorprise
Lincoln’s terms for negotiation by his own admission required that the south bend over and give up their independents to his “benevolent” rule. That’s not negotiation that’s demanding victory. A demand Lincoln never had any right to make.

What you're admitting is that Lincoln's position wasn't open for discussion. The only outcome permitted was for him to surrender and recognize confederate sovereignty. So how can you say there was a sincere offer to negotiate? You can't. They were there to deliver confederate demands, nothing more and nothing less. So please drop the 'they were there to negotiate' farce.

665 posted on 09/18/2010 8:10:12 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 661 | View Replies]

To: Idabilly
Look in the mirror...

If you will only do likewise you'll see one of the reasons for my disgust with Lost Causers.

enough? any young'n fresh out of training pants would be your better, and take yer milk ticket too..

Yes but had it happened, why would a northerner taking my lunch money make me hate southerners?

666 posted on 09/18/2010 8:12:21 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 662 | View Replies]

To: Monorprise
Thanks for making my point disproving your assertion that the North wanted victory more then the south.

You had a point? I started out by stating that the Northern soldier obviously believed in his cause more than the southern conscript since so many voluntarily fought for the whole war. You were the one who dragged in the dead. If anything those statistics show that rebel generals were more callous of their soldier's lives than Union generals were.

For liberty you bet it was, its just too bad we we’re strong enough to successfully stand up to the tyrant and his Government slaves.

And for preserving the Union whole and undivided as our founders had bequeathed it to us, the heavy price paid was worth it as well.

667 posted on 09/18/2010 8:16:39 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 663 | View Replies]

To: cowboyway
So, according to you, had the Germans prevailed in WWII, the extermination of Jews would have been a just cause. According to you, Stalin's purges were righteous.

Damn you are stupid. Only a complete moron would equate fighting to preserve our country whole and undivided as our Founding Fathers had given it to us with the homicidal actions of a German or Russian maniac.

668 posted on 09/18/2010 8:18:20 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 664 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur; lentulusgracchus; cowboyway; Monorprise; southernsunshine; central_va; rustbucket
Paying our tribute...

Photobucket

669 posted on 09/18/2010 9:42:20 AM PDT by Idabilly ("When injustice becomes law....Resistance becomes DUTY!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 649 | View Replies]

To: Idabilly

How long was the wait?


670 posted on 09/18/2010 9:47:03 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed, and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 669 | View Replies]

To: Idabilly

You have made my day. . . good work. I usually just spit when his name is mentioned.


671 posted on 09/18/2010 11:12:07 AM PDT by mstar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 669 | View Replies]

To: LS
Now, as to Helper, it was not unusual at all for the abolitionist wing of the GOP (of which Lincoln was NOT one), to go right to the abolition of slavery in the South, and sure, they latched on to HH like anti-semites do to the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion."

Lincoln's views seem to match those of the Pennsylvania Abolition Society which was founded in 1780. They supported gradual abolition like that that became part of Pennsylvania law. See: Link.

While president, Lincoln proposed compensated abolition for the slave states in the North at $400 a slave, well under the going price for slaves. It didn't go anywhere. He also favored colonization, as did many anti-slavers in the first part of the 19th century.

Lincoln was not what some call a radical abolitionist. The radical abolitionists sprang up about 1830. They favored immediate abolition, and some of them advocated dissolving the Union. A majority of the 120 Republicans in the 1857-1859 Federal Congress endorsed the "we'll stop slavery, by God" type statements in Helper's Book. While Lincoln might not have endorsed those Helper Book statements, he rewarded Hinton Helper with a consulship once he became president.

As an aside, I have an old Pennsylvania Quaker ancestor. He was a member of the ruling council of the colony and a close friend of William Penn. He ended up assisting in a Pennsylvania witch trial. They might have had advanced views about slavery, but if you were a witch, watch out.

672 posted on 09/18/2010 12:58:18 PM PDT by rustbucket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 625 | View Replies]

To: Idabilly
Paying our tribute...

Which only shows why "Class" and "Southerner" are a contradiction in terms.

673 posted on 09/18/2010 12:59:04 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 669 | View Replies]

To: rustbucket; Idabilly; central_va
Which only shows why "Class" and "Southerner" are a contradiction in terms.

An Oxymoron: Classy Non-Sequitur
674 posted on 09/18/2010 1:23:36 PM PDT by mstar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 672 | View Replies]

To: rustbucket

We’ve had discussions on this board before about “gradual emancipated compensation.” I don’t think it would work, for the very reasons of property values we have discussed. Each remaining slave, after one was purchased, would increase in value, just like the last plot of land on ground intended for a mall or a theme park. If a slave today cost $50, tomorrow’s slave would cost $60 to purchase, irrespective of labor value. I think Lincoln understood this by 1861. It’s also interesting that there WAS a constitutional way he could have freed the slaves and given them land without violating the Constitution: declare all rebels traitors, pardon them after the war, but only after seizing the plantation owners’ lands and giving the 40 acres and a mule to the freedmen.


675 posted on 09/18/2010 2:08:44 PM PDT by LS ("Castles made of sand, fall in the sea . . . eventually." (Hendrix))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 672 | View Replies]

To: rustbucket
Lincoln was not what some call a radical abolitionist

Lincoln was an out and out racist to the nth degree.

676 posted on 09/18/2010 2:20:25 PM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed, and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 672 | View Replies]

To: mstar
An Oxymoron: Classy Non-Sequitur

Or just plain moronic, like any mstar post?

677 posted on 09/18/2010 3:14:39 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 674 | View Replies]

To: central_va
Lincoln was an out and out racist to the nth degree.

As were Jeff Davis, Robert Lee, Thomas Jackson, etc., etc., etc. You hypocrisy in this area is getting tiresome.

678 posted on 09/18/2010 3:16:05 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 676 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
As were Jeff Davis, Robert Lee, Thomas Jackson, etc., etc., etc. You hypocrisy in this area is getting tiresome.

None of those guys has a 10,000 sq ft grecco-roman temple erected in their 'honor' for freeing the slaves in a war that wasn't about slavery.....

679 posted on 09/18/2010 3:24:13 PM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed, and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 678 | View Replies]

To: central_va
None of those guys has a 10,000 sq ft grecco-roman temple erected in their 'honor' for freeing the slaves in a war that wasn't about slavery.....

But all were vile racists to the nth degree. Can we at least agree on that part? Then we can talk about the marble pedestal you all put them on. For example, if a racist like Lincoln does not deserve a monument in Washington then why does a racist like Thomas Jefferson? Why should racists like Davis and Lee be in Statuary Hall? Let's PC all of D.C. for you.

680 posted on 09/18/2010 3:29:14 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 679 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 641-660661-680681-700 ... 901-904 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson