>>HandyDandy wrote: “[E]arlier you had stated that President Lincoln held onto his “colonization” idea till “his dying days” (your words). That is totally incorrect. Please learn more about that before you open your mouth about it again. By the time of “his dying days” (your words), Abe had given up on the idea.”
>>Kalamata wrote: “No, I am correct; and since have opened your mouth, put your money where your mouth is.”
>>HandyDandy wrote: “Well, for starters, Lincoln didn’t reach a point in his life that an ordinary person would refer to as “his dying days”. His life was cut short by an assassins bullet. For example, Jefferson Davis did get to live until his “dying days”. In fact, he was able to live long enough to have been able to say the following in a speech at a Lost Cause Ceremony, “United you are now, and if the Union is ever to be broken, let the other side break it.”
I am not sure what your point is.
*****************
>>HandyDandy wrote: “Furthermore, Lincoln had two colonization attempts to coal mines in South America. Neither got off the ground. There was a real attempt to colonize 500(?) blacks to Haiti. Another dismal disaster. Some immediately took off for parts unknown. The rest returned to America and Lincoln made them paid and uniformed soldiers in the Union. That was the end of Lincoln’s pursuing colonization.”
Do you have a source?
*****************
>>HandyDandy wrote: “Of course you know, that earlier, Abe met with the leading Blacks of the day (including Fredrick Douglass) and put the idea of colonization directly on the table. He botched it and they were rightfully offended. There really isn’t much more to be said about Lincoln and Colonization although your ilk love to milk it.”
You have not demonstrated that Lincoln gave up on his decades-long quest for colonization, before his death.
*****************
>>HandyDandy wrote: “You also mentioned that Abe was “executed”. Please correct that.”
>>Kalamata wrote: “You are asking me to lie. No thanks. There were executioners lined up from Washington D.C. to Texas “dying” to rid the world of that terrorist.
>>HandyDandy wrote: “That is an interesting comment. See above. Abe was struck in the back of his head by the bullet of a crazed assassin.”
From what I have read, he was sane. However, there is no doubt the person he executed was a blood-thirsty psychopath, who burned, raped and pillaged his way to “victory,” violating every standard of warfare and common decency, while destroying the lives of perhaps a million people, or more.
*****************
>>HandyDandy wrote: “99% of real Americans would tell you the President was “assassinated”. You are the first I’ve heard use the term, “executed”.”
You and several others on this board tend to play fast-and-loose with the term “real Americans.” You should keep in mind that consensus is not necessarily history; and in matters like this, what appears to be consensus is more likely to be groupthink.
***************** c
>>HandyDandy wrote: “In addition, getting back to Lincoln and Taney, are you familiar with who authored the following passage? . . . Moving along, do you know who authored this?:
>>HandyDandy wrote: “ I do not forget the position assumed by some that constitutional questions are to be decided by the Supreme Court, nor do I deny that such decisions must be binding in any case upon the parties to a suit as to the object of that suit, while they are also entitled to very high respect and consideration in all parallel cases by all other departments of the Government. And while it is obviously possible that such decision may be erroneous in any given case, still the evil effect following it, being limited to that particular case, with the chance that it may be overruled and never become a precedent for other cases, can better be borne than could the evils of a different practice. At the same time, the candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the Government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made in ordinary litigation between parties in personal actions the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their Government into the hands of that eminent tribunal. Nor is there in this view any assault upon the court or the judges. It is a duty from which they may not shrink to decide cases properly brought before them, and it is no fault of theirs if others seek to turn their decisions to political purposes.”
Yeah, I know. He also name-dropped parts of the Declaration (out of context,) when it was to his political advantage.
A good rule of thumb on how to tell the patriot from a conniving rat, using this scenario, is, the patriot will use the Constitutional Convention construction to stop a usurpation of power, while the conniving rat will use it to usurp power.
Mr. Kalamata
"A good rule of thumb on how to tell the patriot from a conniving rat, using this scenario, is, the patriot will use the Constitutional Convention construction to stop a usurpation of power, while the conniving rat will AVOID it to usurp power."
Mr. Kalamata