With respect to Southern insurrectionists during the war, Lincoln's conduct is of no consequence. They were enemies and could assert no Constitutional rights.
By the way, Lincoln was elected to his Constitutional term both times. One who "reigned" would not have stood for re-election. Your characterization is laughable.
"I'm happy you noted that, but you should also note that such wanton killings did occur on Lincoln's watch at far to high of a frequency to tolerate."
It is conceded that wanton acts took place on both sides. It was the role of the courts to punish the offenders.
"I'm talking about yankee-sanctioned war criminals ... who patrolled behind the union lines and basically raped whatever the could out of the southern people who were unfortunate enough to live there as war spoils and to pass the boredom."
If the purpose of the destruction of the Confederate infrastructure was to sooner end the war and save Union lives, it was permissible and justified.
"Separation from a previous regime is the very thing this country was founded on. You can't get any more american than that."
Separation from the British empire was an act of revolution in response to oppression. It is justified under natural law. Unilateral secession purported to be a lawful, constitutional act. History and the courts have proved it was not.
"One thing that our country was NOT founded on, however, was tyranny and the usurpation of the civil authority and rule of law for military convenience."
Which country do you refer to? It is unclear from the context.
Wrong. Either the law applied to everybody in the south or it applied to nobody in the south. You and Saint Abe can't have it both ways because it's convenient for you. Besides, many of Abe's atrocities were committed against northerners and public officials in non-seceded states like Judge Merrick.
By the way, Lincoln was elected to his Constitutional term both times.
Yep, and he violated his oath to uphold the constitution barely a month after taking it! What do you call an executive who shuns the constitution he swore to defend and throws its safeguards and checks upon him (two of which were Judges Taney and Merrick) aside? A tyrant, that's what.
It is conceded that wanton acts took place on both sides. It was the role of the courts to punish the offenders.
Too bad Lincoln used his military to overrun those courts and intimidate the judges that could rule against the lawbreakers in his army.
If the purpose of the destruction of the Confederate infrastructure was to sooner end the war and save Union lives, it was permissible and justified.
Blah blah blah, the end justifies the means, might makes right...all straight out of the Bolshevik and Stalinist manuals, right?
Separation from the British empire was an act of revolution in response to oppression. It is justified under natural law. Unilateral secession purported to be a lawful, constitutional act.
You're straining at gnats and fabricating a false distinction that the secessionists themselves did not profess. A right is a right is a right, period, and the secessionists clearly stated they were acting upon their right: "THE REVOLUTION OF 1861" - Charleston Mercury
Which country do you refer to?
The one that cast off King George because "He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power." Kinda like Lincoln did against Judges Taney and Merrick.
[El Capitan] If the purpose of the destruction of the Confederate infrastructure was to sooner end the war and save Union lives, it was permissible and justified.
Uff da.
It did occur to me after your post lamenting Lincoln's inability to carry out ideological cleansing that nolu chan and I were both born North of the Mason-Dixon; I suppose that means you were really daydreaming about Russian-style butchery.
You make me want to puke.
Nothing like sending the military to 'guard' the pooling booths, to prevent those disloyal copperheads from voting for his competitors.