Replies

Hey argue with your friend GOP Capitalist, he agreed that Lincoln was like Bush or Ike (instead of Reagan)

Courtesy normally dictates that you ping another poster when you are putting words in his mouth. I stated that Ike and Bush were moderates as opposed to conservatives in the modern sense. I did NOT say that Lincoln was on par with either of them though, and far from it. If you want a president who compares with Lincoln both in philosophy and political style there are three who come to mind: FDR, LBJ, and Clinton.

Hey argue with your friend GOP Capitalist, he agreed that Lincoln was like Bush or Ike (instead of Reagan) Courtesy normally dictates that you ping another poster when you are putting words in his mouth. I stated that Ike and Bush were moderates as opposed to conservatives in the modern sense. I did NOT say that Lincoln was on par with either of them though, and far from it. If you want a president who compares with Lincoln both in philosophy and political style there are three who come to mind: FDR, LBJ, and Clinton.

Actually, I thought I had pinged you.

I apologize for the oversight.

Well, then you to are in total agreement.

Wrong.

But in total agreement.

The U.S. House of Representatives had passed the Morrill tariff in the 1859-1860 session, and the Senate passed it on March 2, 1861, two days before Lincoln’s inauguration. President James Buchanan,(emphasis mine) a Pennsylvanian who owed much of his own political success to Pennsylvania protectionists, signed it into law. The bill immediately raised the average tariff rate from about 15 percent (according to Frank Taussig in Tariff History of the United States) to 37.5 percent, but with a greatly expanded list of covered items. The tax burden would about triple. Soon thereafter, a second tariff increase would increase the average rate to 47.06 percent, Taussig writes.

Wait a minute!

Wasn't Buchanan a pro-Southern Democrat!

What is he doing signing in this anti-Southern tariff?

And Lincoln gets blamed for saying he would enforce the law (the tyrant)!

If the Southerners could muster a tie in the Senate, could they have not upheld Buchanan's veto?

http://www.mises.org/fullstory.aspx?control=952&fs=lincoln's%2btariff%2bwar

Below is from Dilorenzo,

http://www.mises.org/fullstory.aspx?control=952&fs=lincoln's%2btariff%2bwar

But with the tariff it was different. He was not about to back down to the South Carolina tariff nullifiers, as Andrew Jackson had done,

Jackson backed down to the nullifiers?

The laws of the United States must be executed. I have no discretionary power on the subject-my duty is emphatically pronounced in the Constitution. (emphasis mine) Those who told you that you might peaceably prevent their execution, deceived you-they could not have been deceived themselves. They know that a forcible opposition could alone prevent the execution of the laws, and they know that such opposition must be repelled. Their object is disunion, hut be not deceived by names; disunion, by armed force, is TREASON. Are you really ready to incur its guilt? If you are, on the head of the instigators of the act be the dreadful consequences-on their heads be the dishonor, but on yours may fall the punishment-on your unhappy State will inevitably fall all the evils of the conflict you force upon the government of your country. It cannot accede to the mad project of disunion, of which you would be the first victims-its first magistrate cannot, if he would, avoid the performance of his duty-the consequence must be fearful for you, distressing to your fellow-citizens here, and to the friends of good government throughout the world.

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/presiden/proclamations/jack01.htm

Lincoln echoed the exact words of Jackson.

Hey, GOP, its seems that the Mises Institute agrees with me on Lincoln being a good Republican like Reagan.

In fact, modern Republicans are almost a mirror image of the original party. Protectionism was a high priority of the early Republican Party. They quickly enacted the Morrill Tariff, which raised tariff rates to extremely high levels, and their extreme protectionism continued throughout the era of Republican dominance. There is really little debate that these Republicans were the primary proponents of protectionism, particularly in the areas of steel and textiles. Modern Republicans, from Reagan to Bush II, have given us protectionism for a variety of favored industries, including steel, as well as the "managed trade" of NAFTA and the WTO.

What?

This can't be!

Reagan was a conservative and Lincoln a tyrant!

http://www.mises.org/fullstory.aspx?control=1476