Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: WhiskeyPapa
A white supremacist would not have done that.

And why wouldn't he? Earl K. Long, the infamous governor of Louisiana, was by all measures a white supremacist. He regularly used the n-word in his public speeches and even his addresses before the legislature. Yet he took several measures towards increasing the ability of blacks to vote. Why? Because he wanted them to vote for him!

Same goes for Lincoln - he wanted the blacks to vote for him and his party and, even though he publicly stated his belief that they were inferior to whites, eventually sought their voting rights because he knew he would gain from their votes.

1,730 posted on 07/17/2003 9:27:00 PM PDT by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1728 | View Replies ]


To: GOPcapitalist
Same goes for Lincoln - he wanted the blacks to vote for him and his party and, even though he publicly stated his belief that they were inferior to whites, eventually sought their voting rights because he knew he would gain from their votes.

Lincoln never said blacks were inferior to whites in moral or intellectual capacity. What he -said- was that black soldiers should have the vote.

I don't think you can show that what you aver above is anything but your very biased opinion. But this is illuminating:

"A number of Minnesota residents and political figures, including Minnesota Governor Alexander Ramsey and Senator Morton Wilkinson, expressed outrage with the pardons after having pressured Lincoln to approve the execution of all the convicted Indians (Nichols 1978, 109-13). Responding to a resolution from the U.S. Senate inquiring into his actions in regard to "the late Indian barbarities," Lincoln stated that his primary concern was ensuring that those guilty of rape were to be executed, followed by those who "have participated in massacres, as distinguished from participation in battles" (Basler V, 1953, 550- 1, emphasis in original). After the 1864 election, Governor Ramsey opined that while the President had carried the State, had Lincoln not pardoned the Sioux, he would have received more votes than he did, to which Lincoln replied, "I could not afford to hang men for votes." (Nichols 1978, 118).

President Lincoln never pandered for votes. This is also germane:

"But there were limits to what Lincoln would do to secure a second term.

He did not even consider canceling or postponing the election. Even had that been constitutionally possible, "the election was a necessity." "We can not have free government without elections," he explained; "and if the rebellion could force us to forego, or postpone a national election, it might fairly claim to have already conquered and ruined us." He did not postpone the September draft call, even though Republican politicians from all across the North entreated him to do so. Because Indiana failed to permit its soldiers to vote in the field, he was entirely willing to furlough Sherman's regiments so that they could go home and vote in the October state elections -but he made a point of telling Sherman, "They need not remain for the Presidential election, but may return to you at once."

Though it was clear that the election was going to be a very close one, Lincoln did not try to increase the Republican electoral vote by rushing the admission of new states like Colorado and Nebraska, both of which would surely have voted for his reelection. On October 31, in accordance with an act of Congress, he did proclaim Nevada a state, but he showed little interest in the legislation admitting the new state. Despite the suspicion of both Democrats and Radicals, he made no effort to force the readmission of Louisiana, Tennessee, and other Southern states, partially reconstructed but still under military control, so that they could cast their electoral votes for him. He reminded a delegation from Tennessee that it was the Congress, not the Chief Executive, that had the power to decide whether a state's electoral votes were to be counted and announced firmly, “Except it be to give protection against violence, I decline to interfere in any way with the presidential election.”

"Lincoln", pp. 539-40 by David H. Donald

Your whole premise is wrong, as usual.

Walt

1,736 posted on 07/18/2003 8:44:07 AM PDT by WhiskeyPapa (Virtue is the uncontested prize.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1730 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


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