Replies

had the 1864 election been FAIR/honest, lincoln would have been back in IL, being a "crooked railroad lawyer".

The guy was crooked all the way. Lincoln was one of these say-anything to get power individuals. A Hitler, a Stalin, a Clinton. He could care less about slavery. I think he represented one slave in all his years as a lawyer (I believe he lost the case, but I could be wrong). I do know the leader of the abolitionist movement and Republican Party hated him and called him "an abomination" or some such. Lincoln used slavery as a political straw man to collect his tariff. It's similar in fashion to Democrats using stem cell research to justify their true agenda, abortion.

Lincoln's famous remark that if he could preserve the Union without freeing one slave he would summed up his attitude. As regards his true attitude to slavery, he was a colonist. He wanted every single one of them put on boats and relocated back to Africa. He most certainly regarded blacks as irredeemably inferior to whites.

I think he represented one slave in all his years as a lawyer (I believe he lost the case, but I could be wrong).

You would be, on both claims.

Lincoln's famous remark that if he could preserve the Union without freeing one slave he would summed up his attitude.

No, Lincoln summed up his attitude at the end of that letter when he said, "I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men everywhere could be free." But I noticed that you posted part of the quote, in keeping with the Southron penchant for half quotes, misquotes, and quotes out of context. What Lincoln actuall said was this:

"As to the policy I "seem to be pursuing" as you say, I have not meant to leave any one in doubt."

"I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views."

Somewhat different when put into context, wouldn't you say?

As regards his true attitude to slavery, he was a colonist. He wanted every single one of them put on boats and relocated back to Africa. He most certainly regarded blacks as irredeemably inferior to whites.

A gross overstatement. Lincoln supported colonization, but so did Robert Lee who paid passage for some of his slaves to Liberia. He did not want every single black deported to Africa, but in fact spoke against those who saw emancipation as a threat to whites. And he was unrepentently, irreversably opposed to slavery unlike men like Robert Lee or Thomas Jackson or Jefferson Davis who believed slavery was the best place for blacks. When compared with those men, Lincoln looks better and better.