Posted on 01/31/2009 12:25:33 PM PST by Mr_Moonlight
ROCHESTER, NY - Seated by a window in the Illinois state Capitol in 1860, a beardless Abraham Lincoln held still 25 seconds for a classic campaign portrait of the soon-to-be president. It was undoubtedly a personal favorite.
"That looks better and expresses me better than any I have ever seen," Lincoln said in a letter to photographer Alexander Hesler. "If it pleases the people, I am satisfied."
To mark the 200th anniversary of Lincoln's birth on Feb. 12, the long-lost positive transparency of this photograph goes on display beginning tomorrow at the George Eastman House museum of photography in Rochester.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
The Kodak website has a good summary too. Truly an extraordinary man.
Along these lines are you familiar with the life of Mark Twain? Another remarkable life that didn’t go as well as you would have hoped for someone as truly talented. Isn’t that often the way the gifted seem to make their way through life?
I recall being told by an interpreter at his Farmington Avenue home in Hartford, that he liked contraptions ... as enamored by the new-fangled typewriter and was the first author to submit a manuscript fully typed.
I often think about some of successful gifted artists of our time and how they were allowed to work pretty much protected from the outside world by their wives, who were actually their business agents. Three women, that I actually have met, Mimi Sloane, Molly Rockwell and Betsy Wyeth, had a certain business sense and insulated their husbands so that they could do-their-thing.
Many artists feed off their angst ...the list is endless.
“
The civil war was a long time in coming and a whole series of presidents kicked the can down the road. Lincoln refused to put it off for future generations.”
He should have had a better plan for his ‘emanicipated slaves’....’future generations’ have certainly had enough problems dealing with that and we haven’t got it right yet.
He didn't have much help in that from the region most effected. Instead of cooperating with the central government in a more orderly gradual phase out of slavery, the secessionists rebelled before Lincoln even took office. I don't think Lincoln can be blamed much when he was occupied with destroying a militant slave empire in the making. And the problems of emancipation would have been much more massive if he allowed the Richmond idiot regime to survive so it could cultivate the growth of the peculiar peculiar institution for a couple more generations.
I’m not arguing about slavery. It should have NEVER happened. The south sure didn’t invent it. Lincoln never did one thing in his political career to end it. He ended it as a military tactic as commander in cheif. Read some of the interviews of slaves. Most were worse off after ‘emaancipation’ than during slavery. Lincoln could have cared less about slavery and said so over and over himself.
The proof he didn’t know what he was doing and didn’t care what happened to slaves is the mess we still are trying to fix today.
Lincoln could not do anything to permanently free the slaves except by Constitutional amendment. Contrary to the misconceptions of some, Lincoln respected the Constitution and was no tyrant. But he did what he could when he could which was strongly support the 13th amendment to the Constitution which would permanently do what a president could not.
Lincoln could have cared less about slavery and said so over and over himself.
The soundest testimony to the anti-slavery attitude of Lincoln came from his first enemies, the South Carolina secessions, whose secession declaration complained about:
"election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery"
The south sure didn’t invent (slavery).
That's true. Many other villains had their hand in the business from Africa to Europe and New England. And it's also true that a majority of Southerners did not even own slaves. But in 1861 it was only the secessionists who attempted to set up a regime whose cornerstone was slavery. Sadly, they fooled enough Southerners long enough to start the ball rolling toward Civil War.
|
|
|||
Gods |
To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list. |
||
|
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
|||
Red Foxx would have the big one over that comparison. Lol!
Blundering into a war that kills 600,000 of your countrymen and lays waste to half the country might have been the cause. Although I’m not sure he was ever sad about it.
Abraham Lincoln was an avid colonizationist. He quoted with approval Henry Clay's words on the topic. He touted colonization in his annual messages to Congress in 1861 and '62, in his appeal to border-state representatives for compensated emancipation (July 12, 1862), and in the Preliminary Emancipation Proclamation (Sept. 22, 1862). In 1861, addressing Congress, he mentioned contraband slaves who had fallen into the hands of Northern troops, as well as the possibility of border states emancipating their slaves. He advocated that “steps be taken for colonizing both classes, (or the one first mentioned, if the other shall not be brought into existence), at some place, or places, in a climate congenial to them. It might be well to consider, too, -- whether the free colored people already in the United States could not, so far as individuals may desire, be included in such colonization.” A year later, he told Congress, “I cannot make it better known than it already is, that I strongly favor colonization.” In his “Speech on the Dred Scott decision” (June 26, 1857), he had scolded both parties for not taking up the cause:
I have said that the separation of the races is the only perfect preventative of amalgamation. I have no right to say all the members of the Republican party are in favor of this, nor to say that as a party they are in favor of it. There is nothing in their platform directly on the subject. But I can say a very large proportion of its members are for it, and that the chief plank in their platform -- opposition to the spread of slavery -- is most favorable to that separation. Such separation, if ever effected at all, must be effected by colonization; and no political party, as such, is now doing anything directly for colonization. Party operations at present only favor or retard colonization incidentally. The enterprise is a difficult one, but 'when there is a will there is a way;' and what colonization needs most is a hearty will. Will springs from the two elements of moral sense and self-interest. Let us be brought to believe it is morally right, and, at the same time, favorable to, or, at least, not against, our interest, to transfer the African to his native clime, and we shall find a way to do it, however great the task may be. The children of Israel, to such numbers as to include four hundred thousand fighting men, went out of Egyptian bondage in a body.
http://www.slavenorth.com/colonize.htm
Lincoln was the first President to invite blacks to a meeting at the White House. But at this meeting he reiterated his view that blacks and whites are too different to live together and he wished these black leaders to encourage emigration to his proposed colonies.
This afternoon the President of the United States gave audience to a Committee of colored men at the White House. They were introduced by the Rev. J. Mitchell, Commissioner of Emigration. E. M. Thomas, the Chairman, remarked that they were there by invitation to hear what the Executive had to say to them.
Having all been seated, the President, after a few preliminary observations, informed them that a sum of money had been appropriated by Congress, and placed at his disposition for the purpose of aiding the colonization in some country of the people, or a portion of them, of African descent, thereby making it his duty, as it had for a long time been his inclination, to favor that cause; and why, he asked, should the people of your race be colonized, and where? Why should they leave this country? This is, perhaps, the first question for proper consideration.
You and we are different races. We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss, but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both, as I think your race suffer very greatly, many of them by living among us, while ours suffer from your presence. In a word we suffer on each side. If this is admitted, it affords a reason at least why we should be separated. You here are freemen I suppose.
A Voice: Yes, sir.
The President---Perhaps you have long been free, or all your lives. Your race are suffering, in my judgment, the greatest wrong inflicted on any people. But even when you cease to be slaves, you are yet far removed from being placed on an equality with the white race. You are cut off from many of the advantages which the other race enjoy. The aspiration of men is to enjoy equality with the best when free, but on this broad continent, not a single man of your race is made the equal of a single man of ours. Go where you are treated the best, and the ban is still upon you.
I do not propose to discuss this, but to present it as a fact with which we have to deal. I cannot alter it if I would. It is a fact, about which we all think and feel alike, I and you. We look to our condition, owing to the existence of the two races on this continent. I need not recount to you the effects upon white men, growing out of the institution of Slavery. I believe in its general evil effects on the white race. See our present condition---the country engaged in war!---our white men cutting one another's throats, none knowing how far it will extend; and then consider what we know to be the truth. But for your race among us there could not be war, although many men engaged on either side do not care for you one way or the other. Nevertheless, I repeat, without the institution of Slavery and the colored race as a basis, the war could not have an existence.
It is better for us both, therefore, to be separated. I know that there are free men among you, who even if they could better their condition are not as much inclined to go out of the country as those, who being slaves could obtain their freedom on this condition. I suppose one of the principal difficulties in the way of colonization is that the free colored man cannot see that his comfort would be advanced by it. You may believe you can live in Washington or elsewhere in the United States the remainder of your life, perhaps more so than you can in any foreign country, and hence you may come to the conclusion that you have nothing to do with the idea of going to a foreign country. This is (I speak in no unkind sense) an extremely selfish view of the case. But you ought to do something to help those who are not so fortunate as yourselves...
http://www.etymonline.com/cw/lincoln.htm
How come people are always so bandwidth-stingy? It wouldn’t have hurt them to include a link to a high-res version.
kinda looks like jamie farr in that picture too
The aging process is specific to the individual and happens whether or not one is in the WH.
The whole discusion of aging while acting as President seems overblown.
Lincoln’s idea was voluntary colonization, not forced deportation. An idea he didn’t push when he realized that it was not as greatly favored among the freed slaves as he earlier supposed. It was much better than the confederates’ colonization plan which was to colonize any new territory they could get their hand on with slaves still in bondage.
Good idea. Let's see...Robert Lee Racist - 284,000 hits. Jefferson Davis Racist - 235,000 hits. Stonewall Jackson Racist - only 76,000 hits.
If you want to judge Lincoln by our times please have the integrity to judge your Southern leaders by the same standards.
I have, many of them. They talk of good masters, bad masters. Good times after emancipation and bad times after emancipation. But in all the hundreds of interviews in the Slave Narratives I'm not aware of a single instance where the former slave said, "I wish I'd never been freed." Shouldn't that say something? For better or worse, Lincoln pushed through the 13th Amendment that ended slavery. If the South had won their rebellion then that day would have been decades after it happened.
Lincoln could have cared less about slavery and said so over and over himself.
Completely false.
I’ve posted the quotes over and over, look them up.
You act as if you were ‘there’. Not all fought for the same reason. It’s not nearly as black and white as you’d like to believe.
Yes, the Confederates were no more progressive than the likes of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, both of whom resented the Crown offering emancipation to slaves willing to fight against the rebellion. Unlike Lincoln, the Royal Government offered freedom to blacks without trying to ship them to Africa or to Central America.
Lincoln was not only against slavery expanding into the territories, he was against free blacks living in the territories as well.
And those numbers are just from the posts you have made, Non-Squirter.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.