Lando 
Posted on 08/11/2004 7:08:05 AM PDT by The Wizard
And that's the REAL reason the demonrats hate GWB: not only is he everything they hoped billyboy would be, he will be remembered for planting the seeds that grew into peace to the Middle East.....
Washington was the Father of our country, and Lincoln freed the slaves, and GWB started the journey that will eventually bring peace to this troubled part of the world, and the rats hate him for it, so much so, that I wouldn't put ANYTHING past them.......
The real democrats, who controlled the party when Tip was the Man, lost control to the clintonistas, and he was so bad, the party regulars fled as the goon squad came in to defend their leader......
But as I sat watching Rummy from Afgahistan today speaking about 9 million folks so hungry to vote they risk their lives to register, it told any logical man that so it will be in Iraq, and all the other kingdoms throughout the world.....
The time of kings is over, now is the time of the little man, and he never had a stronger, braver friend than Ronald Reagan or GWB......
While not asking for this honor, GWB had it blown up on him on 9-11, and the world will be a safer, better place when this is done.
God Bless and protect GWB....
Actually, it was a tri-post, but understand! ;]
The Constitution does not provide a guarantee of immunity to the Chief Justice.
Mandate? What an odd way to phrase his opinion, which of course carries no constitutional weight since it isn't the President's job to wage war on states to compel them to agree with him.
Lincoln was quite willing to be disagreed with. In fact, he expected it as a minority President and said as much in his inaugural.
He was quite willing to preserve slavery, and slaveowner's property interests, as long as it preserved the Union.
It was within his power to have prevented it.
I think the most one could say is that it was in his power to postpone it.
Not THAT is silly.
Of course it is. As soon as we involve the intentionality of more than one person in a series of interconnected events , all the outcomes cannot be laid at one person's feet. That would be to pretend that other people besides the original protagonist are robots.
The states did not join the union by signing the Federalist.
Correct. The Federalist merely presents the case that the authors of the Constitution were making for it.
So the signers, having read The Federalist, were well aware of many of the implications of what they were signing.
And not contemplating secession doesn't forbid it.
Nor does it permit it. It was a lacuna in the Constitution, and a topic over which people could honestly differ.
600,000 of whom lost thier saftey and prosperity over the issue, I guess they don't count.
And some millions gained freedom as well. There were more Americans than just the 600,000 men who died. And the majority of those who fell went into battle quite willingly and voluntarily - as far as they were concerned their opinion definitely counted.
I saw a tv show where the prez was talking to group of people about his policies. (this was on Monday night) He was amazing! I was very proud of him. The looks on the faces of these people was one of awe. This guy will go down in history as one the greats.
Lando
I did no such thing. You are a bald-faced liar and I defy you to present evidence.
which bad enough but you bad mouth a REPUBLICAN hero.
Again, you are a liar.
You bad mouth the USA
Again, you are a shameless liar.
in fact you wish you were not even from the united states.
Again, you are bald-faced, ignorant liar.
I could make a point of your support of racism and slavery but i hope , in your case, that it isn't true.
You've already told several lies, namely that I have slandered an American hero, that I have slandered my country and that I wish I was not a citizen of my country. I'm surprised that vile, lying, cowardly scum like yourself would stop short of telling two more lies about me.
I liked it better when you guys all voted for dems
All which guys?
You don't even know which guy you're talking to, moron.
For your information, I'm a native New Yorker, I live in New Jersey, I've been a registered Republican since I could vote and I'm a proud member of the Sons of Union Veterans.
Get a clue.
though I'll say this about southerns, they are usually very polite
True. That's a lot more than I can say for you, assh*le.
Not really. I haven't gotten a lot of personal comments about the North and Northerners when I've defended Lincoln to Southerners.
But I continually see "Lincoln as saint" partisans make the assumption that those who disagree with them are rednecks, uneducated, racists, etc. and characterize these as defining Southern traits.
Red
Puerto Rico and other terroritories might become states in the future.
The Southern states were part of the USA, so they couldn't secede. In which part of the Constitution can you read about the right to secede?
Immunity from what? Better check your facts. Lincoln ignored the constitution several times.
Lincoln was quite willing to be disagreed with.
Hundreds of thousands died because of his "willingness".
He was quite willing to preserve slavery, and slaveowner's property interests, as long as it preserved the Union.
At least you don't subscribe to the fantasy of many hero worshipers, to your credit. He was a racist.
I think the most one could say is that it was in his power to postpone it.
Your opinion is noted. We disagree. He could have simply let them go. By the time he was out of power, it would have been a settled issue.
So the signers, having read The Federalist, were well aware of many of the implications of what they were signing.
You are making the case that the states knew they were forbidden at gunpoint from ever leaving the union and still joined? That is ridiculous IMO.
Nor does it permit it. It was a lacuna in the Constitution, and a topic over which people could honestly differ.
The constitution is nothing if not a document limiting the power of the federal government. The tenth amendment leaves the states and the people in charge of issues not covered in it. The federal government has no legitimate power to compel states to remain, Lincoln and others made it up.
And some millions gained freedom as well.
Which of course was never the point, only a consequence.
There were more Americans than just the 600,000 men who died. And the majority of those who fell went into battle quite willingly and voluntarily - as far as they were concerned their opinion definitely counted.
Please cite numbers for this assertion if you can. I am more than skeptical. Both sides used conscription extensively.
Such as?
"An added problem is that far too many of the "Lincoln as saint" partisans have a thinly-disguised, self-righteous hatred of the South as a cultural entity."
I think Lincoln is one of the greatest President and love the Southern states. If Lincoln hadn't become President, the South won't be in the USA.
Sorry, I meant "wouldn't have been".
MYTH ALERT. The confederacy was never a sovereign country.
Yeah, and ain't it great. Since we will never know how the world would have been with a different outcome it's not possible to say it was a good thing.
Not with any certainty. But we can look around the world and see where the break-up of larger countries into squabbling smaller governments and elites has produced catastrophes. And where once countries give in to break away factions they find it hard to ever return to peace, order, and prosperity. Or where the loss of unity led to subjugation by foreign powers. The founders of the republic and Lincoln's own generation could look to Latin America, Eastern Europe and other parts of the world to see where such things had happened. So they weren't completely in the dark about such things any more than we are.
Of course there is another side to such things -- large nations can be less subject to popular control, and more apt to impose their will on smaller groups. But some people are so blinded by ideology that they missed what the Framers and Lincoln saw -- that disunity wasn't necessarily freedom, but could be the end of freedom. Let any group break away at its own demand for any reason or none and repudiate its share of national obligations, and the result will be chaos, bloodshed, and perhaps tyranny. Moreover, smaller governmental units often aren't any more tolerant of minority rights than larger units are, as Madison and others knew.
He will always be one of the greatest US Presidents because he managed not to be the last US President
Good Presidents don't ignore the constitution and cause the death of at least 600,000 people for a dubious concept.
I doubt most historians or Americans would put all the blame on Lincoln. The secessionists were certainly willing to go to war to get what they wanted. Moreover, the war came to be fought for liberation of the slaves and that was hardly a "dubious concept," though I suppose one could apply such a description to the idea of secession at will or the vision of a slaveowners' republic.
The Civil War has been over for a good long time. Without neglecting its tragedy and horror, we ought to be able to see things in perspective by now and do without cardboard cut-out saints and villains.
What is illegal about elections in Maryland?
War between the States.
The unconstitutionality in that was the southern acts of rebellion, not Lincoln's acting to surpess it.
Suspension of Habeas Corpus.
The question of who may suspend habeas corpus has never been ruled on by the Supreme Court.
Probably more.
I'd like to see one.
The founders, in founding, had seceeded. It was a recognized concept (take that DoI preamble) that a state could seceed. There were strong movements in both the middle and northern states FOR secession. Lincoln was not universally loved, he suspended Habeus Corpus for the duration of his presidency, and imprisoned thousands of people with "disenting" points of view. He closed news papers, and just after they were elected, rounded up and imprisoned a double handful of merry-lander state congresscritters because they'd made pro-middle-states-secession noises during their campaigns.
Nope I am no Lincoln hating cracker. I have nothing but contempt for those who took the most perfect guideline for creating a government, one that protects individual volition, responsibility, and property, and basically uses it for toilet tissue. Lincoln did great harm to the constitution. We are a lesser country because of it. Fortunately enough of the overall concepts have survived for us to be the greatest nation the world has ever seen (relative to INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY).
Washington=good
Lincoln=bad
Reagan=good
W=Good (needs work to get away from Henry Clay federalism, but we can work with him on that!)
God's speed
Semper Fidelis,
Sic Semper Tyrannis
Had Wilson stayed out of foreign affairs and not made Americans pay the costs of war would we be any further from "world peace" than we were after Wilson led us into war? And "world peace" is itself something of an illusory goal, since peace is likely to be lost or partial, a truce between wars, rather than something whole and permanent. The same may be true of peace and democracy in the Middle East: achievements may only be temporary, and easily reversed when the outsiders who bring them turn away from the region.
I don't say that Bush is another Woodrow Wilson or that he's made the same sort of mistakes or that our situation now is the same as it was eighty or ninety years ago. But good intentions and distant visions aren't enough. Presidents have to look at the way things are, and make the right choices for the short and middle term as well as the long run. To be sure, most politicians make the opposite mistake and don't see past their own reelection, but doing the opposite and neglecting present circumstances to realize a vision of the future is no guarantee of success either.
"Puerto Rico and other terroritories might become states in the future."
I meant "territories".
I've always thought that history will look favorably upon President Bush 43. He will be remembered as a hero for taking a stand against strong opposition (at home and abroad). His birthday will be a national holiday one day and future politicians will be quoting his words. IMHO
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.