Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Pelham
As for "clipping Douglass off mid sentence" I stopped at a paragraph, as did you.

You stopped at a paragraph that left the impression that Douglass thought Lincoln was uninterested in blacks. The reality is the Douglass said that Lincoln did more for blacks than was thought possible.

Selective quoting (and outright lies) are the only thing that keeps the neo-confederate mythology alive.

60 posted on 05/12/2005 5:26:49 AM PDT by Ditto ( No trees were killed in sending this message, but billions of electrons were inconvenienced.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]


To: Ditto
"Selective quoting (and outright lies) are the only thing that keeps the neo-confederate mythology alive."

Bingo! Right on the money! "Neo-confederate mythology" is exactly the main issue. The most hardcore will either publicly attempt to ignore the adverse realities of the slavery machine for the cotton empire. Also today's most ardent neo-confederates whitewash or soft peddle the 100 years of post Civil War, state mandated, degrading segregation, along with painting the perpetrators of mob rule and brutal lynchings as somehow being the 'real victims'.

Another question should be why are the arch neo-confederate spin masters so intent on deliberately masking their current & future agenda(s)?

61 posted on 05/13/2005 10:38:15 PM PDT by M. Espinola (Freedom is never free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

To: Ditto
"He was preeminently the white man’s President, entirely devoted to the welfare of white men. He was ready and willing at any time during the first years of his administration to deny, postpone, and sacrifice the rights of humanity in the colored people to promote the welfare of the white people of this country. In all his education and feeling he was an American of the Americans. He came into the Presidential chair upon one principle alone, namely, opposition to the extension of slavery."

Those are Douglass words. He doesn't retract them in the later part of the speech, rather he gives Lincoln credit for ending slavery. Apparently you find the first section objectionable, and can't figure out how to rid yourself of it other than to charge those who cite it with "outright lies". Tactically, I don't think employing the ad hominem makes your case any better. You're still stuck with explaining away what Douglass was saying in that first section.

72 posted on 05/14/2005 11:28:29 PM PDT by Pelham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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