Abe Lincoln and the media

[Mier]

While all the anti war cowards were screaming for Bush to cut and run and our willing accomplice main stream media acting like kids in a candy store. I heard someone on talk radio say that during the civil war Lincoln had his media detracters thrown in the bottom of a war ship until the war was over. But I can't find any facts on-line to back it up. Does any one know where I might go to find information on this? I mentioned this to a (left wing co-worker) and he thinks I made it up. I sure would like to prove him wrong! Any information on this would be greatly appreciated.

[Non-Sequitur]

You've stated to me before that you agree with John Marshall that the power to suspend habeas corpus belongs to Congress but you believe it has not been definitively decided by the Supreme Court.

Which is true. But my opinion isn't important. The matter of who may suspend habeas corpus has never been brought before the Supreme Court. Until it is then the matter is not settled, and your claim that Lincoln acted unconstitutionally is yout opinion alone. As is the belief that Lincoln's actions were constitutional. The Constitution itself is silent on who alone may suspend it.

Supreme Courts can turn previous rulings upside down and/or void the original intent of the framers. So there is no telling what a Supreme Court might rule on habeas corpus. I was surprised when the Supreme Court ruled that CFR is constitutional when it is clearly not, so what do I know. I fear Justices who feel free to make the Constitution whatever they wish.

Then change the Constitution. That document gives the Supreme Court the jurisdiction over all cases of law and equity arrising under the Constitution. Not you. Not me. Not Congress.

I'll not rehash our past arguments, but I will repost something that the great researcher nolu chan once posted to me about what the founders and others had to say about which branch of government had the power to suspend the writ.

Post any opinion you want, from Nolu Creature or any other source. Those are opinion only, and not law. And until you can point to where the Supreme Court ruled on who may suspend habeas corpus then the matter is not settled.

[carton253]

Oh, so that's what you do... go to every Civil War thread to post your particular brand of truth. Question answered.

BTW, no I am not embarrassed by my heroes. I think Stonewall Jackson, Robert E. Lee, and JEB Stuart were great men and great Americans. I have no qualms about emulating them or calling them heroes.

I'm not even embarrassed to wear my Army of Northern Virginia T-shirt...

[TexConfederate1861]

NS...Your pontifications can hardly be called the truth.
Just because you put a horse-harness on a mule, it doesn't make it a horse! Like this constitution we have been arguing about. Any credible scholar North or South KNOWS very well that the importation of African Slaves was forbidden by the Confederate Constitution. You saying different doesn't make it so. Your warped hypotheses are not TRUTH.

[Non-Sequitur]

Oh, so that's what you do... go to every Civil War thread to post your particular brand of truth. Question answered.

And challenge the southron BS. You forgot that part.

BTW, no I am not embarrassed by my heroes. I think Stonewall Jackson, Robert E. Lee, and JEB Stuart were great men and great Americans. I have no qualms about emulating them or calling them heroes.

Of course you don't. Nor do you have problems condemning Lincoln for beliefs and actions that in most cases were no different that those of your 'heroes' and in many cases were actually much better. But hey, heritage not hate (except for Lincoln). Right?

I'm not even embarrassed to wear my Army of Northern Virginia T-shirt...

And I've no doubt that those people with the Kerry-Edwards stickers on their cars aren't embarassed, either. Losing doesn't mean saying your sorry, I guess.

[TexConfederate1861]

Here Here! NEVER be ashamed of the Confederacy or our Southern Heroes. They were the best of what makes America great!

[TexConfederate1861]

"But hey, heritage not hate (except for Lincoln). Right?"


RIGHT!

[Non-Sequitur]

Any credible scholar North or South KNOWS very well that the importation of African Slaves was forbidden by the Confederate Constitution.

My God, can you not read? Article 1, section 9, clause 1: "The importation of negroes of the African race from any foreign country other than the slaveholding States or Territories of the United States of America, is hereby forbidden; and Congress is required to pass such laws as shall effectually prevent the same."

What part is so hard to understand? The confederacy believed the U.S. to be a foreign country. The confederacy specifically said that importing slaves from that country was legal, said so right in their constitution. How can you sit there with a straight face and say that it was forbidden? It's there in black and white.

The fact that the next clause gave the confederate congress the power to end those imports does not mean that the imports were forbidden, any more than you can say that slave imports were forbidden by the U.S. Constitution because of Article I, Section 9, Clause 1. Imports were at the mercy of Congress, and could be permitted at any time.

So tell me what's warped there? What's incorrect? Where am I lying? I suggest that it's you who is living in a fantasy world where this issue is concerned.

[expatguy]

bttt

[carton253]

Did I condemn Lincoln in post? Have I condemned the Union in my post?

You project your hatred of the South onto those who defend her decision to secede from the Union...

[rustbucket]

The matter of who may suspend habeas corpus has never been brought before the Supreme Court. Until it is then the matter is not settled, and your claim that Lincoln acted unconstitutionally is yout opinion alone.

It is so obvious that only Congress has the power that it doesn't need a Supreme Court ruling. It is like having the Supreme Court rule on whether the sky is blue. The Supreme Court has never ruled on that, so according to you it is not decided, and thus I can't have an opinion.

The Constitution itself is silent on who alone may suspend it.

Not in my interpretation or that of others. I'll take the words of the founders and of Chief Justice John Marshall in Ex parte Bollman and Swartwout over Abraham Lincoln's naked power grab any day. More's the pity that you can't.

If the founders had wanted to give the president the power to suspend clauses in the Constitution, they would have made it plainly clear. They didn't give him that right. What guarantee of our liberties would the Constitution be if a president could suspend it or any clause in it at will? We might as well not have a Constitution. Maybe that would work in non-sequiturville, but I only see anarchy and dictatorship arising from having no checks on executive power.

[PeaRidge]

"Your absolutely absurd claim that 'most newspaper deliveries' in the 1860s were made via US Mail. That is simply bizarre on its face."

You ought to have sources instead of opinions. Here is one you might like:

"Postmaster General Montgomery Blair directed the Postmaster in New York to exclude from the mails the five newspapers named by the Grand Jury. This was significant because the newspapers of that day were almost entirely dependent upon the mails for their circulation. (from here:)

http://www.law.indiana.edu/ilj/volumes/v72/no4/rehnquis.html

[PeaRidge]

You said a mouthfull.

[PeaRidge]

What you conclude as "absurd" is not based on anything other than your 'common sense' which is not based on any facts, and conclusions using words such as 'must have had', 'say', 'at best', 'surely', 'that would', 'if you think', and so on.

Don't you realize how arrogant and supercilious that post was?

[Heyworth]

Do you have any idea how WIDE the entrance to Charleston Harbor is?

About a mile, although the ship channel was much narrower. Still, given that in 1778, the Americans were able to put together the 1500-foot "Great Chain" across the Hudson at West Point in just six weeks, I still contend that a passive barrier across the harbor mouth would have stopped resupply for a couple of days until Anderson surrendered peacefully. But as I said above, firing on Sumter worked to the southern advantage too, by forcing Lincoln to respond militarily, which in turn forced the upper south to join the lower south in secession.

[tbpiper]

I don't know about that particular use of naval power. In U.S. Grant's memoirs, he talks about the northern press constantly inflating Southern successes and Northern losses much like today's MSM treatment of Iraq. Also, during Lincoln's campaign for his second term, the Democrats at their convention called for a new administration because "the war is lost".

[rustbucket]

Still, given that in 1778, the Americans were able to put together the 1500-foot "Great Chain" across the Hudson at West Point in just six weeks, I still contend that a passive barrier across the harbor mouth would have stopped resupply for a couple of days until Anderson surrendered peacefully.

You mean these chains? See: Link

There were two chains created and strung across the Hudson River in an effort to prevent the British from taking control of the Hudson thereby splitting the American colonies. The first chain, which weighed 35 tons and was 1650 yards long stretched between the base of Fort Montgomery and the rock at Anthony's Nose. That chain failed to stop the British forces when they attacked Forts Montgomery and Clinton. That chain was dismantled by the British.

The second chain was laid across the Hudson between Constitution Island and West Point. Each link was two feet long and weighed 180 pounds. This chain was never tested in its effectiveness against British ships. The focus of the war shifted to other battle grounds and they never again tried to bring their ships this far up the Hudson.

[rustbucket]

Here's more. Apparently nature played a role in the design of the Great Chain you talked about. A sharp bend in the Hudson slowed British ships down so they wouldn't have to momentum to been able to break the chain. From Link

The plan was for this sharp bend to slow down British war ships so that they couldn't break the second Great Chain, a chain of huge iron links on a floating boom of logs, which stretched from Constitution Island to West Point from 1778 to the end of the Revolutionary War. Trapped, the ships could then be destroyed by cannon. The chain was never put to the test, unlike the first Great Chain at Anthony's Nose. After their defeat at Saratoga, the British did not try the Highlands again.

I don't think the entrance to Charleston harbor had such a sharp bend that would have slowed Federal ships. And I'm not sure where the links of chain would have come from -- there were probably not too many large foundries in the South at that time, but I could be wrong.

Apparently the first chain on the Hudson was simply flanked and dismantled.

[Heyworth]

The first chain was destroyed when the British captured Fort Montgomery, it's anchor point, by land. The fact that the second, heavier, chain was never challenged doesn't mean that it didn't work. As another site puts it, "So perfectly did it perform its function of blocking the Hudson River and Valley, and, by extension, the entire Northeast, from further British incursion that it effectively drove the next five years of conflict to the Southern states, unquestionably shortening the war. Indeed, it was no accident that the final Northern battle -- an enemy delaying action in New Jersey -- came only three months after the West Point Chain was successfully installed."

Benedict Arnold's plot included weakening the chain by removing a link "for repairs", and connecting the links on either side with an easily-breakable rope.

[Heyworth]

I don't think the entrance to Charleston harbor had such a sharp bend that would have slowed Federal ships.

It did, however, have a narrow, tricky channel that had the same effect. "For naval forces to enter the harbor, they are required to pass through a very constricted opening near the harbor entrance. This opening is less than one nautical mile of which the majority is too shallow to allow vessels to enter without running aground. On the southern side of the entrance is Cummings Point on Morris Island, and on the northern side of the entrance is Sullivan's Island. Even flat-bottomed ships are highly constricted by this entrance. Once the ships have passed the harbor entrance, they must travel over five miles before they reach Charleston. During this transit, they must travel slowly to keep from running aground, and are, therefore, highly restricted in their maneuverability"

http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:CICeJzwRuXIJ:cgsc.cdm.oclc.org/coll2/image/186.pdf+jointness+charleston+1780&hl=en&client=safari

[stand watie]

!!!!!!!!!

don't ya'll just love it when a DY is shown to be either a liar or ,more likely a FOOL, who "knows not & knows not that he knows not"?????

free dixie,sw