How strange.
The Republican Party wanted to abolish slavery here. Is that a fact? Didn’t Fremont abolish slavery in Missouri? I was under the impression that Lincoln overruled him.
What about slavery in Kentucky, Missouri, Maryland and Delaware? The “Emancipation Proclamation” didn’t apply there. Why didn’t ol’ Honest Abe campaign in 1860 on the abolition of slavery?
Oh wait ... that wasn’t in the platform of his own party. The only reason that Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation was to (1) deter Britain and France from recognizing the CSA and (2) to incite a slave rebellion in the cotton states to sap the front lines of his enemy.
“Honest Abe” had such a problem with the “Slave Power” that he sat in the U.S. Congress with plenty of slaveowners. The so-called “Slave Power” must have included George Washington, James Madison, and Thomas Jefferson too, right?
The Constitution of 1789 specifically ratified your “Slave Power.” So Daniel Webster and his Cotton Whig friends were complicit in the “slave power” right?
As for the Yankee myth that the South was only fighting for slavery, what did the South spend the next 12 years fighting against after slavery was abolished? What about the next 100 years?
What are we fighting about in the year 2011? Oh wait ... it was the centralized monstrosity that is the Union that Lincoln created, his tyranny Washington which Barack Hussein Obama has inherited, which lords over the states and makes all the decisions.
In the 1960s, there was another right over “states rights.” Slavery had been dead for 100 years when the Yankees came here again to mind our business.
Now the same people have put Barack Hussein Obama in the White House to centralize the government even more. Obama compares himself to Lincoln all the time.
It is an apt comparison: both of them are tyrants who have no respect for (1) the right of the people to make their own laws or (2) the federal compact between the states and the federal government.
If you have to ask, you probably don't really want to know.
Why would Lincoln have treated loyal states like those attacking the United States? How silly particularly since he never intended to do anything about slavery except limit its growth. The RAT Rebellion began even before he took office.
Lincoln had one term as a Congressman.
The Constitution does not “ratify” slavery it was like a farting uncle one must ignore. It also clearly set the stage for its end by preventing any laws wrt it until 1808.
Slavery was also in direct conflict with the basis of our national existence, freedom, and our founding document, The Declaration of Independence.
Yes, all those ole boys were slavers but Washington put the Union at the head of all concerns. Not Virginia but the Union. The others believed more in using the Union to strengthen Virginia which helped lead to the idea of secession. Washington, on the other hand, warned strenuously (through Hamilton’s Farewell Addressed) against secession by NAME.
There were many in the North who actively supported and assisted the Slave Power only a liar or a fool would deny that. But the fact remains that every president prior to Lincoln except JQ Adams either supported or ignored the issue. And Congress was controlled by Southern congressmen.
Hell, Lincoln would not have even been elected except for having fools for enemies. They split the Democrat Party into three factions each running its own candidate hence Lincoln won with 38% of the vote.
After slavery was abolished the South spent the next hundred years trying to re-establish it in FACT if not in name. And don’t try that BS on me I was born and raised in the South and know exactly how Blacks were treated in the 1950s. Of course, things weren’t as bad as in the 1860s and 70s after the Wah when thousands of Blacks and Republicans were just murdered across the South.
Any complaints about the growth of federal power should be directed at Jefferson Davis and crew until they started the insurrection the federal government was tiny. So tiny it did not even have the military forces to defeat these tinpot dictators.
There is no “compact” between the states and the federal government. There is a Constitution ratified by the American People “gathered” in states. There was no ability for a state to ratify. State legislatures (the highest body of a state)were explicitly taken out of the process. Hence, they had no power to affect that constitution outside of constitutionally prescribed means. The whole Southron argument is based upon a huge lie.
Obama’s likeness to Lincoln is as fraudulent as every other thing about him. One is a pygmy and the other a Giant.