Posted on 06/23/2013 5:55:07 PM PDT by Para-Ord.45
From the time Abraham Lincoln entered the White House nearly a century and a half ago, there has been an anti-Lincoln tradition in American life. President John Tylers son, writing in 1932, seemed to speak for a silent minority: I think he was a bad man, wrote Lyon Gardiner Tyler, a man who forced the country into an unnecessary war and conducted it with great inhumanity.
Throughout his presidency Lincoln was surrounded by rivals, even among his own cabinet. Outside the White House, his many enemies included conservative Whigs, Democrats, northern copperheads and New England abolitionists. Wisconsin editor, Marcus M. Pomeroy, sniped that Lincoln was a
worse tyrant and more inhuman butcher than has existed since the days of Nero.
Shortly before his reelection Pomeroy added: The man who votes for Lincoln now is a traitor and murderer.
And if he is elected to misgovern for another four years, we trust some bold hand will pierce his heart with dagger point for the public good.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
LOL. ;-)
Don’t think Douglass invented it.
King David had one of his generals hung out to dry, so he could marry the guys wife. I am sure David had an alibi too.
I figure Douglass was not as impressed as Brown was with Brown’s miltiary prowess. Amateurs often get out of balance that way. Brown was a smart guy, and perhaps the US expert at that time on raising sheep. As such he traveled a lot to west and south. His intent was to free some slaves, arm them with weapons from harper’s ferry, and defend the land the slaves occupied against local slave patrols. Brown was partially right: a smaller force in a good defensive position had little to fear from a much larger number of infantry. He was also greatly wrong: The slaves were so debased that the great risk of taking up arms was not to be relied on, and his first killing at Harper’s Gerry was a freedman. He also didn’t count on the early participation of a force of Marines put at the disposal of RE Lee and JEB Stuart.
Oddly, he was found guilty of treason against Virgina, a state to which he never had any legal affiliation, for his acts on federal property.
His father was Owen Brown who founded 2 (!) colleges (Western Reserve and Oberlin). I understand he was related to the Rhode Island Browns that had gotten rich as privateers, and richer yet as slave traders. Brown University was founded by that family. A rift within the family caused some to support slavery that made them rich, and others that opposed it because it was evil. John and Owen Brown were the latter. John had a farm in North Elba, Essex county NY (far far upstate), and free Negroes were employed there. I went to high school in Essex county, but my elementary school was Sumner School in Syracuse: named after the Senator, so John Brown and Senator Sumner are almost family history.
My grandmother used to sit on the lap of Harriet Tubman, a local celebrity in Auburn NY who would tell of her trips south to free slaves or to guide US forces during the war. It really is just a few years ago.
Of course Douglass is not to be tarred with Manson’s brush just because you say so.
Douglass had a great regret in life: That his owner/father was compensated so that Douglass should be legally free.
Telegraph was in service as far as Lawrence Kansas. The assault on Sumner while another pro slavery ‘gentleman’ held senators at the point of a gun was big news at the time.
Oddly, he was found guilty of treason against Virgina, a state to which he never had any legal affiliation, for his acts on federal property.
You're right, and Brown's attorneys tried to make a fuss about it, but to no avail. However, President Buchanan, who was probably our first homosexual president and the common law "husband" of Alabama Senator (later Vice-President) William Rufus King, wanted no part of the Brown case and let Virginia assume jurisdiction. And, not all of the killings were at the federal armory and there was plenty of justification for Virginia to prosecute for murder.
In any event, the verdict was never in doubt. What most worried Virginia officials was the possibility of a rescue attempt from the north and the possibility of a lynching by the townsfolk.
But, all's well that ends well.
I would never do that. In fact, I was tarring Manson with Douglass's brush.
That's probably just as unfair, though. ;-)
I will also point out that Owen Brown, John’s father was opposed to slavery before Douglass became promenent.
But you hold that Douglass, a one time roommate had more influence on John Brown than his own father. You wouldn’t make that up would you?
I really give much credit to Wilburforce. He was able to turn the world power of the day from supporting slavery to opposing it, not by force of arms, but by exhortation.
I would someday hope to convince you. Turn from your sins. You have nothing to lose but the ridicule you currently earn with silly posts supporting the lost cause.
LOL. Me, please!!
I heard a great joke today. "Knock, knock."
I really gotta run. You give em hell for me! ;-)
I have met Manson. He isn’t a friend of mine though.
Douglass was no Manson.
The slave power was never too picky about legality.
Slavery thrived on violence and corruption. With a society based on that, the nicer points of justice, like laws, standing, and rules of evidence just got in the way of what the slave owners wanted. Can’t have that.
JefF Davis never did get around to appointing his pretend supreme court. By contrast, Lincoln never did get around to hanging Justice Taney. So they both had flaws.
In October 1784, Wilberforce embarked upon a tour of Europe which would ultimately change his life and determine his future career. Wilberforce’s spiritual journey is thought to have begun at this time. He started to rise early to read the Bible and pray and kept a private journal. He underwent an evangelical conversion, regretting his past life and resolving to commit his future life and work to the service of God. His conversion changed some of his habits but not his nature: he remained outwardly cheerful, interested, and respectful, tactfully urging others towards his new faith. Inwardly, he underwent an agonising struggle and became relentlessly self-critical, harshly judging his spirituality, use of time, vanity, self-control, and relationships with others.
Greatly concerned by what he perceived to be the degeneracy of British society, Wilberforce was also active in matters of moral reform, lobbying against “the torrent of profaneness that every day makes more rapid advances”, and considered this issue and the abolition of the slave trade as equally important goals.
Of course. If what the admirers of Lee say were true, I would admire him too. Freeman’s fiction is particularly glowing.
and then there is the truth.
My God, you are really are a weirdo. My "sin" is dealing with, instead of ignoring, wackos like you who would deny history, deny that we ALL live in this cartoon republic that Lincoln spawned and punks like you defend.
Has it been too long that the memory of "states rights" is completely gone? You cowardly talk of slavery BUT never about states rights. Does "states rights" and slavery mean the same thing to you? Is your sick perverted mind that warped?
The admirer in question was none of than the Supreme Allied Commander during WWII and 34th President of the USA. So you are calling Eisenhower a liar or delusional. So which is it? Was Eisenhower "sinning" by hanging Lee's picture in the oval office? Was he you twisted demented b-tard?
Have you read what he said about Ulysses Grant?
Ulysses S. Grant, Chapter 16: Discussing Secession, Personal Memoirs of U. S. Grant
Grant was a copperhead. He liked killing more than he liked following his personal ethics. Hence the bottle.
And you accuse donmeaker of posting wild stories and lies?
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.