Tammy Bruce: Lincoln vs. Obama -- The incredible tale of two libraries

Fox News.com ^ | May 16, 2017 | Tammy Bruce

[Kaslin]

This is a story of priorities and hypocrisy, brought to us by a president who saved the Union and was murdered for it, and a president whose policies and malevolence damaged both the nation and the world, and who is being rewarded for it.

The Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library Foundation is in trouble. It is auctioning off non-Lincoln related artifacts in an effort to pay back a loan that is coming due. You see, the Lincoln Library doesn’t make a lot of money or attract enough major donors to operate. This is odd, considering President Lincoln is a “favorite” president for so many of today’s modern politicians.

Lincoln wasn’t just a regular touchstone, as an example, for the now super wealthy Barack Obama, he was used to help get Mr. Obama elected as president. Mr. Obama’s affinity for, and similarity to, Mr. Lincoln was made clear to us by his sycophantic legacy media.

“In the last couple of years, several best-selling books have focused on the life and political skills of the nation’s 16th president. And one man in particular has taken a particular interest in not just reading about the Illinois politician, but also modeling himself politically after him. That man: Barack Obama, who will be sworn in as the nation’s 44th — and first African-American — president Tuesday …,” gushed CNN on Jan. 19, 2009.

The New York Times told us, “Not since Lincoln has there been a president as fundamentally shaped — in his life, convictions and outlook on the world — by reading and writing as Barack Obama.” Obama the bookworm. And even better than Lincoln.

[PGR88]

Just a guess, but if the Lincoln Library enlisted a couple billionaires in a public “save the Lincoln Library” campaign, they’d have their money in no time.

[rockrr]

Fortunately only loons and Degenerates believe that.

[Pearls Before Swine]

Re post 18: I was unaware of that, and that Lincoln didn’t listen to his cabinet.

[x]

Lincoln's legacy always was a bunch of Liberal BS.

Hardly. But then you think that any opposition to slavery makes people liberal.

Lincoln was respected by generations of Middle Americans who weren't "liberal" in the sense that people use that word today.

I don't think you're convincing anybody by trotting out your same old nonsense on any and every thread that has (or doesn't have) a Civil War connection.

You remind me of Chronicles magazine. Twenty years back or so, you could place bets on what page of the recent issue was going to tell you that Abraham Lincoln ruined America. That irritating predictability pretty well ruined the magazine and it will do the same for you, too.

[DiogenesLamp]

Re post 18: I was unaware of that, and that Lincoln didn’t listen to his cabinet.

I didn't know about it either until about three years ago. The Ships were the Powhatan, the Pawnee, the Yankee, the Pocahontas, the Baltic, "Uncle Ben", "Thomas Freeborn", and the Harriet Lane.

The Harriet Lane had fired on an confederate ship the night before April 12. The Baltic arrived at 3:00 am on the 12, and the Harriet Lane was already waiting in the Channel.

The Confederates knew these ships were coming and they knew their orders were to use force against them if they resisted. It was the sighting of these ships that confirmed the telegraph information the confederates had about Lincoln sending a force to subdue them. It was the sighting of these ships that convinced them they had to neutralize the fort before the ships attacked them.

Lincoln asked his cabinet about sending these ships:

To Seward: “Assuming it possible to now provision Sumter, under the circumstances, is it wise to do it?

Seward answered the same day: “The attempt must be made with the employment of military and marine force, which would provoke combat, and probably initiate a civil war. . . I would not provoke war in any way now.”

Chase replied to the same question: “If the attempt will so inflame civil war as to involve an immediate necessity for enlistment of armies. . . I cannot advise it.”

Cameron replied: “I am greatly influenced by the opinions of Army officers [that] it is now impossible to succor the fort.”

Welles replied: “The military gentlemen represent that it is unwise. I am not disposed to controvert their opinions.”

Smith: “It would not be wise under the circumstances.”

Blair: “The evacuation of Sumter will show the government lacks firmness.”

Bates: “I am willing to evacuate Sumter, rather than be a active party in the beginning of civil war.” (p. 285)

[DoodleDawg]

Why shouldn't Lincoln's Library website be full of liberal BS? Lincoln's legacy always was a bunch of Liberal BS.

Who would know BS better than you?

[DoodleDawg]

Just looked at the Lincoln Library website... bunch of liberal BS in that place.

OK so I went to the website and I'm not seeing it. Can you be more specific on the liberal BS you're talking about?

[Impy]

:-D

[DoodleDawg]

yes, it’s quite a terrible thing to go about personally murdering 600,000 completely unsuspecting people, as some on this forum imagine that he did...

Not to mention all those vampires.

[rockrr]

DegenerateLamp believes that practice makes perfect - especially when it comes to disseminating liberal BS.

[DoodleDawg]

Re post 18: I was unaware of that, and that Lincoln didn’t listen to his cabinet.

Most likely because it's BS.

[DiogenesLamp]

Hardly. But then you think that any opposition to slavery makes people liberal.

No, I think it made them Liberal back in 1860.

As Charles Dickens clarified it in 1862:

"Every reasonable creature may know, if willing, that the North hates the Negro, and until it was convenient to make a pretense that sympathy with him was the cause of the War, it hated the Abolitionists and derided them up hill and down dale. For the rest, there's not a pins difference between the two parties. They will both rant and lie and fight until they come to a compromise; and the slave may be thrown into that compromise or thrown out, just as it happens.

Dickens described them clearly in the manner we see Liberal Kooks nowadays; Fringe elements that do not reflect the opinions of the majority.

Lincoln was respected by generations of Middle Americans who weren't "liberal" in the sense that people use that word today.

So is Bill Clinton and so is Barack Obama, and for the same reason. The propaganda system that commands the most eyeballs has made this their official narrative, and have been spreading it ever since.

I don't think you're convincing anybody by trotting out your same old nonsense on any and every thread that has (or doesn't have) a Civil War connection.

I started at the other end of this thing. When I first became interested in politics, I researched various subjects and their history in politics. I found out that virtually all of our terrible Supreme Court decisions kept tracing back to the 14th amendment. The 14th amendment was virtually used to justify every liberal wet dream the Black Robed kooks could dream up.

I began to realize that so much of what is wrong with the country is a consequence of the aftermath of the Civil War. It affects everyone's world view and it influences so much about modern politics, but we don't notice it because we aren't looking for the roots of things.

[DiogenesLamp]

By the standards of that era, was Lincoln a Liberal or not?

[DiogenesLamp]

DegenerateLamp believes that practice makes perfect - especially when it comes to disseminating liberal BS.

I grew up believing Lincoln fought a civil war to make men free, so yeah, repeating something over and over again causes people to believe it.

If repetition worked so well for a falsehood, then it ought to work as well for the truth.

[Pearls Before Swine]

I did some reading. The fort was being starved out. Lincoln offered to resupply with provisions, but not war .materiel. But some sources say that one of the resupplying ships was a gunship.

Will read more.

[DiogenesLamp]

Most likely because it's BS.

See? This is what I expect from you, and why I don't take you seriously. Rather than saying "most likely because it's BS", you should be finding the quotes from the various cabinet members that refute it.

Of course this point isn't something trivial like the origin of "sold down the river", so I can see why you have no interest in tracking it down. This point actually matters, and it goes against you, so you will put no work into it.

[rockrr]

All of the ships had armaments. If you were a cop responding to a kidnapping or bank robbery would you ride in an Uber?

[DiogenesLamp]

I did some reading. The fort was being starved out. Lincoln offered to resupply with provisions, but not war .materiel. But some sources say that one of the resupplying ships was a gunship.

They were ALL gunships except the "Uncle Ben" and the "Baltic" (which was a troop ship carrying troops) All of the rest of them mounted cannons.

Also there were at least 200 reinforcement troops on the "Baltic", as well as powder, shot, rifles, mortars, fuses and pretty much everything Lincoln said would not be put into the fort if the supply mission was allowed to continue.

Major Anderson was going to evacuate the Fort peaceably if Lincoln had just allowed him one more day. He had already written the evacuation order.

Here are some newspaper clippings from the New York Times from early April of 1861.

[x]

I was unaware of that, and that Lincoln didn’t listen to his cabinet.

The cabinet opposed resupply at first. When they voted again almost two weeks later, some changed their mind and a narrow majority supported Lincoln.

Some people on the Internet have major axes to grind and you can't always trust what they say.

[DiogenesLamp]

All of the ships had armaments. If you were a cop responding to a kidnapping or bank robbery would you ride in an Uber?

Because gunboats are exactly what you send on a grocery run.

Lincoln was lying his @$$ off when he sent that letter to Pickens saying no attempt to reinforce the fort would be made.

He had already launched the ships!