Replies

But Lincoln WAS in favor of ending slavery. That is why he is a Republican.

However, if the South is going to seceed and start a war, then Lincoln was more than willing to make any number of concessions to avoid the disolution of the Union.

The treasonous Breckenridge and his fellow democrat fire heaters were hell bent on causing a war. They were in no mood to compromise.

Much in the same manner as the modern democrat leaders it seems.

You make some good arguments. Here's a letter from Lincoln to Horace Greeley of the New York Tribune. The lost causers always like to cite this letter but they leave of the last paragraph for some reason.

Executive Mansion,
Washington, August 22, 1862.
Hon. Horace Greeley:
Dear Sir.
I have just read yours of the 19th. addressed to myself through the New-York Tribune. If there be in it any statements, or assumptions of fact, which I may know to be erroneous, I do not, now and here, controvert them. If there be in it any inferences which I may believe to be falsely drawn, I do not now and here, argue against them. If there be perceptable in it an impatient and dictatorial tone, I waive it in deference to an old friend, whose heart I have always supposed to be right.

As to the policy I "seem to be pursuing" as you say, I have not meant to leave any one in doubt.

I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.

I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men every where could be free.

Yours,
A. Lincoln.

But Lincoln WAS in favor of ending slavery.

So he said. Of course he did support the Corwin Amendment, which according to you would have destroyed slavery by preserving slavery.

I'm still not smart enough to understand that, but perhaps one day i'll figure out your thinking on this.

then Lincoln was more than willing to make any number of concessions to avoid the disolution of the Union.

Why? Why would anyone want a bunch of F***ing slave states in their Union? I would think people of moral character would have told the f*ckers to get the f*** out! Wouldn't want to associate with them, but for some reason Lincoln felt it was important to bring them G*dD@mn slaveholders back into the Union, completely with all their slaveholding!

I guess he was still working on that "destroying slavery by preserving slavery in the Union strategy you mentioned that is too above my head to comprehend.

So why did Lincoln want the slave holding states back again? I'm still having trouble with this idea.