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.
No. Someone of moral character would put them in the ground.
We're Republicans. We believe in liberty. Our whole party was founded with the explicit purpose to do away with slavery. They declared their purpose and in a decade slavery was gone. The south had the chance to do it the easy way, or the hard way. They chose wrong.
The slave south was doomed either way, they just didn't know it until their farms were burning down around them. You can argue they had the right to use deadly force over tariffs, and it comes right back that the workers in the field had more right than that to resist with deadly force their enslavement.
They were lucky they had the option of surrendering to Grant rather than their field hands.
You can defend it all you want, but it mystifies me that anyone would try. It makes me think you are not a serious person.