I wouldn't call it enthralling and it certainly isn't everything he said about preserving slavery in that speech, but how about "You too know, that among us, white men have an equality resulting form a presence of a lower caste, which cannot exist where white men fill the position here occupied by the servile race."
That wasn't from Mein Kampf. That was from Jefferson Davis.
Since you don't seem to dispute the authenticity of that speech, or if you did then I couldn't see it among all of that other stuff you flooded your post with, we'll go with the understanding that JD actually said this.
Your embedded link goes to the first posting of the quote. It is a post from FLT-bird to wardaddy, and I am not in the address line. I did not post it, and it was not sent to me. My #590 responded to FLT-bird (and wardaddy) and called the provenance into question.
I'm not sure how I got the link to the wrong post, but you are correct. Since I acknowledge my mistake, I'm sure you're going to insult me again.
You only see whatever ridiclous, specious crap you want to see. Jefferson Davis said nothing walking back his support of slavery.
You could have given that answer without burying it in other people's work for post after post, and I would have accepted it.
Neither Davis nor Reagan would ever subscribe to the horse pucky stated by Lincoln.
Neither had to deal with the Democrats splitting the nation in an admitted attempt to preserve slavery.
I wouldn't call it enthralling and it certainly isn't everything he said about preserving slavery in that speech, but how about "You too know, that among us, white men have an equality resulting form a presence of a lower caste, which cannot exist where white men fill the position here occupied by the servile race."That wasn't from Mein Kampf. That was from Jefferson Davis.
You imagine some sort of achievement in finding that a leader of a slave state favored slavery and thought the black race to be inferior. And yet, Abraham Lincoln openly espoused the inferiority of the Black race, and believed in the elimination of all Black labor in competition with White labor.
The words of Lincoln bear a remarkable agreement with the comments of Jefferson Davis of the same year. And yet, you have tried to represent Lincoln to have been an abolitionist. As Black historian Lerone Bennett, Jr. stated, "In fact, it is impossible to conceive of an abolitionist Abraham Lincoln." Attempts to defend Lincoln by quoting Davis fail. They merely provide further evidence that Lincoln was a racist of the same nature as Davis.
Lincoln-Douglas Debate #1, August 21, 1858
When southern people tell us they are no more responsible for the origin of slavery, than we; I acknowledge the fact. When it is said that the institution exists, and that it is very difficult to get rid of it, in any satisfactory way, I can understand and appreciate the saying. I surely will not blame them for not doing what I should not know how to do myself. If all earthly power were given me, I should not know what to do, as to the existing institution. My first impulse would be to free all the slaves, and send them to Liberia,—to their own native land. But a moment's reflection would convince me, that whatever of high hope, (as I think there is) there may be in this, in the long run, its sudden execution is impossible. If they were all landed there in a day, they would all perish in the next ten days; and there are not surplus shipping and surplus money enough in the world to carry them there in many times ten days. What then? Free them all, and keep them among us as underlings? Is it quite certain that this betters their condition? I think I would not hold one in slavery, at any rate; yet the point is not clear enough to me to denounce people upon. What next? Free them, and make them politically and socially, our equals? My own feelings will not admit of this; and if mine would, we well know that those of the great mass of white people will not. Whether this feeling accords with justice and sound judgment, is not the sole question, if indeed, it is any part of it. A universal feeling, whether well or ill-founded, can not be safely disregarded. We can not, then, make them equals. It does seem to me that systems of gradual emancipation might be adopted; but for their tardiness in this, I will not undertake to judge our brethren of the south.When they remind us of their constitutional rights, I acknowledge them, not grudgingly, but fully, and fairly; and I would give them any legislation for the reclaiming of their fugitives, which should not, in its stringency, be more likely to carry a free man into slavery, than our ordinary criminal laws are to hang an innocent one.
Regarding the myth of the Lincoln origin of the quote, "You can fool some of all of the time, and you can fool all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time," Lerone Bennett, Jr. cogently observed, "By turning a racist who wanted to deport all Blacks into a national symbol of integration and brotherhood, the Lincoln mythmakers have managed to prove Lincoln or whoever said it wrong."
Notably, membership in the cottage industry of Lincoln mythmakers is practically lily white.
Moreover, the revisionist Lincoln claim that the Union created the States is remarkably echoed by Adolf Hitler in Mein Kampf. It is the polar opposite of the beliefs of Jefferson Davis. Lincoln purposed to rid the nation of what he perceived to be inferior races—so did Hitler. The Davis family chose to take in and foster or adopt James Henry Brooks.
I'm not sure how I got the link to the wrong post, but you are correct. Since I acknowledge my mistake, I'm sure you're going to insult me again.
Fewer mistaken claims would be preferable to more acknowledgements of mistake.
You could have given that answer without burying it in other people's work for post after post, and I would have accepted it.
I reply to erroneous claims in my own way. I rebut the claim and provide documentation to support my contention. You are free to use your method, exemplified here, of responding with some complaint about the documentation which you do not actually address.
Neither Davis nor Reagan would ever subscribe to the horse pucky stated by Lincoln.Neither had to deal with the Democrats splitting the nation in an admitted attempt to preserve slavery.
Lincoln did not have to deal with Democrats splitting the nation. It was the GOP who split the nation with their anti-slavery, or anti-territorial slavery, issue, and their defiance of the fugitive slave clause of the Constitution. The Whigs had imploded and joined the John Adams Federalists upon the ash heap of history. The Republicans could not have won in 1860 had they not divided the nation and the Democrats. The Republicans only won about 40% of the vote. The Democrats got about 60%, divided between two flavors of Democrat.
The nation had existed with legal slavery since its birth. More than 80 years later, the Democrats were not trying to divide the nation by advocating the status quo. "Riddle said 'the most conspicuous feature' of Lincoln's congressional career on the slavery issue was his "discreet silence." "Never before [the Kansas-Nebraska Act] had Lincoln run for office on the slavery issue," Riddle says, "but never afterward would he run on any other. There were, he noted, thirty-six full-length speeches on slavery in the short session, but none by Lincoln." Lerone Bennett, Jr., Forced Into Glory Johnson Publishing Company (2000), pp. 301, 213, quoting Donald W. Riddle, Congressman Abraham Lincoln, Westport, 1979, pp. 179, 252. The Republican party used the anti-slavery issue to divide and conquer, and to achieve political power.