Author of the The Real Lincoln to speak TODAY at George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia

[Lady Eileen]

Washington, DC-area Freepers interested in Lincoln and/or the War Between the States should take note of a seminar held later today on the Fairfax campus of George Mason University:

The conventional wisdom in America is that Abraham Lincoln was a great emancipator who preserved American liberties.  In recent years, new research has portrayed a less-flattering Lincoln that often behaved as a self-seeking politician who catered to special interest groups. So which is the real Lincoln? 

On Wednesday, April 16, Thomas DiLorenzo, a former George Mason University professor of Economics, will host a seminar on that very topic. It will highlight his controversial but influential new book, The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War.  In the Real Lincoln, DiLorenzo exposes the conventional wisdom of Lincoln as based on fallacies and myths propagated by our political leaders and public education system. 

The seminar, which will be held in Rooms 3&4 of the GMU Student Union II, will start at 5:00 PM.  Copies of the book will be available for sale during a brief autograph session after the seminar. 

[stand watie]

exactly. there would be 2 nations, one (the south) FREE, the other SOCIALIST & anything but free.

you should push for dixie LIBERTY. then you could have hillery, teddy kennedy and/or chuckie schumer for the president of the Socialist Peoples Republic of Amerika.

free dixie,sw

[stand watie]

you MAY be correct.

personally, i think of wee willie as lincoln's TWIN, separated by 140 years or so.

FRee dixie,sw

[stand watie]

my ONLY agenda is the same as my ancestor's: FREEDOM for dixie.

FRee dixie,sw

[stand watie]

i HAVE beeen accused of being PRO-liberty for dixie.

GUILTY as charged.

Free dixie,sw

[Hacksaw]

If we're talking about the same program, "April 1865: The Month That Saved America" then I don't think either Walt and I will dispute it. The fact that in March 1865 the confederate congress passed legislation authorizing the raising of black combat troops is undisputable. What I dispute is the ridiculous claim that the confederate army enlisted blacks in combat roles throughout the war. The evidence against that is overwhelming. Any blacks with the confederate army prior to the spring of 1864 were there in an unauthorized, in fact illegal status. At that time the confederate congress passed legislation authorizing the enlistment of free blacks and slaves for support roles only.

Feh. Sounds like you are trying to qualify after the fact.

[GOPcapitalist]

Too, Lincoln didnt have to send his "army" to Missouri. Local federal authorities and loyal Union men there were able and active.

That's precisely the point, Walt. Missouri had already decided to stay in the union and had very few indications of doing anything else. They simply asked that their neutrality be respected and the war not be conducted on their soil. To ensure this, the Missouri government dispatched the state militia to stand guard at home as they are legally entitled to do. But that wasn't enough for Lincoln - staying in the union alone didn't satisfy him. He wanted war, so he marched the federal army into St. Louis, used it to arrest a nearby militia encampment, marched them as prisoners through the streets, and used that same army to fire upon civilians who protested that their state was being invaded and their lawfully assembled militia being taken hostage. The legislature, which had previously affirmed itself as unionist, heard of this and acted to halt the invasion with remaining militia forces as the army then turned upon the state government. The legislature and governor fled southward towards Arkansas as Lincoln's army advanced on them to, quite literally, overthrow their government. This how the Neosho secession ordinance came about, Walt. The previously-unionist legislature convened in Neosho while fleeing the federal army and voted, as a last resort, to secede. Lincoln had physically driven the state of Missouri out of the union.

[GOPcapitalist]

Such as? Names?

You've seen the document several times, Walt. Remember all those farmers he robbed and executed in Tennessee?

[GOPcapitalist]

Taney was the losing party. His reputation went completely into the toilet, over this and Dred Scott.

You aren't even making sense anymore, Walt. Did you sleep through high school civics class or something? It appears so, because your understanding of our court system is severely lacking. When a case comes up before the court and a ruling is issued, that ruling stands unless it is overturned on appeal. The loser, as in the person who is ruled against in the case, has the right to file an appeal to a higher court or he may simply abide by the decision even though he may not like it. Lincoln lost the Merryman case - it was decided against him and his order was stricken down as unconstitutional. It was therefore his burden to appeal if he did not like the way that the case went. That, or he could have accepted it and abided by the ruling. Simply ignoring it was not a legally valid option.

Notice that Chief Justice Rehnquist says the question of who may suspend the Writ has never been "authoritatively" answered.

And in that he is simply wrong. Or are Marshall, Story, Curtis, and Taney not authorities on matters of the Constitution? If those for men are authorities on the constitution, then it has been authoritatively answered as all four of them answered it. If they are not authorities on the constitution though, I do not know who else is, thus your standard is intentionally set at an unreachable level.

[GOPcapitalist]

The confederate constitution did not mince words. The judicial power of the confederacy was to be vested in one supreme court and such other courts as the congress would establish.

That it did, but if you look at the record of debates from the Confederate Senate, they sought to block its appointment to limit what they feared would be judicial activism infringing on state power. If you recall, the senate has oversight on appointments to the court and can block those appointments from being filled if they so desire. To do so is within their constitutional authority.

[Treebeard]

Twenty score and ten posts ago, a lady posted an announcement about a seminar on a college campus somewhere. It has since degenerated into this thread.

Talk about a Peter pulling contest at St. Taffy's...

[4CJ]

I was referring to #318. You are such a dishonest bum.

Nonsense. Your #325 was a reply to GOPCapitalist, your response in full:

That has nothing to do with the nature of the Union.

"We are all Republicans--we are all Federalists. If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is free to combat it."

Thomas Jefferson March 4, 1801

Walt

YOU stated that "That has nothing to do with the nature of the Union", and your alleged refutation SUPPORTS GOPCapitalist, not your ludicrous assertion.

Ask the orderlies to up your meds.

[4CJ]

CJ Rehquist also acknowledged Curtis understanding and agreement of Taney's habeas corupus position (on page 45 IIRC). Curtis had no reason th agree with Taney - he vigorously disagreed with Taney in the Scott decision. The US legislature also wanted an explanation from Lincoln/Bates as to the legality of the Executive suspending the writ.

[Ditto]

The idea that secession was revolution was concockted by Lincoln to justify destroying the union.

Really? Thirty years before Lincoln entered the White House, James Madison, the father of the constitution, called unilateral secession nothing but revolution. So maybe it was Madison who "concockted" it? Or maybe it was Washington who was the only president before Lincoln to use the Militia Act who "concocketed" it.

Or just maybe it was the greedy slaveocrats like Calhoon and Davis who thought they could ignore the Constitution and the Rule of Law when it suited their purposes who concocked the idea that secession was constitutional.

[GOPcapitalist]

What a crock of crap! Missouri was split, like the other border states, on the question of secession.

It had decided to stay in the union and proclaimed its neutrality.

While it is true that the state convention voted unanimously not to secede in March 1862, the arsenals that you speak of were federal arsenals and Governor Jackson had no legal right to seize them.

Jackson didn't seize the St Louis arsenal though! The militia was assembled near St. Louis to prevent the use of the weapons against the state of Missouri and was ready to act in the event that the federals waged war there, but at the time they were captured they had not done anything. They were simply assembled as the legislature and governor had approved them to be! This event is widely attributed to the overzealousness of the union commander, Nathaniel Lyon.

You say that 'feds responded by marching the U.S. army on the state capital to oust the governor and state legislature' which is nonsense

History records that Lyon led a march toward Jefferson City, on June 14, 1861. As they approached and occupied the capital, the governor, lieutenant governor, and a quorum of the state legislature - all duly elected officials of the state - fled to the southwest. The state militia attempted to impede the march at Booneville on the 17th. Another union attempt to incercept the governor was made on July 5th at Carthage, where the militia held off the advances.

and that 'the state government convened in October in the town of Neosho' which is false.

The legislature remained in office, and Claiborne Jackson was impeached and removed from office.

I just did a search for the terms "claiborne fox jackson missouri impeached" and found no hits pertaining to anything of the sort. He was indeed "deposed" by a "provisional government" established by the yankee army, but that "government" lacked elected legitimacy and was established by a military force that pushed out the legitimate government and occupied the capitol.

It was the impeached governor and the minority of the state senate which met in Neosho and voted secession, something that they lacked the authority to do.

Records from Neosho indicate that a quorum of the legislature was present. They were the only legitimately elected government in the state, and Jackson was the legitimately elected governor. Therefore their action was valid.

[GOPcapitalist]

What about later ones, including one named Edgar Lee Masters?

What about em? I don't recall ever quoting Masters here. I have shown, however, that the original marxist named Karl adored Lincoln in his own time.

[Non-Sequitur]

Nonsense. I am fully aware of the fact that the confederate congress authorized black combat troops about 4 weeks before Lee surrendered. The interesting thing is that even then, even at the end of the road when they were the most desperate, the confederate congress couldn't bring itself to to anything that might threaten slavery. Those slaves were conscripted into the army and forced to fight for the confederacy and were promised nothing in return. They weren't paid, their masters were. And had the confederacy won the war then they would have been handed back to their owners.

[Non-Sequitur]

i personally prefer "the war for southern independence", but will accept TWBTS.

And I would prefer "War of Southern Rebellion" but realize that "Civil War" was the official name adopted by congress. I'm trying to popularize "Jeff Davis's War" but it's slow going.

[rebelyell]

It's "slow going" because it is both stupid and inaccurate.

[Non-Sequitur]

That it did, but if you look at the record of debates from the Confederate Senate, they sought to block its appointment to limit what they feared would be judicial activism infringing on state power. If you recall, the senate has oversight on appointments to the court and can block those appointments from being filled if they so desire. To do so is within their constitutional authority.

To violate the constitution was within their constitutional authority? Neat system, like I said, in keeping with the overall contempt for the courts that the Davis regime had.

[GOPcapitalist]

That is a LIE.

Not at all. Karl Marx adored Lincoln, wrote extensively in his defense during the war, and regularly sent letters of praise to Lincoln for his actions.

Go read the Beards, neo-Marxists, and read what they say about Lincoln

Why mess with the neos when you can see it first hand from the real thing, the one named Karl?