It's not a game at all. It is about the meaning of that word and the context of that time. If you care to forsake all historical context and damn Lincoln as a racist for expressing the popular social prejudices of the day, then you must also condemn with equal or in most cases even greater zeal, 99% of our leaders from the very beginning of the nation until very recent times when expressing those prejudices was no longer "popular".
If you also choose to ignore basic political history and damn Lincoln for wanting to win election by not alienating a majority of voters in both his state and in much of the country by walking a narrow line on race and slavery issues, be my guest. The fact is that in that era, no one who's racial views would pass muster today could have possibly won any office in Illinois and probably not in any other state.
But if you want to take that stance, then be honest and equally damn others from George Washington on for the same sin.
Now back to Lincoln, and the quote in #169 that you gave as "evidence" of his racism.
"I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong, having the superior position. . . . I agree with Judge Douglas he [the Negro] is not my equal in many respects."
And your comment on that was ...
Claiming that ones own race is superior and that the Negro race is not equal is racist by most definitions.
It's interesting that you give a snip of a quote out of context and as others have pointed out, very conveniently omit the next sentence which is the object of those words.
By way of context, the quote is from the first of the Lincoln-Douglas debates in 1858. Because of the then new Republican party's general opposition to slavery and more specifically the expansion of slavery to the territories, Democrats coined the term "Black Republicans" which was short hand for advocating full legal, racial and social equality including inter-racial marriage. There actually were a very small handful of such people in the country then, but none of them could ever win election in Illinois or any other state.
But you could win election then by arguing that slavery was just wrong, and was an affront to our basic principles expressed in The Declaration that all men were created equal. Beyond that philosophical argument, there were even larger segments of the population in Illinois and other states who were opposed to any further expansion of slavery beyond it's present limits. As a "Free Soiler", those were the people Lincoln was appealing to. But Lincoln was also very careful with words. Douglass and his supporters had accused Lincoln of being a radical abolitionist which fit their characterization of the 'Black Republicans' and Lincoln replied.
Anything that argues me into his idea of perfect social and political equality with the negro is but a specious and fantastic arrangement of words, by which a man can prove a horse-chestnut to be a chestnut horse. I will say here, while upon this subject, that I have no purpose directly to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and the black races. There is a physical difference between the two, which, in my judgment, will probably for ever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality; and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position.
I have never said anything to the contrary, but I hold that, notwithstanding all this, there is no reason in the world why the negro is not entitled to all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence—the right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I hold that he is as much entitled to these as the white man.
I agree with Judge Douglas he is not my equal in many respects—certainly not in color, perhaps not in moral or intellectual endowment. But in the right to eat the bread, without the leave of anybody else, which his own hand earns, he is my equal and the equal of Judge Douglas, and the equal of every living man.
Let's parse the first paragraph. Lincoln does not say what he thinks of "equality" but he denies every publicly advocating it. And then he switches to the larger issue of abolition. He states plainly that he does not intend to interfere with slavery where it then existed. In 1858, abolition by Federal decree was an impossibility. All acknowledged that it would require a Constitutional amendment that had to be ratified by 3/4 of the states. With 15 slave states opposed, it could never be ratified so it was foolish for any serious politician to even suggest it. Lincoln's formula was to isolate slavery and allow it the "wither on the vine."
And in the second paragraph, he again states that he has "no purpose" to introduce 'perfect equality,' and says why.
There is a physical difference between the two, which, in my judgment, will probably for ever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality.
It's a pretty obvious physical difference which still plays out --- skin color. Other 'oppressed minorities' through our history could eventually blend in because their skin color is the same as the majority -- white.
While forever is a long time, 150 years after Lincoln spoke those words, we are still dealing with that "skin issue" and I think that while we have reached a technical legal equality between races, few would argue that we have reached "perfect" social equality, and I doubt I'll see it in my lifetime. Lincoln well understood the incredible difficulty of changing hearts, minds and basic human instinct. No politician is capable of that accomplishment.
Lincoln then goes on to say... inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position.
Well duh! He doesn't want to be oppressed and he wants to assure the voters (whites) that he is not looking to force a change in their social status.
Now on to the parts you were reluctant to quote.
... notwithstanding all this, there is no reason in the world why the negro is not entitled to all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence—the right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I hold that he is as much entitled to these as the white man.
Does a racist in any age argue that the object of his racism should have the same fundamental legal entitlements as he? Sheets Byrd sure didn't in the 1960s. Woodrow Wilson didn't in the 1910s. And Stephen Douglas surely didn't in the 1850s.
Douglas and many main-stream Democrats in fact argued that the Founders did not intend to include blacks when writing the Declaration. He was wrong. The Southern fire-eaters such as Calhoon were more honest about it. They acknowledged that Jefferson and the rest did indeed mean to include blacks, but they said that Jefferson and the rest were misguided and the Declaration was a wrong-headed document which should be ignored.
Lincoln and the 'Black Republicans' correctly argued that the Founders did indeed mean 'all men' and that the Declaration remained the moral and philosophical guiding light of the Republic.
And now, the last paragraph.
"I agree with Judge Douglas he is not my equal in many respects—certainly not in color, perhaps not in moral or intellectual endowment. But in the right to eat the bread, without the leave of anybody else, which his own hand earns, he is my equal and the equal of Judge Douglas, and the equal of every living man.
So, Lincoln agrees with Douglas --- but on what? Equal in color? That is obvious, but meaningless. How about in "moral and intellectual endowment"? Douglas says they are not equal and Lincoln says "perhaps" they are not. He does not necessarily agree or disagree with Douglas on that point, but he says that is meaningless as well because the negro has the God given right, as expressed in the Declaration, to eat the bread, without the leave of anybody else, which his own hand earns, [and] he is my equal and the equal of Judge Douglas, and the equal of every living man.
In 1858, that was a very bold statement for anyone to make and in the Deep South, such a statement would likely gotten him shot on the spot. For anyone to consider the man who had the courage to say that a racist, displays either a sad lack of historical education or a shameful willingness to distort history to fit a contemporary political agenda. Sadly, I see a lot of the latter recently from the hard core Libertarian segment.
Back to the word game. A racist is someone who in both word and deed intends to oppress another because of skin color. Lincoln, in both word and deed, sought to lift oppression from the black race.