Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: obamaisandrogynous

“Barry hasn’t freed an entire people left in bondage, or managed a cross-continental war, successfully.”

Lincoln didn’t do that either. He emancipated only the slaves held in states under rebellion. They weren’t freed in the north. It was an act to control an asset of war...slavery, by the commander in chief.

The second point, that he successfully managed the war is arguable as well. ‘Emancipating’ the South’s labor source was the best tactical move he made. And that is what it was. It didn’t end slavery.


8 posted on 12/25/2008 4:59:25 PM PST by AuntB (The right to vote in America: Blacks 1870; Women 1920; Native Americans 1925)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: AuntB

Oh, did the North have slaves?


10 posted on 12/25/2008 5:05:23 PM PST by classified
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: AuntB
Lincoln didn’t do that either. He emancipated only the slaves held in states under rebellion.

Not exactly accurate. He pushed for compensated emancipation from early in his presidency and supported the various amendments that eventually freed all the slaves. The president has no role in amendments, but he encouraged Congress to pass them and send them to the states.

IOW, Lincoln did everything he constitutionally could to free all the slaves. He had no right or mechanism to directly emancipate northern slaves.

BTW, by the end of the war slaves remained in bondage only in KY and a few hundred in DE. All others had already been freed by state action.

16 posted on 12/25/2008 5:42:25 PM PST by Sherman Logan (Everyone has a right to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: AuntB

Let B.O. and the Dims have Lincoln. They’ve been embracing him for years.....even the celluloid clowns on The West Wing would get weepy-eyed over the mere mention of “honest Abe”.

If the Republicans want to be a conservative party again, and that seems VERY much in doubt, they need to re-embrace the ideals of Jefferson, Washington, and Madison.....and the presidential governing precepts of Tyler, Cleveland, Pierce, and Hayes ( limited government, fiscal responsibility, and no needless bloodshed ).

Let the liberals have Lincoln. He’s always been one of them.


20 posted on 12/25/2008 6:05:49 PM PST by colonel mosby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: AuntB

“Lincoln didn’t do that either. He emancipated only the slaves held in states under rebellion. They weren’t freed in the north. It was an act to control an asset of war...slavery, by the commander in chief. The second point, that he successfully managed the war is arguable as well. ‘Emancipating’ the South’s labor source was the best tactical move he made. And that is what it was. It didn’t end slavery.”

He emancipated (i.e., “freed”) no one. He had no authority over the Confederate states and thus no one was emancipated. Hell, he specifically EXCLUDED from his Emancipation Proclamation the slaves in areas of the Confededracy the Yankees DID control (i.e., New Orleans and some of the Southern Louisiana parishes).


34 posted on 12/25/2008 7:29:23 PM PST by ought-six ( Multiculturalism is national suicide, and political correctness is the cyanide capsule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: AuntB
They weren’t freed in the north.

Actually they were. By the 13th Amendment, which Lincoln also supported, fought for, and lived long enough to see it sent to the states for ratification.

58 posted on 12/29/2008 3:17:21 PM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson