[shuckmaster]

Aw, Shucks!

[laconic]

Lincoln was a great man, one of our two greatest presidents. This is a bunch of revanchist nonsense with logic and name-calling redolent of the "scholars" you'd find in Saudi Arabia.

[Vladiator]

Lincoln’s War also effectively overthrew the existing decentralized, limited federal government that had existed and governed well in the US since established by America’s founding fathers. Lincoln bastardized a respected federal government with limited powers into a dictatorial, uncontrollable Washington federal empire.

Please, when you leave the country, do not let the door hit you in the butt on the way out. And please do not take anything that does not belong to you.

Oh, you're staying? Well, it must be a real cross to bear, all this opression. See you at the voting booth.

[Jim Scott]

How sad that 137 years after his death folks are still attempting to trash Lincoln and paste whatever current civil war mythology is current onto his presidency. Now it's an attempt to portray the Civil War as one big war crime and Abe Lincoln as the chief war criminal. Oh my. Next old Abe will morph into a 'terrorist' and be compared to Arafat - or has that one been tried already? Hard to keep up with all the anti-Lincoln stuff when real threats to our country right now seem a bit more important.

Unbelievable that in the 21st century this endless rehashing of a period long, long past in our nations history is still able to generate windy diatribes like the above article and who-knows-how-many websites, books, 'newsletters' and other Civil War-era detritus. To what end? Oh, yes, the 'truth' must be known. Yes, yes.

Give it up.

[SamAdams76]

It is my hope that someday, in the not too distant future, a true account of the war crimes of Lincoln will be discussed, debated and even acknowledged.

I hope this guy is not holding his breath. Jeez. What a load of tripe. Everybody knows that it was FDR that brought us big, intrustive federal government. All Lincoln tried to do was hold this nation together. And he succeeded, though at enormous cost of life, including his own. Would we be better off if we had split into two (or more) countries? That question will never be answered but I think we are all better off as the United States of America. In fact, it's a shame that we couldn't have spread over all of North America while we had the chance (during the 1800s). But we were too busy fighting amongst ourselves.

[Diddle E. Squat]

Mr. Holland, I eagerly anticipate your 'Opus'.

[WhiskeyPapa]

Dixie Daily?

Consider the source.

Walt

[ReclaimDixie]

It is interesting to note that whenever a topic such as this comes up, the detractors immediately resort to name calling and brow beating. They can never come up with any facts to counter the point usually because there aren't any. Why do you think that Davis, et al were never tried for treason? BECAUSE THEY DIDN"T COMMIT TREASON and the Supreme Court said so. ...and I guess the smart states were the northern border states that used the Constitution to keep their slaves for months after the War. So much for liberty and justice for all. If the South wanted to keep their slaves, they only had to stay in the Union (Original 13th Amendment). The War obviously isn't over or you wouldn't be so ticked off. The factions between the North and South are still here as evident by your name calling.

[Honorary Serb]

Whatever one thinks about the rights and wrongs of the South versus the North (I come from a state with connections to both), the basic truth is that civil wars are the GREATEST arenas for war crimes, atrocities, disregard of civilian rights, and just plan mass killing. This applies to the American Civil War, as well as more recent civil wars in Mexico, Russia, Spain, China, etc. etc. And it also applies to the civil wars in 1990s Yugoslavia.

This, however, does not give some outside "humanitarian warrors" the right to intervene in civil wars, take steps to exacerbate them, to demonze one side or the other, and to occupy parts of the country that had the civiil war on some "peacekeeping mission." The "West", as well as the international islamic jihad, did all these things in Yugoslavia, and are still doing them.

Anyone who supports "humanitarian intervention" should ask themselves what would have happened if the 19th century "Concert of Europe", led by Great Britain and France, had intervened in the US Civil War, in order to "stop atrocities", "restrain war criminals", "protect trade interests", or any other number of reasons. Would there be a United States (or for that matter, a Confederacy) today? Would European powers still occupy parts of the US, Mexico, and/or Canada? Would Russia (whether Czarist, communist/socialist,or otherwise) still be in Alaska? How might Europe itself be different?

They should also ask themselves how the United States, which went through a great civil war itself, could possibly morally justify intervening in Yugoslavia, for any of the reasons given above. How could we expect a good outcome from such an intervention?

[ladyinred]

What's up with you people anyway?

[GOPcapitalist]

Their job is to lie to the American people and cover up a true and honest account of our history in order to support the government and political system in power.

"Such is the tale; is there any possibility of making our citizens believe in it? Not in the present generation, he replied; there is no way of accomplishing this; but their sons may be made to believe in the tale, and their sons' sons, and posterity after them. I see the difficulty, I replied; yet the fostering of such a belief will make them care more for the city and for one another." - Plato, The Republic, ca. 380 B.C.

[weikel]

Wasn't Lincoln the one who wanted to have mercy on all the confederates.

[Quix]

Calling all idiots. Calling all idiots. Some great lies here get em while their cheap. Step right up. Don't miss out.

RIGHT YOU ARE! AMEN!

THANKFULLY, THIS TOO, LIKE GAS SHALL PASS.

Though it appears that the evidently angry, pride-wounded obsessive compulsive's spouting this nonsense would pass along to another task quicker if they could smell the gas they are expelling.

I've observed a fair amount of strange hobbies in my time but this is an extremely unique one. . . clearly something born, bread and incubated in the . . . what . . . uhhhh ingrown . . . . South?

I still contend that at this point, whatever % Lincoln had flaws is exceedingly irrelevant.

LINCOLN
WAS STILL
ENOUGH
HEAD AND SHOULDERS
ABOVE THE JOKERS
WRITING AND POSTING
SUCH JUNK
AS TO EASILY
LEAVE THEM IN THE
DUST
. . .
WHEN IT COMES TO
PERSONAL INTEGRITY
ELOQUENCE
DOWN-HOME REASONABLENESS
HORSE SENSE
AND
HUMAN WARMTH
&
PERCEPTIVITY
. . .
AS WELL AS
AUTHENTIC HUMAN
CARING.

He had to be a saint, if for no OTHER reason than to live with his wife as honorably as he did.

But I happen to believe he had a number of other honorable values authentically lived out. And no amount of revisionist hogwash by sore losers will convince me otherwise. If I get to Heaven and he's not there and God Himself points out vividly why, THEN I'll change my mind.

[stainlessbanner]

It's ironic that many folks accept Lincoln's sainthood on blind faith b/c that's what they were taught. I neither worship the man, nor hate him, but prefer to look at the historical record.

Surely, Holland's last comments in the article, "Never Again", are shared by all Americans today. Never again do we need to fight that war, never again do we need our leaders to break the Constitution that binds them, never again should be stand off brother against brother.

[Gospel_guy]

It is glorious to see the TRUTH about DISHONEST Abe! It is a shame that the War Criminal Lincoln did not believe in the Declaration of Independence, i.e., that it is the right and duty to throw off tyranny, and that government derives its powers from the CONSENT of the governed. May the Lincoln-Myth continue to fall!

[rdf]

... but it was obvious from his earlier speeches that he had previously advocated the prevalent constitutional right of democratic, state by state secession.

This is ignorant. Pig ignorant.

Shame on Ron Holland, who has done good work, and ought to know better.

Richard F.

[MiddyArcher]

After reading the responses to Ron Holland's article, I'm convinced of one thing: nothing inspires such blind antiSouthern hatred in yankees and such an outpouring of venom and name-calling as a Southerner who tells the truth.

[MoJo2001]

Barf..Barf!! LOL!

[LibertyGirl77]

Oh, for heaven's sake. Get OVER it, already.

--a Virginian

[erod]

Ping for later