Replies

Cheap shot. His ellipsis doesn't substantially alter the meaning of the passage. Lincoln is trying to make a case that "mere" enforcement of the collection of the revenues, etc., etc., was not an invasion.

While one may have differing opinions on whether or not enforcement of laws or protection of federal property is an invasion, it is nonetheless quite clear from the text that Lincoln considered S.C. the aggressor in this case. Given the entire text, the case that Lincoln is a liar is very weak indeed.

Of course, that doesn't explain his ships' opening up on militiamen, and it doesn't by the longest stretch justify his sending Irvin McDowell with 13,000 men to occupy the Custis-Lee mansion the day after Virginia's people voted to ratify the secession ordinance. Did he send McDowell to make sure Mary Lee's mail got delivered?

From a historical perspective, it has been quite common to seize the property of rebels. The north considered the south in rebellion, ergo seizing property of leaders of the rebellion was justified. I do admire Lee and wish that he had been recompensed after the war. It is entirely likely that the Lincoln (whom you so despise) would have done so. Given Lincoln's character and shrewdness it is almost certain that he would have pardoned many (if not all) southern leaders.

Either way, Lincoln's rhetoric was eyewash, and Cap is justified in pointing it out. Your attempt to impute dishonesty to him is likewise eyewash.

Naw, when you post textual rail-splits then you open yourself up to charges of dishonesty or sloppy research. Of course, in this instance I was not really imputing such, because if GOPCapitalist got his info from DiLorenzo, there is a quite reasonable excuse for him.

To recap, GOPCapitalist called Lincoln a liar and indeed the text he posted fully supported this supposition. However, this was text taken out of context, which I showed when I posted some more of the speech. Given the entire text it is quite clear that Lincoln did not lie in this matter. The fact that you disagree with Lincoln's reasoning is beside the point. The point is that this speech was being used to prove Lincoln a liar. And that succeeds only if you delete inconvenient portions of the speech.

The fact that you disagree with Lincoln's reasoning is beside the point. The point is that this speech was being used to prove Lincoln a liar. And that succeeds only if you delete inconvenient portions of the speech.

I don't agree with you that GOPcapitalist has no case for deception on Lincoln's part. To talk about ensuring revenue collection and the integrity of the mails, while you are preparing a vast civil war to destroy slavery and recast the Union, could be construed by reasonable people as a Machiavellian exercise in expedience....and misdirection.