Statue of Abe Lincoln: "...a slap in the face of a lot of brave men..."

The Cincinnati Enquirer ^ | Friday, December 27, 2002 | AP

[yankeedame]

Friday, December 27, 2002

Lincoln statue won't be embraced by all

The Associated Press

RICHMOND, Va. - Abraham Lincoln is returning to the capital of the Confederacy, much to the chagrin of the Sons of Confederate Veterans.

Five days before the Civil War ended in April 1865, the president and his youngest child, Tad, traveled to still-smoldering Richmond soon after Southern forces abandoned the city in flames. On April 5, 2003, the 138th anniversary of that visit, a bronze statue of the pair commissioned by the United States Historical Society will be unveiled at the Civil War Visitor Center of the National Park Service.

"Here is a national hero, a small boy, and a beautiful city by the James River, all united again," said Robert Kline, chairman of the nonprofit group society, which works on behalf of museums and other groups on projects of historic and artistic value. "This time Lincoln's in Richmond for all time."

Richmond, home to towering statues of Confederacy figures including Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson and J.E.B. Stuart, was abandoned after Union forces led by Gen. Ulysses S. Grant attacked on April 2, 1965.

The Sons of Confederate Veterans view the Lincoln statue as "a slap in the face of a lot of brave men and women who went through four years of unbelievable hell fighting an invasion of Virginia led by President Lincoln," Brag Bowling, the SCV Virginia commander, said Thursday. The group had only recently learned of the statue, and had no immediate plans to protest.

The life-size statue by sculptor David Frech will show Lincoln and his son on a bench against a granite wall. The words "To Bind Up The Nation's Wounds" will be etched into a capstone.

[CyberCowboy777]

You make reference of events and documents that have history and battles behind them. The fact that Slavery existed and was condoned by some in the North does no negate the Fight many in the North entered to free ALL slaves. A fight that spread across the Atlantic from England.

By simply making references and not any detail you are ignoring the history and debate behind at least 6 Presidents before Lincoln. The split of the Whigs and the Democrats, the further split of the Democrats, the rise and reason of the Republicans, the organization and debate behind the territories and statehoods.

We had over 20 years of varying debate and ideas on the issue of slavery. But always the vast majority of anti-slavery movement was in the North and West, not the South.

[talleyman]

Ah, the old "I think I smell a racist" canard. From the Al Sharptoon / Jesse Jackson Institute for Rhetoric and Logic. But you forgot to frame it in rhyme.

[CyberCowboy777]

force its abolition in the South and the Territories.

The South was wrong to refuse it and lost the war because of it. That is all I have said from the begining.

Pride comes before a fall.

[talleyman]

"Pride comes before a fall."
No, a summer comes before a fall - "Pride goeth before a fall."

[wardaddy]

Scotland was a part of Great Britain last time I looked. I think they should be tearing down those Wallace and Bruce memorilas and erecting Cromwell memorials don't you think?

Are you prepared to personally come down here and occupy us so we'll "behave" according to your lofty wishes?
Don't you think that as a purported "conservative" that you have enough unfinished business at home in blue zone land?

As they say "Southern Man don't need you around anyhow"

[Johnny Shear]

Ah, such compelling rhetoric! Thank God we have people like you to "bind up the wounds".

Here's the deal...

I think "Southern Heritage" is pretty cool. As a matter of fact, I think ANY "Heritage" is cool. From high school rivalries to college fraternity battles to The Yankees versus The Red Sox to America versus Great Britian (Or even America versus the World). Having pride in one's self and "Community" builds character and fosters pride within one's self.

That being said...

I think a LOT of these "Confederate Defenders" use "Southern Pride" as a way to hide their true racist feelings and attitudes. Thus doing harm to the reputation of people of good faith who are simply proud of their heritage.

Now...I am FOR "States Rights". I think it's a wonderful idea at its core. In the most basic of terms, it allows us to have 50 little experiments. That's a VERY good thing. It would allow us to see who's government is best if utilized fully. And in the end, ALL of us would be better off as a result of these "Tests".

But guess what? There have been, and are, a certain number of racist rednecks who use and have used "States Rights" as a way to foster their racism. And because of them, that concept of "States Rights" is gone forever. Because of those few assholes we'll never have the best country possible. I resent them because of that. And once in a while, I speak-up about it.

President Lincoln was a WONDERFUL man who lost his life because he tried to keep the union in-tact and wanted to free some American slaves who happened to be black. And now we have these jackles running around saying we should not have a tribute to him in one of OUR states? Screw them! I can think of ONLY one reason why ANYONE would oppose that statue...Because they agree with the people who wanted President Lincoln dead.

[Johnny Shear]

Ah, the old "I think I smell a racist" canard. From the Al Sharptoon / Jesse Jackson Institute for Rhetoric and Logic. But you forgot to frame it in rhyme.

Yep...Just because I think some people have racist attitudes, I MUST be JUST LIKE those race baiting poverty pimps, Jackson and Sharpton.

YOU, and people like YOU, are the reason people are called racist when they attempt to disagree with Jackson and Sharpton. I hope you're proud.

[billbears]

The fact that Slavery existed and was condoned by some in the North does no negate the Fight many in the North entered to free ALL slaves. A fight that spread across the Atlantic from England.

First you say this 'battle' had been going on with government support for 20 years. I point out several instances that it had not. Now you claim this 'fight' spread across the Atlantic from England. Tell me now, just how many nations had slavery as an institution in the Western Hemisphere by the end of the 19th century. And then how many of those nations had a war to end slavery in the Western Hemisphere?

By simply making references and not any detail you are ignoring the history and debate behind at least 6 Presidents before Lincoln. The split of the Whigs and the Democrats, the further split of the Democrats, the rise and reason of the Republicans, the organization and debate behind the territories and statehoods

Perhaps you may want to reread lincoln's speech in '54 concerning Kansas-Nebraska to name a few. As for the 'debate' of the previous 6 Presidents, I'd say the argument was much more over a national bank then whether or not slavery should continue. Unless you're suggesting that any President of that time seriously pandered to less than 1% of the population. They may make a speech or two but the main concern was limiting Southern power. To accept slaves as an actual person while in servitude was to give voting power to the South that northern legislators did not want them to have. And it was a hatred that extended all the way back to the War of 1812 if not further. Surely in your extensive studies you realize the South wanted to continue while the north would have just rejoined Britain in some fashion if given the chance, which is what the Hartford Convention was, a threat of secession.

But always the vast majority of anti-slavery movement was in the North and West, not the South.

I realize that. And the population numbers provided do not include Southern states. So again, how is 200,000 out of 20 million a movemont of anything. H#ll, more people claim to be homosexual per capita today than that!! Until lincoln's war and his failings by late '62 he wouldn't have turned to them unless absolutely necessary. Or haven't you read his First Inaugural Address?

[talleyman]

"I can think of ONLY one reason why ANYONE would oppose that statue..."

Alas, my friend, that is the problem: you can only think of one reason, when life is so much more complicated than that...
Nevertheless, I wish you well - have a great weekend, and we'll fight another day.
Peace, love, & beer!

[wardaddy]

I think "Southern Heritage" is pretty cool

Good Thinking

I think a LOT of these "Confederate Defenders" use "Southern Pride" as a way to hide their true racist feelings and attitudes
I can think of ONLY one reason why ANYONE would oppose that statue...Because they agree with the people who wanted President Lincoln dead.

Aw Shucks....why'd you have to go and spoil it all?

[CyberCowboy777]

Here is just a brief of what was going on before Lincoln, it is amazing the debate and wrangling that surrounded the Slavery issue. The Anti-Slavery side was taking the lead from England which had halted expansion before trying to remove slavery completely. This really only is a brief from the POTUS side but you can see the fight.

Van Buren
Inclined more and more to oppose the expansion of slavery, Van Buren blocked the annexation of Texas because it assuredly would add to slave territory--and it might bring war with Mexico.
Defeated by the Whigs in 1840 for reelection, he was an unsuccessful candidate for President on the Free Soil ticket in 1848.

Tyler
In 1842 Tyler signed a tariff bill protecting northern manufacturers. The Webster-Ashburton treaty ended a Canadian boundary dispute; in 1845 Texas was annexed.
The administration of this states'-righter strengthened the Presidency. But it also increased sectional cleavage that led toward civil war. By the end of his term, Tyler had replaced the original Whig Cabinet with southern conservatives. In 1844 Calhoun became Secretary of State. Later these men returned to the Democratic Party, committed to the preservation of states' rights, planter interests, and the institution of slavery. Whigs became more representative of northern business and farming interests.
When the first southern states seceded in 1861, Tyler led a compromise movement; failing, he worked to create the Southern Confederacy. He died in 1862, a member of the Confederate House of Representatives.

Polk
President Polk added a vast area to the United States, but its acquisition precipitated a bitter quarrel between the North and the South over expansion of slavery.

Taylor
Northerners and Southerners disputed sharply whether the territories wrested from Mexico should be opened to slavery, and some Southerners even threatened secession. Standing firm, Zachary Taylor was prepared to hold the Union together by armed force rather than by compromise. "Old Rough and Ready's" homespun ways were political assets. His long military record would appeal to northerners; his ownership of 100 slaves would lure southern votes. He had not committed himself on troublesome issues. The Whigs nominated him to run against the Democratic candidate, Lewis Cass, who favored letting the residents of territories decide for themselves whether they wanted slavery.
In protest against Taylor the slaveholder and Cass the advocate of "squatter sovereignty," northerners who opposed extension of slavery into territories formed a Free Soil Party and nominated Martin Van Buren. In a close election, the Free Soilers pulled enough votes away from Cass to elect Taylor.
Traditionally, people could decide whether they wanted slavery when they drew up new state constitutions. Therefore, to end the dispute over slavery in new areas, Taylor urged settlers in New Mexico and California to draft constitutions and apply for statehood, bypassing the territorial stage.
Southerners were furious, since neither state constitution was likely to permit slavery; Members of Congress were dismayed, since they felt the President was usurping their policy-making prerogatives. In addition, Taylor's solution ignored several acute side issues: the northern dislike of the slave market operating in the District of Columbia; and the southern demands for a more stringent fugitive slave law.
In February 1850 President Taylor had held a stormy conference with southern leaders who threatened secession. He told them that if necessary to enforce the laws, he personally would lead the Army. Persons "taken in rebellion against the Union, he would hang ... with less reluctance than he had hanged deserters and spies in Mexico." He never wavered.
Then events took an unexpected turn. After participating in ceremonies at the Washington Monument on a blistering July 4, Taylor fell ill; within five days he was dead. After his death, the forces of compromise triumphed, but the war Taylor had been willing to face came 11 years later. In it, his only son Richard served as a general in the Confederate Army.


Fillmore
Fillmore presided over the Senate during the months of nerve-wracking debates over the Compromise of 1850. He made no public comment on the merits of the compromise proposals, but a few days before President Taylor's death, he intimated to him that if there should be a tie vote on Henry Clay's bill, he would vote in favor of it.
Thus the sudden accession of Fillmore to the Presidency in July 1850 brought an abrupt political shift in the administration. Taylor's Cabinet resigned and President Fillmore at once appointed Daniel Webster to be Secretary of State, thus proclaiming his alliance with the moderate Whigs who favored the Compromise.
A bill to admit California still aroused all the violent arguments for and against the extension of slavery, without any progress toward settling the major issues.
Clay, exhausted, left Washington to recuperate, throwing leadership upon Senator Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois. At this critical juncture, President Fillmore announced in favor of the Compromise. On August 6, 1850, he sent a message to Congress recommending that Texas be paid to abandon her claims to part of New Mexico.
This helped influence a critical number of northern Whigs in Congress away from their insistence upon the Wilmot Proviso--the stipulation that all land gained by the Mexican War must be closed to slavery.
Douglas's effective strategy in Congress combined with Fillmore's pressure from the White House to give impetus to the Compromise movement. Breaking up Clay's single legislative package, Douglas presented five separate bills to the Senate:
Admit California as a free state.
Settle the Texas boundary and compensate her.
Grant territorial status to New Mexico.
Place Federal officers at the disposal of slaveholders seeking fugitives.
Abolish the slave trade in the District of Columbia.
Each measure obtained a majority, and by September 20, President Fillmore had signed them into law. Webster wrote, "I can now sleep of nights."
Some of the more militant northern Whigs remained irreconcilable, refusing to forgive Fillmore for having signed the Fugitive Slave Act. They helped deprive him of the Presidential nomination in 1852.
Within a few years it was apparent that although the Compromise had been intended to settle the slavery controversy, it served rather as an uneasy sectional truce.
As the Whig Party disintegrated in the 1850's, Fillmore refused to join the Republican Party; but, instead, in 1856 accepted the nomination for President of the Know Nothing, or American, Party. Throughout the Civil War he opposed President Lincoln and during Reconstruction supported President Johnson.

Pierce
Franklin Pierce became President at a time of apparent tranquility. The United States, by virtue of the Compromise of 1850, seemed to have weathered its sectional storm. By pursuing the recommendations of southern advisers, Pierce--a New Englander--hoped to prevent still another outbreak of that storm. But his policies, far from preserving calm, hastened the disruption of the Union. Pierce, after serving in the Mexican War, was proposed by New Hampshire friends for the Presidential nomination in 1852. At the Democratic Convention, the delegates agreed easily enough upon a platform pledging undeviating support of the Compromise of 1850 and hostility to any efforts to agitate the slavery question. But they balloted 48 times and eliminated all the well-known candidates before nominating Pierce, a true "dark horse." Probably because the Democrats stood more firmly for the Compromise than the Whigs, and because Whig candidate Gen. Winfield Scott was suspect in the South, Pierce won with a narrow margin of popular votes. Pierce had only to make gestures toward expansion to excite the wrath of northerners, who accused him of acting as a cat's-paw of Southerners eager to extend slavery into other areas. Therefore he aroused apprehension when he pressured Great Britain to relinquish its special interests along part of the Central American coast, and even more when he tried to persuade Spain to sell Cuba.
But the most violent renewal of the storm stemmed from the Kansas-Nebraska Act, which repealed the Missouri Compromise and reopened the question of slavery in the West. This measure, the handiwork of Senator Stephen A. Douglas, grew in part out of his desire to promote a railroad from Chicago to California through Nebraska. Already Secretary of War Jefferson Davis, advocate of a southern transcontinental route, had persuaded Pierce to send James Gadsden to Mexico to buy land for a southern railroad. He purchased the area now comprising southern Arizona and part of southern New Mexico for $10,000,000.
Douglas's proposal, to organize western territories through which a railroad might run, caused extreme trouble. Douglas provided in his bills that the residents of the new territories could decide the slavery question for themselves. The result was a rush into Kansas, as southerners and northerners vied for control of the territory. Shooting broke out, and "bleeding Kansas" became a prelude to the Civil War.
By the end of his administration, Pierce could claim "a peaceful condition of things in Kansas." But, to his disappointment, the Democrats refused to renominate him, turning to the less controversial Buchanan. Pierce returned to New Hampshire, leaving his successor to face the rising fury of the sectional whirlwind.

Buchanan
Presiding over a rapidly dividing Nation, Buchanan grasped inadequately the political realities of the time. Relying on constitutional doctrines to close the widening rift over slavery, he failed to understand that the North would not accept constitutional arguments which favored the South. Nor could he realize how sectionalism had realigned political parties: the Democrats split; the Whigs were destroyed, giving rise to the Republicans. As President-elect, Buchanan thought the crisis would disappear if he maintained a sectional balance in his appointments and could persuade the people to accept constitutional law as the Supreme Court interpreted it. The Court was considering the legality of restricting slavery in the territories, and two justices hinted to Buchanan what the decision would be.
Thus, in his Inaugural the President referred to the territorial question as "happily, a matter of but little practical importance" since the Supreme Court was about to settle it "speedily and finally."
Two days later Chief Justice Roger B. Taney delivered the Dred Scott decision, asserting that Congress had no constitutional power to deprive persons of their property rights in slaves in the territories. Southerners were delighted, but the decision created a furor in the North.
Buchanan decided to end the troubles in Kansas by urging the admission of the territory as a slave state. Although he directed his Presidential authority to this goal, he further angered the Republicans and alienated members of his own party. Kansas remained a territory.
When Republicans won a plurality in the House in 1858, every significant bill they passed fell before southern votes in the Senate or a Presidential veto. The Federal Government reached a stalemate.
Sectional strife rose to such a pitch in 1860 that the Democratic Party split into northern and southern wings, each nominating its own candidate for the Presidency. Consequently, when the Republicans nominated Abraham Lincoln, it was a foregone conclusion that he would be elected even though his name appeared on no southern ballot. Rather than accept a Republican administration, the southern "fire-eaters" advocated secession.
President Buchanan, dismayed and hesitant, denied the legal right of states to secede but held that the Federal Government legally could not prevent them. He hoped for compromise, but secessionist leaders did not want compromise.
Then Buchanan took a more militant tack. As several Cabinet members resigned, he appointed northerners, and sent the Star of the West to carry reinforcements to Fort Sumter. On January 9, 1861, the vessel was far away.
Buchanan reverted to a policy of inactivity that continued until he left office. In March 1861 he retired to his Pennsylvania home Wheatland--where he died seven years later--leaving his successor to resolve the frightful issue facing the Nation.

[Johnny Shear]

There are no "hillbillys" involved in this dispute, and your name-calling exemplifies the Yankee persona.

In this context, I define "Hillbilly", "Redneck" or even "Backward-Ass Country F##k" as anyone who has racist beliefs. From Archie Bunker types (Brooklyn New York) to old-time Mississippi Judges and courts who didn't convict a white man of a crime against a black man until 1971(?) (I use the question mark because the year may be a bit off...I wish I could remember the EXACT facts but I can't. But I am close).

Ps...I'm from Indiana and have an accent that makes people from "The North" ask me what "Southern State" I'm from...I proudly call it my "Indiana-Hillbilly Accent". And I count many GOOD "Hillbillys", "Rednecks" and "Backward-Ass Country F##ks" as some of my best and dearest friends...They are some of the best people I have ever known. Don't like my definitions? I really don't care. (No offense to you personally).

[CyberCowboy777]

Thank you for the grammar check, it has added so much to the discussion.

[billbears]

I can think of ONLY one reason why ANYONE would oppose that statue...Because they agree with the people who wanted President Lincoln dead.

Or else we've bothered reading the Constitution and realize certain powers are not transferrable between government branches. lincoln saw slavery as an issue for one reason and one reason only. To undermine the Southern states from seceding and taking precious monies from his Treasury coffers. He could have cared one whit about the slaves as evidenced many times out of his own mouth

"I cannot make it better known than it already is, that I strongly favor colonization ... in congenial climes, and with people of their own blood and race."--lincoln, Dec 1, 1862 speech to Congress

I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races ... nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes..."--lincoln, Sept 1858, Douglass debates

We want [the new territories] for the homes of free white people. Slave states are the places for poor white people to move from. New free states are the places for poor people to go and better their condition."--lincoln, Oct. 16, 1854

[Johnny Shear]

Nevertheless, I wish you well - have a great weekend, and we'll fight another day. Peace, love, & beer!

And the same to you! "Good Fights" are good things!! But I'll make it "Peace, love, and Jim Beam", if you don't mind.

[Senator Pardek]

Archie Bunker types (Brooklyn New York)

Queens.

[Senator Pardek]

...deliberately provocative.

Who - me?

[Johnny Shear]

Whoops! Sorry about that! I plead Indiana Ignorance!

But the SAD fact is, I'm a Yankee Fan!!

[putupon]

In truth, no kidding, I've lived here all my life. There will be a little noise, maybe some of the re-enactors will come in uniform. Then everyone will be called a racist and go home. Nothing will happen except mabe the winos who live under the bridge a few blocks away may come over at night and leave the sort of stuff winos leave. You have seen more fireworks on this thread than you will during the real event.

You want to know what really sets folks off about this crap down here? Not Lincoln, Lee, Jeff Davis, Grant, The War. They are just tools used to constantly harp that we are outright racist and Klan members and on and on. This Lincoln Statue thing is just another obvious "You Dumb A.. Crackers are Nothing But A Bunch of White Trash Racists." And we will let you hang the sign. But we know what the truth is, and that is what rankles us.

A couple of months ago a white racist preacher came to the Chesterfield County, just south of Richmond (I'll bet he didn't have the cajones to try this in the city). Everybody had a fit. He was going to sue the county if they didn't let him use one of the libraries for a meeting. You know what? In this hotbed of racism, I'll bet not 6 or 7 people showed up. The outside was filled with busloads of anti-racist people protesting though. Go figure.

The racist Commonwealth of Virginia is the only State in the Union to ever elect a black govenor, but Virginia is racist. When mandatory busing was ordered in the early '70s, Richmond sucked it up and did it, with no more than maybe a little verbal complaining. At the same time, enlightened, liberal, Kennedy loving non-racist Yankees rioted and tore Boston to pieces, but we are the racists.

It just grates on peoples nerves when you go seven ways from Sunday trying to prove that you don't go off and burn crosses in the woods, and a bunch of hypocritical yankees who are constantly preaching otherwise come and want to stick another racist tag on you.

[Johnny Shear]

Check-out this thread (On the same subject) if you're interested... http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/812499/posts

Whiskey Papa defends President Lincoln along these same lines MUCH better than I ever could. He seems to speak from knowledge and documeted facts. I simply speak from opinion (Hopefully mostly informed).