Just out of curiosity what would you have had Lincoln say? Had you bothered to include the complete quote, you would see that he was addressing Black sufferage in Louisiana. A state where the year before there had been no Black sufferage of any kind, where 95% of the black population had been slaves the year before. Lincoln first suggested black voting rights in a letter to the governor of Louisiana in March 1864. Who else was suggesting that? Were the good people of Louisiana or any other southern state talking about sufferage for both races? You claim that President Lincoln was separating himself from those who wanted full rights for blacks. Well, who were they? How were they hindered by President Lincoln's actions? Where are those who were pushing for more than the President was willing to give?
Sufferage is also a state issue. President Lincoln could not by executive order give blacks the vote throughout the country. Given what he had to work with why is his position surprising? We know what the attitude was towards free blacks in the south before the war, and we saw what happened after the war. Sufferage for some was a first step, a step that nobody but President Lincoln was willing to fight for. But that obviously escaped you.
The truth of his postition, which I believe he stated. As usual, Lincoln's own words prove Waltrot to be a liar in regards to Lincoln. Lincoln did NOT support full rights for blacks as Walt FALSELY claimed.
Had you bothered to include the complete quote, you would see that he was addressing Black sufferage in Louisiana.
In that speech he makes clear that he does not support the idea of full rights for blacks, separates himself from those that do, and outlines his exclusionary and prejudiced concepts for black suffrage.
Lincoln first suggested black voting rights in a letter to the governor of Louisiana in March 1864.
Yes, thank you for reminding about another historical source that clearly proves Waltrot's LIE for what it is. In that letter Lincoln clearly states that he was NOT for "full rights for blacks" as Waltrot falsely claims. He says in that letter:
"I barely suggest for your private consideration, whether some of the colored people may not be let in---as, for instance, the very intelligent, and especially those who have fought gallantly in our ranks."
Notice the very exclusionary aspects of Abe's idea of black suffrage, which clearly proves again that wlat LIED. Lincoln did NOT endorse full rights for blacks.
You claim that President Lincoln was separating himself from those who wanted full rights for blacks. Well, who were they?
You don't know much about history. The ones in Congress were called 'radical republicans'. They were Lincoln's political opponents within his own party, and it was they, not Lincoln, who actually freed the slaves. It was they, not Lincoln, who guaranteed full rights for blacks. It was they who saw to it that Lincoln's exclusionary and prejudiced ideas about black suffrage were outlawed. Once again, Wlat LIED, Lincoln did NOT support full rights for blacks.
How were they hindered by President Lincoln's actions?
He, as president, had this little thing called a veto. Also, he had a wee bit of influence due to the fact that he was President.
Where are those who were pushing for more than the President was willing to give?
In Congress, and outside it. If you had bothered to read his last speech, which you claim knowledge of, he repeatedly references those people in it, since he makes mention of their criticism of him in regards to the matter. In the quote I originally provided, they are the "some" that Lincoln separates himself from. Here it is again:
"It is also unsatisfactory to some that the elective franchise is not given to the colored man. I would myself prefer that it were now conferred on the very intelligent, and on those who serve our cause as soldiers."
He is addressing their criticism of him, and putting forth his own views on the matter. Once again, Wlat lied, Lincoln did NOT support full rights for blacks. That was the point of my post, and it is correct.
Sufferage is also a state issue. President Lincoln could not by executive order give blacks the vote throughout the country.
That's not the issue, the issue was whether or not he supported full rights for blacks, which he very obviously did not. Waltrot lied, and I was correct to point out and disprove his perversion of the historical record.
Given what he had to work with why is his position surprising?
Who said it was surprising? I was only pointing out that Waltrot had once again LIED and distorted the historical record. Anyone who has read my posts regarding Lincoln will see that I have innumerable times pointed out the importance of historical perspective when viewing his prejudiced race views. It was the 1800s.
Sufferage for some was a first step, a step that nobody but President Lincoln was willing to fight for.
That, like Waltrot's, is a lie. Lincoln's political opponents within his own party had tried before to give blacks freedom and rights, and Lincoln stood in their way. As evidenced by his own words, he separated himself from 'those', and preferred instead to promote his exclusionary and prejudiced ideas of suffrage. "Those" opponents of his made sure his exclusionary ideas were outlawed. Once again, Waltrot lied, Lincoln did NOT support full rights for blacks. That is history.
But that obviously escaped you.
What has escaped you is a basic knowledge of history, and the truth with it.