Skip to comments.Sam Waterston Reads Lincoln's "Emancipation Proclamation" - Video 2/12/09
Posted on 02/12/2009 8:59:00 AM PST by Federalist Patriot
Here is video of actor Sam Waterston reading President Abraham Lincoln's "Emancipation Proclamation" which was signed on January 1, 1863, officially freeing the slaves, though the Civil War would rage on for over two more years.
Waterston's reading is part of the celebration of Lincoln's birthday today, which is also the 200th anniversary of Lincoln's birth in Kentucky on February 12, 1809. . . . . . (Watch Video)
(Excerpt) Read more at freedomslighthouse.com ...
Excuse me for not being PC, but Lincoln freed SOME OF the slaves, not all. The Procalamation makes that clear.
Actually, the war and Lincoln’s subsequent Constitutional amendments freed the rest, so he did free all of them.
I can’t stand Sam Waterson even though I love Law and Order. I think it is the character that I don’t like actually. It is great though to see him giving Abe Lincoln his due respect for the incredible job he did during his presidency.
When was the 13th ratified? And what is the President’s role in an amendment?
Happy 200th birthday to a great American, a great President and the first Republican.
Lincoln had been calling for such an amendment for a while, but while it passed the senate, it couldn't pass in the house. In 1864, Lincoln pushed to have a call for the amendment added to the Republican platform. When he won the election and the Republicans gained seats in the house, it was able to pass. Lincoln signed the amendment, even though it was unnecessary and had never been done before to show his backing. Twenty-one states passed the amendment before Lincoln was assassinated.
“...officially freeing the slaves...”
In the southern states.....the states which had seceded....over which lincoln had debatable authority...and did not affect the northern states.
yep, with generations believing him the greatest prez ever, no wonder we are in the dire straits we find ourselves.
Hamiltonian federalism turns into the henry clay American plan. The AP turns into the “restoration,” the restoration turns into the new deal, and the new deal becomes the new new deal on friday the 13th, 2009. Every step of the way, people who believe lincoln to be the greatest pre, have voted or had their representation vote more government control over daily life.
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm social democracy......
WE ARE SO BONED!
Correct, signing the amendment was not needed and unconstitutional.
I’ll cede that Lincoln’s actions eventually freed the slaves ( a very good and necessary thing), but he did not do it through the Emancipation Proclamation.
Who will emancipate the slaves’ descendants from victim mentality and liberal brainwash?
The best version I remember ever hearing of Linclon’s Gettysburg Address was donw by the late Senator Everett Dirksen. He was ONE hell of a guy and other than Linclon himself the only other person from Illinois that I would have wanted for president. I wish I could find a audio file of his presentation.
Not unconstitutional, just aconstitutional. It was the strongest way he could show his endorsement. Several amendments have been signed by presidents since.
December 1865. Seeing as though the amendment was made possible by the war and was foreseen by everyone (including Lincoln), it is quite reasonable to give him the credit.
It’s totally appropriate. Liberals love the lip-service to the Constitution that Lincoln was good at, ignoring the principles of the Founders in truth, and he was concerned with their favorite issue - blacks. They love pushing the race card, and Lincoln is a favorite, as far as being the antithetical white guy who did everything for blacks, the most oppressed people ever.
The thing is in truth, we are more heirs probably the Democrats of that time than the Republicans, and vice-versa. Although I’d definitely say we have now plenty of Federalist roots.
In any case, it seems to me the Republican/Democrat thing flipped perhaps c.1920 or so. Even Teddy Rooselvelt in truth did alot of things anti-libertarian, and more government-interventionist than there should be.
"RUSH: Now, folks, I don't know how in the world Abraham Lincoln could be called a "bipartisan" by anybody. Abraham Lincoln was one of the most partisan presidents we've ever had, and you know what his bias was? His bias was the Constitution. He was biased toward the Constitution of the United States."
"We, the people, are the rightful masters of both congress and the courts - not to overthrow the constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the constitution". ~~~ Abraham Lincoln
I think too many people misunderstand the Founders, what they went through (and I mean the people as a whole), and thus how the document came about. That includes people mistaking Lincoln as a great champion of the Constitution. Just because you say it, doesn’t make it so. Just like today’s liberals paying lip service when it serves them.
There is nothing of the Confederacy about “overthrowing the Constitution”. They only wanted to secede, and part ways with it. There is nothing inherently wrong with that in nature, nor against the Constitution. Else there would’ve been something wrong with New Englanders even threatening to secede in 1812. No-one questioned that right back then; only when the “evil” south wanted to, and now beyond.
As for Lincoln being partisan - yes, in many ways. And more power to him. At least he wasn’t a namby-pamby shifty-eyed charlatan trying to hide the truth.
Agreed. And you're one of those people. Some kinda wacko still fighting the Civil War. Actually, you're no better than the liberals you bitch about. Carry on.
OTOH. Lincoln, Rush and myself, we know what the Constitution is all about and not because I say so either.
A big lib, true, but he did donate to Fred Thompson’s campaign last year. And I’ve never heard him publicly say anything stupid, so he gets a pass from me.
For a liberal DA, “Jack McCoy” ain’t bad. His donation to friend “Arthur Branch” is understandable.
Back in the real world....
Good comeback. Real insulting.
As for me, George Washington is my hero and the greatest of all.
In fact, the revolutionary/federal era is my preferred department. People who suffered much worse and against much greater odds, truly “brother vs. brother”, than Confederates deserve attention, and I like to give it to them. That is my perspective. Including the very fact that they themselves were doing the same thing as Confeds and recognized it as a natural right to do so. Even Jefferson mentions this a gazillion times. Secession is not evil and is not “against the law”.
Thanks, it was meant to be. As was yours, whiner.
How insulting? Point it out.
Words have meaning. Yours are weak and pathetic.
Never been into “lip service”, “liberal” or otherwise.
I did not insult you. Period. YOU DID insult me, and continue to do so.
If you don’t like my views about Lincoln and the Constitution, perhaps you should take it up with Walter Williams, for one.
I’m taking it up with you, bucko.
Besides being thin skinned, you’re a liar to boot.
I have no clue what you’re talking about. Insulting, thin-skinned (did I go off half-cocked like you?), liar (about what?)?
You can’t even answer my simple question.
Pretty apparent who’s the belligerent dodger. And apparent I didn’t do much because you can’t answer the question.
Funny how you get your bristles up so easily when we probably share much more than we disagree.
As long as you run around this forum denouncing Lincoln, refighting the Civil War and infer that conservatives like Rush and myself are no better than liberals paying lip service to the Constitution, you won't find many folks agreeing with you.
Hope that clears up your obvious confusion.
You still haven’t told me what “barbs” I shot at you. Lie about what? You are libeling me, incidentally. You seem way oversensitive, whatever it is.
I didn’t infer that “conservatives” are no better than liberals. I said LIBERALS like Lincoln because he did something for their favorite group, and he opened up alot of cans of worms for big government. And liberals, like Lincoln in many cases, pay lip service to the Constitution.
I just don’t think many people, including many conservatives, really understand the Founders and the founding era and how that went into the Constitution. Nor how it conflates with the “Civil War” situation. I can’t help thinking many conservatives stick with Lincoln because he was “the 1st Republican” and they like what he did. But many of us DON’T, to either part.
It’s not a huge deal to me as it is to you. I don’t “re-fight” the Civil War because too many people already do that and I don’t think it’s fair to the other soldiers in other wars (besides WWII). I’m still much more concerned with the lack of knowledge (much less interpretation) of the whole founding era - the Revolution, etc. I’m very big on the Revolution and the miracle it was - and how it was also a civil war, much more than the “US Civil War”.
Too bad you can’t just have a civil discussion, apparently, without whipping out a bad attitude; all I did was state my view in straight terms, even if not in the best English. I’m more than willing to discuss; I just have an opinion that happens to offend many people.
>>>>>You are libeling me, incidentally.
LOL Thanks for a good laugh.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.