Lincoln And The Death Of The Constitution

Wolves of Liberty ^ | 9/7/2010 | gjmerits

[gjmerits]

The Gettysburg speech was at once the shortest and the most famous oration in American history...the highest emotion reduced to a few poetical phrases. Lincoln himself never even remotely approached it. It is genuinely stupendous. But let us not forget that it is poetry, not logic; beauty, not sense. Think of the argument in it. Put it into the cold words of everyday. The doctrine is simply this: that the Union soldiers who died at Gettysburg sacrificed their lives to the cause of self-determination - that government of the people, by the people, for the people, should not perish from the earth. It is difficult to imagine anything more untrue. The Union soldiers in the battle actually fought against self-determination; it was the Confederates who fought for the right of their people to govern themselves.

[central_va]

Pure revisionism

Lincoln was a racist and didn't run his 1860 campaign as an abolitionist.

However if you were to ask the average sheeple, Lincoln was an abolitionist who wanted to free blacks and loved the black race.

That is revisionism at its finest.

[Non-Sequitur]

That is revisionism at its finest.

Only because you haven't gotten really warmed up yet, though you've come close.

[central_va]

my Dad always argued with his sister, my aunt, that Lincoln was the worst president ever

Me and your old man would have got along...

[central_va]

Only because you haven't gotten really warmed up yet, though you've come close.

I feel the spirit ofMajor Randolph coming on.....

[Non-Sequitur]

Lincoln was a tyrant, and the forerunner of men like Hussein.

Yep. This crap's getting deeper by the moment. You've got competition in the Southron BS department, C_VA.

[IrishCatholic]

I think you are trying to form a coherent thought, I’m not quite sure though.

Perhaps you should go lie down until the pain goes away.

[Non-Sequitur]

I feel the spirit ofMajor Randolph coming on.....

I had the same feeling this morning. But I took care of it and then I flushed.

[fortheDeclaration]

The Confederates were fighting for the right to leave the Union because their section of the nation lost an election.

It was the Confederates who were in violation of the Constitution.

[fortheDeclaration]

Yes, after plundering Federal armories.

[Non-Sequitur]

...and a rooted culture.

Mainly imaginary.

[DrC]

“Lincoln was a racist and didn’t run his 1860 campaign as an abolitionist.”

Lincoln is on record as saying that if he could save the Union by freeing all slaves, he would do so; if he could save it by freeing no slaves, he would do that. He also favored sending freed slaves back to Liberia rather than integrating them into the fabric of American society. It’s very clear he viewed blacks as intellectually and morally inferior to whites.

[Idabilly]

It was the Confederates who were in violation of the Constitution.

Sorry, them New England liberals had been violating the Constitution for many years..

Looky here, Mr. Federalist - Daniel Webster of Massachusetts

If the South were to violate any part of the Constitution intentionally and systematically, and persist in so doing, year after year, and no remedy could be had, would the North be any longer bound by the rest of it? And if the North were deliberately, habitually, and of fixed purpose to disregard one part of it, would the South be bound any longer to observe its other obligations? I have not hesitated to say, and I repeat, that if the Northern States refuse, willfully and deliberately, to carry into effect that part of the Constitution which respects the restoration of fugitive slaves, and Congress provide no remedy, the South would no longer be bound to observe the compact. A bargain cannot be broken on one side and still bind the other side.

[Neoliberalnot]

The path was set by Hamilton before the ink even dried on the Constitution. Men of evil intent desire wealth and power over their fellows. Period. The problem has always been how to check them. The Constitution clearly did not.

[Triple]

If the civil war was only about slavery - then how do you explain that slavery was legally carried out in the “union” after the civil war, and that the emancipation proclamation freed only some slaves?

(No slaves in the union were freed and those slaves in certain parishes in LA were excluded from the proclamation.)

[Non-Sequitur]

He also favored sending freed slaves back to Liberia rather than integrating them into the fabric of American society. It’s very clear he viewed blacks as intellectually and morally inferior to whites.

And that differs him from any Southerner you care to name how?

[Non-Sequitur]

If the civil war was only about slavery - then how do you explain that slavery was legally carried out in the “union” after the civil war, and that the emancipation proclamation freed only some slaves?

Because the rebellion was about slavery...from the Southern point of view.

[Triple]

but not on the union side?

Really, that is your best response?

[Psalm 144]

It has withstood the corrosives of apostate Puritans for over two centuries.

Deo vindice, jayhawker.

[RJR_fan]

Tyndale wrote, "This Bible is for the government of the people, by the people, and for the people." Given access to divine Writ, people could govern themselves, could run their own lives wisely. Lincoln abused this sound bite, using it as a way to deify the omnivorous and insatiable "Federal" government, the entity Hegel called "God walking through history."

[Non-Sequitur]

but not on the union side?

From the Union side? No. The North fought to preserve the Union, nothing more and nothing less. An end to slavery was a fortunate offshoot of the victory but never the reason for fighting.