Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Clintonfatigued
If I'm not mistaken, Lincoln did not plan for centralization of power to be permanent.

Lincoln assumed somewhat despotic powers. The congress was happy to have him do it. Which congressman of the day would anyone choose to trade Lincoln for? What other national figure could one look to for guidance? Taney? What an inspiration that guy must have been.

My guess is Lincoln was first and foremost in his view that despotism is no way to run a railroad. The problem is in a real crisis, consensus has zero hope of getting anything done. I think he would be aghast at the centralization of powers today.

These days we could take a lesson from Lincoln on how to treat the judiciary.

14 posted on 02/05/2005 7:04:31 PM PST by stevem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: stevem

"These days we could take a lesson from Lincoln on how to treat the judiciary."

Well, I can agree with that statement. I understand that when Lincoln suspended habeus corpus that Chief Justice Taney ruled him unconstitutional. It is said that Lincoln considered having Taney arrested, but didn't follow through. He simply ignored Taney. I believe Lincoln said that, "more rogues than honest men find shelter behind habeus corpus."

It is ironic that to "save the union", Lincoln had to deliberately violate the Constitution. I think that Lincoln was a consumate pragmatic politician that did whatever was expedient at the time. Is this greatness? Personally, I don't know. Does it make him bad? I don't know about that either.


19 posted on 02/05/2005 7:24:59 PM PST by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson