Posted on 02/09/2007 7:22:48 PM PST by ChildOfThe60s
Honest Abe to go on trial - for racism
Daily Sun reports
Thursday, February 08, 2007
AURORA | The Community College of Aurora's professors will stage a mock trail that puts Abraham Lincoln on trial for racism at 2 p.m. Saturday, Feb. 10, at the college's Fine Arts building at 16000 E. CentreTech Parkway.
The trial is free and open to the public. Based on his speeches and written documents, teams for the prosecution and the defense assembled from the Community College of Aurora's criminal justice program and will try Lincoln to determine whether he was a racist and how his beliefs and attitudes influenced the course of the Civil War, Reconstruction and post-war society.
Call 303-739-6600 or visit www.auroralibrary.org.
KingArthur305, your Republican masters must be proud, but you'll have to a better job defending them.
One thing is for sure my friend. If Lincoln didn't commit those crimes you stated then their is no USA. Who knows what it would have been like with two countries in the current USA living side by side or living with constant strife. Lincoln may have freed the slaves for economic or political reasons but the results is what matters. Doesn't matter if he had the conviential idea of blacks but he looked to the future and looked for the out for the country as a whole while the south was look for it own "States Rights".
I don't deny Lincoln commited crimes.
Lincoln's Crimes is less than or equal to his accomplishments and results thereof.
His crimes were honorable compared to the crimes of Southern society.
The derivative of the civil war is the sum of the redneck ignorance and Negro blood and sweat divided by the years spent in Dixie times the people in the south at the time with an I.Q of over 100.
You certainly seem to have an appreciation for us "rednecks". What's eating you?
Then what are you squawkin about on this thread?
The crimes were unavoidable. If no crime was commited by Lincoln at that critial period in time their is no USA.
Obviously the crimes are understood as necessary. That's all.
One thing I do agree with you on is that the school system is telling fantastic liberation stories about Lincoln and I think that's wrong. I just respect this decisions because his life and the country life was on the line and he went for it.
Since my heritage is not in the South I don't have an emotional connections to their defeat or the wrongs commited against them by Lincoln and the North but I like the result of that period with is a slave free country (regardless of originator) compared to one that was based on slavery and agriculture.
Wrong. It freed a lot of slaves. The Union army was not exactly standing still. In essence that one document eventually freed ALL of the slaves in the South.
These were the only slaves he could free by fiat. All of the rest required legislation by Congress. These were eventually granted by the Constitutional amendments - for which he worked very assiduously. See "Team of Rivals" by Goodwin, page 686 "Nothing on the home front in January engaged Lincoln with greater urgency than the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment, abolishing slavery. He had long feared that his Emancipation Proclamation would be discarded once the war came to an end. "A question might be raised whether the proclamation was legally valid, he said. "It might be added that it only aided those who came into our lines... or that it would have no effect upon the children of the slaves born hereafter." Passage of a constitutional amendment eradicating slavery once and for all would be "a King's cure for all the evils."
So when did racism become a criminal act?
On the other hand you have Roger Taney, supported by Robert Lee and Jeff Davis and Thomas Jackson and all the other Southern leaders who didn't believe blacks could be citizens at all, second class or otherwise. Which is worse?
Can you point to a quote from any Southern leader of the time which indicated they believed the black man had any rights at all that a white man was bound to respect?
As is the racism of Robert Lee and Thomas Jackson and Jeff Davis. The dirty little Southron secret y'all keep hidden. Like the crazy aunt in the attic.
Why golly, you make it sound like President Johnson, a democrat, was the driving force behind implementing the 13th amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Is that really the true facts, or did somebody else do all the work?
Lincoln was murdered on Good Friday, April 14, 1865 (Yes, by a Democrat!).
The Thirteenth amendment was passed by Congress on January 31, 1865 - and President Lincoln and his administration was the primary driving force behind its passing.
21 of the needed 27 states had voted in favor of its ratification before President Lincoln was assassinated (Arkansas ratified it on April 14th).
The final six states (Conecticut May 4; New Hampshire June 1; South Carolina Nov 13; Alabama Dec 2; North Carolina Dec 4; and Georgia Dec 6) necessary passed the bill by December 6, 1865. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Ratification
So you are technically correct that the thirteenth amendment was not ratified until President Johnson's administration.
However, all of the work and the heavy lifting was done by REPUBLICAN President Lincoln; his REPUBLICAN cabinet; and the REPUBLICAN dominated HOUSE AND SENATE.
1. Illegal appropriation of funds to build weapons (no Congressional consent)
Lincoln's authorization of the disbursement of some funds came out of the government money available. Your claim is debatable at best.
2. Illegal blocking of Southern ports (considered an act of war, no Congressional consent obtained) Considered an act of war by whom? Lincoln was commander of the army and the navy. He announced a blockade as a means of combatting the Southern rebellion. What required him to get Congressional approval ahead of time? Your claim is false.
3. Suspension of habeas corpus (again, without Congressional consent)
The Constitution says habeas corpus may be suspended when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it. It does not say who can suspend it. Lincoln's actions have never been ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court so your claim is false. 4. Demanding state governors conscript 75,000 soldiers (no Congressional consent)
Lincoln called for 75,000 volunteers, well within the powers granted him by the Militia Act. Nothing was said about conscription. This is a complete lie on your part, stainless, and quite out of character for you.
5. Usurpation of power.
Say what?
6. Deportation/Colonization plan for slaves in Liberia/Panama/Haiti.
Nothing illegal in that since such colonization was to be voluntary. And in keeping with plans supported by the likes of Roger Taney, Robert Lee, and John Breckenridge. Your criticizm of Lincoln should extend to them as well, shouldn't it?
7. Shutting down of newspapers and other outlets.
Outlets? You mean Lincoln shut down the malls???? Claims that Lincoln suppressed the press are badly overstated by the Southeron contingent.
8. Refusal to trade Union POWs with Confederate POWs
Because the confederates refused to consider black Union soldiers as POWs. You keep forgetting to mention that part.
Lincoln's results...
The results were from a war that the south started, stainless. You also keep forgetting to mention that part.
You seem to be ignoring the factory owners in the north who made millions producing textiles. They had 'slaves' too, some were eight and ten year old children who lived in conditions that were worse than those in the south. Many of them ended up with brown lung disease, if they didn't die or lose a limb in the factory.
There were good and bad in the north and in the south. There were both black and white slaves and believe it or not -- there were black slave owners. Lots of them.
Souuthn Praade!!
It's interesting to see you read what isn't there into what I wrote. But then the Lincoln cult does tend to react first and think later.
Why don't you provide a bit more of the quote:
quote page 470/471 of Goodwin's "Team of Rivals"
"The most sensational criticism, however, came from Horace Greeley. He published an open letter to the president in the New York Tribune on August 20, which he entitled "The Prayer of Twenty Millions." Claiming to speak for his vast readership, he decried the policy Lincoln seemed "to be pursuing with regard to the slaves," which, "unduly influenced by counsels ... of certain fossil politicians hailing from the Border Slave States," failed to recognize that "all attempts to put down the Rebellion and at the same time uphold its inciting cause [slavery] are preposterous and futile." Lincoln decided to reply to Greely's letter, seizing the opportunity to begin instructing the public on the vital link between emancipation and military necessity. "As to the policy I 'seem to be pursuing' as you say, I have not meant to leave anyone in doubt," he began. "My paramount objective in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause."
The Republican party was founded by antislavery men around 1854 to 1856. It was a new party forming at a time when the dominant parties were Whigs and Democrats. The abolition of slavery is the issue that gave birth the Republican party.
By May of 1860, the party was strong enough to elect its first president. That president was Abraham Lincoln. He after a contentious debate, Lincoln made a stunning come from behind win (he was fifth or worse in votes at the beginning) and was in the end nominated unanimously.
Now why do you think the Southerners threatened to secede if Lincoln was elected?
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.