Posted on 05/01/2002 4:39:27 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
He's all the rage, don't you know.
"But there were limits to what Lincoln would do to secure a second term. He did not even consider canceling or postponing the election. Even had that been constitutionally possible, "the election was a necessity." "We can not have free government without elections," he explained; "and if the rebellion could force us to forego, or postpone a national election, it might fairly claim to have already conquered and ruined us." He did not postpone the September draft call, even though Republican politicians from all across the North entreated him to do so.
Because Indiana failed to permit its soldiers to vote in the field, he was entirely willing to furlough Sherman's regiments so that they could go home and vote in the October state elections —but he made a point of telling Sherman, "They need not remain for the Presidential election, but may return to you at once." Though it was clear that the election was going to be a very close one, Lincoln did not try to increase the Republican electoral vote by rushing the admission of new states like Colorado and Nebraska, both of which would surely have voted for his reelection. On October 31, in accordance with an act of Congress, he did proclaim Nevada a state, but he showed little interest in the legislation admitting the new state. Despite the suspicion of both Democrats and Radicals, he made no effort to force the readmission of Louisiana, Tennessee, and other Southern states, partially reconstructed but still under military control, so that they could cast their electoral votes for him. He reminded a delegation from Tennessee that it was the Congress, not the Chief Executive, that had the power to decide whether a state's electoral votes were to be counted and announced firmly, “Except it be to give protection against violence, I decline to interfere in any way with the presidential election.”
"Lincoln" pp 539-40 by David Donald
Lincoln had a lot of faith in the people.
Walt
The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court said the same thing.
"The revolution, or rather the Declaration of Independence, found the people already united for general purposes, and at the same time, providing for their more domestic concerns by state conventions, and other temporary arrangements.
From the crown of Great Britain, the sovereignty of their country passed to the people of it; and it was then not an uncommon opinion, that the unappropriated lands, which belonged to that crown, passed, not to the people of the colony or states within whose limits they were situated, but to the whole people; on whatever principles this opinion rested, it did not give way to the other, and thirteen sovereignties were considered as emerged from the principles of the revolution, combined with local convenience and considerations; the people nevertheless continued to consider themselves, in a national point of view, as one people; and they continued without interruption to manage their national concerns accordingly; afterwards, in the hurry of the war, and in the warmth of mutual confidence, they made a confederation of the States, the basis of a general Government. Experience disappointed the expectations they had formed from it; and then the people, in their collective and national capacity, established the present Constitution. It is remarkable that in establishing it, the people exercised their own rights and their own proper sovereignty, and conscious of the plenitude of it, they declared with becoming dignity, "We the people of the United States," 'do ordain and establish this Constitution." Here we see the people acting as the sovereigns of the whole country.; and in the language of sovereignty, establishing a Constitution by which it was their will, that the state governments should be bound, and to which the State Constitutions should be made to conform. Every State Constitution is a compact made by and between the citizens of a state to govern themeselves in a certain manner; and the Constitution of the United States is liekwise a compact made by the people of the United States to govern themselves as to general objects, in a certain manner. By this great compact however, many prerogatives were transferred to the national Government, such as those of making war and peace, contracting alliances, coining money, etc."
-- Chief Justice John Jay, 1793
If President Lincoln said the Union preceded the states, he had good company.
Walt
What facts? You Lincoln bashers are in the same category as the Holocaust deniers. If you don't like this country, get lost and move to Africa. They are ripe for revolution. If you fail, maybe they will hang you by your neck.
Anyone who takes President Lincoln to task has to dodge a pretty big bullet. What did he --really-- do that they hate so much?
He helped advance human rights.
George Washington, James Madison, Chief Justice Jay, Chief Justice Marshall, Andrew Jackson, Sam Houston, and many others, even Chief Justice Taney! --all, all-- were for a perpetual Union.
Over a million union men volunteered to fight against rebellion and secession.
It wasn't just Lincoln, and yet he gets the blame. What is the variable that makes his name come up time and time again?
Walt
It wasn't just Lincoln, and yet he gets the blame. What is the variable that makes his name come up time and time again?
There is no avoiding the fact that secession was a right and it's purpose was to avoid a "civil" war. Lincoln and his henchmen were the rebels. You probably buy the spin from todays new liberals as well. The results speak for themselves. Maybe you think this country didn't go in the toilet after that war. Keep grazing.
The first three Supreme Court Justices indicated otherwise.
It's not so just because you say it is.
Washington absolutely urged an immovable attachment to the national union. Why blame Lincoln for taking the same position?
Walt
PINKO ALERT
Do these people know how you and your fellow travelers vote?
Here is your reply to Leesylvanian from another thread:
==================================
Leesylvanian:
Keep in mind when dealing with WP that you're dealing with a man who favors the government's rights/authority over those of the people. He voted for Clinton twice. 'Nuff said!
Wlat (WhiskeyPapa):
Well, I've never said I voted for Clinton twice, so I am glad you will be glad to post a retraction.What I said was that I had never voted for a Republican presidential candidate. I voted for John Anderson in 1980. In '84 I voted Democratic. Same in '88. In '92 I DID vote for Clinton, although I was for Perot until he went batty. In'96 I didn't vote. In '00, I did vote for Al Gore. --Walt
780 posted on 2/28/02 10:49 AM Pacific by WhiskeyPapa
Exellent advice for the likes of Wlat. See his pedigree above.
Regards--
Get a life.
From: http://www.historychannel.com/
What was the primary cause of the Civil War?
Slavery 28% 938 votes
State's rights 56% 1916 votes
Trade and tariff policy 9% 318 votes
Western expansion 3% 93 votes
Other 4% 130 votes
Total: Total Votes: 3,395
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.