150 years ago today, Republicans made a massive power grab for Big Government.

[Inthemiddle]

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

What the fuck are you babbling about now?

 

[Inthemiddle]

What? Don't you think that the President taking it upon himself to decide how individual states should handle their own affairs just a wee bit of a federal intrusion?

 

[g5000]

It's pretty sad you don't even know when Lincoln took office.

It was not 150 years ago today.

The rest of your grasp of history appears to be equally tenuous.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Sure, but then you agree that it was the Republicans that freed the slaves, against the wishes of the Democrats... right?

 

[g5000]

Some Republicans worked hard to free the slaves. Absolutely. It is a foundation of which Republicans should be proud.

Today, though, Republicans work very hard at hating gays, Muslims, and immigrants. It is fucking pathetic they have to go back nearly 50 years, or more, to find something to brag about when it comes to human rights. That says a lot about how far the party has strayed from its founding principles.

It is no coincidence that it was about the same time that Strom Thurmond defected to the GOP.

 

[g5000]

The South did not rebel because Lincoln made some big power grab. This is ignorance of the highest order. Lincoln constantly obsessed over what Constitutional powers he had, and he was in no way convinced he had the power to ban slavery.

Lincoln clearly articulated in a letter to Albert Hodges that, "If slavery is not wrong, then nothing is wrong." However, he also stated in a letter to Horace Greeley:

I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object 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 I believe 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. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.

I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men every where could be free.

The South seceded from the Union upon Lincoln's election because they saw the handwriting on the wall. The balance of votes in Congress was slowly shifting to the point where anti-slavery votes would soon outnumber pro-slavery votes. The election of Lincoln, who belonged to the new Republican party which had a platform plank calling for the abolition of slavery, was a sign to them that the end of slavery was getting closer.

That is why with each new addition of a state to the Union, there was an influx of pro and anti slavery voters into those territories in an attempt to swing the balance of power in the new state toward or against slavery in Congress, creating proxy wars such as Bleeding Kansas.

 

[martybegan]

The South did not rebel because Lincoln made some big power grab. This is ignorance of the highest order. Lincoln constantly obsessed over what Constitutional powers he had, and he was in no way convinced he had the power to ban slavery.

Lincoln clearly articulated in a letter to Albert Hodges that, "If slavery is not wrong, then nothing is wrong." However, he also stated in a letter to Horace Greeley:

I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object 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 I believe 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. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.

I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men every where could be free.

The South seceded from the Union upon Lincoln's election because they saw the handwriting on the wall. The balance of votes in Congress was slowly shifting to the point where anti-slavery votes would soon outnumber pro-slavery votes. The election of Lincoln, who belonged to the new Republican party which had a platform plank calling for the abolition of slavery, was a sign to them that the end of slavery was getting closer.

That is why with each new addition of a state to the Union, there was an influx of pro and anti slavery voters into those territories in an attempt to swing the balance of power in the new state toward or against slavery in Congress, creating proxy wars such as Bleeding Kansas.

Yes. Secession was based on the fear that congress MIGHT try to ban slavery nationwide.
Lincoln's sole platform was restricting slavery to the areas it already existed.

 

[Inthemiddle]

It's pretty sad you don't even know when Lincoln took office.

It was not 150 years ago today.

The rest of your grasp of history appears to be equally tenuous.

I was not referring to the day that Lincoln took office.

 

[g5000]

It's pretty sad you don't even know when Lincoln took office.

It was not 150 years ago today.

The rest of your grasp of history appears to be equally tenuous.

I was not referring to the day that Lincoln took office.

Your entire opening post was nothing more than a graphic referring to his election to office as the first Republican President.

Use your words...

 

[Inthemiddle]

It's pretty sad you don't even know when Lincoln took office.

It was not 150 years ago today.

The rest of your grasp of history appears to be equally tenuous.

I was not referring to the day that Lincoln took office.

Your entire opening post was nothing more than a graphic referring to his election to office as the first Republican President.

Use your words...

I'm afraid you're misinterpreting it slightly. It's not a reference to his election. It's a reference to Republicans invoking their historical genesis with Lincoln, and their one sided interpretation of its relevance.

 

[bripat9643]

Your point? I'm no fan of Lincoln. He was the country's first dictator. He trashed the Constitution and destroyed the country.

Many republicans are ignorant of what Lincoln was really all about. They wouldn't admire him if they knew the facts.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Many republicans are ignorant of what Lincoln was really all about. They wouldn't admire him if they knew the facts.

THAT is the point.