New statue has something to offend everyone!

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Give a few examples and I'd be glad to refute/debate them. Until then I'll accept the apparently "near" universal truth that Abraham Lincoln is one of the greatest presidents/men to ever live.

- Lincoln's desire to deport all African-Americans out of the country.
Source?
- Lincoln's support of the Corwin Amendment to make slavery permanent and irrevocable.
You must mean James Buchanan's? It passed days into Lincoln's presidency and he neither opposed nor favored it.
- Lincoln's support for an Illinois state law forbidding free blacks from emigrating to the state.
Source; name of law; years; anything? Do you want debate or do you want me to individually have to decode your statements?
- Lincoln's support for high protective tariffs that hurt the south and benefitted the north.
Laws; Links; Anything?
- Lincoln's deportation of an Ohio Congressman for speaking out against him.
This is becoming a broken record. Name of congressman perhaps?
- Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus in the north.
- Lincoln's shutting down of opposition newspapers in the north.
So out of context it gives me stomach pains.
- Lincoln's issuing an arrest warrant for the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
- Lincoln's waging a war to suppress the right to self-government.
Oh comon.

All of these facts are so subjective and out of context I would be a fool to post open-ended remarks. I could randomly post general facts as well if you'd like.

1. Abraham Lincoln made the decision to fight to prevent the nation from splitting apart.

2. Abraham Lincoln was an unfaltering commander in chief during the Civil War which preserved the United States as one nation.

3. Abraham Lincoln's foreign policy was successful in preventing other countries from intervening in America's Civil War.

4. Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation which began the process of freedom for America's slaves. The document also allowed black soldiers to fight for the Union.

5. Abraham Lincoln was a strong supporter of the Thirteenth Amendment that formally ended slavery in the United States.

6. Legislation Abraham Lincoln signed into law included the Homestead Act, the Morrill Act, the National Banking Act, and a bill that chartered the first transcontinental railroad.

7. Abraham Lincoln set an example of strong character, leadership, and honesty which succeeding presidents tried to emulate. Barack Obama is the latest to look to Lincoln as a model.

All I had to do was copy and paste. I must be a genius.

These facts are easily looked up, though I didn't really expect you to do any real work. And my facts were not copied and pasted, they were individually written out from the top of my head.

I'll try my best to set this information up in a coherent manner. My bullet points will be in bold.

- Lincoln's desire to deport all African-Americans out of the country.

In the 1850s, colonization was urged by the governor of New York and the legislature of Connecticut. The concept was endorsed by the new Republican Party and was embraced by its first successful presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln.

American Colonization Society

"I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race." - Abraham Lincoln

- Lincoln's support of the Corwin Amendment to make slavery permanent and irrevocable.

"I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution – which amendment, however, I have not seen – has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid minsconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose not to speak of particular amendments so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable." - Abraham Lincoln, first Inaugural Address

Abraham Lincoln: First Inaugural Address. U.S. Inaugural Addresses. 1989

- Lincoln's support for an Illinois state law forbidding free blacks from emigrating to the state.

In Springfield, Ill., on July 17, 1858, Lincoln said, "What I would most desire would be the separation of the white and black races." On Sept. 18, 1858, in Charleston, Ill., he said: "I will to the very last stand by the law of this state, which forbids the marrying of white people with Negroes."

Lincoln supported the Illinois Constitution, which prohibited the emigration of black people into the state, and he also supported the Illinois Black Codes, which deprived the small number of free blacks in the state any semblance of citizenship.

Let's put myths to rest

- Lincoln's support for high protective tariffs that hurt the south and benefitted the north.

The tariff under Lincoln was instated with a vigor and was raised to unparalleled heights.3l This economic policy of anti- Southem tariffs and economic exploitation of the South was to be continued for almost eighty years after the war and was only abandoned in the face of the crisis of World War II.

Shattering the Icon of Abraham Lincoln

His support of Henry Clay's American System, which proposed high tariffs, was what won Lincoln so much support in the north in states like Pennsylvania, and no support in the south.

- Lincoln's deportation of an Ohio Congressman for speaking out against him.

His name was Clement Vallandigham.

On 13 Apr. 1863, Maj. Gen. Ambrose E. Burnside, Commmander of the Department Of The Ohio, had issued General Order No. 38, forbidding expression of sympathy for the enemy. On 30 Apr. Vallandigham addressed a large audience in Columbus, made derogatory references to the president and the war effort, then hoped that he would be arrested under Burnside's order, thus gaining popular sympathy. Arrested at his home at 2 a.m., 5 May, by a company of troops, he was taken to Burnside's Cincinnati headquarters, tried by a military court 6-7 May, denied a writ of habeas corpus, and sentenced to 2 years' confinement in a military prison. Following a 19 May cabinet meeting, President Lincoln commuted Vallandigham's sentence to banishment to the Confederacy. On 26 May the Ohioan was taken to Confederates south of Murfreesboro, Tenn., and there entered Southern lines. Outraged at his treatment, by a vote of 411 -11 state Democrats nominated Vallandigham for governor at their 11 June convention.

Clement Laird Vallandigham Biography Page

- Lincoln's shutting down of opposition newspapers in the north.

Shutting down newspapers that are against your administration despite the first amendment can be taken out of context?

Those seem to be the only claims you required further proof towards.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Depicting Abraham Lincoln as a humanitarian is laughable.

You're right. He should have a category all his own. Reserved for one of the greatest men to ever live.

Yes, the man who single-handedly destroyed the ideals with which our nation was founded should certainly go down in the annals as one of the greatest men to ever live.

Take your ignorance somewhere else, we hand you your ass every time you defend Slavery and the South.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

You're right. He should have a category all his own. Reserved for one of the greatest men to ever live.

Yes, the man who single-handedly destroyed the ideals with which our nation was founded should certainly go down in the annals as one of the greatest men to ever live.

Take your ignorance somewhere else, we hand you your ass every time you defend Slavery and the South.

I am well within my rights to post my thoughts of Abraham Lincoln in this thread, as it is relevant to the topic at hand. As for defending slavery, I have never done so in my life and you are blatantly lying in an attempt to discredit me. As for "handing me my ass," that is, of course, your opinion.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Yes, the man who single-handedly destroyed the ideals with which our nation was founded should certainly go down in the annals as one of the greatest men to ever live.

Take your ignorance somewhere else, we hand you your ass every time you defend Slavery and the South.

I am well within my rights to post my thoughts of Abraham Lincoln in this thread, as it is relevant to the topic at hand. As for defending slavery, I have never done so in my life and you are blatantly lying in an attempt to discredit me. As for "handing me my ass," that is, of course, your opinion.

You OPENLY defend the Southern Government which was fully formed on the PREMISE of ensuring SLAVERY was protected and want us to believe you do not defend slavery?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Take your ignorance somewhere else, we hand you your ass every time you defend Slavery and the South.

I am well within my rights to post my thoughts of Abraham Lincoln in this thread, as it is relevant to the topic at hand. As for defending slavery, I have never done so in my life and you are blatantly lying in an attempt to discredit me. As for "handing me my ass," that is, of course, your opinion.

You OPENLY defend the Southern Government which was fully formed on the PREMISE of ensuring SLAVERY was protected and want us to believe you do not defend slavery?

I have defended the right of secession, but never slavery. To say that I support slavery because I defend the right of the southern slave states to secede is to say that anyone that defends the American colonies' right to independence from the British Empire is also supporting slavery.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I am well within my rights to post my thoughts of Abraham Lincoln in this thread, as it is relevant to the topic at hand. As for defending slavery, I have never done so in my life and you are blatantly lying in an attempt to discredit me. As for "handing me my ass," that is, of course, your opinion.

You OPENLY defend the Southern Government which was fully formed on the PREMISE of ensuring SLAVERY was protected and want us to believe you do not defend slavery?

I have defended the right of secession, but never slavery. To say that I support slavery because I defend the right of the southern slave states to secede is to say that anyone that defends the American colonies' right to independence from the British Empire is also supporting slavery.

Wrong, since the Colonists were NOT fighting over slavery at all.

 

[California Girl]

Harvey Milk? Since when is taking it in the ass and getting killed grounds for being honored?

Yea, there are several 'WTF?' moments in that list.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

You OPENLY defend the Southern Government which was fully formed on the PREMISE of ensuring SLAVERY was protected and want us to believe you do not defend slavery?

I have defended the right of secession, but never slavery. To say that I support slavery because I defend the right of the southern slave states to secede is to say that anyone that defends the American colonies' right to independence from the British Empire is also supporting slavery.

Wrong, since the Colonists were NOT fighting over slavery at all.

So it was okay that they sanctioned and defended slavery, so long as slavery wasn't a primary motive for fighting for their independence. Now it sounds like you might be supporting slavery.

Of course, the issue of slavery being the main issue of the Civil War is highly contestable, I'm simply trying to follow your logic in this instance.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I have defended the right of secession, but never slavery. To say that I support slavery because I defend the right of the southern slave states to secede is to say that anyone that defends the American colonies' right to independence from the British Empire is also supporting slavery.

Wrong, since the Colonists were NOT fighting over slavery at all.

So it was okay that they sanctioned and defended slavery, so long as slavery wasn't a primary motive for fighting for their independence. Now it sounds like you might be supporting slavery.

Of course, the issue of slavery being the main issue of the Civil War is highly contestable, I'm simply trying to follow your logic in this instance.

There was no effort what so ever by England to stop or prevent slavery. It played absolutely NO ROLE in the war of Independence, claiming otherwise is simply a lie designed by you to justify YOUR defense of a Government that STATED its one main goal was to ensure Slavery was protected and able to expand.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Wrong, since the Colonists were NOT fighting over slavery at all.

So it was okay that they sanctioned and defended slavery, so long as slavery wasn't a primary motive for fighting for their independence. Now it sounds like you might be supporting slavery.

Of course, the issue of slavery being the main issue of the Civil War is highly contestable, I'm simply trying to follow your logic in this instance.

There was no effort what so ever by England to stop or prevent slavery. It played absolutely NO ROLE in the war of Independence, claiming otherwise is simply a lie designed by you to justify YOUR defense of a Government that STATED its one main goal was to ensure Slavery was protected and able to expand.

Actually it did. The British offered freedom to slaves that would fight against the colonists. But it doesn't matter whether that's what they explicitly fought for or not, and I don't believe either the colonies or the Confederacy were fighting for slavery. You can't pick and choose which slave-allowing government is good and which is bad, just because you like one and not the other. To do so is hypocritical.

 

[sitarro]

That is some of the weakest sculpting I have ever seen, I guess it helps that the "artist", Mario Chiodo, is a member of the 2009-2010 Oakland Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors.

Google Image Result for http://www.oaklandchamber.com/about/board/mario_chiodo.jpg

 

[RetiredGySgt]

So it was okay that they sanctioned and defended slavery, so long as slavery wasn't a primary motive for fighting for their independence. Now it sounds like you might be supporting slavery.

Of course, the issue of slavery being the main issue of the Civil War is highly contestable, I'm simply trying to follow your logic in this instance.

There was no effort what so ever by England to stop or prevent slavery. It played absolutely NO ROLE in the war of Independence, claiming otherwise is simply a lie designed by you to justify YOUR defense of a Government that STATED its one main goal was to ensure Slavery was protected and able to expand.

Actually it did. The British offered freedom to slaves that would fight against the colonists. But it doesn't matter whether that's what they explicitly fought for or not, and I don't believe either the colonies or the Confederacy were fighting for slavery. You can't pick and choose which slave-allowing government is good and which is bad, just because you like one and not the other. To do so is hypocritical.

Your entire line of reasoning is flawed, EVERY STATE that left the Union listed as their reason Slavery and the danger of it being done away with, they went on to specify that they were defending the instution and planned to see it expand. The Vice President of the Confederacy made a speech about the defense of Slavery as the main cause of the split and the need to ensure it was protected and expanded into new territories. You have been LINKED to these documents more then once so do not bother demanding them again, you failed to read them in your own threads. Go back and try again. You are PATHETIC.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Sorry, but I'm still boggling at Rigoberta Menchu. Does this idiot not read at all? I mean, whatever your opinion of the others on that sculpture, at least they actually DID something, and it's not hard to understand how a leftist looneytune would admire some of them. But Menchu was publicly exposed as a lying fraud who made the whole thing up for attention. You'd think even the left would notice THAT.

I like the inclusion of the unnamed rebel from Tianenmen Square, though. That was cool.

 

[asaratis]

Give a few examples and I'd be glad to refute/debate them.

That whole Civil War ring a bell?

There was no civil war.

That is some of the weakest sculpting I have ever seen, I guess it helps that the "artist", Mario Chiodo, is a member of the 2009-2010 Oakland Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors.

Google Image Result for http://www.oaklandchamber.com/about/board/mario_chiodo.jpg

Liberals patting liberals on the back with taxpayer's money...nothing out of the ordinary. The statue will likely be a living artwork with additions coming in response to large contributions to various liberal causes...and to the "artist". No wonder California is broke...the monkeys are running the zoo.

 

[RadiomanATL]

So far the premise is holding up...

 

[Cecilie1200]

So far the premise is holding up...

Nah, it didn't offend me. As long as my tax dollars aren't involved, I can just be amused at the stupidity of liberals. It's not often that I get to do that without having to be outraged that they're being stupid on MY dime.

 

[xsited1]

Yay!

Oakland to honor 25 leaders in huge sculpture

Remember Them: Champions for Humanity - Humanitarians Represented - Abraham Lincoln

It looks like they dug up that sculpture from one of my kindergarten art projects. Maybe Mario can use the money he makes off the sale to go to art school.

 

[asaratis]

Yay!

Oakland to honor 25 leaders in huge sculpture

Remember Them: Champions for Humanity - Humanitarians Represented - Abraham Lincoln

It looks like they dug up that sculpture from one of my kindergarten art projects. Maybe Mario can use the money he makes off the sale to go to art school.

Saga of a Statue:The Struggles of Rodin's Balzac - NYTimes.com

Perhaps another Rodin in the making....

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

There was no effort what so ever by England to stop or prevent slavery. It played absolutely NO ROLE in the war of Independence, claiming otherwise is simply a lie designed by you to justify YOUR defense of a Government that STATED its one main goal was to ensure Slavery was protected and able to expand.

Actually it did. The British offered freedom to slaves that would fight against the colonists. But it doesn't matter whether that's what they explicitly fought for or not, and I don't believe either the colonies or the Confederacy were fighting for slavery. You can't pick and choose which slave-allowing government is good and which is bad, just because you like one and not the other. To do so is hypocritical.

Your entire line of reasoning is flawed, EVERY STATE that left the Union listed as their reason Slavery and the danger of it being done away with, they went on to specify that they were defending the instution and planned to see it expand. The Vice President of the Confederacy made a speech about the defense of Slavery as the main cause of the split and the need to ensure it was protected and expanded into new territories. You have been LINKED to these documents more then once so do not bother demanding them again, you failed to read them in your own threads. Go back and try again. You are PATHETIC.

Trying to change the subject now. We've certainly had this discussion before, but that's not what we were discussing here. You were attempting to paint me as a racist slavery supporter because I believe the southern states had the right to secede, and I contended that if you supported the colonies' right to secede you must support slavery as well because they promoted and endorsed slavery as much as the Confederacy did. Then you contended that because the colonies didn't fight the Revolutionary War over slavery, while you believe the Confederacy did, it's ok. So your entire point seems to be that slavery is only bad if you fight a war over it, which is obviously nonsense.