Steven Spielberg's movie about Lincoln is pure bullshit !!!!!!!

[nodoginnafight]

Strange, I don't see anything about slavery here.

Seriously??? Are you able to read the English language???

 

[g5000]

Strange, I don't see anything about slavery here.

Whereas, The laws of the United States have been for some time past and now are opposed, and the execution thereof obstructed, in the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by the powers vested in the Marshals by law :

Now, therefore, I, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, President of the United States, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution and the laws, have thought fit to call forth, and hereby do call forth, the Militia of the several States of the Union, to the aggregate number of 75,000, in order to suppress said combinations, and to cause the laws to be duly executed. The details for this object will be immediately communicated to the State authorities through the War Department.

I appeal to all loyal citizens to favor, facilitate, and aid this effort to maintain the honor, the integrity, and the existence of our National Union and the perpetuity of popular government, and to redress wrongs already long enough endured.

I deem it proper to say that the first service assigned to the force hereby called forth will probably be to repossess the forts, places, and property which have been seized from the Union, and, in every event, the utmost care will be observed, consistently with the objects aforesaid, to avoid any devastation, any destruction of, or interference with property, or any disturbance of peaceful citizens in any part of the country; and I hereby command the persons composing the combinations aforesaid to disperse and retire peaceably to their respective abodes within twenty days from this date.

Deeming that the present condition of public affairs presents an extraordinary occasion, I do, hereby, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution, convene both Houses of Congress. The Senators and Representatives are therefore summoned to assemble at their respective chambers at twelve o'clock, noon, on Thursday, the fourth day of July next, then and there to consider and determine such measures as, in their wisdom, the public safety and interest may seem to demand.

In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.

Done at the City of Washington, this fifteenth day of April, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-one, and of the independence of the United States the eighty-fifth.

You are being typically selective.

You, too, need to read the declarations of secession. The rebel states clearly stated they were leaving over slavery. They left no shadow of a doubt.

You also need to read the letter Lincoln wrote to Albert Hodges to which I linked above. In that letter it becomes crystal clear Lincoln is stating the war is about slavery.

Despite his absolute detestation of slavery, keeping the country together had to take precedence.

.

 

[g5000]

The fact that Southern States seceded over slavery in no way proves that the Northern States fought over slavery. Unless, of course, you think we fought WWII because Germany was being oppressed by Europe.

Jesus this is some fucked up illogic.

The southern states left to preserve slavery. So obviously the war was about slavery, dipshit. If there was no slavery, there was no war.

Before the war: slavery. After the war: no slavery.




.

 

[g5000]

The fact that Southern States seceded over slavery in no way proves that the Northern States fought over slavery. Unless, of course, you think we fought WWII because Germany was being oppressed by Europe.

Germany was being oppressed by Europe.

Spoken like a true WN.

.

 

[mascale]

At the First Lincoln Innauguration, Slavery and the end of Slavery was not what the Administration was planning to do. Southerners being Southerners, the attack on Fort Sumter had to be addressed. That eventually required a federal intervention. Southern States were already in Secession.

The original Article I, Section 9, abolished the importation of slaves on a date certain. That had actually happened, way before Lincoln was taking office. Even in the "Emancipation Proclamation," the Abolition of Slavery was not extended into the states not in Secession. The Emancipation was allowed in the already at-war states.

Lincoln likely was himself not entirely ready for the concept of a bunch of freed. . . .Words now fail us in the more modern, technical, and advanced civilization--which tanked the international financial community, only in the last five years.
_________________________________

Clause 1. The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

Clause 2. The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.
__________________________________

Lincoln never once violated Clause 1, but violated famously: Most important, Clause 2. George Bush II, Terms I & II, had more or less the same concept in mind in the phony, "War on Terror' against the already atomized Moslems of 9/11. They, of course, were already dead. There was not only the nonsense of the fabricated "Weapons of Mass Destruction" on which to rely in the Bush Administration!

It was the living who were supposed to have their civil rights suspended, indefinitely--even unto now, in the Bush Administration!

Famously, then: Abraham Lincoln was not a saint, even by comparison, even to the most recent President Bush!

Lincoln was dead way before, in fact, any Amendments were considered or passed, post-Civil War.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
("Better Dead Than Red" even famous when not discussing Lands of Many Nations, at the RNC rallies--if any(?)!)

 

[elvis]

The fact that Southern States seceded over slavery in no way proves that the Northern States fought over slavery. Unless, of course, you think we fought WWII because Germany was being oppressed by Europe.

Germany was being oppressed by Europe.

Spoken like a true WN.

.

Actually Germany was oppressed.

 

[paperview]

...
Lincoln was dead way before, in fact, any Amendments were considered or passed, post-Civil War.

...

The 13th Amendment



See that signature to the right? That's Lincoln's signature.

It was passed by Congress in January of 1865.

His signature was not required, he nonetheless quite purposefully, and boldly, signed it.

 

[Contumacious]

One of the biggest lies in history is the idea that the CW was fought to free the slaves. How can that possibly be true when there were 4 northern states that allowed slavery during the entire war and when General US Grant was a slave owner during the war and so to Lincoln's second vice president Andrew Johnson.?

Executive Mansion,

Washington, August 22, 1862.

Hon. Horace Greeley:

Dear Sir.

I have just read yours of the 19th. addressed to myself through the New-York Tribune. If there be in it any statements, or assumptions of fact, which I may know to be erroneous, I do not, now and here, controvert them. If there be in it any inferences which I may believe to be falsely drawn, I do not now and here, argue against them. If there be perceptable in it an impatient and dictatorial tone, I waive it in deference to an old friend, whose heart I have always supposed to be right.

As to the policy I "seem to be pursuing" as you say, I have not meant to leave any one in doubt.

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.

Yours,
A. Lincoln.

.

 

[paperview]

The party of Lincoln, hates Lincoln.

Go figger.

 

[paperview]

Little trip back, a few years before Lincoln was elected.

The Republican party, founded on Anti-slavery ideals, had their first presidential candidate in 1856. That would be Fremont.

He gave over 50 speeches for Fremont's campaign, Lincoln was co-founder of the Republican party in Illinois - there was no national party...and in that first presidential campaign - Lincoln was first runner up for VP.
At the Republican Convention that year, Lincoln spoke, and well, I'll let

Contemporary observer William H. Porter intro this:[

"When the convention speeches finished about 5:30 o'clock people began calling for Lincoln. From his seat in the back of the house, near where I sat, Lincoln got up and said he believed he would talk from where he was, if nobody objected. But everybody shouted for him to take the platform. All heads turned to the back of Major's Hall, when Lincoln's long frame unlimbered itself. Cheers shook the walls as he elbowed his way down the aisle.
​

And then:

Snip:

Lincoln biographer William E. Barton wrote: "There stood Lincoln in the forefront, erect, tall, and majestic in appearance, hurling thunderbolts at the foes of freedom, while the great convention roared its endorsement!

I never witnessed such a scene before or since. As he descried the aims and aggressions of the unappeasable slaveholders and the servility of their Northern allies as illustrated by the perfidous repeal of the Missouri Compromise two years previously, and their grasping after the rich prairies of Kansas and Nebraska, to blight them with slavery and to deprive free labor of this rich inheritance, and exhorted the friends of freedom to resist them to death, the convention went fairly wild.

It paralleled or exceeded the scene in the Revolutionary Virginia convention of eight-one years before, when Patrick Henry invoked death if liberty could not be preserved, and said, 'After all we must fight.'
...
According to young William H. Porter,"the tall man in black told us about the aims of the new party they were organizing that day. I'll say now that I learned more during that next hour and a half, about what was the best for the United States, than I'd learned in all my life before."

Read more: 1856 - Abraham Lincoln​

 

[Contumacious]

Lincoln’s Greatest Failure​

(Or, How a Real Statesman Would Have Ended Slavery)
by Thomas J. DiLorenzo


"Every other country in the world got rid of slavery without a civil war . . . . How much would that cost compared to killing 600,000 Americans when the hatred lingered for 100 years."

~ Ron Paul to Tim Russert on "Meet the Press" in 2007

The new Steven Spielberg movie about Lincoln is entirely based on a fiction, to use a mild term. As longtime Ebony magazine executive editor Lerone Bennett, Jr. explained in his book, Forced into Glory: Abraham Lincoln’s White Dream: "There is a pleasant fiction that Lincoln . . . became a flaming advocate of the [Thirteenth] amendment and used the power of his office to buy votes to ensure its passage. There is no evidence, as David H. Donald has noted, to support that fiction". (Emphasis added).

In fact, as Bennett shows, it was the genuine abolitionists in Congress who forced Lincoln to support the Thirteenth Amendment that ended slavery, something he refused to do for fifty-four of his fifty-six years. The truth, in other words, is precisely the opposite of the story told in Spielberg’s Lincoln movie, which is based on the book Team of Rivals by the confessed plagiarist/court historian Doris Kearns-Goodwin. (My LRC review of her book was entitled "A Plagiarist’s Contribution to Lincoln Idolatry").

.

Wow. That link is one of the most twisted gyrations of historical revisionism and logical fallacies I have seen in some time.

As if the South was ever going to end slavery peacefully. Yeah, right. I want what that dumb shit is smoking.



.

From your favorite fish wrapper NY Times:


Throughout the first six months of 1862, Radical Republicans, abolitionists and border state legislators all entertained uncertainties about Abraham Lincoln’s stance on the future of slavery. The president seemed to act as “a moderator between contending factions,” wrote William M. Dickson, a Cincinnati judge and eventual commander of one of the first black units in the Union Army (and husband to Mary Todd Lincoln’s first cousin). He is “helping the one today & the other tomorrow & and holding . . . [each] by the hope that . . . he will finally be with one of them. Neither breaks with him because each yet hopes him to be on its side.”
"

 

[USwings]

Linclon, like most White Americans at the time, were pure racist.

Complete bullshit.

"I am naturally anti-slavery. If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong."

Letter by Abraham Lincoln to Albert Hodges

.

Nothing like going to the source.

 

[BallsBrunswick]

This thread is stupid.

 

[lovemymutts]

The party of Lincoln, hates Lincoln.

Go figger.

Can't EVER make them happy,bunch of whiners.

 

[paperview]

...
(Or, How a Real Statesman Would Have Ended Slavery)
by Thomas J. DiLorenzo
///
.

And your piece of shit article by the scumsucking neo-confederate and economist (NOT historian) Thomas J. DiLorenzo is nothing more that White Supremacist trash.

Of course he hates Lincoln. The Hate group he belongs to is still fighting the Lost Cause / Civil War.

 

[paperview]

This thread is stupid.

It's a Contumacious thread. Is there any other kind?

 

[Contumacious]

Historians praise its accuracy, but if you say it's pure BS, they must all be wrong.

Which historians?

Lerone Bennet, an Afro-American , historian also agrees that the movie is pure bullshit

"Lerone Bennett, Jr. contends that it is almost impossible for the average citizen to know much of anything about Lincoln despite the fact that literally thousands of books have been written about him. "A century of lies" is how he describes Lincoln "scholarship." He provides thousands of documented facts to make his case.

On the subject of Steven Spielberg’s new movie on Lincoln, which is entirely about Lincoln’s supposed role in lobbying for the Thirteenth Amendment that ended slavery, Bennett points out: "There is a pleasant fiction that Lincoln . . . became a flaming advocate of the amendment and used the power of his office to buy votes to ensure its passage. There is no evidence, as David H. Donald has noted, to support that fiction . . ." To the extent that Lincoln did finally and hesitatingly support the amendment, Bennett argues that it was he who was literally forced into it by other politicians, not the other way around as portrayed in the Spielberg film. (David Donald, by the way, is the preeminent Lincoln scholar of our day and Pulitzer prize-winning Lincoln biographer).
"

 

[Dr.Traveler]

[
The fact that Southern States seceded over slavery in no way proves that the Northern States fought over slavery. Unless, of course, you think we fought WWII because Germany was being oppressed by Europe.

The South fought to preserve Slavery. Go read the articles of Secession from the Southern States. Play a drinking game. Have a beer every time the word slave or negro is used. If you're still alive in the morning, let me know how it turned out.

The problem is wars are fought for different reasons and everyone involved has their own motives. The wealthy plantation owners fought 100% to preserve slavery, and as they formed the leadership of the South, the Southern States fought with that as a war aim. The poor folks that ended up as foot soldiers fought to stop what they saw as Northern Aggression.

In the North, the industrialists and the Feds fought to preserve the Union and keep the South in. However, for the folks that ended up as foot soldiers in the North abolitionism absolutely was a war aim. Northern papers DEMONIZED the South over Slavery, songs and poems were written to motivate the North to stay in the war to free their fellow man.

Ultimately, Slavery is absolutely why the South lost. The South lacked the population, industrial capability, naval power, and railroad lines to win a modern protracted war without help. They could only win if the North gave up or Europe stepped in. The North never gave up because they were confident that fighting to end slavery was a just cause. Europe never entered because they saw Slavery as a detestable horrible downright evil institution.

That kept the South isolated and the North motivated. After that, there was never any doubt how that would end.

 

[Mustang]

Historians praise its accuracy, but if you say it's pure BS, they must all be wrong.

Sheesh. Next thing we know, you're going to be talking about how random sampling statistical analysis can predict electoral outcomes in larger groups or how science can trace global warming to human activity...and other ridiculous nonsense like that.

 

[Contumacious]

$10 says that the movie has nothing about him being one of the worst Presidents who butchered the constitution

I have found people who parrot things like this generally know very little of the man.

.

Exactly.

So why don't you grab a history book and become informed?!?!?!?

.