The Gettysburg Address

[bripat9643]

I'm just going to quote H. L. Mencken because he said it better than I ever could.

The Gettysburg speech is at once the shortest and the most famous oration in American history. Put beside it, all the whoopings of the Websters, Sumners and Everetts seem gaudy and silly. It is eloquence brought to a pellucid and almost child-like perfection—the highest emotion reduced to one graceful and irresistible gesture. Nothing else precisely like it is to be found in the whole range of oratory. Lincoln himself never even remotely approached it. It is genuinely stupendous.

But let us not forget that it is oratory, not logic; beauty, not sense. Think of the argument in it! Put it into the cold words of everyday! The doctrine is simply this: that the Union soldiers who died at Gettysburg sacrificed their lives to the cause of self-determination — “that government of the people, by the people, for the people,” should not perish from the earth. It is difficult to imagine anything more untrue. The Union soldiers in that battle actually fought against self-determination; it was the Confederates who fought for the right of their people to govern themselves. What was the practical effect of the battle of Gettysburg? What else than the destruction of the old sovereignty of the States, i. e., of the people of the States? The Confederates went into battle an absolutely free people; they came out with their freedom subject to the supervision and vote of the rest of the country—and for nearly twenty years that vote was so effective that they enjoyed scarcely any freedom at all. Am I the first American to note the fundamental nonsensicality of the Gettysburg address? If so, I plead my aesthetic joy in it in amelioration of the sacrilege.

- H.L. Mencken -​

 

[rightwinger]

I'm just going to quote H. L. Mencken because he said it better than I ever could.

The Gettysburg speech is at once the shortest and the most famous oration in American history. Put beside it, all the whoopings of the Websters, Sumners and Everetts seem gaudy and silly. It is eloquence brought to a pellucid and almost child-like perfection—the highest emotion reduced to one graceful and irresistible gesture. Nothing else precisely like it is to be found in the whole range of oratory. Lincoln himself never even remotely approached it. It is genuinely stupendous.

But let us not forget that it is oratory, not logic; beauty, not sense. Think of the argument in it! Put it into the cold words of everyday! The doctrine is simply this: that the Union soldiers who died at Gettysburg sacrificed their lives to the cause of self-determination — “that government of the people, by the people, for the people,” should not perish from the earth. It is difficult to imagine anything more untrue. The Union soldiers in that battle actually fought against self-determination; it was the Confederates who fought for the right of their people to govern themselves. What was the practical effect of the battle of Gettysburg? What else than the destruction of the old sovereignty of the States, i. e., of the people of the States? The Confederates went into battle an absolutely free people; they came out with their freedom subject to the supervision and vote of the rest of the country—and for nearly twenty years that vote was so effective that they enjoyed scarcely any freedom at all. Am I the first American to note the fundamental nonsensicality of the Gettysburg address? If so, I plead my aesthetic joy in it in amelioration of the sacrilege.

- H.L. Mencken -​

Well said

The only problem with Mencken is that the Constitution of that government seeking self determination specifically prohibits any laws that impede the institution of slavery. The Confederacy was not looking for self determination, but the right to determine that others were subhuman and deserve to be property

Lincoln 1
Mencken 0

 

[bripat9643]

I'm just going to quote H. L. Mencken because he said it better than I ever could.

The Gettysburg speech is at once the shortest and the most famous oration in American history. Put beside it, all the whoopings of the Websters, Sumners and Everetts seem gaudy and silly. It is eloquence brought to a pellucid and almost child-like perfection—the highest emotion reduced to one graceful and irresistible gesture. Nothing else precisely like it is to be found in the whole range of oratory. Lincoln himself never even remotely approached it. It is genuinely stupendous.

But let us not forget that it is oratory, not logic; beauty, not sense. Think of the argument in it! Put it into the cold words of everyday! The doctrine is simply this: that the Union soldiers who died at Gettysburg sacrificed their lives to the cause of self-determination — “that government of the people, by the people, for the people,” should not perish from the earth. It is difficult to imagine anything more untrue. The Union soldiers in that battle actually fought against self-determination; it was the Confederates who fought for the right of their people to govern themselves. What was the practical effect of the battle of Gettysburg? What else than the destruction of the old sovereignty of the States, i. e., of the people of the States? The Confederates went into battle an absolutely free people; they came out with their freedom subject to the supervision and vote of the rest of the country—and for nearly twenty years that vote was so effective that they enjoyed scarcely any freedom at all. Am I the first American to note the fundamental nonsensicality of the Gettysburg address? If so, I plead my aesthetic joy in it in amelioration of the sacrilege.

- H.L. Mencken -​

Well said

The only problem with Mencken is that the Constitution of that government seeking self determination specifically prohibits any laws that impede the institution of slavery. The Confederacy was not looking for self determination, but the right to determine that others were subhuman and deserve to be property

Lincoln 1
Mencken 0

You're a moron.

Slavery existed in the North as well as the South. The Constitution of the United States required the federal government to enforce the institution of slavery. If the South wasn't looking for self-determination, then neither was the federal government. So, once again, the Gettysburg Address is a fraud.

 

[rightwinger]

I'm just going to quote H. L. Mencken because he said it better than I ever could.

The Gettysburg speech is at once the shortest and the most famous oration in American history. Put beside it, all the whoopings of the Websters, Sumners and Everetts seem gaudy and silly. It is eloquence brought to a pellucid and almost child-like perfection—the highest emotion reduced to one graceful and irresistible gesture. Nothing else precisely like it is to be found in the whole range of oratory. Lincoln himself never even remotely approached it. It is genuinely stupendous.

But let us not forget that it is oratory, not logic; beauty, not sense. Think of the argument in it! Put it into the cold words of everyday! The doctrine is simply this: that the Union soldiers who died at Gettysburg sacrificed their lives to the cause of self-determination — “that government of the people, by the people, for the people,” should not perish from the earth. It is difficult to imagine anything more untrue. The Union soldiers in that battle actually fought against self-determination; it was the Confederates who fought for the right of their people to govern themselves. What was the practical effect of the battle of Gettysburg? What else than the destruction of the old sovereignty of the States, i. e., of the people of the States? The Confederates went into battle an absolutely free people; they came out with their freedom subject to the supervision and vote of the rest of the country—and for nearly twenty years that vote was so effective that they enjoyed scarcely any freedom at all. Am I the first American to note the fundamental nonsensicality of the Gettysburg address? If so, I plead my aesthetic joy in it in amelioration of the sacrilege.

- H.L. Mencken -​

Well said

The only problem with Mencken is that the Constitution of that government seeking self determination specifically prohibits any laws that impede the institution of slavery. The Confederacy was not looking for self determination, but the right to determine that others were subhuman and deserve to be property

Lincoln 1
Mencken 0

You're a moron.

Slavery existed in the North as well as the South. The Constitution of the United States required the federal government to enforce the institution of slavery. If the South wasn't looking for self-determination, then neither was the federal government. So, once again, the Gettysburg Address is a fraud.

"Conceived in Liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal....."

Southern traitors need not apply

 

[bripat9643]

Well said

The only problem with Mencken is that the Constitution of that government seeking self determination specifically prohibits any laws that impede the institution of slavery. The Confederacy was not looking for self determination, but the right to determine that others were subhuman and deserve to be property

Lincoln 1
Mencken 0

You're a moron.

Slavery existed in the North as well as the South. The Constitution of the United States required the federal government to enforce the institution of slavery. If the South wasn't looking for self-determination, then neither was the federal government. So, once again, the Gettysburg Address is a fraud.

"Conceived in Liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal....."

Southern traitors need not apply

The federal government enforced slavery, you fucking moron.

 

[JakeStarkey]

"The federal government enforced slavery, you fucking moron."

Until the federal government executed it.

Fucking moron? My, my. Grow up, tubby.

 

[bripat9643]

"The federal government enforced slavery, you fucking moron."

Until the federal government executed it.

Fucking moron? My, my. Grow up, tubby.

The federal government didn't abolish it until 1865 when it passed the 13th Amendment, numskull. Even then, that Amendment wasn't legitimate since Southern states had to approve it as a condition of being readmitted to the Union.

By the way, you can find good deals on adult diapers here:

Adult Diapers and Incontinence Supplies | NorthShore Care Supply

NorthShore Care Supply
The Incontinence Supply Experts

Discreet Delivery of Adult Diapers, Youth Diapers & Incontinence Supplies​

Just trying to help you in your evening of life.

 

[Luissa]

I'm just going to quote H. L. Mencken because he said it better than I ever could.

The Gettysburg speech is at once the shortest and the most famous oration in American history. Put beside it, all the whoopings of the Websters, Sumners and Everetts seem gaudy and silly. It is eloquence brought to a pellucid and almost child-like perfection—the highest emotion reduced to one graceful and irresistible gesture. Nothing else precisely like it is to be found in the whole range of oratory. Lincoln himself never even remotely approached it. It is genuinely stupendous.



But let us not forget that it is oratory, not logic; beauty, not sense. Think of the argument in it! Put it into the cold words of everyday! The doctrine is simply this: that the Union soldiers who died at Gettysburg sacrificed their lives to the cause of self-determination — “that government of the people, by the people, for the people,” should not perish from the earth. It is difficult to imagine anything more untrue. The Union soldiers in that battle actually fought against self-determination; it was the Confederates who fought for the right of their people to govern themselves. What was the practical effect of the battle of Gettysburg? What else than the destruction of the old sovereignty of the States, i. e., of the people of the States? The Confederates went into battle an absolutely free people; they came out with their freedom subject to the supervision and vote of the rest of the country—and for nearly twenty years that vote was so effective that they enjoyed scarcely any freedom at all. Am I the first American to note the fundamental nonsensicality of the Gettysburg address? If so, I plead my aesthetic joy in it in amelioration of the sacrilege.

- H.L. Mencken -​

Well said



The only problem with Mencken is that the Constitution of that government seeking self determination specifically prohibits any laws that impede the institution of slavery. The Confederacy was not looking for self determination, but the right to determine that others were subhuman and deserve to be property



Lincoln 1

Mencken 0

You're a moron.



Slavery existed in the North as well as the South. The Constitution of the United States required the federal government to enforce the institution of slavery. If the South wasn't looking for self-determination, then neither was the federal government. So, once again, the Gettysburg Address is a fraud.

Have you heard of free states? By the time Lincoln gave that speech northern states were mostly free states.


Sent from my iPhone using the tears of Raider's fans.

 

[bripat9643]

Well said



The only problem with Mencken is that the Constitution of that government seeking self determination specifically prohibits any laws that impede the institution of slavery. The Confederacy was not looking for self determination, but the right to determine that others were subhuman and deserve to be property



Lincoln 1

Mencken 0

You're a moron.



Slavery existed in the North as well as the South. The Constitution of the United States required the federal government to enforce the institution of slavery. If the South wasn't looking for self-determination, then neither was the federal government. So, once again, the Gettysburg Address is a fraud.

Have you heard of free states? By the time Lincoln gave that speech northern states were mostly free states.


Sent from my iPhone using the tears of Raider's fans.

By the time he gave the speech? That's a little late, don't you think? What about when the war started? You can hardly claim that the North was fighting to end slavery when quite a number of states in the union still practiced slavery.

 

[rightwinger]

To even imply that the traitors remotely thought that all men are created equal shows what abdouchebag Mencken is

 

[rightwinger]

You're a moron.



Slavery existed in the North as well as the South. The Constitution of the United States required the federal government to enforce the institution of slavery. If the South wasn't looking for self-determination, then neither was the federal government. So, once again, the Gettysburg Address is a fraud.

Have you heard of free states? By the time Lincoln gave that speech northern states were mostly free states.


Sent from my iPhone using the tears of Raider's fans.

By the time he gave the speech? That's a little late, don't you think? What about when the war started? You can hardly claim that the North was fighting to end slavery when quite a number of states in the union still practiced slavery.

We can debate till the end of time that the north fought to end slavery.......but there is no doubt the south fought to preserve it

 

[Luissa]

You're a moron.







Slavery existed in the North as well as the South. The Constitution of the United States required the federal government to enforce the institution of slavery. If the South wasn't looking for self-determination, then neither was the federal government. So, once again, the Gettysburg Address is a fraud.

Have you heard of free states? By the time Lincoln gave that speech northern states were mostly free states.





Sent from my iPhone using the tears of Raider's fans.

By the time he gave the speech? That's a little late, don't you think? What about when the war started? You can hardly claim that the North was fighting to end slavery when quite a number of states in the union still practiced slavery.

Of course they weren't fighting to free slaves.


Sent from my iPhone using the tears of Raider's fans.

 

[mamooth]

Slavery apologists like Bri are boring. You see them everywhere, defending their beloved slaver heroes.

 

[rightwinger]

Have you heard of free states? By the time Lincoln gave that speech northern states were mostly free states.





Sent from my iPhone using the tears of Raider's fans.

By the time he gave the speech? That's a little late, don't you think? What about when the war started? You can hardly claim that the North was fighting to end slavery when quite a number of states in the union still practiced slavery.

Of course they weren't fighting to free slaves.


Sent from my iPhone using the tears of Raider's fans.

The Union Army sure freed a lot of them

 

[Luissa]

By the time he gave the speech? That's a little late, don't you think? What about when the war started? You can hardly claim that the North was fighting to end slavery when quite a number of states in the union still practiced slavery.

Of course they weren't fighting to free slaves.





Sent from my iPhone using the tears of Raider's fans.

The Union Army sure freed a lot of them

That they did.


Sent from my iPhone using the tears of Raider's fans.

 

[Luissa]

Slavery apologists like Bri are boring. You see them everywhere, defending their beloved slaver heroes.

My ancestors owned slaves, and I won't try to change the facts to make that seem alright.


Sent from my iPhone using the tears of Raider's fans.

 

[Toro]

The Confederacy was statist.

It blows my mind that conservatives who claim to be for individual rights defend it so vehemently today.

 

[JakeStarkey]

We can see bripat's dementia causing him to write "The federal government didn't abolish it until 1865 when it passed the 13th Amendment, numskull. Even then, that Amendment wasn't legitimate since Southern states had to approve it as a condition of being readmitted to the Union."

(1) The government did abolish it.

(2) The amendment was legitimate because the reconstructed states approved it as a requirement for readmission into the Union.

 

[whitehall]

According to legend Lincoln wrote the speech while on the train to Gettysburg. Today the politicians can't give a speech without a small army of speech writers, psychologists and political analysts. How many memorable speeches were ever given during the 20th century?

 

[Wry Catcher]

You're a moron.



Slavery existed in the North as well as the South. The Constitution of the United States required the federal government to enforce the institution of slavery. If the South wasn't looking for self-determination, then neither was the federal government. So, once again, the Gettysburg Address is a fraud.

Have you heard of free states? By the time Lincoln gave that speech northern states were mostly free states.


Sent from my iPhone using the tears of Raider's fans.

By the time he gave the speech? That's a little late, don't you think? What about when the war started? You can hardly claim that the North was fighting to end slavery when quite a number of states in the union still practiced slavery.

The North was fighting to preserve The Union, as was Lincoln. The North and Lincoln knew that the civilized world no longer embraced slavery and the South was the last stand for this inhuman and disgusting abuse of humanity; sadly, dirt bags like bripat9643 still do.