Lincoln is an example of perfect following of the Constitution

[TNHarley]

LINCOLN was great

Yeah, to a fascist POS tyrant. Not decent folk.

 

[Libby von H]

Yeah, to a fascist POS tyrant. Not decent folk.

I continue to applaud my strategy , whic is to get you to speak your hateful filth so as to poison all subscription to your detestable views. RIDE ON !!!

 

[TNHarley]

I continue to applaud my strategy , whic is to get you to speak your hateful filth so as to poison all subscription to your detestable views. RIDE ON !!!

ok

 

[Curried Goats]

That’s absurd. He ignored the Constitution and mass murdered Americans.

THINK!

What genuine lover of liberty shouldn't ignore a document that legitimizes the States right to defend the ownership of people as property?

 

[gipper]

What genuine lover of liberty shouldn't ignore a document that legitimizes the States right to defend the ownership of people as property?

Abe had no intention of ever outlawing slavery. In fact, he offered to ensconce slavery in the constitution if the south agreed to stay in the Union. He was a rabid racist even for his time. He sold slaves his wife inherited for a nice profit.

Learn history rather than believe propaganda.

 

[Curried Goats]

Abe had no intention of ever outlawing slavery. In fact, he offered to ensconce slavery in the constitution if the south agreed to stay in the Union. He was a rabid racist even for his time. He sold slaves his wife inherited for a nice profit.

Learn history rather than believe propaganda.

Did you see the name Lincoln mentioned in that post? If you do you're imagining it. My comments were about the Constitution itself and those who would pretend to support liberty and freedom defending a States right to keep people as property.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Abe had no intention of ever outlawing slavery. In fact, he offered to ensconce slavery in the constitution if the south agreed to stay in the Union. He was a rabid racist even for his time. He sold slaves his wife inherited for a nice profit.

Learn history rather than believe propaganda.

Ok, if true, and? You Secesh fuckers still went and attacked US troops. So we had to kick the fuck out of you.

 

[gipper]

Ok, if true, and? You Secesh fuckers still went and attacked US troops. So we had to kick the fuck out of you.

Foolish. It wasn’t a football game. Thousands died. Half the nation destroyed and the Constitution shit canned. Hardly worth your bloodlust.

The entire western world outlawed slavery without violence, except the good old USA. Why?

 

[gipper]

Did you see the name Lincoln mentioned in that post? If you do you're imagining it. My comments were about the Constitution itself and those who would pretend to support liberty and freedom defending a States right to keep people as property.

Okay. The Founders really fucked up not eliminating slavery. Then Lincoln made it worse.

I love his lies in the Gettysburg Address. “A new birth of freedom…” by killing hundreds of thousands and destroying half the nation. Only a fool would believe that.

 

[Curried Goats]

Okay. The Founders really fucked up not eliminating slavery. Then Lincoln made it worse.

I love his lies in the Gettysburg Address. “A new birth of freedom…” by killing hundreds of thousands and destroying half the nation. Only a fool would believe that.

The Founders were slavers and I don't give a shit about even hundreds of thousands of deaths of slavery defenders. You could make it a billion and I still wouldn't give a shit.

 

[gipper]

The Founders were slavers and I don't give a shit about even hundreds of thousands of deaths of slavery defenders. You could make it a billion and I still wouldn't give a shit.

Foolish. Clearly you know nothing about war.

 

[Curried Goats]

Foolish. Clearly you know nothing about war.

What insight about war do you imagine to be sharing? Sounds more like you're trying to share some insight on morality which your opinion on I also don't care about seeing as how morality is subjective.

 

[gipper]

What insight about war do you imagine to be sharing? Sounds more like you're trying to share some insight on morality which your opinion on I also don't care about seeing as how morality is subjective.

War is always a racket designed by and for the benefit of the elite. The civil war was no different. Lincoln invaded his country to benefit his wealthy donors.

 

[Libby von H]

What genuine lover of liberty shouldn't ignore a document that legitimizes the States right to defend the ownership of people as property?

Your just a stubborn stupid person. Even Frederick Douglass disagrees with you.
YOU ARE A RACIST and should be shunned

 

[Curried Goats]

War is always a racket designed by and for the benefit of the elite. The civil war was no different. Lincoln invaded his country to benefit his wealthy donors.

My comment to you had absolutely nothing to do with Lincoln. It never even mentioned Lincoln. My comment was philosophical in nature. Is the Constitution more important than the rights it's purported to protect? If the Constitution legalizes the tyranny of slavery should it be respected by any true lover of liberty and freedom?

 

[Curried Goats]

Your just a stubborn stupid person. Even Frederick Douglass disagrees with you.
YOU ARE A RACIST and should be shunned

View attachment 926482

You're a poor debater. A personal attack and a reference to someone else's opinion do not make a rational argument.

 

[Libby von H]

Well, I'm a big Lincoln fan, but we really cannot say that he "perfectly followed the Constitution." He unconstitutionally pro-rogued two Northern state legislatures after voters in those states elected anti-war majorities. He shut down dozens of Northern newspapers and jailed a number of newspaper editors on highly dubious grounds. He illegally suspended the writ of habeas corpus and then tried to have civilians put on trial by military courts, a move that the Supreme Court eventually slapped down in 1866 in Ex Parte Milligan.

I give Lincoln a pass for invading Virginia because the Confederate bombardment of Fort Sumter made it impossible for him to do otherwise. Once Jefferson Davis committed the astonishing, idiotic blunder of having Fort Sumter bombarded, Lincoln had no viable, realistic choice but to resort to coercion, given the power of the Radical Republicans and the inflammation of Northern public opinion caused by the Confederate attack.

You sound like Tom DiLorenzo's wife...
A pass for what he 'couldn't do otherwise' --- do you even read what you write ??????

As to your claim it is rubbish as any historian knows.
Fremont liberated slavers in Missouri and Lincoln countermanded him and DISMISSED HIM

 

[Libby von H]

You're a poor debater. A personal attack and a reference to someone else's opinion do not make a rational argument.

Even there you make no sense, as if I should debate a racist like you.
Opinions is all you have

 

[Curried Goats]

Even there you make no sense, as if I should debate a racist like you.
Opinions is all you have

View attachment 926494

What opinions? Is it my opinion that slavery is the opposite of liberty and freedom? Is it my opinion that a person who respects liberty and freedom can't reasonably value a document that legitimizes the enslavement of people over the liberty of those people?

 

[gipper]

Well, I'm a big Lincoln fan, but we really cannot say that he "perfectly followed the Constitution." He unconstitutionally pro-rogued two Northern state legislatures after voters in those states elected anti-war majorities. He shut down dozens of Northern newspapers and jailed a number of newspaper editors on highly dubious grounds. He illegally suspended the writ of habeas corpus and then tried to have civilians put on trial by military courts, a move that the Supreme Court eventually slapped down in 1866 in Ex Parte Milligan.

I give Lincoln a pass for invading Virginia because the Confederate bombardment of Fort Sumter made it impossible for him to do otherwise. Once Jefferson Davis committed the astonishing, idiotic blunder of having Fort Sumter bombarded, Lincoln had no viable, realistic choice but to resort to coercion, given the power of the Radical Republicans and the inflammation of Northern public opinion caused by the Confederate attack.

Do you have proof Davis told SC to fire on Ft Sumter?

You must know Lincoln set up events at Ft Sumter to justify an invasion of the South. You know FDR set up events at Pearl Harbor. How could you not see Lincoln’s deceit?

You must also know every federal installation in the South vacated without violence. Lincoln told Ft Sumter to hold on so he could supply it, even though they told SC they would vacate. SC saw through the typical deception and fired on the fort. Yet, no one was injured. Do you think this justifies Lincoln invading the South resulting in massive death and destruction?