Tuesday, December 14, 2010


Lincoln was well known to oppose slavery vehemently, yet he said his first goal was preservation of the union. He was a politician - that's always important to remember about our sainted former Presidents. They weren't actually saints, just people trying to accomplish something, often against tall odds.

I think Lincoln might have considered carefully what his nation would actually go to war far. He might have found abolition wanting as a popular cause, even if it was in fact his real cause.

Marked “Private & confidential,” the letter instructed Kellogg to “entertain no proposition for a compromise in regard to the extension of slavery. The instant you do, they have us under again; all our labor is lost, and sooner or later must be done over. … Have none of it. The tug has to come & better now than later.”
I wish I were confident that President Obama were flawed enough to do political battle for his beliefs.


Anonymous said...

Lincoln was a tyrant and a homosexual. As a tyrant he suspended habeas corpus and closed down any newspaper, the main media outlet of the day, that disagreed on how he conducted the war. His days in college were spent in a homosexual love affair with his roommate. Lincoln was a sexual degenerate and a disgrace to the office of President of the United States.

lovable liberal said...

From the neo-Confederate point of view - yours - which is worse?

What made his alleged sexuality degenerate? Was it only that he allegedly allowed himself what you want but can never (again) let yourself taste?

lovable liberal said...

By the way, the Constitution's view of habeas corpus is pretty emphatic: "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."

You think maybe the war to preserve human bondage might have qualified as a rebellion? Was Gettysburg an invasion?

Riiight. Think would be at least a bridge too far.

Anonymous said...

There was no rebellion, there was succession. The war was between two nations so your rebellion argument is lame. Lincoln first suspended the Writ of Habeas Corpus in 1861 long before the battles at Gettysburg in 1863. So, your invasion argument is also lame. What was that about thinking???

lovable liberal said...

If you're going to cheerlead for racist, treasonous dead-enders, at least learn how to spell what they did - secession. Succession is what one president does to another.

Not a rebellion? What the hell do you think that word means, anyway?

That's some Orwellian dictionary you're using. Your bullshit isn't even plausible, yet you keep right on pretending it is.