- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Let's discuss the union
Posted on 6/24/15 at 5:53 am
Posted on 6/24/15 at 5:53 am
Abraham Lincoln
Emancipation Proclamation
did not apply to all the Confederate states
You can't discuss the size of the federal government without discussing Lincoln
quote:
I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races – that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and 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. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything.
Emancipation Proclamation
did not apply to all the Confederate states
You can't discuss the size of the federal government without discussing Lincoln
7
Posted on 6/24/15 at 5:58 am to eScott
Obama played more golf than I did last year. That's mind boggling.
Posted on 6/24/15 at 6:04 am to BRgetthenet
He's the king of the lakes
Posted on 6/24/15 at 6:05 am to eScott
One of the great aspects of Lincoln, among many, is that his beliefs evolved over time. His views on blacks changed over time. He was wrong in this particular belief as many Northerners were. Sadly some of his biographies are more akin to hagiography, and sanctify the man without mentioning his faults. Yet, many others condemn the man by selecting a few quotes or incidents as if that completely tarnishes his accomplishments. Both are wrong.
Posted on 6/24/15 at 6:06 am to fouldeliverer
Lincoln liked "wrestling" dudes.
This post was edited on 6/24/15 at 6:33 am
Posted on 6/24/15 at 6:14 am to eScott
Lincoln was a tyrant. The federal government was never intended to be so powerful, but he started that ball rolling and now we have the shite-show we see today.
Posted on 6/24/15 at 6:21 am to kilo1234
What specifically did he do that was tyrannical?
Why blame him for all the future actions that expanded federal power? Is it his fault later presidents took his war time measures and introduced them during peace time?
I have always had a hard time believing a tyrant would allow a democratic election that he could very well lose in the midst of a civil war. How many political leaders in history have done that?
If he was indeed a tyrant why not take more radical steps to ensure his stay in power?
Do you think Davis was a tyrant? Or at least acted tyrannically in some ways? Confederacy also introduced a draft and suspended writ of habeas corpus.
Why blame him for all the future actions that expanded federal power? Is it his fault later presidents took his war time measures and introduced them during peace time?
I have always had a hard time believing a tyrant would allow a democratic election that he could very well lose in the midst of a civil war. How many political leaders in history have done that?
If he was indeed a tyrant why not take more radical steps to ensure his stay in power?
Do you think Davis was a tyrant? Or at least acted tyrannically in some ways? Confederacy also introduced a draft and suspended writ of habeas corpus.
This post was edited on 6/24/15 at 6:33 am
Posted on 6/24/15 at 6:27 am to fouldeliverer
He finally got it through his head that this was a bad idea Emancipation Proclamation
Posted on 6/24/15 at 6:35 am to fouldeliverer
quote:
What specifically did he do that was tyrannical?
Suspended the writ of habeas corpus, although mainly they used that in lieu of bombarding Maryland - in order to keep it in the Union (a slave state, mind you) he also specifically used it to suppress his political opponents - the "Peace" Democrats.
If that isn't tryanny, it will do until tyranny comes along.
Posted on 6/24/15 at 7:04 am to eScott
Posted on 6/24/15 at 7:25 am to Ace Midnight
Let's table the discussion of the constitutionality of his action for a minute and focus on Maryland. In my opinion his actions were necessary and justified (even if you think they were unconstitutional, which I don't) He could not allow a small group of Marylanders from stopping the movement of troops marching south to defend the capital. He said "Are all the laws but one to go unexecuted, and the government itself go to pieces, lest that one be violated?" I think that is a powerfully pragmatic argument. Later, and my memory sketchy on details Marylanders voted to oust the democratic governor and his congressional supporters.
This post was edited on 6/24/15 at 7:26 am
Posted on 6/24/15 at 7:31 am to fouldeliverer
quote:
In my opinion his actions were necessary and justified
If you're going to go with "the ends justify the means" - then you're not disputing that it was tyranny, but, rather that you're okay with that tyranny.
But don't be surprised when it gets brought up as an example of tyranny, when it so clearly was. Even Roosevelt didn't act so boldly in WWII - a war that dwarfed the Civil War - at least logistically.
quote:
Later, and my memory sketchy on details Marylanders voted to oust the democratic governor and his congressional supporters.
Because they knew what was good for them. Anytime a group is suppressed under official sanction by FedGov - they tend to lose support. Modern examples would be IRS targeting of Tea Party groups - a tyranny that most people just seem okay with, as those groups were demonized in the media.
Posted on 6/24/15 at 7:33 am to fouldeliverer
quote:
What specifically did he do that was tyrannical?
Plenty. Silenced political critics, implemented Mrshl law, suspended habeas corpus, shut down free speech, invaded a country for his own benefit, shite on the constitution and the other bodies of government, ignored checks and balances, trampled state'a rights.
Any historian will tell you that he was a ruthless dictator.
They will justify it and wash it out, but most everyone agrees he was the most tyrannical president.
This post was edited on 6/24/15 at 7:36 am
Posted on 6/24/15 at 7:33 am to Ace Midnight
I don't think it was tyranny because I don't think his actions were unconstitutional. Furthermore, even if they were I don't think that automatically qualifies it as an act of tyranny give the circumstances. I also think it gets lost that Davis did the same thing yet isn't vilified for it.
Posted on 6/24/15 at 7:35 am to eScott
Didn't LSU totally remodel the Union a few years ago?
Posted on 6/24/15 at 7:36 am to fouldeliverer
quote:
Do you think Davis was a tyrant? Or at least acted tyrannically in some ways? Confederacy also introduced a draft and suspended writ of habeas corpus.
Yes. But that tyranny didn't survive to get handed down to the next generation. I think the Confederacy's situation was more exigent, but I'm not going to deny that Davis was, generally, tryannical in leading the CSA. (Keep in mind that he didn't even, really, want the job. He wanted to be the military commander of the Confederacy, but offered his services in whatever capacity Mississippi wanted him.)
Lincoln ran as an abolitionist, so it is reasonable to conclude he always intended to end slavery - by whatever means necessary - and the secession crisis gave him his opportunity. His talk of preserving the union - at all costs - rings hollow in light of his actions during the war.
Posted on 6/24/15 at 7:37 am to fouldeliverer
quote:
I don't think his actions were unconstitutional.
Then you clearly don't understand the constitution or his actions.
Posted on 6/24/15 at 7:39 am to Ace Midnight
Lincoln ran as an anti-slavery candidate not as an abolitionist. I think that is a subtle but important difference.
I can agree to disagree on the other matters.
I can agree to disagree on the other matters.
Posted on 6/24/15 at 7:43 am to Breesus
I'm not as knowledgable on this subject as others though I've read a few books on this matter. My thinking is greatly influenced by The Fate of Liberty: Abraham Lincoln and Civil Liberties by Mark Neely
This post was edited on 6/24/15 at 7:44 am
Page 1 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News