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

[paperview]

AL wanted the South to accept constitutional, electoral process; to recognize that slavery would not extend beyond the Old South; and to respect federal property.

He waited for the Confederates to fire on Old Glory and Ft Sumter, which enraged northern Democrats as well as Republicans. The war was lost the day it began for the Old South.

Like I said.... Bigger and more centralized government.
No wonder Obama likes to compare himself to Lincoln

You understand the confederacy was just as centralized, and in some cases, even more so, no?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The CSA instituted the draft a full year before the North.

The CSA sent out man hunters to force dodgers into the draft.

However, the Civil War's early modernistic ways of conducting warfare did force both North and South to centralize quickly.

Inevitable.

 

[hortysir]

The far right and the libertarians are clearly posting revisionist nonsense.

I like a lot of you folks, but really, come on now.

Lincoln went to war to Preserve The Union, and by the late Spring of 1862, he came to realize that slavery had to be destroyed to save the Union.

He was right.

Spring of 1862? Really?

Why'd he write this that summer?????

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;

Why did he push through an amendment that would have allowed slavery to the states, written in such a way that only that state could ever abolish it, in an attempt to lure the south back into the Union?

That letter AL sent Horace Greeley ends with this:

"...and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men, everywhere, could be free. Yours, A. LINCOLN."

A LETTER FROM PRESIDENT LINCOLN. - Reply to Horace Greeley. Slavery and the Union The Restoration of the Union the Paramount Object. - NYTimes.com


People often leave that part out.

And your facts on the Corwin Amendment are wrong.

Lincoln had nothing to do with its passage. By the time he addressed it, most states had already seceded.

I know the final part all too well.
It's presented as an after-thought, however, not as a tool to support the previous statement.
Abe was just like any other power-hungry politician. His political agenda took priority over individuals.
And that agenda was to rule over as many states as he could and reap the benefits thereof.

 

[hortysir]

The Corwin Amendment was before AL became president, and he would never have permitted it.

That's why his IL representatives were the first to sign on before the war preempted passage?

 

[hortysir]

AL wanted the South to accept constitutional, electoral process; to recognize that slavery would not extend beyond the Old South; and to respect federal property.

He waited for the Confederates to fire on Old Glory and Ft Sumter, which enraged northern Democrats as well as Republicans. The war was lost the day it began for the Old South.

Like I said.... Bigger and more centralized government.
No wonder Obama likes to compare himself to Lincoln

You understand the confederacy was just as centralized, and in some cases, even more so, no?

Then, perhaps, you would like to expound on their tax policies, trade plans, and cabinet positions and authority??

 

[JakeStarkey]

Like I said.... Bigger and more centralized government.
No wonder Obama likes to compare himself to Lincoln

You understand the confederacy was just as centralized, and in some cases, even more so, no?

Then, perhaps, you would like to expound on their tax policies, trade plans, and cabinet positions and authority??

You have not been particularly specific, and this has been your burden of affirmation, hortysir, so you better get cracking on comparative policies and plans.

I gave you the one on Conscription: points to the Union.

 

[hortysir]

You understand the confederacy was just as centralized, and in some cases, even more so, no?

Then, perhaps, you would like to expound on their tax policies, trade plans, and cabinet positions and authority??

You have not been particularly specific, and this has been your burden of affirmation, hortysir, so you better get cracking on comparative policies and plans.

I gave you the one on Conscription: points to the Union.

It's not up to me to be specific (yet).
Paper made the bolded claim.

I want to see evidence of it

 

[JakeStarkey]

These (tax policies, trade plans, and cabinet positions and authority) are your interests,

Post for us, please. And if indeed the Union was more centralized, so what? The vast geography and the technology required to overcome it required centralization.

Why then are you so afraid of modernism and We the People.

We are not going backwards.

 

[paperview]

The Corwin Amendment was before AL became president, and he would never have permitted it.

That's why his IL representatives were the first to sign on before the war preempted passage?

What do other IL reps have to do with Lincoln?

It was a last ditch effort, which most all knew stood no chance of survival, and you are wrong about IL being the first to sign it.

Like I said, most of the states had already seceded before it was passed. A futility, and most all saw it as such.

 

[Katzndogz]

The Civil War had nothing to do with slavery. Slavery did not even become an issue until the nation was two years into the war. It was about economic oppression and the control the mills in the North wanted over the growers in the South.

Lincold didn't want to free the slaves. He wanted to repatriate them and send them back to Africa.

 

[paperview]

Oh geeze, here we go again.

Round and round.

Idiocy.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Reactionaries are the opposition to which HS and college instructors teach. Such as Katzndogz make it very easy for a mainstream teacher to tell the truthful American narrative.

 

[hortysir]

These (tax policies, trade plans, and cabinet positions and authority) are your interests,

Post for us, please. And if indeed the Union was more centralized, so what? The vast geography and the technology required to overcome it required centralization.

Why then are you so afraid of modernism and We the People.

We are not going backwards.

Ya know, Jake, most times I honestly enjoy exchanging points of view with you....
But this post just helps to prop up others' claims that you're not a Republican.
Why else would you say "so what" to a more controlling centralized government?

Anyhoo.....this is one of those subjects that never get anywhere

 

[JakeStarkey]

That you reactionaries and libertarians have trouble with a Ford Republican, so who cares?

Watch what happens to your candidates next year in the primaries.

 

[Rogue 9]

The Civil War had nothing to do with slavery. Slavery did not even become an issue until the nation was two years into the war. It was about economic oppression and the control the mills in the North wanted over the growers in the South.

Lincold didn't want to free the slaves. He wanted to repatriate them and send them back to Africa.

Here is why the war happened, in the words of those who started the war:

Observing the forms of the Constitution, a sectional party has found within that Article establishing the Executive Department, the means of subverting the Constitution itself. A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that "Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free," and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction.

In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.

But not to be tedious in enumerating the numerous changes for the better, allow me to allude to one other-though last, not least: the new Constitution has put at rest forever all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institutions-African slavery as it exists among us-the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson, in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right.

Need I go on? Because I can. There's lots, lots more.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The Civil War had nothing to do with slavery. Slavery did not even become an issue until the nation was two years into the war. It was about economic oppression and the control the mills in the North wanted over the growers in the South.

Lincold didn't want to free the slaves. He wanted to repatriate them and send them back to Africa.

Here is why the war happened, in the words of those who started the war:

Observing the forms of the Constitution, a sectional party has found within that Article establishing the Executive Department, the means of subverting the Constitution itself. A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that "Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free," and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction.

In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.

But not to be tedious in enumerating the numerous changes for the better, allow me to allude to one other-though last, not least: the new Constitution has put at rest forever all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institutions-African slavery as it exists among us-the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson, in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right.

Need I go on? Because I can. There's lots, lots more.

Civil war is simple: Lincoln got elected, it meant north would control extension of slavery so south left union rather than submit to northern control of slavery, southern economies, and lifestyles.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The Civil War had nothing to do with slavery. Slavery did not even become an issue until the nation was two years into the war. It was about economic oppression and the control the mills in the North wanted over the growers in the South.

Lincold didn't want to free the slaves. He wanted to repatriate them and send them back to Africa.

Here is why the war happened, in the words of those who started the war:

But not to be tedious in enumerating the numerous changes for the better, allow me to allude to one other-though last, not least: the new Constitution has put at rest forever all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institutions-African slavery as it exists among us-the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson, in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right.

Need I go on? Because I can. There's lots, lots more.

Civil war is simple: Lincoln got elected, it meant north would control extension of slavery so south left union rather than submit to northern control of slavery, southern economies, and lifestyles.

The meds are working!

 

[Rogue 9]

Need I go on? Because I can. There's lots, lots more.

Civil war is simple: Lincoln got elected, it meant north would control extension of slavery so south left union rather than submit to northern control of slavery, southern economies, and lifestyles.

Unfortunately for any case that they were in the right, slavery is one of the greatest evils of human history. Refusing to permit controls upon it and the aim of its eventual abolition shows the leaders of the Slave Power and the plantation aristocracy to be monsters, worthy only of scorn from their posterity.

 

[Thunderbird]

The movie is evil because it attempts to justify dictatorship.

The common people are depicted as ignorant racists. The people are only redeemed when they worship the politicians.

The politicians are saints. Whatever lies the politicians tell, whatever corruption they embrace, whatever rights they dispose of, even if they kill 100s of 1000s they are justified because the politicians motives are supposed to be pure.

In reality Lincoln was a white supremacist who wanted to send African Americans to foreign colonies. Lincoln fought an ugly war (which included a large number of civilian deaths, torture of suspected deserters, brutal POW camps) to maintain the supremacy of the central government.

Is that any justification for all the suffering? If Quebec decided to leave the rest of Canada and the Ottawa government fought a war to force Quebec to submit, would any reasonable person defend the national government?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The movie is great because it shows the end of the Southern dictatorship over human flesh and soul.

Thunderbird clearly, so clearly, has not a clue about what he pontificates.

Disgusting.