What Americans Were.....sigh....

[Uncensored2008]

Ft Sumpter was a US facility. Why wouldn't there be US troops there?

The mobilization of troops into the Carolinas was an act of war, just as marching the US Army into Sacramento would be an act of war today.

 

[Mr Natural]

Ft Sumpter was a US facility. Why wouldn't there be US troops there?

The mobilization of troops into the Carolinas was an act of war, just as marching the US Army into Sacramento would be an act of war today.

Ft Sumpter was a US Army Facilty.

US troops in a US facility is the norm.

 

[Dragon]

U.S. troops marching into Sacramento would not be an act of war, either. In fact, U.S. troops go through Sacramento frequently. I see them in San Jose, too. Most definitely U.S. troops at Beale Air Force Base in California do not constitute an act of war.

However, that's really neither here nor there. Lincoln, for his time, was a liberal. He was a liberal on the slavery issue, and on the rights of labor, too. So was Theodore Roosevelt, another Republican and the nation's first "progressive" president in the modern sense. Party is one thing, ideology is another.

 

[rightwinger]

Ummmm.....Lincoln did control industry,

Oh? Kewl! So you'll be posting 5 year industrial and manufacturing and production plans, showing the industries nationalized and the industrial boards Lincoln controlled.

Unless you're just lying through your fucking teeth...

As usual.....

fought for a strong FEDERAL Government and against States Rights

Lincoln was pretty federalist, that's in the same county as accurate - which for you is damned astounding.

Lincoln was a Nationalist Whig. In the Douglas debates he argued that States and the Federal Government were "coequal" in authority. Quite a break from the Republican position of Jefferson, but not the opponent of states rights you dishonestly portray.

You guys would have loved Lincoln during the Civil War

And you call Obama a dictator?

Suspended Habeus Corpus, Controlled the railroad and telegraph systems, ignored states rights and centralized power in the Federal Government

 

[Uncensored2008]

Ft Sumpter was a US Army Facilty.

US troops in a US facility is the norm.

Nope.

The fort was being built as a means to wage war against the Carolinas. It was unfinished at the time of the battle. It was meant to provoke a war, and it did.

 

[koshergrl]

U.S. troops marching into Sacramento would not be an act of war, either. In fact, U.S. troops go through Sacramento frequently. I see them in San Jose, too. Most definitely U.S. troops at Beale Air Force Base in California do not constitute an act of war.

However, that's really neither here nor there. Lincoln, for his time, was a liberal. He was a liberal on the slavery issue, and on the rights of labor, too. So was Theodore Roosevelt, another Republican and the nation's first "progressive" president in the modern sense. Party is one thing, ideology is another.

No, he wasn't. He fought to preserve the Union as he believed the founding fathers conceived it.

The very definition of conservative.

You lose. As usual.

The liberals are the southerners who wanted to secede from the Union and form their own nation...who defied the federal government for the sake of maintaining a captive slave population.

Just like libs today. Nothing has changed atall.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You guys would have loved Lincoln during the Civil War

And you call Obama a dictator?

Suspended Habeus Corpus, Controlled the railroad and telegraph systems, ignored states rights and centralized power in the Federal Government

So you acknowledge that you were lying, and are now changing the subject?

Figures.

 

[Uncensored2008]

No, he wasn't. He fought to preserve the Union as he believed the founding fathers conceived it.

The very definition of conservative.

You lose. As usual.

Conservative and leftist are meaningless terms in regard to Lincoln. RW is a disingenuous troll. If we take the position that Republicans like Jefferson and Mason were the definition of "liberals," then Lincoln was the polar opposite of a liberal. Lincoln would be more aligned with Adams, as an advocate of nationalism.

Lincoln was no conservative either, he was an advocate of a central bank and a proponent of direct taxation through income tax. Lincoln was an abolitionist and believed that the use of the federal government to abolish slavery was justified. Those who claim that Lincoln had no such plans have simply not read the writings of Abe. He was very clear on his intent to end slavery.

Lincoln simply does not fit into the mold of modern politics. He was a 19th century man dealing with 19th century issues.

 

[rightwinger]

You guys would have loved Lincoln during the Civil War

And you call Obama a dictator?

Suspended Habeus Corpus, Controlled the railroad and telegraph systems, ignored states rights and centralized power in the Federal Government

So you acknowledge that you were lying, and are now changing the subject?

Figures.

No, I am admitting that you obviously don't know what you are talking about

But that is not news to anyone

 

[Uncensored2008]

No, I am admitting that you obviously don't know what you are talking about

Well, obviously. I mean, you lie, I point out that you're a fucking liar - clearly that means I don't know what I'm talking about.

But that is not news to anyone

So, you're actually a right wing troll, pretending to be a leftist to defame the left, then?

You're doing a superb job - seriously.

 

[koshergrl]

No, he wasn't. He fought to preserve the Union as he believed the founding fathers conceived it.

The very definition of conservative.

You lose. As usual.

Conservative and leftist are meaningless terms in regard to Lincoln. RW is a disingenuous troll. If we take the position that Republicans like Jefferson and Mason were the definition of "liberals," then Lincoln was the polar opposite of a liberal. Lincoln would be more aligned with Adams, as an advocate of nationalism.

Lincoln was no conservative either, he was an advocate of a central bank and a proponent of direct taxation through income tax. Lincoln was an abolitionist and believed that the use of the federal government to abolish slavery was justified. Those who claim that Lincoln had no such plans have simply not read the writings of Abe. He was very clear on his intent to end slavery.

Lincoln simply does not fit into the mold of modern politics. He was a 19th century man dealing with 19th century issues.

I agree, but for the purposes of idiots who want to apply today's labels to yesterday's politicians, it bears noting that the REASON Lincoln was profoundly anti-secession and anti-slavery is because he believed the principles upon which this country were founded prohibited those things....

Plus I'm pretty sure he was anti-abortion, and Christian to boot.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I agree, but for the purposes of idiots who want to apply today's labels to yesterday's politicians, it bears noting that the REASON Lincoln was profoundly anti-secession and anti-slavery is because he believed the principles upon which this country were founded prohibited those things....

The country was not founded on the principle of anti-secession. Jefferson, the founder of the Republicans, held that the Federal government was an agent of the states, and had absolutely no power over them. Jackson, the founder of the Democrats, likewise held that the Federal government was simply a means for the many states to conduct their affairs with foreign nations and the Indian tribes, and was not a nation unto itself.

John Adams had a differing view, and favored Nationalism and perhaps an Empire.

Plus I'm pretty sure he was anti-abortion, and Christian to boot.

"In religion, Mr. Lincoln was about of the same opinion as Bob Ingersoll, and there is no account of his ever having changed. He went to church a few times with his family while he was President, but so far as I have been able to find out, he remained an unbeliever. Mr. Lincoln in his younger days wrote a book, in which he endeavored to prove the fallacy of the plan of salvation and the divinity of Christ."
-- Judge James M Nelson, who had an intimate acquaintance with Lincoln in Washington, in the Louisville Times, in 1887, quoted from Franklin Steiner, The Religious Beleifs of Our Presidents, p. 137

 

[rightwinger]

No, he wasn't. He fought to preserve the Union as he believed the founding fathers conceived it.

The very definition of conservative.

You lose. As usual.

Conservative and leftist are meaningless terms in regard to Lincoln. RW is a disingenuous troll. If we take the position that Republicans like Jefferson and Mason were the definition of "liberals," then Lincoln was the polar opposite of a liberal. Lincoln would be more aligned with Adams, as an advocate of nationalism.

Lincoln was no conservative either, he was an advocate of a central bank and a proponent of direct taxation through income tax. Lincoln was an abolitionist and believed that the use of the federal government to abolish slavery was justified. Those who claim that Lincoln had no such plans have simply not read the writings of Abe. He was very clear on his intent to end slavery.

Lincoln simply does not fit into the mold of modern politics. He was a 19th century man dealing with 19th century issues.

I agree, but for the purposes of idiots who want to apply today's labels to yesterday's politicians, it bears noting that the REASON Lincoln was profoundly anti-secession and anti-slavery is because he believed the principles upon which this country were founded prohibited those things....

Plus I'm pretty sure he was anti-abortion, and Christian to boot.

Please don't post when you obviously don't know what you are talking about

This country was founded on the principle of anti-slavery?

Lincoln was anti-abortion? in the 1860s?

 

[koshergrl]

Lol.

 

[Mr Natural]

Ft Sumpter was a US Army Facilty.

US troops in a US facility is the norm.

Nope.

The fort was being built as a means to wage war against the Carolinas. It was unfinished at the time of the battle. It was meant to provoke a war, and it did.

It was built following the War of 1812.

But nonetheless, it was still a US military facility and troops stationed there would have been neither unusual or a provocation.

 

[rightwinger]

Ft Sumpter was a US Army Facilty.

US troops in a US facility is the norm.

Nope.

The fort was being built as a means to wage war against the Carolinas. It was unfinished at the time of the battle. It was meant to provoke a war, and it did.

It was built following the War of 1812.

But nonetheless, it was still a US military facility and troops stationed there would have been neither unusual or a provocation.

US Military bases are Federal property. The attack on Ft Sumter was an act of treason

 

[daveman]

Oh, you mean childish insults like "Conservatives have always approved of some people exercising control and domination over other people"?

No, I mean insults hurled specifically at another poster in lieu of an argument. That amounts to a confession that you don't have an argument.

What you just quoted is simply calling it like it is.

Of course it is. It's always different. Somehow. It just is.

You're pathetic.

And that's simply calling it like it is.

 

[daveman]

Anyone who thinks that the Republicans have always been conservative, or that the Democrats have always been liberal, has no grasp of history at all. Read up on Theodore Roosevelt (R) sometime. Or on Grover Cleveland (D).

On the slavery issue, the Republicans were liberals. On the same issue, while not all Democrats were conservative, all conservatives were Democrats unless they were some right-wing extremist party. Party and ideology are not the same thing.

And there is it:

Liberal = good.

Conservative = bad.

This is the basis for your whole view of history. And it's ludicrous.

You are encouraged to list the contributions of of Conservatives to our society

Only to have you mindlessly screech "Nuh-UHH!!" and fling poo, you dishonest slug?

Why should I bother?

You will now predictably claim that I can't think of any, and wet your pants in glee.

So feel free to eat shit. I heard you really like Obama's. You'll have to arm wrestle Synthia for it, though.

 

[daveman]

And there is it:

Liberal = good.

Conservative = bad.

LOL close, but not quite.

Liberal = for the common person.

Conservative = for the wealthy, powerful elite.

Which of those is "good" or "bad" is a value judgment. Naturally I do think that being for the common people is "good" while being for the wealthy, powerful elite is "bad," because I'm a liberal. That doesn't mean conservatives are guilty of EVERY evil, or that something is "conservative" merely because it's also bad. It has to be a specific KIND of bad.

Lots of words that do nothing but prove me right.

Good job, kid. You've proven unequivocally that you're utterly mindless and, as is typical of leftists, capable only of binary thinking.

 

[daveman]

You are encouraged to list the contributions of of Conservatives to our society

Betcha he gives us some contributions of liberal Republicans. Watch and see.

Yeah, you're not worth the effort either, kid.

It's funny the way you two pretend you want debate, but there is not a single chance in hell that you'd EVER consider allowing an unapproved thought rattle around in your vacuous craniums.

So you can stop lying about it any time now.

But you won't.