[ronald reagan]

A friend of mine recently told me in a passionate monologue that Lincoln was the black man's best friend, and the primary force behind equality. And he even quoted Obama, among others, in his defense of Lincoln. Most of his 'facts' were directly from his college history textbook, and his memory of k-12 schooling. Listening to him, it makes perfect sense. And 99% of Americans would agree with him. In fact, up until just a few years ago, so would I. But today, I'm educated. And being educated, is far different than 'knowing something'. For instance, in 1400 -- we 'knew' the earth was flat. Before that, we "knew" the earth was the center of the universe, and especially the center of the solar system. Other things we've "known" throughout history include aristotle's idea that life generated from nothing. He "knew" that mice spontaneously appeared from garbage. Alligators from mud at the bottom of the water.

I "knew" Lincoln as a just man who fought the civil war because he believed Blacks were equal to whites. But I LEARNED something very different when I simply looked into it a little deeper. Here's what I found:

While I was at the hotel to—day, an elderly gentleman called upon me to know whether I was really in favor of producing a perfect equality between the negroes and white people... I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way 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 ***** should be denied every thing. I do not understand that because I do not want a ***** woman for a slave I must necessarily want her for a wife. [Cheers and laughter.] My understanding is that I can just let her alone. I am now in my fiftieth year, and I certainly never have had a black woman for either a slave or a wife. So it seems to me quite possible for us to get along without making either slaves or wives of negroes. I will add to this that I have never seen, to my knowledge, a man, woman or child who was in favor of producing a perfect equality, social and political, between negroes and white men... I will also add to the remarks I have made, that I have never had the least apprehension that I or my friends would marry negroes if there was no law to keep them from it, but as Judge Douglas and his friends seem to be in great apprehension that they might, if there were no law to keep them from it, I give him the most solemn pledge that I will to the very last stand by the law of this State, which forbids the marrying of white people with negroes. I will add one further word, which is this: that I do not understand that there is any place where an alteration of the social and political relations of the ***** and the white man can be made except in the State Legislature—not in the Congress of the United States—...

Lincoln wasn't a freedom lover. He was a commander in chief, trying to preserve the union. Slavery was part of the deal, necessary to win the war and the support of factions of the nation that might not support the conflict. He was simply stating that he did not support slavery, but made crystal clear -- that did not mean anything other than just that. He thought whites were superior, and blacks were inferior. He didn't believe that being antislavery meant that one had to marry the "*****" he felt should be free. In fact, he felt and stated emphatically and consistently that the ***** he felt should be freed from slavery, should never be part of the rest of society.

Funny how history writes its own story sometimes. Luckily, we have the rest of the story, if we're willing to take the blinders off.

Thoughts?

[TheRealThing]

It is possible to judge black men and white men by the same standard. In fact, I believe we are called on, by no less the Lord Himself, to do just that. Without overburdening my point with a litany of examples, we can use the workplace and the institution of marriage.

If I do not do my job, or if I do my job poorly, or if I lay off at he drop of a hat and come up with the lamest of excuses for doing so, I should expect the ax to fall on my employment at any time. Or if I go out on my wife but, only seem contrite at the times for which I have been overtaken in my error, should not my wife throw me out with the rest of the garbage? Black people are no better or worse than white folks, as Dr King asked, should black men be judged on the content of their character, or the color of their skin?

None the less, slugs should be called out for being slugs (whether they happen to be pale or dark). And since such a life lived is done so at the individual's choice, honorable acting people should be esteemed above others. In our time, at least one thing is different to the days of Lincoln. The availability of information. Consequently, the true meaning of various passages in Scripture which have been revealed to Pastors and Preachers are now shared knowledge among the ecumenical community and consequently the masses, not just the few who happen to be lucky enough to sit under the guidance of the genuinely enlightened. So nowadays, we should all know God conceived of and designed every person who ever lived. Which only means that the black man is as answerable for his life as the white man, as are any other ethnic groups.

In short, lives led with integrity are a matter of choice. Those who do not choose to be responsible, should not have the world handed to them by government. It is an affront to those who must pay for it and encourages sloth. Lincoln's viewpoint was surely based on the things he saw, and owing to his obvious intellect, cannot be dismissed as the ravings of a lunatic.

Therefore, the narrative falsely deifying Lincoln along lines of social justice, that you have so eloquently pointed to, and which tend to fan the flames of riot we have seen of late with regard to racial unrest, is not based on the noble aspirations of which liberals would have us believe. Said narrative does however give the Dems the appearance of having the moral high ground, and appearance is good enough for them. :biggrin:

[Hoot Gibson]

Taking historical quotes out of the context of history is what liberals have done to vilify or marginalize heroic figures of western civilization. If Lincoln had held a modern liberal view of blacks in the mid-1800s, nobody but his family would have remembered him longer than a generation or two. People are not perfect and it is impossible for them not to be influenced, for better or worse, by the times and places in which they live.

I think that Lincoln is overrated as a U.S. President because he disregarded important Constitutional principles and set some very bad precedents. Furthermore, he served as president during a Civil War in which more than 618,000 American troops died. Technology was quickly making slavery economically less feasible and other modern societies managed to outlaw slavery without sacrificing hundreds of thousands of their own citizens. A better president might have worked out a compromise to preserve lives while pushing slavery toward the ash heap.

That being said, I still view Lincoln as a great U.S. President and when viewed in the context of his life and times, he was no racist. He was a transitional leader whose actions were heroic. The country was not ready for a Martin Luther King or Bobby Kennedy and only half the country was ready for Lincoln. Lincoln did what he believed was right and made possible the civil rights movement that continued for decades after his death.

[RunItUpTheGut]

Its very simple.
Its a simple fact the civil war was about $.

Nothing more, nothing less.
Kind of irrelevant what Lincoln was or wasn't. Never liked his policies either way.

[ronald reagan]

Harry,

I totally understand your post and it is entirely relevant, but i have to ask... if you believe that someone can't be racist when viewed in context, then you'd have to say that the 1960's south wasn't racist either. When a plurality of the citizenry exhibit racist tendencies, it would effectively smother out the arguement that any one person is racist because it is likely just 'the times' and the enviroment that caused him to be like that.

However, if we look closely at Lincoln's own words, it is hard to further your argument. When someone says that whites are superior, blacks inferior, and because of physical differences blacks should never be on an equal playing field as whites, and because of their skin color, never made jurors, politicians, landowners, or marital partners of those who are white... It would take proof that a gun was held to their head when they made those remarks for me to believe they weren't racist.

I have family that I would classify as racist. They make frequent jokes about minorities. Lock doors when a black person approaches their car. Say things like, "Shaneequa cut my hair" in reference to a black lady. Use the n-word excessively. Fly confederate flags (without a clue what the flag really stood for). Are democrat, and liberal, but purposely voted against obama at every stage of the elections because of his skin color. The list could go on, ad infinitum. But their defense to not being racist is simply that slavery was wrong.

I appreciate all the thoughtful posts and the time people spend responding.

[ronald reagan]

Kind of irrelevant what Lincoln was or wasn't.

Irrelevant to you, or irrelevant to anyone?

The point of the thread was to show how liberalism has written history in its favor, not to condemn Lincoln as a person. As Harry pointed out, Lincoln likely was influenced by the times and his environment.

[Hoot Gibson]

Irrelevant to you, or irrelevant to anyone?

The point of the thread was to show how liberalism has written history in its favor, not to condemn Lincoln as a person. As Harry pointed out, Lincoln likely was influenced by the times and his environment.

Just for the record, Harry is not Hoot and Hoot is not Harry.

My point was and is that anybody who hopes to effect societal change must work within the framework in which they are born. Unless you are born with a large army sworn to follow you blindly, good intentions will not get you very far if you are too extreme to lead many others down a righteous path.

Lincoln and the thousands of troops that died in battle did far more good for black Americans than the extremists who preceded them, such as John Brown.

[Harry Rex Vonner]

Old Harry is honored to be confused with Hoot.

As for Lincoln, I believe he has both suffered and benefited from the revision of history by liberal "educators" and text book writers.

If you doubt that history is being revised, look at some of these government school history books. The authors are never handcuffed by the truth.

[TheRealThing]

Old Harry is honored to be confused with Hoot.

As for Lincoln, I believe he has both suffered and benefited from the revision of history by liberal "educators" and text book writers.

If you doubt that history is being revised, look at some of these government school history books. The authors are never handcuffed by the truth.

And in saying that you have defined the problem with all liberals. They are liars. I heard Mr Obama say that Americans "who like their health insurance can keep their health insurance" all the while knowing beyond any measure of question whatever, that was a false a statement. Why did he know better? Because from the moment the Dems rammed ObamaCare rather illegally through the Congress, all healtlh insurance companies had been conscripted to rewrite their policies to conform to the mandates of ObamaCare. In other words they had to conform to the new law because the law that used to standardize health coverage was gone.

But, their lies certainly do not stop there. Campaigns are fraught with lies as are their agenda aims. Global Warming = lie. Keynesian Economics has been tried in a number of societies across time and has failed each of those times. Therefore despite the rantings of Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton, and the legion of mushrooms they represent, a government committed to giving it's citizens life's necessities instead of encouraging them to work for all that, will fall. And, it doesn't matter how deeply down in their sould they think they can feel it, it's not a matter of polity it is a matter of math. Education does not equal advanced civility. Therefore mankind is unfortunately not a great big brotherhood awaiting the definition of their frustrations, thus the specter of war has not been relegated to the past as is presently claimed and in which the lunacy of present foreign policy is apparent. Rich people are not bad. And contrary to the supremely misguided court, a society steeped in sexual deviations is not stronger than a society guided by an adherence to Christian principles.

So IMHO, if lies are your thing by all means keep voting liberal.

[Harry Rex Vonner]

The authors of the US Constitution and the writers of the Fourteenth Amendment would not recognize their document if they were living today. Liberal politicians and liberal judges have completely bastardized our founding document.

For example, the Fourteenth Amendment, used by liberals to create a non-existent and unintended right to privacy and legalizing homosexual marriage among other atrocities was solely intended to grant full rights and protections to blacks after the Civil War. That was the only intent of the writers. That was the sole intent of the states who ratified it. However, as is often the case, liberals have destroyed original intent.

And, it is abominable that the Fourteenth Amendment is not being used to protect the equal protection and due process of babies from the time of conception. After all, medical science now proves conclusively that a baby has separate DNA from the woman carrying it and is, thus, a separate human being. Isn't it strange that the abortion industry never argues medical science anymore?

[WideRight05]

The authors of the US Constitution and the writers of the Fourteenth Amendment would not recognize their document if they were living today. Liberal politicians and liberal judges have completely bastardized our founding document.

For example, the Fourteenth Amendment, used by liberals to create a non-existent and unintended right to privacy and legalizing homosexual marriage among other atrocities was solely intended to grant full rights and protections to blacks after the Civil War. That was the only intent of the writers. That was the sole intent of the states who ratified it. However, as is often the case, liberals have destroyed original intent.

And, it is abominable that the Fourteenth Amendment is not being used to protect the equal protection and due process of babies from the time of conception. After all, medical science now proves conclusively that a baby has separate DNA from the woman carrying it and is, thus, a separate human being. Isn't it strange that the abortion industry never argues medical science anymore?

[Image: https://scottystarnes.files.wordpress.co...01-120.jpg]

[ronald reagan]

Let me apologize to Harry and Hoot for the confusion. And let me make clear that I wasn't insinuating that you two were one and the same. I respect both of you and your post content. We seem to agree on about 95% of the issues. Which mean, simply, that you guys are only wrong about 5% of the time. :Clap: