[thecavemaster]

"Corporations have been enthroned...An era of corruption in high places will follow and the money power will endeavor to prolong its reign by working on the prejudices of the people...until wealth is aggregated in a few hands...and the republic is destroyed." -Abraham Lincoln

Lincoln spoke this shortly before he was assassinated. In 1886, the United States Supreme Court, in Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad, ruled that a private corporation was a "natural person" under the US Constitution and therefore entitled to protection under the Bill of Rights.

Suddenly, corporations enjoyed all the rights and sovereignty previously enjoyed only by the people. This decision, basically, gave corporations the same powers as private citizens. But considering their vast financial resources, corporations thereafter actually had far MORE power than any private citizen. They could defend and exploit their rights and freedoms more vigorously than any individual and therefore they were MORE FREE.

Fair scales capitalism lost... the era of cut-throat capitalism came blowing in.

[Hoot Gibson]

"Corporations have been enthroned...An era of corruption in high places will follow and the money power will endeavor to prolong its reign by working on the prejudices of the people...until wealth is aggregated in a few hands...and the republic is destroyed." -Abraham Lincoln

Lincoln spoke this shortly before he was assassinated. In 1886, the United States Supreme Court, in Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad, ruled that a private corporation was a "natural person" under the US Constitution and therefore entitled to protection under the Bill of Rights.

Suddenly, corporations enjoyed all the rights and sovereignty previously enjoyed only by the people. This decision, basically, gave corporations the same powers as private citizens. But considering their vast financial resources, corporations thereafter actually had far MORE power than any private citizen. They could defend and exploit their rights and freedoms more vigorously than any individual and therefore they were MORE FREE.

Fair scales capitalism lost... the era of cut-throat capitalism came blowing in.

It is always a good idea to provide the source of such quotes. According to Snopes.com, Lincoln did not say what you say he said. You will need to look elsewhere for quotes to defend the current regime. Marx or Alinsky, perhaps.

[thecavemaster]

It is always a good idea to provide the source of such quotes. According to Snopes.com, Lincoln did not say what you say he said. You will need to look elsewhere for quotes to defend the current regime. Marx or Alinsky, perhaps.

David R. Loy, A Buddhist Critique of Transnational Corporations, www.igc.apc.org/bpf/think.html

Snopes? Hahahaha

[thecavemaster]

Letter to Col. William Elkins, Nov. 21, 1864...Reference: The Lincoln Encyclopedia, Archer H. Shaw, published in 1950

He saw it, Hoot... don't be upset because with your tunnel vision you can't. Pity.

[ukyfootball]

I found this quote very interesting, especially since Lincoln was a Republican.

Such a great President.

[thecavemaster]

This applied to a specific case before Lincoln, but it is relevant here:

"These capitalists generally act harmoniously and in concert to fleece the people, and now that they have got into a quarrel with themselves, we are called upon to appropriate the people's money to settle the quarrel." -Abe Lincoln

Speech to Illinois legislature, Jan. 1837... See Vol. 1, p. 24 of Lincoln's Complete Works

[Hoot Gibson]

Letter to Col. William Elkins, Nov. 21, 1864...Reference: The Lincoln Encyclopedia, Archer H. Shaw, published in 1950

He saw it, Hoot... don't be upset because with your tunnel vision you can't. Pity.

Did you read the Snopes link at all? The part where Lincoln's personal secretary claimed that the letter cited in your reference was a hoax? Probably not. It is always better to do your homework before you start a new thread. Defending a blunder is much tougher than avoiding it in the first place.

[thecavemaster]

Did you read the Snopes link at all? The part where Lincoln's personal secretary claimed that the letter cited in your reference was a hoax? Probably not. It is always better to do your homework before you start a new thread. Defending a blunder is much tougher than avoiding it in the first place.

Funny, upon tracing the source, your Snopes bullsmack don't play. I invite anyone interested to investigate for themselves, including Snopes, but not limited to Snopes. Is it unusual to realize that Lincoln distrusted corporate power and championed the cause of the working man? Or, Hoot, in your tunneled vision, is that also socialism. You're some piece of work.

[Hoot Gibson]

Funny, upon tracing the source, your Snopes bullsmack don't play. I invite anyone interested to investigate for themselves, including Snopes, but not limited to Snopes. Is it unusual to realize that Lincoln distrusted corporate power and championed the cause of the working man? Or, Hoot, in your tunneled vision, is that also socialism. You're some piece of work.

Go ahead and perpetrate the hoax if you want, CM. I am beginning to understand why you never provide links to the "information" that your post here.

[thecavemaster]

Go ahead and perpetrate the hoax if you want, CM. I am beginning to understand why you never provide links to the "information" that your post here.

I provided sources, which can easily be looked up. I am not surprised, Hoot, that a sort such as you would completely buy into the sanitized version of Lincoln. However, this particular tack of yours in this thread is foolish. Again, I invite anyone interested to search out this quote, look at the Snope's site, and make their own determination. The quote, to my mind and satisfaction after research, is legitimate and squares with other things Lincoln wrote about in his letters or suggested in his speeches. The thought thread runs true. I know when things don't square with your tight little worldview, Hoot, that you get troubled. Ease your mind. Allow those who are interested enough to make their own determination.

[Hoot Gibson]

I provided sources, which can easily be looked up. I am not surprised, Hoot, that a sort such as you would completely buy into the sanitized version of Lincoln. However, this particular tack of yours in this thread is foolish. Again, I invite anyone interested to search out this quote, look at the Snope's site, and make their own determination. The quote, to my mind and satisfaction after research, is legitimate and squares with other things Lincoln wrote about in his letters or suggested in his speeches. The thought thread runs true. I know when things don't square with your tight little worldview, Hoot, that you get troubled. Ease your mind. Allow those who are interested enough to make their own determination.

The quote appeared nowhere in Lincoln's collective quotes and the official biographer labeled it a hoax. If you want to post such quotes on the DailyKos or DemocraticUnderground, you might not run into much resistanxe - but don't expect to post an unsourced quote in an OP here and have it accepted on its face.

It took very little time to discover that the authenticity of the quote is highly suspect.

As for buying into a sanitized version of Lincoln, you do not know what you are talking about. IMO, Lincoln is one of our most overrated presidents. He was unable to avoid the bloodiest war in this country's history and he botched the prosecution of the war in the early years, despite having huge strategic advantages over the Confederacy, before he finally put Grant in charge. Lincoln did what he had to do, but I suspect that many other presidents would not have done as good or better job. As a war president, Lincoln was no FDR. But Lincoln, unlike 0bama, was no socialist.

[Stardust]

The quote appeared nowhere in Lincoln's collective quotes and the official biographer labeled it a hoax. If you want to post such quotes on the DailyKos or DemocraticUnderground, you might not run into much resistanxe - but don't expect to post an unsourced quote in an OP here and have it accepted on its face.

It took very little time to discover that the authenticity of the quote is highly suspect.

As for buying into a sanitized version of Lincoln, you do not know what you are talking about. IMO, Lincoln is one of our most overrated presidents. He was unable to avoid the bloodiest war in this country's history and he botched the prosecution of the war in the early years, despite having huge strategic advantages over the Confederacy, before he finally put Grant in charge. Lincoln did what he had to do, but I suspect that many other presidents would not have done as good or better job. As a war president, Lincoln was no FDR. But Lincoln, unlike 0bama, was no socialist.

Great job Hoot, very nice :Thumbs:

[Stardust]

I found this quote very interesting, especially since Lincoln was a Republican.

Such a great President.

What is your argument here, or what point are you trying to make?

I respect Lincoln, but don't make the comparison of what the Republican and Democratic parties of the 3rd quarter of the 19th century to what they are in the 1st quarter of the 21st. The Democratic and Republican parties were both at the beginnings of a transition that resulted with the end of the Whig Party. When the Whig party ended in the 1850's, the party separated and half went to each of the democratic and republican parties. Which made ideologies similar, but not the same. Fast-forward almost 150 years later and you have two parties that have very little in common.

[ukyfootball]

What is your argument here, or what point are you trying to make?

I respect Lincoln, but don't make the comparison of what the Republican and Democratic parties of the 3rd quarter of the 19th century to what they are in the 1st quarter of the 21st. The Democratic and Republican parties were both at the beginnings of a transition that resulted with the end of the Whig Party. When the Whig party ended in the 1850's, the party separated and half went to each of the democratic and republican parties. Which made ideologies similar, but not the same. Fast-forward almost 150 years later and you have two parties that have very little in common.

I wasnt really trying to make a point or argue, but rather I was just make a general statement.

The Whig Party was actually destroyed. The Liberty Party and the Free Soil Party joined together to form the Republican Part in 1854.

[thecavemaster]

The quote appeared nowhere in Lincoln's collective quotes and the official biographer labeled it a hoax. If you want to post such quotes on the DailyKos or DemocraticUnderground, you might not run into much resistanxe - but don't expect to post an unsourced quote in an OP here and have it accepted on its face.

It took very little time to discover that the authenticity of the quote is highly suspect.

As for buying into a sanitized version of Lincoln, you do not know what you are talking about. IMO, Lincoln is one of our most overrated presidents. He was unable to avoid the bloodiest war in this country's history and he botched the prosecution of the war in the early years, despite having huge strategic advantages over the Confederacy, before he finally put Grant in charge. Lincoln did what he had to do, but I suspect that many other presidents would not have done as good or better job. As a war president, Lincoln was no FDR. But Lincoln, unlike 0bama, was no socialist.

My expectation from you, Hoot, was met. Based on other strains in Lincoln's thought, and the sources I looked at, I do not share your "hoax" view of the quote. Of course, that is for others, who are interested, to look up for themselves, Snopes balanced with others, and decide. The ability to avoid the North/South conflict... by what means? allowing the country to remain both slave and free? a clear abrogation of this country's creed? Believing in fair scales capitalism, in the dignity and vulnerablity of the working man does not make one a socialist. Period.

[Hoot Gibson]

My expectation from you, Hoot, was met. Based on other strains in Lincoln's thought, and the sources I looked at, I do not share your "hoax" view of the quote. Of course, that is for others, who are interested, to look up for themselves, Snopes balanced with others, and decide. The ability to avoid the North/South conflict... by what means? allowing the country to remain both slave and free? a clear abrogation of this country's creed? Believing in fair scales capitalism, in the dignity and vulnerablity of the working man does not make one a socialist. Period.

If you knew that the authenticity of the quote that you attributed to Lincoln was questionable when you created the thread, then you should have disclosed that fact in the OP. If you did not know, then you should have known. I am not debating Lincoln's worth as a president here, merely demonstrating that you once again made assumptions about my political beliefs with no basis in fact.

[thecavemaster]

If you knew that the authenticity of the quote that you attributed to Lincoln was questionable when you created the thread, then you should have disclosed that fact in the OP. If you did not know, then you should have known. I am not debating Lincoln's worth as a president here, merely demonstrating that you once again made assumptions about my political beliefs with no basis in fact.

Dearest Hoot, I suggested (at least twice) that to my mind, after researching, was satisfied that the quote is legitimate, as it still is. Lincoln said other things in other places that suggested his distrust of big money, concentrated in few hands, with the potential to thwart democracy. I saw a cartoon where a dad was shining a light under his kid's bed, the caption read, "See, son, no socialists." Was it a tableau of your childhood?

[Hoot Gibson]

Dearest Hoot, I suggested (at least twice) that to my mind, after researching, was satisfied that the quote is legitimate, as it still is. Lincoln said other things in other places that suggested his distrust of big money, concentrated in few hands, with the potential to thwart democracy. I saw a cartoon where a dad was shining a light under his kid's bed, the caption read, "See, son, no socialists." Was it a tableau of your childhood?

Socialists seem quite desperate to claim Lincoln as one of their own. Lincoln's contemporary biographers who forcefully claimed that the quote you cited was fraudulent were better placed to know the truth than you are and they had no motive to claim Lincoln as one sympathetic to the socialist creed. Alas, you have not found the successful socialist that you seek in Abraham Lincoln. I again suggest that you look elsewhere to validate your political beliefs.

[thecavemaster]

Socialists seem quite desperate to claim Lincoln as one of their own. Lincoln's contemporary biographers who forcefully claimed that the quote you cited was fraudulent were better placed to know the truth than you are and they had no motive to claim Lincoln as one sympathetic to the socialist creed. Alas, you have not found the successful socialist that you seek in Abraham Lincoln. I again suggest that you look elsewhere to validate your political beliefs.

May I suggest that I do not view Abraham Lincoln a socialist, nor anyone else, simply because they distrust conglomorated money and corporate power? And, frankly, I don't think you do either. I stand by the quote, your henpecking notwithstanding...when compared with several other thought threads in Lincoln, it is not incompatible. Fair scales capitalism is not socialism, Hoot. It just isn't. Fair scales capitalism need look no further than the essential Judaeo-Christian Founder's Book. Of course, I wouldn't expect you to think about that.

[thecavemaster]

A perusal of Lincoln's writings, which he often repeats in several places, suggests that Lincoln praised the moral rightness of both Capital and Labor, but this is invariably in the context of a nation where no more than ONE PERSON IN EIGHT is a Capitalist or a Laborer (the other 7/8 of the population are self-employed on their own farms and homesteads). Anyone interested, look it up for yourself.

[Beetle01]

If u wanna see the type of power corporations hold in this country, and wield in politics, I recommend everyone watch the documentary Food Inc.

[Hoot Gibson]

May I suggest that I do not view Abraham Lincoln a socialist, nor anyone else, simply because they distrust conglomorated money and corporate power? And, frankly, I don't think you do either. I stand by the quote, your henpecking notwithstanding...when compared with several other thought threads in Lincoln, it is not incompatible. Fair scales capitalism is not socialism, Hoot. It just isn't. Fair scales capitalism need look no further than the essential Judaeo-Christian Founder's Book. Of course, I wouldn't expect you to think about that.

In thread after thread, you attempt to recast the socialist agenda of the 0bama regime as some stranger, mangled form of capitalism.

Norman Thomas, a six-time American presidential candidate on the Socialist Part of American ticket saw people like you and Barack 0bama coming 64 years ago, when he said the following:

[INDENT]

The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of “liberalism”, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.

[/INDENT]

Whether you call it socialism, liberalism, progressivism, or class warfare for dummies, the socialists' agenda has never changed.

[thecavemaster]

In thread after thread, you attempt to recast the socialist agenda of the 0bama regime as some stranger, mangled form of capitalism.

Norman Thomas, a six-time American presidential candidate on the Socialist Part of American ticket saw people like you and Barack 0bama coming 64 years ago, when he said the following:

Whether you call it socialism, liberalism, progressivism, or class warfare for dummies, the socialists' agenda has never changed.

You just don't get it, Hoot... Barack Obama is a flea on a Mammoth's backside, as is all the worrying over winning and losing elections.
As a person of Native American heritage, it is interesting what Lieutenant James Calhoun wrote before the Wounded Knee massacre (he was serving under George Armstrong Custer)....

The hives of industry will take the place of dirty wigwams. Civilizations will ere long reign supreme and throw heathen barbarism into oblivion. Seminaries of learning will raise their proud cupolas far above the canopy of Indian lodges, and Christian temples will elevate their lofty spires upward towards the azure sky while places of heathen mythology will sink to rise no more. This will be a period of true happiness.

I want Barack Obama to win in 2012 in the way I'd prefer a tropical storm to a hurricane, not because he's all that desireable, but because, to my view, I'm choosing less damage and threat. I do NOT believe that government owned industry and state regulation of people in minutia, or even in the main, is ANY GOAL WHATSOEVER of this President. I think you're a hack for spouting that vitriol on this site. The question, from above quote is this: given the empirical data coming in from all over the planet, has an increasingly industrialized world, that has throw native peoples globally into nigh oblivion, been a "period of happiness" for this planet... or, a period of incredible exploitation and waste and destruction, where human beings willingly, for instance, kill 80 million sharks a year so that rich Chinese and Japanese can eat shark fin soup? Unsustainable, immoral, reckless and arrogant.

[Stardust]

You just don't get it, Hoot... Barack Obama is a flea on a Mammoth's backside, as is all the worrying over winning and losing elections.
As a person of Native American heritage, it is interesting what Lieutenant James Calhoun wrote before the Wounded Knee massacre (he was serving under George Armstrong Custer)....

The hives of industry will take the place of dirty wigwams. Civilizations will ere long reign supreme and throw heathen barbarism into oblivion. Seminaries of learning will raise their proud cupolas far above the canopy of Indian lodges, and Christian temples will elevate their lofty spires upward towards the azure sky while places of heathen mythology will sink to rise no more. This will be a period of true happiness.

I want Barack Obama to win in 2012 in the way I'd prefer a tropical storm to a hurricane, not because he's all that desireable, but because, to my view, I'm choosing less damage and threat. I do NOT believe that government owned industry and state regulation of people in minutia, or even in the main, is ANY GOAL WHATSOEVER of this President. I think you're a hack for spouting that vitriol on this site. The question, from above quote is this: given the empirical data coming in from all over the planet, has an increasingly industrialized world, that has throw native peoples globally into nigh oblivion, been a "period of happiness" for this planet... or, a period of incredible exploitation and waste and destruction, where human beings willingly, for instance, kill 80 million sharks a year so that rich Chinese and Japanese can eat shark fin soup? Unsustainable, immoral, reckless and arrogant.

Mammoth's were really, really big, which would make Barack the Flea the biggest pest that our time has ever seen. Unfortunately it's going to take more than a fyl-swatter to whack this insect!

[Hoot Gibson]

You just don't get it, Hoot... Barack Obama is a flea on a Mammoth's backside, as is all the worrying over winning and losing elections.
As a person of Native American heritage, it is interesting what Lieutenant James Calhoun wrote before the Wounded Knee massacre (he was serving under George Armstrong Custer)....

The hives of industry will take the place of dirty wigwams. Civilizations will ere long reign supreme and throw heathen barbarism into oblivion. Seminaries of learning will raise their proud cupolas far above the canopy of Indian lodges, and Christian temples will elevate their lofty spires upward towards the azure sky while places of heathen mythology will sink to rise no more. This will be a period of true happiness.

I want Barack Obama to win in 2012 in the way I'd prefer a tropical storm to a hurricane, not because he's all that desireable, but because, to my view, I'm choosing less damage and threat. I do NOT believe that government owned industry and state regulation of people in minutia, or even in the main, is ANY GOAL WHATSOEVER of this President. I think you're a hack for spouting that vitriol on this site. The question, from above quote is this: given the empirical data coming in from all over the planet, has an increasingly industrialized world, that has throw native peoples globally into nigh oblivion, been a "period of happiness" for this planet... or, a period of incredible exploitation and waste and destruction, where human beings willingly, for instance, kill 80 million sharks a year so that rich Chinese and Japanese can eat shark fin soup? Unsustainable, immoral, reckless and arrogant.

0bama is your man if you are looking for man ready, willing, and capable of crippling the private sector. I doubt that you will ever have another chance to vote for 0bama in a national election. Maybe he will damage our economy sufficiently and stamp out enough of our remaining personal liberties in the two years that he has remaining to sate your appetite for economic chaos and polarizing racial politics. For most of your fellow Americans, two years of the 0bama train wreck has been more than enough.

[thecavemaster]

0bama is your man if you are looking for man ready, willing, and capable of crippling the private sector. I doubt that you will ever have another chance to vote for 0bama in a national election. Maybe he will damage our economy sufficiently and stamp out enough of our remaining personal liberties in the two years that he has remaining to sate your appetite for economic chaos and polarizing racial politics. For most of your fellow Americans, two years of the 0bama train wreck has been more than enough.

Remaining personal liberties? Explain to me, with specifics please, what it is that you wanted to do today that you didn't get to? As "personal liberties" is a broad concept, please do not focus on "I had to pay taxes" and all that rant. I had an unfettered day, Hoot. There wasn't a single thing that I wanted to do, that I was able to do, that I could afford to do, that I didn't do. I do not understand your personal vindetta style, propoganda enriched sytlistics, Hoot. I don't want to... you're a pit bull whose had a bad owner.

[thecavemaster]

Mammoth's were really, really big, which would make Barack the Flea the biggest pest that our time has ever seen. Unfortunately it's going to take more than a fyl-swatter to whack this insect!

Shall we get you some Leggos and Tonka toys to push around? Put on your "Idiot" shirt, the one with a finger pointing straight up...

[Hoot Gibson]

Remaining personal liberties? Explain to me, with specifics please, what it is that you wanted to do today that you didn't get to? As "personal liberties" is a broad concept, please do not focus on "I had to pay taxes" and all that rant. I had an unfettered day, Hoot. There wasn't a single thing that I wanted to do, that I was able to do, that I could afford to do, that I didn't do. I do not understand your personal vindetta style, propoganda enriched sytlistics, Hoot. I don't want to... you're a pit bull whose had a bad owner.

Whether you choose to take advantage of your personal liberty at a particular time or not is irrelevant to the loss of your freedom. The same goes for your privacy. The intrusion of the 0bama regime into our private lives has been well documented ad nauseum. If you want specific documentation of how 0bama, Starks, Pelosi, Reid, Franks, Dodd, Rangel, Waters, et al. are robbing us of our freedom, just review the threads in this forum. You either have an extremely short attention span or choose to remain blissfully ignorant. I suspect the latter but do not rule out a medical issue but do not rule out the former.

[thecavemaster]

Whether you choose to take advantage of your personal liberty at a particular time or not is irrelevant to the loss of your freedom. The same goes for your privacy. The intrusion of the 0bama regime into our private lives has been well documented ad nauseum. If you want specific documentation of how 0bama, Starks, Pelosi, Reid, Franks, Dodd, Rangel, Waters, et al. are robbing us of our freedom, just review the threads in this forum. You either have an extremely short attention span or choose to remain blissfully ignorant. I suspect the latter but do not rule out a medical issue but do not rule out the former.

In dodge ball terms, you're hiding in the corner. Explain to me, since Obama took office, how your personal, day by day liberty has been diminished. Nancy Pelosi is robbing me of freedom? What a hackster rant. You may not agree with Ms. Pelosi, Sir, but the kind of garbage you engage in is dirty. Hoot, sniff, sniff, you stink. Given all the paranoic, propogandized nonsense you apparently believe, well, I wouldn't worry too much about mental health issues when, apparently, the sink is clogged in your own kitchen, if you know what I mean....