Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (16095)	11/14/2003 11:53:15 AM
From: FaultLine	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 793618

Hi LB, a class of men fit only to hunt, dance, gamble and duel Lindy Bill, I think they talking about us again... --fl

To: LindyBill who wrote (16095)	11/14/2003 11:59:40 AM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793618

Here's Lincoln' Second Inaugural Address: bartleby.com

To: LindyBill who wrote (16095)	11/14/2003 5:20:22 PM
From: Brian Sullivan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793618

Somewhere Lincoln remarked that in every Southern town there existed a class of men fit only to hunt, dance, gamble and duel, and that there existed no solution for such a problem except to kill them all. Good thing you weren't living in Texas in the 1850's Bill.

To: LindyBill who wrote (16095)	11/14/2003 9:16:28 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793618

About that time there was a very large third party, the "Know Nothings" or "nativists", who believed that foreign born immigrants and Catholics should not be allowed to vote or hold public office. Lincoln wrote a pretty cool letter about the Know Nothings, circa 1855. "I am not a Know-Nothing. That is certain. How could I be? How can any one who abhors the oppression of negroes, be in favor of degrading classes of white people? Our progress in degeneracy appears to me to be pretty rapid. As a nation, we begin by declaring that "all men are created equal." We now practically read it "all men are created equal, except negroes." When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read "all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and catholics." When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretence of loving liberty-to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocracy." nps.gov

To: LindyBill who wrote (16095)	11/14/2003 9:36:59 PM
From: JF Quinnelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793618

They would have permitted the South to secede, and slavery would have spread like cancer from the Mason-Dixon Line to Tierra del Fuego. Spengler is a fool. The economic rationale of slavery was already ending by the 1860s. A point made evident by the fact that slavery ended everywhere in the Americas by the 1880s- and did so peacefully in all cases but in Haiti and the United States. The cult of Lincoln ought to read the man's speeches. In his first inaugural he tells you what his war is for- to preserve the Union. He isn't threatening war against Virginia and upper South slave states, because they hadn't seceded. He expressly states that he has neither the intention, nor in his opinion does he have the authority, to interfere with slavery in the states. Lincoln proposed a 13th Amendment that would have permanently embedded slavery into the Constitution, if the lower South would only return to the Union. Fellow-Citizens of the United States: IN compliance with a custom as old as the Government itself, I appear before you to address you briefly and to take in your presence the oath prescribed by the Constitution of the United States to be taken by the President "before he enters on the execution of this office." I do not consider it necessary at present for me to discuss those matters of administration about which there is no special anxiety or excitement. Apprehension seems to exist among the people of the Southern States that by the accession of a Republican Administration their property and their peace and personal security are to be endangered. There has never been any reasonable cause for such apprehension. Indeed, the most ample evidence to the contrary has all the while existed and been open to their inspection. It is found in nearly all the published speeches of him who now addresses you. I do but quote from one of those speeches when I declare that— I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so. Those who nominated and elected me did so with full knowledge that I had made this and many similar declarations and had never recanted them; and more than this, they placed in the platform for my acceptance, and as a law to themselves and to me, the clear and emphatic resolution which I now read: Resolved, That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and especially the right of each State to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, is essential to that balance of power on which the perfection and endurance of our political fabric depend; and we denounce the lawless invasion by armed force of the soil of any State or Territory, no matter what pretext, as among the gravest of crimes. I now reiterate these sentiments, and in doing so I only press upon the public attention the most conclusive evidence of which the case is susceptible that the property, peace, and security of no section are to be in any wise endangered by the now incoming Administration. I add, too, that all the protection which, consistently with the Constitution and the laws, can be given will be cheerfully given to all the States when lawfully demanded, for whatever cause—as cheerfully to one section as to another. There is much controversy about the delivering up of fugitives from service or labor. The clause I now read is as plainly written in the Constitution as any other of its provisions: No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall in consequence of any law or regulation therein be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due. It is scarcely questioned that this provision was intended by those who made it for the reclaiming of what we call fugitive slaves; and the intention of the lawgiver is the law. All members of Congress swear their support to the whole Constitution—to this provision as much as to any other. To the proposition, then, that slaves whose cases come within the terms of this clause "shall be delivered up" their oaths are unanimous. Now, if they would make the effort in good temper, could they not with nearly equal unanimity frame and pass a law by means of which to keep good that unanimous oath? There is some difference of opinion whether this clause should be enforced by national or by State authority, but surely that difference is not a very material one. If the slave is to be surrendered, it can be of but little consequence to him or to others by which authority it is done. And should anyone in any case be content that his oath shall go unkept on a merely unsubstantial controversy as to how it shall be kept? Again: In any law upon this subject ought not all the safeguards of liberty known in civilized and humane jurisprudence to be introduced, so that a free man be not in any case surrendered as a slave? And might it not be well at the same time to provide by law for the enforcement of that clause in the Constitution which guarantees that "the citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States"? I take the official oath to-day with no mental reservations and with no purpose to construe the Constitution or laws by any hypercritical rules; and while I do not choose now to specify particular acts of Congress as proper to be enforced, I do suggest that it will be much safer for all, both in official and private stations, to conform to and abide by all those acts which stand unrepealed than to violate any of them trusting to find impunity in having them held to be unconstitutional. remainder at: bartleby.com