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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (50941)	7/13/2004 12:54:29 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

What Would Abraham Lincoln Say About Canceling a Presidential Election? A BUZZFLASH READER CONTRIBUTION Dear BuzzFlash: As far as I am concerned, anyone in this administration who makes plans for canceling a Constitutionally mandated presidential election for any reason is treasonous and in gross violation of their oath of office. Period. This country has been through a number of wars including the Cold War, where thousands of nuclear warheads were trained on our cities, deliverable in half an hour. We have never before foreseen the need to plan for canceling a federal election. There is no need now, no matter what "terrorists" might do. The good people of this great country will hold Bush accountable for his record in just a few months, so help us God. BuzzFlash readers may be interested to read what a real president, Abraham Lincoln, had to say about the 1864 election which took place during the Civil War, by far the bloodiest conflict our country has endured. See below. RA in LA * * * Lincoln on the 1864 Presidential Election Response to a Serenade November 10, 1864 It has long been a grave question whether any government, not too strong for the liberties of its people, can be strong enough to maintain its own existence in great emergencies. On this point the present rebellion brought our republic to a severe test; and a presidential election occurring in regular course during the rebellion added not a little to the strain. If the loyal people, united, were put to the utmost of their strength by the rebellion, must they not fail when divided, and partially paralized (sic), by a political war among themselves? But the election was a necessity. We can not have free government without elections; and if the rebellion could force us to forego, or postpone a national election it might fairly claim to have already conquered and ruined us. The strife of the election is but human-nature practically applied to the facts of the case. What has occurred in this case, must ever recur in similar cases. Human-nature will not change. In any future great national trial, compared with the men of this, we shall have as weak, and as strong; as silly and as wise; as bad and good. Let us, therefore, study the incidents of this, as philosophy to learn wisdom from, and none of them as wrongs to be revenged. But the election, along with its incidental, and undesirable strife, has done good too. It has demonstrated that a people's government can sustain a national election, in the midst of a great civil war. Until now it has not been known to the world that this was a possibility. It shows that, even among candidates of the same party, he who is most devoted to the Union, and most opposed to treason, can receive most of the people's votes. It shows also, to the extent yet known, that we have more men now, than we had when the war began. Gold is good in its place; but living, brave, patriotic men, are better than gold. buzzflash.com