Lincoln... A+. Always, always always.

Great talk extremely helpful considering my library is barren of any useful Lincoln books.

@capncrunch7259

5 жыл бұрын

@T Williams ~ Don't go by this, you'll end up a Idiot Neo Confederate ~ all you need can be found for free on line, and depending on your state and how the Public Libraries work, your local library .

I would give him A+

Am I to let all the laws of the nation go unenforced and the country go to pieces lest one law be violated?

WOW!!

@capncrunch7259

5 жыл бұрын

@69timotte ~ Holy Bat Shit Adam West ~

Did the federal courts ever consider the issue of whether the states had the right to secede from the union? I think that Lincoln was wrong to use force to prevent secession.

@powerdriller4124

Жыл бұрын

The slavery states did not have the right to have slaves. The were evil doers, so they did not have right to crybaby claiming their rights to do evil. The USA had a destiny of greatness in the XX century, a balkanized bunch of small countries would not have been up to the job. Besides their evilness, stupid Reb states were very centrifugal, always about to bicker each other and to Jefferson Davies.

@syourke3

Жыл бұрын

@@powerdriller4124 You are confusing moral rights with legal rights. They are two entirely different kinds of rights. Slavery certainly violates the idea of natural rights expressed in the Declaration of Independence. But the Constitution was established in order to protect property rights, including the institution of slavery. After all, half the states that adopted the Constitution were slave states. The law is not about morals. It’s about power. Understand?

@powerdriller4124

Жыл бұрын

@@syourke3 :: No, I´m not confusing anything. Slavery violated Natural Rights, was then liable to be disobeyed, no matter what the Constitution did not say, because it did not say anything about slavery. in Virginia 1860, a slave who to get his freedom had to kill his master to be able to run away, would be accepted as a political refugee in Canada, England , France, even in Mexico; and the USA would not have a valid case to claim. The courts in those countries would reply that the slave had a Natural Right to be free and fight for his freedom. Wisconsin thought that way too, the state did not have to obey the Fugitive Slave law that was against Wisconsin own laws, against Humanity , and that was an embarrassment for the USA among civilized nations. Understand?

@syourke3

Жыл бұрын

@@powerdriller4124 I am a civil rights lawyer and I’ve studied the Constitution. I’ve also studied the causes of the Civil War in graduate school. I don’t mean to insult you, but you have no idea what you are talking about. You are so full of moral indignation about slavery that you are not thinking clearly about the Constitution and the causes of the Civil War. I share your moral outrage about slavery but as a student of the Constitution, I have to acknowledge that slavery was protected under the Constitution until ratification of the 13th Amendment in 1865. (Even today, slavery is legal in prisons, because the 13th Amendment provides an exception for those convicted of crimes! Prison labor is effectively slave labor - and its enormously profitable!) The Constitution clearly recognized and protected the institution of slavery. It never would have been ratified by the southern states if it didn’t protect slavery. The so-called “three-fifths clause” gave the southern states extra political power by counting slaves as three-fifths of a person for purposes of political representation in the federal government. Even Abraham Lincoln, who detested slavery, had to admit that the federal government had no power under the Constitution to interfere with slavery in those states where it already existed. That’s why his famous debates with Stephen Douglas in 1958 only concerned the expansion of slavery into the western territories, not its abolition where it already existed. The Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 required that runaway slaves must be returned to their owners and even that northerners had to help slave owners recover their runaway slaves. In 1857, the U S Supreme Court, in the infamous Dred Scott decision, held that the Fugitive Slave Law was constitutional and that people of African descent had no legal rights that a white man had to respect. Yes, it’s morally outrageous but that’s what the U S Supreme Court held! The U S Supreme Court is the ultimate authority on the U S Constitution and its word is final. Thus, when the southern states seceded from the union following Lincoln’s election as president in 1860, there is no question but that slaves had no rights at all under the U S Constitution and could not gain legal status as free men by absconding to the north. They were not “persons” within the meaning of the Constitution. They were merely property. The Dred Scott decision was morally outrageous and it prompted Lincoln to run for the Senate in 1858 and for president in 1860. The decision sparked outrage in the north and it triggered John Brown’s raid on Harper’s Ferry in 1859 and Lincoln’s election as president in 1860, which in turn triggered the secession of the southern states because southerners knew how Lincoln felt about slavery and the Dred Scott decision. Still Lincoln repeatedly assured the southern states that he had no intention of interfering with slavery in the states where it already existed as he concedes that he lacked the power to do so. Ironically, if the southern states had not rebelled and taken up arms against the federal government, Lincoln would not have issued the Emancipation Proclamation in 1862 which only applied to free slaves in those territories controlled by the Confederacy!

@syourke3

Жыл бұрын

I provide a link to a series of lectures on the causes of the Civil War by Professor David Blight given at Yale University. I have listened to them and I think they are excellent. Law and justice are two very different things. Sometimes they overlap but not very often. That’s why it took a terrible war to finally abolish slavery in the USA. Cheers. kzread.info/head/PL5DD220D6A1282057

Seems Lincoln and Karl Marx, close and wrote to each other and influential. Lincoln "Labor is prior to and independent of Capital. Capital is only the fruits of labor and could not have existed.if labor have first existed. Labor is the superior of capital and deserves much higher consideration" This Lincoln quote is pure Marxist theory.

@billolsen4360

7 ай бұрын

Why do bozos all over the work still bother reading the works of the author of failure, karl marx? They all must be suffering from rectal-cranial inversion.

@BobDingus-bh3pd

2 ай бұрын

And now his likeness is printed on paper and metal currency. Lol suck it Karl.

This was actually really good right up to the end where his biases and carrying water and rationalizing FDR ruined the whole presentation.

This is a good lecture, but in discussing ex parte Milligan Professor Neely failed to clearly and emphatically state that Tanny ruled that Lincoln did not have a right to suspend habeas corpus, that it was a Legislative prerogative, or that Lincoln tried to have the Chief Justice arrested, but his Marshal refused to server the President's warrant. Importantly Lincoln invaded Maryland with Federal troops creating riots and violence and the governor ordered Milligan to break up the rail lines coming from the North to prevent this illegal invasion. The Constitution forbade the moving of troops into a state without the permission of the legislature or the governor if the legislature was not in session. Additionally, Professor does not discuss the arrest of half of the Maryland legislature by Lincoln in violation of the "republican government" requirement of the Constitution and he fails to mention the usurpation of state power in Missouri and his rump government and Federal occupation of that state by Lincoln or his efforts to promote West Virginia as a state. Abraham Lincoln was a tyrant.

@timothymeehan181

4 ай бұрын

He saved/preserved the Union, Constitution intact, and ended slavery(was the sine qua non of those 3 things)…..so….my kinda “tyrant”. May all “tyrants” be such Christ-like statesmen. 🙏🎩🇱🇷

@cliffpage7677

4 ай бұрын

@@timothymeehan181 Lincoln did not end slavery. His actions as Commander in Chief were just as suspect as Sherman's 40 acres and a mule, and might have been reversed following the war by the Supreme Court. Slavery remained in all those places in the South that were under Federal control and in all states outside the Confederacy until the 13th Ameendment. Lincoln's war was not executed to free slaves. That was repeatedly stated by Lincoln, and he also stated he had on authority to do so. He removed Gen. Freemont for doing so in MO. Lincoln's Emancipation was brought about by Gen. Butler in his "contraband theory". These Contrabands were kept in the world's first internment camps and the men were in some cases used to do slave work for the Army. Particularly noteworthy was the horribible conditions at Devil's Den, where many Contrabands begged to be returned to their masters as slaves. Lincoln, if he had lived would most likely not necessarily freed all the slaves into the United States, but sent them out of the country. Congresss appropriated $600,000 to do that during the war. Lincolns assination and the control of the Congress by the Radical Republicans transformed the Constitution until it is hardly recognized from its structure under the original founding fathers intentions. We are paying for those changes today and millions of Americans and I don't like those changes. But most Americans don't know how it has changed or what those changes were, and that includes our politications for life in Washington. Jefferson and Madison had an ongoing discussion on the how and when of subdivision of the States. I do not like the United States as it exists today, and what came about because of Lincoln and the Radical Republicans - principally "Nationalism", and the death of democratic-republicanism of Jefferson, state's rights, and sectional diversity.

They put German Americans i Camps

Poor speaker. Halting, stammering.

Licoln was republican, Bush was republican :)

@capncrunch7259

5 жыл бұрын

My church is very popular. A couple of priests who sit next to me at the bus stop asked me what religion I am. I said Protestant, they then offered me money !

@billolsen4360

7 ай бұрын

duh