Lincoln was our best leader

[ironfoot]

http://www.npr.org/2011/09/27/140802802/bill-oreilly-abraham-lincoln-was-our-best-leader

[missouri dave]

In the sense that he managed to hold the country together when it was trying to tear itself apart he may very well have been. Of course, if britain had won the revolutionary war and crushed the colonies we might very well have some tory saying king george was the best king we ever had. Hmmmmm.........

[williamlayton]

If & Butts---
Blessings

[P.A. Myers]

An eloquent leader that threw the Constitution in the dumper. Sound familiar?

[Sourdough]

I don't think so.
Presidents, with few exceptions, that get assasinated in office become marters.  That is what happened with Lincoln.
 
Look at Kennedy, he was not our best president, he got us into Viet Nam.  He created the Bay of Pigs, then failed to back the troops that went in, letting them get wipped out.  Put to the general publid he was as great as Lincoln
 
To this day I do not believe Oswald shot him.  Especially since I own one of those Carcano Carbines like he was supposed to have used.  If the man was such an expert as we are led to believe he would not have chosen a Carcano, when other far superior guns were availiable for the same money.   

[rio grande]

Oh yeah, 'Ape" Lincoln.  A great leader, shredded the Constitution.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/decoster/decoster21.html

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig2/lincoln-arch.html

[us920669]

I don't see "Best Leader" - the country split up over his election.  Was he "Great"?  Well, big things happened during his years, that's for sure.  Were they good things?  People are still arguing over it.

[ironfoot]

The country split up because Lincoln had established himself as an anti slavery candidate in the Lincoln/Douglas debates and Lincoln'Coopers Union speech. Would he have been greater if he had endorsed slavery in order to appease the South? He did try to appease the South to the extent he admitted he could not legally end slavery, but he opposed the expansion of slavery into the territories. For the South, simply saying slavery was wrong was enough to offend.

[Mack in N.C.]

Saying Lincoln was our best leader is like saying the Yugo was the Best car........

[Cabin4]

Lincoln was the best. The best as violating the constitution and killing his fellow Americans. 500,000 Americans lost their lives because of him. He was the best all right..........

[Cabin4]

Lincoln saw the Civil War as part of a greater world war. In the case, of principlely North America re-conquest by the French and English.  This war was engineered. Fortunately, Russia came to aid of Lincoln to repell British and French imperialist using the war as a focal point for their designs. The 'bankers' and other protagionist saw the opportunity of destroying the Constitution at this time, even at Lincoln's hands during a national emergency they concocted. Those people living in Alaska can thank Lincoln for their state and territory, because it was his Sec of State, Seward, that forged the Alaskan Purchase....there should be a national Linclon/Seward Day in Alaska once a year! Lincoln tried to keep 'carpet baggers' out of the South during Restoration....one reason he was shot....that and like Kennedy he created real US currency, green back dollars separate from the debt creators. ....
.
.
...TM7

It does not change the facts of the crimes he commited against our constitution and the people of this country.

[Cabin4]

How about sending armed troops to war against the southern states. How about throwing journalists in jail because he did not like their stories. How about suspending habitues corpus. Here is a list:
 
 

#1 Lincoln ordered the military blockade of Southern ports.

This an act of war.

Only Congress can do that.

At that time Lincoln certainly violated the US Constitution.


#2 Lincoln ordered hundreds of Northern newspapers who dared to speak out against him to be shut down. And their owners and editors were arrested for disloyalty.

This is a clear violation of the 1st Amendment of the Constitution that Lincoln swore to uphold.


#3 Lincoln ordered the arrest of Ohio Congressman Clement Vallandigham for the crime of speaking out against him.

Can you imagine that?


#4 Ex parte Merryman,

Chief Justice of the US Roger Taney, sitting as a judge of the United States Circuit Court for the District of Maryland, ruled that Lincoln had violated the US Constitution when he illegally suspended the Writ of Habeas Corpus.

After hearing this Lincoln signed an arrest warrant to have the Chief Justice of the US arrested.


#5 US Constitution Article lll...

Section 3. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them.

Lincoln committed treason.

Lincoln waged war upon his own country. Unless one considers secession legal and the Confederacy was a sovereign nation.


#6 Lincoln sent Union troops door to door in areas of Maryland, a Union state, to confiscate weapons.

This is a clear violation of the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution.

_____________________________

Many Constitutional violations against Maryland

'Maryland my Maryland' was published calling Lincoln a tyrant and a despot and a vandal.

Lincoln as already mentioned, trashed the Constitution by suspending the Writ of Habeas Corpus and sending troops door to door confiscating weapons in areas of Maryland.

Maryland was a Union state.

Lincoln ordered the arrest of thousands Marylanders for the crime of 'suspected Southern sympathies'.


Lincoln ordered the arrest of US Congressman Henry May representing Maryland. #7

Lincoln also had arrested...

Most of the Maryland State Legislature #8

Most of the Baltimore city council #9

The police commissioner of Baltimore #10

The mayor of Baltimore #11

Thousands of prominent Maryland citizens. #12

These people were arrested and held in Military prisons, without trial, some of them for years.

This trashing of the Constitution upset many Marylanders. One of them was named Booth.

Committing so many crimes against Maryland would end up giving Lincoln a big "headache".

[SHOOTALL]

he was not !

[Cabin4]

TM,
The Confederate states split off. There was no need to wage a war. The confederate states are no threat to the Union. None of it had to happen to preserve the concept of a "Union". Lincoln just simply did not want those states to become their own independent nation. There was nothing, in the constitution that mandated any state stay in the Union. The States independently formed the Union at their own free will. Lincoln simply deployed a war to compel them to stay. There was no legal justification for the war on any constitutional grounds. Still the case today.......
 
These are the only points of principal that matter.
 

[sjc1]

Lincoln was the best. The best as violating the constitution and killing his fellow Americans. 50,000 Americans lost their lives because of him. He was the best all right..........

[sjc1]

Did not get all of my post on.......I believe Lincoln caused the deaths of over 500,000 Americans. A real great president.

[Dee]

The country split up because Lincoln had established himself as an anti slavery candidate in the Lincoln/Douglas debates and Lincoln'Coopers Union speech. Would he have been greater if he had endorsed slavery in order to appease the South? He did try to appease the South to the extent he admitted he could not legally end slavery, but he opposed the expansion of slavery into the territories. For the South, simply saying slavery was wrong was enough to offend.

The South split from the Union, because Lincoln, and his industrialized north business cronies tried to commandeer the textiles produced in the south. i.e. mainly COTTON. The president before him had put a 10% EXPORT tax on them, and Lincoln BEFORE ELECTED stated if elected HE (LINCOLN) WOULD DOUBLE THE EXPORT TAX, and FORCE the South to sell the cotton to the north at the NORTH's price offer.
Florida had already said that if Lincoln won they would secede, and South Carolina simply beat them to it.
Go on line, and search "Lincoln racist speeches" and see the REAL Lincoln. Read where Lincoln intended to move all blacks out of the United States and saying the West is for the White man. Read his quotes saying the Mexican is a mongrel.
As someone here has already said: Getting shot as president has it's perks. You become a "god" little g. By the way, he most likely was queer, and with a little research you can see whom his favorite bed partner was, and it wasn't Mrs. Lincoln. If memory serves me correctly his name started with Lieutenant.

[SHOOTALL]

Check out the way the Southern states were "re admitted" to the union. If succesion was illegal then the way they were taken back was more illegal.

[Cabin4]

Usual debate/study of the Civil War is limited to domestic studies .
....TM7

That’s why they call it a "Civil War". None of the international items mean anything. The southern states left the Union because they wanted to. Whatever factors, international and or domestic that drove them to leave the Union, are irrelevant. They elected to leave and that is a decision they have within their legal power to make. What is relevant are the illegal actions the Union took under the leadership of Lincoln.

[SHOOTALL]

Usual debate/study of the Civil War is limited to domestic studies .
....TM7

That’s why they call it a "Civil War". None of the international items mean anything. The southern states left the Union because they wanted to. Whatever factors, international and or domestic that drove them to leave the Union, are irrelevant. They elected to leave and that is a decision they have within their legal power to make. What is relevant are the illegal actions the Union took under the leadership of Lincoln.

 
 
AMEN !

[SHOOTALL]

It would seem logical to assume that the war of 1812 took alot of the wind out of the words uttered after Yorktown by the beaten english king . Hey he tried and failed nuff said . The enemy abe faced behind him in many cases was the people in places like new york that were aginst the war and old abe. It was mostly an American problem hey it took weeks to get the news out ..........

[Cabin4]

I think your just looking for as many excuses for Lincoln as you can possibally find.

[SHOOTALL]

It would seem logical to assume that the war of 1812 took alot of the wind out of the words uttered after Yorktown by the beaten english king . Hey he tried and failed nuff said . The enemy abe faced behind him in many cases was the people in places like new york that were aginst the war and old abe. It was mostly an American problem hey it took weeks to get the news out ..........

. Yeah well, this war had lots of names.. Civil War, Freedom War,War Between the States, War of northern Agression, War of Southern Independence and so forth depending on who you read. But make no mistake whatsoever,,,this part of an ongoing world war was also call by many The Second American Revolution.
.
.TM7

those were  what the war of 1812 as called ?

[SHOOTALL]

fantistic .

[subdjoe]

I think your just looking for as many excuses for Lincoln as you can possibally find.

.
 Not exactly...I was once a Lincoln basher like you. Then I became aware of what he chose to deal with, but I also believe myself and the world would be much better off if the Southern States peeled off and did what they wanted.
.
 Lets look a little closer at your domestic views of The Second American Revolution:
.
Lincoln in answer to a Horace Greely attack in the NYTimes wrote a letter detailing exactly what he intended to do with the siutuation he inherited from Pres Buchanan before him, much as a state of the union address, actually. Greely dutifully posted the letter.  Lincoln said he intended to keep the Union together any and all ways possible....with or without slavery. Do search up his letter.

Of course, in his inaugural address, he pretty much said he didn't care what they did, so long as the cash kept flowing into the federal coffers.
.
The legal question of succession has still not been answered and wasn't in 1861 either. Lincoln believed succession was un-Constitutional, doable by ananmous state's approval or by ratification of an amendment, but not by just stating we're out (or later stating we're back in!).

But, in "A View of the Constitution" by Rawle, used as a text at the US Military Academy and some rather prestigious colleges, it was laid out that any state could withdraw from the union. 
.
Lincoln delt with Maryland the best way possible without arms....there was no way he could allow Maryland to secceed which would have the nation's Union capital, Washington DC, surrounded and cut off by dissident states,,,tactical suicide and the Constitution is not a suicide pact.

So, you are saying that expediency trumps the Constitution?
.
Fort Sumpter...first shots in anger were from Confeds on a national/union installation...was Lincoln obligated to protect the nation's assets? or just let them be destroyed?.

No, the first shots were fired by federals at civilians in FL.  At Sumter, "Honest" Abe had the offer to withdraw his troops from SC soil free and clear.  He made the choice to reprovision and reinforce instead.  Using your logic, all American soil still belongs to the Crown of England.
.
Habeus corpus....please read the appropriate part of the Constitution on habeus corpus and notice it is suspendable in dire times of emergency.  Notice that Lincoln did not suspend habeus corpus universally but in areas he deemed necessary by emergency powers. I reckon 'emergency powers' is double edge sword but The Founders did provide for emergency powers. Was the impending War (international in scope and foreign fueled) and failure/dissolution of the world's first democratic nation/Constitution an emergency?  At least Lincoln thought so.

Conflating secession and the war. The seven states of the deep south just wanted to leave.  That would not have destroyed the relationships among the other states, nor torn apart the federal government.  It wasn't a "crisis" until Abe made it one.
.
 Slavery...neo-Confeds and Linclon bashers try to point out that he was an hypocrit or some kind of white supremacist, etc....but the Constitution did not outlaw slavery (that came latter when chattel slavery was ended and replaced with 'bonded' slavery.. ), in fact allowed for it with the 4/5s clause etc. Lincoln could not go to work one day and say slavery was over; however, given popular abolishinists and international movements (and remember Marxism was popular new movement) he could politic on it well knowing that the economic power of the South depended on slavery AND that the days of chattel slavery were numbered...his goal was to keep the Union intact against a re-conquest of North America by Britain's Albert and Napolean III, and the Bank of Rothschild of which the South consorted with.

Secession may have been mostly about slavery.  The war itself, as per Abe's own words, was about revenue.  Economically slavery was coming to an end.  In the industrial north they saw that early, sold their slaves south, then outlawed it (although northern finance and industry still kept their hands in the slave trade into about 1860, providing ships, sailors, trade goods).  Also, in his first inaugural, Abe gave support to the Corwin Amendment, which had passed in Congress without any votes from the deep south.
.
Nobody likes to see the Constitution shredded, but criticizing Lincoln and his emergency and dealing with dissolution of the Nation must be taken in context. Moreover, criticising Lincoln as a nation destroyer is possiblely the height of hypocrisy (as demonstrated by Levin, Hannity, Bachmann, OReilly, etc.) given what this nation just endured under the Bush administration's shredding of the Constitution under relatively minor dubious circumstances compared to Lincoln's situation. And here's why:
.
http://lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo222.html
.and
.
http://goldfishforthought.blogspot.com/2011/03/lincoln-did-not-kill-united-states.html
.
.
.....TM7

Funny.  Bush pretty much acted within what was arguably a reasonable interpretation of the law of the land.  Some of the finer points overstepped, but that law was passed overwhelmingly by Congress (which shows the danger of ruling (passing laws) by emotion rather than reason).  But, enough on that, current politics is beyond the scope of this subforum.

[SHOOTALL]

fantastic !
 
but in todays world it might be better to hold it together anyway

[subdjoe]

I think your just looking for as many excuses for Lincoln as you can possibally find.

.
 Not exactly...I was once a Lincoln basher like you. Then I became aware of what he chose to deal with, but I also believe myself and the world would be much better off if the Southern States peeled off and did what they wanted.
.
 Lets look a little closer at your domestic views of The Second American Revolution:
.
Lincoln in answer to a Horace Greely attack in the NYTimes wrote a letter detailing exactly what he intended to do with the siutuation he inherited from Pres Buchanan before him, much as a state of the union address, actually. Greely dutifully posted the letter.  Lincoln said he intended to keep the Union together any and all ways possible....with or without slavery. Do search up his letter.

Of course, in his inaugural address, he pretty much said he didn't care what they did, so long as the cash kept flowing into the federal coffers.
He said to Greely that he intended to keep the Union together, to manitain the world's first Contitutional Republic no matter what the costs..to not let this be defeated. He did not believe the South should 'offshore' their goods and to have tariff laws skipped.
But why?  To keep the money rolling in.  Again, look to his public words.
.
The legal question of succession has still not been answered and wasn't in 1861 either. Lincoln believed succession was un-Constitutional, doable by ananmous state's approval or by ratification of an amendment, but not by just stating we're out (or later stating we're back in!).

But, in "A View of the Constitution" by Rawle, used as a text at the US Military Academy and some rather prestigious colleges, it was laid out that any state could withdraw from the union.
Not exactly and kinda misleading. Rawle, a rather minor obscure lawyer and not a Founder, and his "View"book were not used at the USMA save for only one year. 1826 I believe and then they moved on to more Constitutional materials; and this has been proven as post-war Southerners made this Rawle claim, but not true.. Even so Rawle's view of secession is actually quite moderate and why many many Confed mil officers resigned their commissions rather than risk the integrity of the Union based on local or states desires--most notablely RE Lee.. Here's what Rawle said about secession In Chapter 32 of his book, Rawle writes,
"The consequences of an absolute secession cannot be mistaken, and they would be serious and afflicting."The seceding state, whatever might be its relative magnitude, would speedily and distinctly feel the loss of the aid and countenance of the Union. The Union losing a proportion of the national revenue, would be entitled to demand from it a proportion of the national debt. It would be entitled to treat the inhabitants and the commerce of the separated state, as appertaining to a foreign country. In public treaties already made, whether commercial or political, it could claim no participation, while foreign powers would unwillingly calculate, and slowly transfer to it, any portion of the respect and confidence borne towards the United States.

"Evils more alarming may readily be perceived. The destruction of the common hand would be unavoidably attended with more serious consequences than the mere disunion of the parts.

"Separation would produce jealousies and discord, which in time would ripen into mutual hostilities, and while our country would be weakened by internal war, foreign enemies would be encouraged to invade with the flattering prospect of subduing in detail, those whom, collectively, they would dread to encounter." 

He wasn't so minor, and his book was used for more than one year.  I believe his 1829 edition (which came after 1826) was used into at least the 1850s.  I didn't say he said it would be a smart or good thing to do, just that he, (and also Buchanan, by the way) thought it was legal.
.
Lincoln delt with Maryland the best way possible without arms....there was no way he could allow Maryland to secceed which would have the nation's Union capital, Washington DC, surrounded and cut off by dissident states,,,tactical suicide and the Constitution is not a suicide pact.

So, you are saying that expediency trumps the Constitution?
No, I'm saying a national emergency with an impending war fueled and armed by outsiders did in Lincoln's mind.
So then, political expediency trumps the Constitution.
.
Fort Sumpter...first shots in anger were from Confeds on a national/union installation...was Lincoln obligated to protect the nation's assets? or just let them be destroyed?.

No, the first shots were fired by federals at civilians in FL.  At Sumter, "Honest" Abe had the offer to withdraw his troops from SC soil free and clear.  He made the choice to reprovision and reinforce instead.  Using your logic, all American soil still belongs to the Crown of England.
No, using my logic American soil belongs to America and American people vis-a-vis the Union. I don't believe Confeds offered to purchase Sumter property or to aleviate a provisons shortage of those billeted there. Protection of federal property is allowed for, moreso today. I don't know much about any Florida incident except troops have a right of self-protection and defense.

Oh?  How much did we pay the King?  Same logic applies.  As an aside, offers to pay for fortifications etc were made and rejected.
.
Habeus corpus....please read the appropriate part of the Constitution on habeus corpus and notice it is suspendable in dire times of emergency.  Notice that Lincoln did not suspend habeus corpus universally but in areas he deemed necessary by emergency powers. I reckon 'emergency powers' is double edge sword but The Founders did provide for emergency powers. Was the impending War (international in scope and foreign fueled) and failure/dissolution of the world's first democratic nation/Constitution an emergency?  At least Lincoln thought so.

Conflating secession and the war. The seven states of the deep south just wanted to leave.  That would not have destroyed the relationships among the other states, nor torn apart the federal government.  It wasn't a "crisis" until Abe made it one.
As I said Lincoln was determined to have the Constitution American experiment suceed and not be destroyed. Please review the paragraphs in the Constitution concerning secession and post here, thanx.

As you know, the Constitution is silent on the matter.  In which case, per the 10th Amendment, that right would reside with the states.  You make the assumption that somehow seven states leaving would have destroyed the Constitution and the relationship of, oh, NY with VA (remember, VA didn't leave until troops were starting to march through).  States leaving would no more "destroy" it than adding states does.
.
 Slavery...neo-Confeds and Linclon bashers try to point out that he was an hypocrit or some kind of white supremacist, etc....but the Constitution did not outlaw slavery (that came latter when chattel slavery was ended and replaced with 'bonded' slavery.. ), in fact allowed for it with the 4/5s clause etc. Lincoln could not go to work one day and say slavery was over; however, given popular abolishinists and international movements (and remember Marxism was popular new movement) he could politic on it well knowing that the economic power of the South depended on slavery AND that the days of chattel slavery were numbered...his goal was to keep the Union intact against a re-conquest of North America by Britain's Albert and Napolean III, and the Bank of Rothschild of which the South consorted with.

Secession may have been mostly about slavery.  The war itself, as per Abe's own words, was about revenue. Please state where and when he said thatagain, see his first inaugural address...I know he shunted Bankers with the green backs dollars, which I believe earned him an assassination. JWBooth was British as you know. Economically slavery was coming to an end.  In the industrial north they saw that early, sold their slaves south, then outlawed it (although northern finance and industry still kept their hands in the slave trade into about 1860, providing ships, sailors, trade goods).  Also, in his first inaugural, Abe gave support to the Corwin Amendment, which had passed in Congress without any votes from the deep south.
I don't know if it was mostly about slavery or not since that era was fast closing, but slaverly was certainly a hot button issue steering the citizenry. Certainly not everybody in the South endorsed chatell slavery--most notably RE Lee_ _in fact, only the 'plantation culture' relied on slavery and the plantation culture was coming under attack by local freedom movements and the new marxist idealogy.  That the southern elite leadership conspired with Britain, France, Bank of Rothschild only hardened Linclon's resolve to maintain the Union against foreign intervention; and brought Russia into the melee on tghe Union's side.. That was his thinking, imo. As for me I would be happy today if those several states had left, even today, if only somebody could prove the Constitutional basis for secession without unanimous state's approval; but it seems once your in there's no way out..

Please show by citation where in the Constitution states are prohibited from leaving the Union.  Don't give us the Articles of Confederation, they were replaced, and nowhere are the words "perpetual union" found in the Constitution.  And, again, see the 10th amendment.  Here, I'll give you a hand:  The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.  Now, where in the Constitution does it say that states MUST stay in the Union? If it doesn't, then, per that amendment, that right/power, must reside with the states.
.
Nobody likes to see the Constitution shredded, but criticizing Lincoln and his emergency and dealing with dissolution of the Nation must be taken in context. Moreover, criticising Lincoln as a nation destroyer is possiblely the height of hypocrisy (as demonstrated by Levin, Hannity, Bachmann, OReilly, etc.) given what this nation just endured under the Bush administration's shredding of the Constitution under relatively minor dubious circumstances compared to Lincoln's situation. And here's why:
.
http://lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo222.html
.and
.
http://goldfishforthought.blogspot.com/2011/03/lincoln-did-not-kill-united-states.html
.
.
.....TM7

Funny.  Bush pretty much acted within what was arguably a reasonable interpretation of the law of the land.  I don't think so and he had a far far smaller issue than Lincoln faced. Some of the finer points overstepped, but that law was passed overwhelmingly by Congress (which shows the danger of ruling (passing laws) by emotion rather than reason). Agreed  But, enough on that, current politics is beyond the scope of this subforum. Not necessarily...we learn from history--or should...
.
.
.......TM7
.
.

[subdjoe]

How did seven states leaving "destroy the union?"  Seems like the federal government kept working without those members in Congress.  Railroads kept running.  Post office kept working.  Army and Navy were still there.  The Constitution still applied to the states still in the union.  I'm not seeing anything "destroyed" any more than a family is "destroyed" if someone moves out of the house. 

Was the relationship between NY and OH changed in any way?  How about VT and PA?  No?  CA and DE maybe?  No, all those relationships stayed the same. 

The anti-constitutionalist always bray about the union being "destroyed" but fail to show any evidence that, other than getting smaller by seven states, anything at all changed.  Well...not as much money to finance northern infrastructure was going into the federal treasury, is that maybe what "destroyed" the union?

Nor have any of the war-mongering Lincoln apologists shown anywhere in the Constitution a clause that prohibits a state from leaving.  Remember, the Constitution deals with the federal government, not the states, except for a very few things prohibited to the states.  Leaving the union is not one of the things prohibited.

[Cabin4]

The Union was still intact. In fact, the northern army was called the Union army. The north was called the Union and still under Washington control. All this garbage about international forces is all meaningless. It’s just the Lincoln apologists hard at work.

[Cabin4]

Of course Lincoln had his reasons for a war with the south. Thats still not the point.