Lincoln "Unfreed " Slaves In Kentucky?

[Neo]

you guys problem here is that you're creating a STRAWMAN. by only looking a PART of the situation and framing the narative to fit your ... whatever picture that makes you fell better or something.


it takes 2 to tangle. all your comments talk about "the north, the north, Lincoln, the north..."

The History I learned ALSO mentioned the SOUTH and It's Motives for LEAVING the Union. which was SLAVERY.
they didn't leave the union because of TARIFFS, they left BECAUSE they FEARED the north would change/END Slavery. It'd been an issue for 100 years. most of the session docs explicitly state slavery as the reason. the Confederate president stated it as the reason. Southern Senators leaving the Congress stated it as the reason. southern newspapers stated it as the reason. southern soldiers in letters state it as the reason. the slavery clauses are the ONLY major difference in the Confederate constitution from the U.S. Constitution.
Lincoln's Republican party was formed by ABOLITIONIST. So the the south decided to LEAVE. Lincoln wanted to appease the South by any means, but the south would not have it or believe it. Lincoln's main goal was to "Save the Union" the south's main goal was to "Save Slavery". the goals were at cross purposes. The Northern abolitionist used it as a political wedge as Lincoln did eventually.


if you look at a history of say... a concrete company with 2 owners. Mr Red wants to continue to use Sand from China and Mr Green sorta doesn't. But BECAUSE Mr Red in fears that the Sand from China will be stopped he decides to split the biz. But Mr. Blue doesn't want to. He Goes go to court to keep the biz one unit and wins. And by winning also all the Sand from China portion of the biz is ended.
WHAT Caused the Court battle?

you just don't look at ONE side and say well the Br Blue never really had that much a problem with Sand from China ANYway so Sand from China was NOT the real reason for the court case.
that's dishonest.

the sand from China was what caused the rift. no rift, no court.

Anyone that says Lincoln was Saint is a Lair.
Anyone that says the Slavery was just a Side Show or a 2ndry component is a Liar.

there are no angels in Northern or Southern politics here, Except maybe some of the abolitionist that from the beginning want to end slavery in the U.S..

Slavery was/is a horrific thing and people of good conscious should have ended it and not tried to keep it for ANY reason. It wasn't benign in any form in the U.S.. And the Civil War IS what finally ended it.

If you want to say that Lincoln was a scumbag of a politician and that some in the north had slaves and many whites in the North didn't care AT ALL about slavery. YES, you're EXACTLY right. But don't leave out that the politicians and slave owners in the South were WORSE on the issue.
ONLY the abolitionist of the north and south have clean hands on the issue.
The war brought it to head and Northern politicians were free to move in the right direction without trying to compromise with southern politicians wishes. But only compromise with the minority of the north that still embraced the practice. But by the end of the War ALL were freed... by northern soldiers and northern politicians.

Rev, the bolded sentence is the only thing I can find fault with, I believe that's slanderous.

While I think Lincoln erred in suspending habeas corpus and not going far enough in the Emancipation Proclamation, he certainly wasn't a scumbag. If you read his 2nd Inaugural, it illustrates his compassion, fairness, love of America, & her citizens. His act of forgiveness was a noble & very Christian thing to do.

[revelarts]

Rev, the bolded sentence is the only thing I can find fault with, I believe that's slanderous.

While I think Lincoln erred in suspending habeas corpus and not going far enough in the Emancipation Proclamation, he certainly wasn't a scumbag. If you read his 2nd Inaugural, it illustrates his compassion, fairness, love of America, & her citizens. His act of forgiveness was a noble & very Christian thing to do.

Slanderous, Possibly, Frankly I agree I wouldn't put him the scumbag category myself for his ..lack of courage of his convictions concerning the slavery issue and putting the preservation of the union above the freedom of millions.

But i'd say he was a what we call today a "PRAGMATIC" politician.
when i use that term it's not a compliment.

Today politicians that are "personally" opposed to legal abortion but think it's "pragmatic" not to push the issue politically. Or think it "Pragmatic" to torture, "Pragmatic" to spy of u.s. citizens without warrents.

but who profess love of America, love of human life, love of the constitution and cry at the raising of the flag.
Are "Good people"

They put on a good show and are appear sincere in their concern for America but are hypocritically Pragmatic to the best of our ideals and are willing to subvert the constitution to assumed larger ends.

Scumbag as an overall description is not nuanced enough.
A Politician with noble intent who helped achieve some good ends but who was hypocritically pragmatic in the pursuit of mixed goals.

Like Jefferson and many founders, Many of America's heroes have very real flaws. All men do.
I've no wish to diminish Lincoln's good qualities but history is not served if we diminish his less than noble acts as well.

It's odd that some here have little love at all for Lincoln, and point out loudly how few in the north cared about slavery.
But don't like it when people quote Fredrick Douglass assessment of Lincoln and the U.S.. when he said basically the SAME thing.

Frederick Douglass Memorial to Lincoln is probably one of the most honest and reverent.

[revelarts]

....
.....

Frederick Douglass Memorial to Lincoln is probably one of the most honest and reverent.

http://teachingamericanhistory.org/l...raham-lincoln/

[Gunny]

http://teachingamericanhistory.org/l...raham-lincoln/

Nice. To the man who state he would have allowed slavery to exist where it was to circumvent then stop the war.

You need to get with yourself on this, rev. You consider the man that violated the Constitution more than anyone up to his time, and many since to be some moral beacon; yet, call yourself a Constitutionalist. Shit or get off the pot.

[revelarts]

Nice. To the man who state he would have allowed slavery to exist where it was to circumvent then stop the war.

You need to get with yourself on this, rev. You consider the man that violated the Constitution more than anyone up to his time, and many since to be some moral beacon; yet, call yourself a Constitutionalist. Shit or get off the pot.

Did you even listen to or read the speech?
Did you even read what I said?

[Gunny]

Did you even listen to or read the speech?
Did you even read what I said?

Do I ever read your novellas? You're off topic. No one was discussing the right or wrong of slavery. It's a separate issue and hardly a topic exclusive to the US, Lincoln, Douglas nor anyone else. Slavery exists and always has regardless what you and Frederick Douglas think.

The issue is the reaction by poor whites, specifically in border states. The sentiment you hold was not a popular one. It an excuse to take by force of arms what the US couldn't get by bullying.

You apparently haven't read what I posted. Poor whites in tenements working in slave shops were no less slaves because someone labelled them otherwise. Try to stay on the topic for once.

[revelarts]

Do I ever read your novellas? You're off topic. No one was discussing the right or wrong of slavery. It's a separate issue and hardly a topic exclusive to the US, Lincoln, Douglas nor anyone else. Slavery exists and always has regardless what you and Frederick Douglas think.

The issue is the reaction by poor whites, specifically in border states. The sentiment you hold was not a popular one. It an excuse to take by force of arms what the US couldn't get by bullying.

You apparently haven't read what I posted. Poor whites in tenements working in slave shops were no less slaves because someone labelled them otherwise. Try to stay on the topic for once.

SO you didn't read my post and it looks like you didn't even read the 1st post of the thread which is about Lincoln, Kentucky, Slavery, Mentions the reasons for the Civil War, AND has NOTHING to do with "the reaction of POOR WHITES".

Maybe that's where YOU wanted to take it but don't pretend that's what the Thread's 'ABOUT" and claim others are off topic.

find your reading glasses G.

Lincoln "Unfreed " Slaves In Kentucky?

I've Googled myself to death trying to find just ONE corroborating ANYTHING on this and have found bumpkus. When I read it I said "no way, Jose"....thennnnnnnn I started thinking about the "nature" of a politiciian, AND Lincoln was MOST DEFINITELY a skilled and brilliant tactician.....
Thoughts?
Source: http://www.ushistory.org/us/34a.asp
Americans tend to think of the Civil War as being fought to end slavery. Even one full year into the Civil War, the elimination of slavery was not a key objective of the North. Despite a vocal Abolitionist movement in the North, many people and many soldiers, in particular, opposed slavery, but did not favor emancipation....