he hates white xian goyim

he even thinks that border control and immigration laws are
unconstitutional

On Nov 21, 7:35 pm, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote:
> Do you have some point in posting shit like this?
>
> On Nov 21, 12:11 am, "M. Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Grand Ole Tyrantsby Thomas J. DiLorenzoI am humble Abraham Lincoln. I have 
> > been solicited by many friends to become a candidate for the legislature. 
> > My politics are short and sweet, like the old woman’s dance. I am in favor 
> > of a national bank . . . in favor of the internal improvements system and a 
> > high protective tariff. -- Abraham Lincoln, 1832Lincoln and the Republicans 
> > “intended to enact a high protective tariff that mothered monopoly, to pass 
> > a homestead law that invited speculators to loot the public domain, and to 
> > subsidize a transcontinental railroad that afforded infinite opportunities 
> > for jobbery.-- David Donald,Lincoln Reconsidered
> > [T]he Thirty-seventh Congress [1861-63] ushered in four decades of 
> > neo-Hamiltonianism: government for the benefit of the privileged few.
> > -- Leondard Curry,Blueprint for Modern America: Nonmilitary Legislation of 
> > the First Civil War Congress
> > The very first public statement that Abraham Lincoln made after being 
> > inaugurated as the sixteenth president was an ironclad defense of slavery: 
> > “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.” He then quoted 
> > the Republican Party platform of 1860 that said essentially the same thing; 
> > pledged his support for the Fugitive Slave Clause of the Constitution “with 
> > no mental reservations”; and supported a proposed constitutional amendment 
> > (the “Corwin Amendment”) that would have prohibited the federal government 
> > fromeverinterfering with slavery. In fact, it was Lincoln who instructed 
> > William Seward to see that the Corwin Amendment made it through the U.S. 
> > Senate, which it did (and the House of Representatives as well).
> > In the same speech, Lincoln promised a military invasion and “bloodshed” in 
> > any state that refused to collect the federal tariff on imports, which had 
> > just been more than doubled two days before his inauguration. “[T]here 
> > needs to be no bloodshed or violence, and there shall be none unless it be 
> > forced upon the national authority,” he continued. Thus, mere minutes after 
> > taking an oath to protect the constitutional liberties of American 
> > citizens, Abraham Lincoln threatened to orchestrate the murder of many of 
> > those same citizens.
> > What on earth was he talking about? What would cause a president to wage 
> > war on his own citizens whose liberties he had just pledged to protect? 
> > Lincoln explained in the very next sentence: “The power confided to me will 
> > be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to 
> > the Government andto collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be 
> > necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using force 
> > against or among the people anywhere” (emphasis added). He promised to 
> > murder American citizens over tax collection.
> > This was necessary, in the mind of Lincoln, if he was to deliver on what 
> > his party elected him to do, as stated in the quotations at the beginning 
> > of this article: to enact a high protective tariff, give away public lands 
> > mostly to mining, railroad, and timber corporations, and lavish the 
> > railroad corporations, among others, with corporate welfare. This was the 
> > old “American System” of Alexander Hamilton, which was endorsed for decades 
> > by Lincoln’s Whig Party, and finally the Republicans. The overwhelming 
> > majority of Southern congressmen had for decades been ardently opposed to 
> > all of these things. But now, they must be forced into it, or so Lincoln 
> > thought, for the sake of revenue collection. (At the time, the tariff on 
> > imports accounted for more than 90 percent of all federal tax revenues.)
> > Southerners (as well as Northerners) needed to be forced to pay for the 
> > empire of corporate welfare that the Republican Party hoped would keep it 
> > in power for decades. (It did: the Republican Party essentially monopolized 
> > national politics for the next half century.) That is why there had to be a 
> > war, in the minds of Lincoln and the Republican Party. They were perfectly 
> > willing to enshrine slavery explicitly in the Constitution, but there would 
> > be no compromise over collecting the newly doubled tariff.
> > This is also why opposition to war in the North had to be brutally 
> > repressed, as it was, and a myth of “national unity” invented. Much of the 
> > story of how the Republican Party engaged in a Stalinist spasm of political 
> > repression is told by historian William Marvel in his book,Lincoln’s 
> > Darkest Year: The War in 1862, which I highly recommend. (Marvel is a 
> > renowned Lincoln scholar, winner of the Lincoln Prize and the Douglas 
> > Southall Freeman Award.)
> > The Republican Party’s first act of political chicanery was to begin 
> > kicking out of the U.S. Senate men like Democratic Senator Jesse Bright of 
> > Indiana, who “lacked enthusiasm for Abraham Lincoln’s war against the 
> > South,” writes Marvel. Using the excuse that, in the years before the war, 
> > Senator Bright “had known and admired [fellow Senator] Jefferson Davis of 
> > Mississippi, the Republican Party accused Senator Bright, one of the most 
> > senior members of the Senate, of “retroactive treason” and expelled him 
> > with a bare two-thirds majority vote.
> > TheCongressional Globepropagandized that “only a traitor would advocate 
> > peace,” and newspapers all over the North that were openly affiliated with 
> > the Republican Party (as was common during that period of time) quoted this 
> > statement. As for Northern newspapers that did not support the waging of 
> > war on their fellow Americans, the government had already begun to “squelch 
> > the most effective . . . criticism by stopping distribution, seizing 
> > equipment, and arresting publishers. Unionist mobs had collaborated in that 
> > suppression of free speech during the summer of 1861, destroying the 
> > offices of antiwar journals and attacking the editors.”
> > Even “Francis Scott Key’s own grandson understood how dangerous it had 
> > become to utter an unpopular opinion in the Land of the Free,” Marvel 
> > sarcastically writes. The grandson of the author of “The Star Spangled 
> > Banner” was a Baltimore newspaper editor who had been thrown into “the 
> > bowels of a coastal fort” without any due process for editorializing 
> > against the Lincoln administration’s suppression of free speech.
> > “The party that dominated the United States Senate intended to formalize 
> > the concept that meaningful dissent [to the political agenda of the 
> > Republican Party] amounted to treason.” After kicking Senator Bright out of 
> > office the leaders of the “Grand Ole Party” then “wished to end their day 
> > early in order to prepare for a grand party that had occupied Mary 
> > Lincoln’s attention for some weeks.” Marvel writes that White House 
> > employees quickly began calling Mrs. Lincoln “the American Queen” who, 
> > according to one senator, appeared at the party “looking like she was 
> > wearing a flower pot on her head.” Many of the generals, admirals, Supreme 
> > Court justices, and foreign counsels who attended the party, writes Marvel, 
> > considered Lincoln to be “a vulgar provincial lacking in either sincerity 
> > or statesmanlike qualities.”
> > Without bothering to amend the Constitution, the Republican Party in 1861 
> > invented a brand new definition of “treason.” Treason, to Lincoln and the 
> > Republican Party, meant oppositionto them.This was very different from the 
> > actual definition of treason in Article I, Section 3 of the U.S. 
> > Constitution: “Treason against the United States shall consist only in 
> > levying War againstthem, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid 
> > and Comfort” (emphasis added). As with all of the founding documents, 
> > “United States” is in the plural, signifying that the free and independent 
> > states (as they are called in the Declaration of Independence) are united 
> > in forming a compact of states for their own mutual benefit. The central 
> > government was to betheir agent.
> > Treason under the Constitution consists of levying war against “them,” the 
> > states. This of course is exactly what Lincoln and the Republican Party 
> > did. Their war on the South was the very definition of treason under the 
> > U.S. Constitution. Long before George Orwell’s time, they distorted the 
> > meaning of the word to mean exactly the opposite of what the founding 
> > fathers intended it to mean. As the perpetrators of treason as defined by 
> > the Constitution, they accusedtheir political opponents– those who opposed 
> > the levying of war” on the states – of treason.
> > Marvel writes that on his very first day in office as Lincoln’s Secretary 
> > of War Edwin Stanton “would exercise a cool, dictatorial demeanor” as he 
> > commenced to enforce the new definition of treason. The U.S. government was 
> > failing to recruit enough soldiers for its war despite the fact that it was 
> > offering enlistment “bounties” of as much as $415. Despite the totalitarian 
> > crackdown on Northern antiwar newspapers, there was still pervasive verbal 
> > opposition to the war in Northern cities. Consequently, Stanton 
> > “unilaterally abolished” that freedom of speech on August 8, 1862, writes 
> > ...
>
> > read more »

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Reply via email to