Plan on seeing the movie "Lincoln"? Keep this in mind... --- it's just another example of jews profiting off racism and white guilt
On Nov 16, 1:51 pm, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: > Tuesday, November 13, 2012Plan on seeing the movie "Lincoln"? Keep this in > mind...By, Chris Rossini > 1832 -- Lincoln begins his political career in the Illinois legislature“I > presume you all know who I am. I 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.”Lincoln hits the ground running with central banking, > corporate welfare, and high taxation. We are still living with all of > them...only the players have changed. > 1838 -- Lincoln's corporate welfare brings Illinois to its knees > William H. Herndon, Lincoln’s law partner and one of his closest friends, > wrote:“Every river and stream…was to be widened, deepened, and made > navigable. A canal to connect the Illinois River and Lake Michigan was to be > dug…cities were to spring up everywhere; capital from abroad was to come > pouring in; attracted by the glowing reports of marvelous progress and great > internal wealth, people were to come swarming in by colonies, until in the > end Illinois was to outstrip all others, and herself become the Empire State > of the Union.”...“The internal improvement system, the adoption of which > Lincoln had played such a prominent part, had collapsed, with the result that > Illinois was left with an enormous debt and empty treasury.”Not much has > changed.Today, Illinois is a financial train wreck waiting to happen. > But back to Lincoln. You'd think that after such a disaster, one would lose > all credibility and trustworthiness. > Nope! When it comes to government, nothing succeeds like failure. > 1858 -- The Great Emancipator on the black & white races > Lincoln's words from the famous Lincoln vs. Douglas debate on Sept. 18, > 1858:"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing > about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black > races, [applause] that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters > or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, not to > intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there > is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe > will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and > political equality."1861 -- Abraham Lincoln -- The First Republican President > The dreadful political party that we're still battling today began with > Lincoln. > Please don't fool yourself into thinking that somehow The Republican Party, > that was born in tyranny, will end up getting taken over by Libertarians; and > the country will return to the freedom-loving days of the founding fathers. > No. > It surely can't happen that way. > The Republican Party, since day one, and all the way up to today, is no > friend of liberty. The saying "by their fruits, ye shall know them" speaks > volumes here. It reminds you to look at the root. > The root of The Republican Party tree lies here in 1861. Don't ever expect it > to grow the fruits of liberty. > Before moving on, let's not skip past Lincoln's first inaugural address. He > touched on the question of slavery and quoted one of his earlier published > speeches:“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.”1861 -- Lincoln > refuses a peaceful Southern Secession > Many Americans (educated by their government, of course) believe that "The > Civil War" was fought to free the slaves. This is just not true. This was a > war over Southern secession. > The war is misnamed. It was not a Civil War. The South had no interest in > taking over the Northern government. > Confederate President Jefferson Davis wanted to make clear to the North that > the Confederates did not constitute a threat to the government in > Washington:“We seek no conquest, no aggrandizement, no concession of any > kind…all we ask is to be let alone.”President Davis appointed three > commissioners to negotiate with the North. The commissioners reached > Washington on Mar. 5, 1861, the day after Lincoln’s inauguration. > Lincoln's response? He outright refused to see the commissioners, and also > refused to recognize the Confederate government. > Whether the South wanted conquest or not made no difference. It was the > economic policies of the South that enraged the North. > You see, the Confederate Constitution created, in essence, a free trade zone > with opposition to protectionism. It stated:“but no bounties shall be granted > from the Treasury; nor shall any duties or taxes on importation from foreign > nations be laid to promote or foster any branch of industry.”Davis, in his > Inaugural Address stated that he was “anxious to cultivate peace and commerce > with all nations,” and that “our policy is peace, and the freest trade our > necessities will permit.” > This was in stark contrast to the North's high-taxes and protectionism. And > remember what Lincoln said when he entered politics: "I am in favor of a > national bank…in favor of the internal improvements system and a high > protective tariff." > Free Trade? Ha! > The North was in no way going to allow the South become an attractive market > for the rest of the world, while at the same time, pricing out the North. > On Apr. 2, 1861 The Newark Daily Advertiser, warned ominously that > Southerners had apparently “taken to their bosoms the liberal and popular > doctrine of free trade” and that they “might be willing to go…toward free > trade with the European powers” which “must operate to the serious > disadvantage of the North” as “commerce will be largely diverted to the > Southern cities.” > This is America...the "land of the free"...and if there's one thing that will > not be tolerated, it's free trade. > When Lincoln was in Congress, he had no problem with secession. In a speech > on Jan. 12, 1848, he said:“Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the > power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and > form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable, a most sacred > right - a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. Nor is > this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing > government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people, that can, > may revolutionize, and make their own of so much of the territory as they > inhabit.”But as President, Lincoln's words went out the door as fast as > George W. Bush's "humble" foreign policy. > As President, Lincoln called secession the “essence of anarchy.” > In other words, if the South wanted free trade, then it was time for Lincoln > to invade. > Now the fun begins.... > 1861Apr. 19, Lincoln imposed a blockade on Southern ports of South Carolina, > Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas. Did Congress declare > war? No. Constitution violated. Apr. 20, Lincoln ordered the Sec. of Treasury > to spend public money for defense without congressional appropriation, > violating the Constitution. Apr. 27, Lincoln made the unprecedented move of > suspending, through an unconstitutional order, the writ of habeas corpus, or > the protection against unlawful imprisonment.Lincoln signed a warrant for the > arrest of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court because the Judge rendered > an opinion that Lincoln acted unconstitutionally by suspending the writ of > habeas corpus.Lincoln had U.S. Rep. Clement Vallandigham of Ohio arrested for > “disloyal sentiments and speeches.” Vallandigham opposed the Morrill Tariff > and the central bank. An estimated 13,000 Northern citizens were detained for > merely expressing opposition to the war. This group contained hundreds of > newspaper editors and owners. None of these people ever heard evidence > against them and were never brought to trial.During the war, adult male > civilians in the South were compelled to take a loyalty oath to the federal > government or be shot. In the words of Justice Benjamin R. Curtis, Lincoln > had established “a military despotism.” > 1862 -- What's war without paper money to pay for it? > In the Legal Tender Act of Feb. 1862, Congress authorized the printing of > $150 million in new “United States notes” (Greenbacks) to pay for the growing > war deficits. “In God We Trust” was also introduced on the U.S. dollar in > 1862 when it’s gold backing was dropped. > 2012?...No change...Worldwide military empire...constant war....all financed > with electronic digits and enforced with legal tender laws. > Here's a heads up though...Eventually (like Lincoln's Greenbacks) the money > becomes worthless. > 1862 -- The Great Emancipator on freeing slaves > Lincoln wrote to Horace Greeley:"My paramount object in this struggle is to > save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could > save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save > it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing > some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, > and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and > what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the > Union."Lincoln's America > In the interest of brevity, I'll end with a quote from H.L. Mencken. He talks > about Lincoln's absurd claim, in The Gettysburg Address, that Northern > soldiers fought for the cause of self-determination:"It is difficult to > imagine anything more untrue. The Union soldiers in the battle actually > fought against self determination; it was the Confederates who fought for the > right of their people to govern themselves. The Confederates went into the > battle free; they came out with their freedom subject to the supervision of > the rest of the country."The "Union" was saved...geographically. The spirit > of self-determination and decentralization was crushed. > Sadly, for generations to come (including us) the power of centralized > government in America had only just > begun.http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2012/11/plan-on-seeing-movie-lincoln-keep-this.html -- 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.
