New Democratic ad: What’s Steve Cohen doing in our churches?

posted at 8:48 pm on August 6, 2008 by Allahpundit

Interesting question. A better question: What’s a blogger to do when, after righteously hammering the left all week for reading nefarious subtexts into innocent ads, he’s confronted with an ad that might not be so innocent? I’d give Tinker the benefit of the doubt here if not for the fact that her last ad compared Cohen to a, er, Klansman. We know she’s perfectly willing to hit below the belt, in other words; the only question is how low. Judge for yourselves. Is the “our” in “our churches” a tad too inflected for comfort?

Update: Damn, looks like the video’s been pulled. TPM has a transcript.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

So democrats complaining about republican race baiting is just to insulate them, so they can do it more openly?

Am I getting it right?

lorien1973 on August 6, 2008 at 8:52 PM

The question is, can he bring home the bacon?

ninjapirate on August 6, 2008 at 8:52 PM

We will hear liberals complain about the separation of church and state here in [crickets chirping].

When it comes to black churches and the Democratic party, there is no “wall of separation.” That’s only for conservative Christians and the GOP.

Wethal on August 6, 2008 at 8:54 PM

Wow, that video disappeared quick…somebody, somewhere in YouTubeLand doesn’t think it’s nuanced enough.

AUINSC on August 6, 2008 at 8:55 PM

Video is now gone.

terryannonline on August 6, 2008 at 8:56 PM

It’s inflected enough to ostracize Cohen along racial lines.

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 8:56 PM

**poof**

My collie says:

Wish I could do magic tricks like that.

CyberCipher on August 6, 2008 at 8:58 PM

Video doesn’t work.

Darth Executor on August 6, 2008 at 8:59 PM

Ahh, this makes me recall last spring when either Jeremiah Wright or Obama were saying that white people go to Trinity United and feel comfortable there.

It's Vintage, Duh on August 6, 2008 at 9:03 PM

I hope someone made a copy of it. Tinker earned Olberdouche’s Worst Person Award today for this.

Of course Howard Dean did call the Republican party “pretty much a white Christian party“, what does he think of his own party’s treatment of non-Christians?

clghitis on August 6, 2008 at 9:20 PM

The Civil War created two geniuses; Abraham Lincoln and Nathan Bedford Forrest.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 9:23 PM

This is being discussed on Hannity and Skeletor right now.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 9:24 PM

This is not helping David Axelrod’s boy at all. Please, keep it up.

SouthernGent on August 6, 2008 at 9:25 PM

I lived in Memphis for years. This district has a history of anti-white racism and Antisemitism. After a close race in the 1994 Harold Ford Sr (father of the previous Representative and a classic corrupt machine pol) almost lost re-election in a tough fight with a well-funded, black Republican businessman. After he won Ford Sr lashed out at “East Memphis Devils” – a local code for white in general and Jews in particular. It was his last race. His son, Harold Ford Jr, ran and won in 1996.

Memphis is a sad town. The most racially divided city I’ve ever seen. Cohen may survive this challenge but not the next. Demographics and the city’s poisonous racial politics will doom him. Eventually either Harold Jr comes back (if Obama doesn’t win and offer him a job) or a cog of the Ford machine will re-claim the seat that Ford Sr views as the property of the Ford family. I wouldn’t at all be surprised if behind Tinker you’d find a group of pro-Ford bagmen egging her on so one of the Ford sons can run against her in 2010.

I know the Fords. I worked for them at one point (back in my days as a Democratic hack) and I would bet money they are involved in this. Ford Sr and his even more corrupt brothers and extended family are a political mafia in Memphis. They don’t like Cohen (not personally and not politically) and will do what it takes to get rid of him. Tinker is just a puppet.

Vote Sauron 08 on August 6, 2008 at 9:25 PM

The Civil War created two geniuses; Abraham Lincoln and Nathan Bedford Forrest.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 9:23 PM

Huh? One was a murdering racist, the other was a klansman. I’ll let you figure out which one was which.

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 9:40 PM

Huh? One was a murdering racist, the other was a klansman. I’ll let you figure out which one was which.

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 9:40 PM

Time to learn some history if you think that way.
Forrest started the KKK but got out when it became too violent for him. So you are saying Abe Lincoln was a ‘murdering racist’??
Despite of what you think about NBF because he started the clan, the man was a military genius.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 9:42 PM

A murdering racist? Wtf

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 9:43 PM

A murdering racist? Wtf

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 9:43 PM

I know, lol.
Tim Burton must be hitting the sauce a bit early this evening.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 9:45 PM

The comments at TPM are wonderful. They make it through 10 entire comments before the GOP gets blamed, and even after the mistake is corrected, they can’t stop.

TexasDan on August 6, 2008 at 9:46 PM

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 9:40 PM

Wow! Are you from the South?

Oldnuke on August 6, 2008 at 9:49 PM

The tolerance these people demonstrate is heartwarming. /s/

coldwarrior on August 6, 2008 at 9:49 PM

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 9:40 PM

These kind of slanders of Lincoln piss me off. Fredrick Douglas said that Lincoln was the only man who he met that when he talked to him, Lincoln saw him as a man. Not a black man, just a man. Lincoln was not a racist.

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 9:52 PM

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 9:40 PM

Wow! Are you from the South?

Oldnuke on August 6, 2008 at 9:49 PM

I think Tim made an honest mistake, however, if he is insinuating that Nathan Bedford Forrest was a ‘murdering racist’, he is sorely misguided. Forrest was never found to be a murderer. He killed 31 men during the Civil War, but during wartime that is not considered murder. A racist? Yes, as were all other slave holders during that period. However, Forrest gave a choice to his 44 slaves to fight with him and gain their freedom; all 44 agreed and only one deserted while the other 43 fought to the end of the war.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 9:53 PM

Abraham Lincoln was a modest, brilliant, intelligent man and quite frankly, saved the union. Of all the men who have walked the earth, Abe is my second favorite behind Jesus.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 9:55 PM

Time to learn some history if you think that way.
Forrest started the KKK but got out when it became too violent for him. So you are saying Abe Lincoln was a ‘murdering racist’??
Despite of what you think about NBF because he started the clan, the man was a military genius.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 9:42 PM

Don’t know your history do you?

Not only was he a murderer, but he also was a big time racist.

The only reason that Lincoln backed off deportation was because he couldn’t figure out how to get them all there. Ultimately, he wanted the US to be white.

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 9:58 PM

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 9:53 PM

I’m not sure if he made a mistake or not. His comment caught me so off guard that I almost spewed coffee. I’ve heard Lincoln called many things but this is the first time I’ve ever heard him called a murdering racist! I can only assume he was referencing Lincoln since I don’t think old Abe was ever a member of the Klan. My question was a little tongue in cheek since I can’t imagine any Southerner referring to Lincoln as a racist. A tyrant, a despot, a dictator maybe but never a racist. Don’t yell at me Spirit, I’m not calling him any of those. I would like to find out what Tim Burton meant with that comment.

Oldnuke on August 6, 2008 at 10:02 PM

The only reason that Lincoln backed off deportation was because he couldn’t figure out how to get them all there. Ultimately, he wanted the US to be white.

That’s bull. He thought the racial division in the country was so deep that it might never heal. That doesn’t make him racist. I mean, dude, look at the next 100 years! “Separate but Equal” proved that he was right about the powers that be still trying to keep the blacks from their rights. By that argument, all the blacks that did emigrate are racist too. Fail.

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 10:02 PM

Oldnuke on August 6, 2008 at 10:02 PM

No yelling :) I’m just tired of all the re-writing of his life. I mean books that say Lincoln was racist, books that say Lincoln was gay, books that say that Lincoln wanted war, etc. Lame.

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 10:07 PM

Time to learn some history if you think that way.
Forrest started the KKK but got out when it became too violent for him. So you are saying Abe Lincoln was a ‘murdering racist’??
Despite of what you think about NBF because he started the clan, the man was a military genius.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 9:42 PM

Don’t know your history do you?

Not only was he a murderer, but he also was a big time racist.

The only reason that Lincoln backed off deportation was because he couldn’t figure out how to get them all there. Ultimately, he wanted the US to be white.

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 9:58 PM

Nice propaganda there Tim. You must also believe the US Government orchestrated 9-11? Hey, do you also believe that we didn’t really reach the moon? Think it was a film made in a studio on some lot in Hollywood?
You sir, are a fool.
I gave you the benefit of the doubt on called Lincoln a ‘murdering racist’. You have proved yourself an idiot and your stupid questionable “blog” links and trash books do not prove anything. If you are a Lincoln hater, you are in the smallest minority in the nation. I would recommend that you take some advice from the so-called ‘murdering racist’ and:
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.
Abraham Lincoln

Idiot.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:08 PM

Oldnuke on August 6, 2008 at 10:02 PM

No yelling :) I’m just tired of all the re-writing of his life. I mean books that say Lincoln was racist, books that say Lincoln was gay, books that say that Lincoln wanted war, etc. Lame.

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 10:07 PM

The idiots who slander the name of Lincoln are fighting a losing battle. This man is legend, in a way that few ever reach.
I think Tim is an idiot.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:10 PM

These kind of slanders of Lincoln piss me off. Fredrick Douglas said that Lincoln was the only man who he met that when he talked to him, Lincoln saw him as a man. Not a black man, just a man. Lincoln was not a racist.

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 9:52 PM

That is funny, because Douglas pointed to the Confederate Army as proof that Negros should be allowed to fight for the Union. Since Stonewall Jackson had 3,000 black troops with him when he went into Fredrick, MD.

Douglas also supported Brown, who was a psychopathic murderer.

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 10:12 PM

The idiots who slander the name of Lincoln are fighting a losing battle. This man is legend, in a way that few ever reach.
I think Tim is an idiot.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:10 PM

Great rebuttal there.

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 10:13 PM

Douglas also supported Brown, who was a psychopathic murderer.

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 10:12 PM

Wow Tim, you really must be an racist. John Brown died for the slaves.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:14 PM

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:10 PM

Hey, I’m willing to give a bit of ground on his deification. Sure, he is martyr and so he gets a touch of gloss.

But the facts are incredible. I’ve read most of the stuff that he produced, whether official or private letter, etc. His secretaries put together everything of his they could find. And it’s impressive. It’s the mind of a truly great man – human with some frailty – he was nervous around women, was depressed with all the death he saw earlier in his life, but he was a great idealist and incredible politician who knew exactly when and how hard to push to get doors opened.

I don’t think this country can thank him enough frankly. So it pisses me off when people can’t believe how great he was, and unable to believe in goodness, bring him down with slanders.

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 10:15 PM

Great rebuttal there.

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 10:13 PM

You showed me. Wow,, nice retort.

Where did you learn history??
You are either drunk, stupid or both. I would say both.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:16 PM

I gave you the benefit of the doubt on called Lincoln a ‘murdering racist’. You have proved yourself an idiot and your stupid questionable “blog” links and trash books do not prove anything. If you are a Lincoln hater, you are in the smallest minority in the nation. I would recommend that you take some advice from the so-called ‘murdering racist’ and:
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.
Abraham Lincoln

Idiot.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:08 PM

Nice try, you first start up with a bunch of ad hominem attacks and then dismiss the historical facts.

It is well known that Lincoln ordered the murder of those Indians.

It is also well known that he wanted to deport blacks, until he realized it was impossible to get them back. He has plenty of racist quotes.

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 10:17 PM

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 10:07 PM

Ok, I could tell this was something you felt deeply about and didn’t want you to think I was calling Lincoln names. The civil war isn’t something I’ve ever really studied in any depth. I took a look at Tim Burton’s links. I also found links debunking the book by Lerone Bennett. As with any subject you’ll always have people who view things differently. I do have to agree with Carbon though Forrest was a genius. I disagree that he and Lincoln were the only such to come out of the Civil war.

Oldnuke on August 6, 2008 at 10:17 PM

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 10:12 PM

I don’t care if it funny or not, it’s true.

Brown was a polarizing figure, to be sure.

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 10:18 PM

He has plenty of racist quotes.

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 10:17 PM

Then produce them.

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 10:19 PM

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 10:15 PM

I have read tons of books on Lincoln. The man was brilliant, filled with humility and great personal losses. Through it all, he held this country together when the odds were against him.
Tim Burton would not understand this because he is obviously reading stupid conspiracy crap and passing it off as reality.
Ad hominem Tim?
SO be it. You are a tool and not even a challenge to debate with.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:19 PM

It is well known that Lincoln ordered the murder of those Indians.Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 10:17 PM

Oh really? Well known is a stretch.
Who said: “The only good injun is a dead one”?
Was that Lincoln you arrogant, misinformed troll?

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:21 PM

Wow Tim, you really must be an racist. John Brown died for the slaves.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:14 PM

Yes, you know you lost the argument when you claim the other person is racist. Sorta like Godwin’s Law.

He died for the slaves? Well, he sure liked to kill people:

In 1856, three years before his celebrated raid on Harpers Ferry, John Brown, with four of his sons and three others, dragged five unarmed men and boys from their homes along Kansas’s Pottawatomie Creek, and hacked and dismembered their bodies as if they were cattle being butchered in a stockyard.

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 10:24 PM

Crap, wrong link. Correct link.

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 10:24 PM

I have read tons of books on Lincoln. The man was brilliant, filled with humility and great personal losses. Through it all, he held this country together when the odds were against him.
carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:19 PM

Ditto here, and I agree with this totaly EXCEPT he held the country together with an incredible level of butchery that wasn’t necessary. Therein lies my problem with Lincoln.

JonRoss on August 6, 2008 at 10:25 PM

That is funny, because Douglas pointed to the Confederate Army as proof that Negros should be allowed to fight for the Union. Since Stonewall Jackson had 3,000 black troops with him when he went into Fredrick, MD.

It is Frederick, MD. Just pointed out how stupid you are.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:26 PM

Oh really? Well known is a stretch.
Who said: “The only good injun is a dead one”?
Was that Lincoln you arrogant, misinformed troll?

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:21 PM

LOL! No that quote was by Philip Sheridan. Ironically enough, he served under Lincoln.

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 10:26 PM

It is Frederick, MD. Just pointed out how stupid you are.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:26 PM

LOL! The best you can rebut is a spelling error?

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 10:27 PM

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 10:24 PM

Yes Tim, I know about he and his sons hacking the pro-slave men too death with swords.
He was also the spark that started the Civil War which ended up freeing the slaves.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:28 PM

They cant be racist, they’re black

/sarcasm

DwnSouthJukin on August 6, 2008 at 10:28 PM

LOL! The best you can rebut is a spelling error?

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 10:27 PM

LOL yes. That is all I have against you–a brilliant history scholar.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:28 PM

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 10:26 PM

Good! You finally have shown that you do have a grip on reality. Just checking.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:29 PM

He didn’t like to kill people. He did it because he thought it was the only way to free America from slavery. Don’t agree with him, fine, but that doesn’t mean he had a blood-lust.

The 1856 incident is the aberration in his life. I do not excuse it. But it cost John Brown a significant portion of his financial backing back east (read: it wasn’t what they signed up for – meaning it was a bridge too far). It was the only time he went across that bridge. Bleeding Kansas was not bleeding just because of John Brown. He was a counter-reaction to the violence of pro-slavers. That’s why he went to Kansas in the first place.

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 10:30 PM

I saw the ad/video, somewhere on cable earlier today. It definitely and clearly depicted Cohen as a white supremacist, replete with a scary image of a hooded klansman, panning to a shot of a statue of Forrest mounted on a horse in a park. According to the voice-over, Cohen voted against removing that statue, and a black announcer was on camera condemning him for that. It was a scathing, vicious black on white racial attack. Makes me wonder why a white guy would even run for dog catcher in Memphis. Whew!

marybel on August 6, 2008 at 10:30 PM

JonRoss on August 6, 2008 at 10:25 PM

I assume you mean on the battlefield. It was unfortunate, but at the beginning of the war both sides were fighting outdated tactics. Napoleonic tactics with new technology.

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 10:32 PM

Ditto here, and I agree with this totaly EXCEPT he held the country together with an incredible level of butchery that wasn’t necessary. Therein lies my problem with Lincoln.

JonRoss on August 6, 2008 at 10:25 PM

Wow, you really think so? How?
The South started the war by seceding and the attack on Ft. Sumpter. The Civil War was bloody from both sides. The Rebels slaughtering the advancing Union soldiers at Fredericksburg; Pickett’s Charge at Gettysburg on day 3. There was butchery on both sides; that is what war is about.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:33 PM

Then produce them.

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 10:19 PM

I am not now, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social or political equality of the white and black races. I am not now nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor of intermarriages with white people. There is a physical difference between the white and the black races which will forever forbid the two races living together on social or political equality. There must be a position of superior and inferior, and I am in favor of assigning the superior position to the white man.

Lincoln in his speech to Charleston, Illinois, 1858

My first impulse would possibly be to free all slaves and send them to Liberia to their own native land. But a moment’s reflection would convince me that this would not be best for them. If they were all landed there in a day they would all perish in the next ten days, and there is not surplus money enough to carry them there in many times ten days. What then? Free them all and keep them among us as underlings. Is it quite certain that this would alter their conditions? Free them and make them politically and socially our equals? My own feelings will not admit of this,

Lincoln in speeches at Peoria, Illinois

Also, when realizing that freeing the slaves and sending them back to Africa wouldn’t work, Ben Butler suggested Lincoln send them to dig the Panama Canal. Lincoln thought it was a great idea.

“You and we are different races. We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other 2 races. Even when you cease to be slaves, you are yet far removed from being placed on an equality with the white race. you are cut off from many of the advantages which the other race enjoys. It is better for us both to be separated.”

Abraham Lincoln, during a meeting with free Negro leaders, at the White House, August, 1862

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 10:35 PM

I assume you mean on the battlefield. It was unfortunate, but at the beginning of the war both sides were fighting outdated tactics. Napoleonic tactics with new technology.

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 10:32 PM

Agreed.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:37 PM

I have lived my entire life in southeast Tennessee. Five of my gggrandfathers from here fought in the “war”. Four of the five went Union. One of the Union died in battle in Tennessee. This area is a microcosim of the national schizophrenia (no I don’t have spell check) that the country has over this subject. We have learn to just let it go. I suggest everyone else do so.

JonRoss on August 6, 2008 at 10:39 PM

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:33 PM

The individual states each joined the union by a simple vote of their respective legislatures. I’ve never seen anything anywhere that says they were bound to that union forever. Why could they not secede using the same method that they joined? I saw this question posed by a judge once and I’ve never heard an answer that I would call satisfactory. This thread has gone way off topic.

Oldnuke on August 6, 2008 at 10:42 PM

…Wow, you really think so? How?
The South started the war by seceding and the attack on Ft. Sumpter.
carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:33 PM

Recall that after the war Robert E. Lee was called before the U.S. Congress and grilled about everything. He pointed out that secession was not unlawful, and no one in Congress refuted that. No one was ever even as much as charged with treason over the entire affair.

JonRoss on August 6, 2008 at 10:43 PM

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 10:35 PM

“All men are created equal except negroes, foreigners and Catholics.” When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty — to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy.
– Abraham Lincoln

A man who changes his mind is more honorable had he remained stuck in the mud of wrongs.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:43 PM

The individual states each joined the union by a simple vote of their respective legislatures. I’ve never seen anything anywhere that says they were bound to that union forever. Why could they not secede using the same method that they joined? I saw this question posed by a judge once and I’ve never heard an answer that I would call satisfactory. This thread has gone way off topic.

Oldnuke on August 6, 2008 at 10:42 PM

You are 100% correct. The states did have the right to secede as they saw fit. However, the South also made the choice to attack Ft. Sumpter and starting the war.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:45 PM

Wow, you really think so? How?
The South started the war by seceding and the attack on Ft. Sumpter. The Civil War was bloody from both sides. The Rebels slaughtering the advancing Union soldiers at Fredericksburg; Pickett’s Charge at Gettysburg on day 3. There was butchery on both sides; that is what war is about.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:33 PM

According to the Declaration of Independence, Secession is a right to an oppressive government.

Also secession has a long history, the North claimed the right during the embargo on shipping during the War of 1812, they also claimed the right if Virginia had another President elected (They felt VA had too much power), they also wanted to secede so they could violate the Compromise of 1850.


The Mid-Atlantic States also have a long history of threatening Secession pre-1861.

That also isn’t to mention that JC Calhoun resigned from VP over the right to secede when Jackson was in office.

The only reason they attacked, was because the Federal Government refused to withdraw from state property. After all, they would have been starved out weeks earlier if the South wouldn’t have been sending them food.

Also, you probably don’t know, but Lincoln was willing for the Corwin Amendment to pass to preserve the Union. Don’t know what the Corwin Amendment is? It would have made Slavery eternal in the United States.

Even with that offer, the South was unwilling to return, even though Lincoln was willing to accept it.

I can not be ignorant of the fact that many worthy and patriotic citizens are desirous of having the National Constitution amended. While I make no recommendation of amendments, I fully recognize the rightful authority of the people over the whole subject, to be exercised in either of the modes prescribed in the instrument itself; and I should, under existing circumstances, favor rather than oppose a fair opportunity being afforded the people to act upon it. I will venture to add that to me the convention mode seems preferable,

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 10:46 PM

Reading comments on liberal web sites is dizzying. What a bunch of neurotic fems.

Jaibones on August 6, 2008 at 10:47 PM

Pre-CW quotes are explained in the simple context of his priorities. It is not accurate to say that Lincoln would have abolished slavery if would have cost the Union. It is accurate to say that he hated slavery. But his first priority was to save the Union. Everything he says pre-war is said with the mindset that Union must be preserved first. Like many of the fathers, he thought slavery would die of it’s own. None of his political positions were about race equality, they were about preserving the Union with the understanding that preventing the expansion of slavery would kill it.

To prove my point, I quote a larger excerpt of the speech you clipped:

We know that some Southern men do free their slaves, go North and become tip-top abolitionists, while some Northern Men go South and become most cruel masters.
When Southern people tell us that they are no more responsible for the origin of slavery than we are, I acknowledge the fact. When it is said the institution exists, and it is very difficult to get rid of in any satisfactory way, I can understand and appreciate the saying. I surely will not blame them for not doing what I should not know what to do as to the existing institution. My first impulse would possibly be to free all slaves and send them to Liberia to their own native land. But a moment’s reflection would convince me that this would not be best for them. If they were all landed there in a day they would all perish in the next ten days, and there is not surplus money enough to carry them there in many times ten days. What then? Free them all and keep them among us as underlings. Is it quite certain that this would alter their conditions? Free them and make them politically and socially our equals? My own feelings will not admit of this, and if mine would, we well know that those of the great mass of whites will not. We cannot make them our equals. A system of gradual emancipation might well be adopted, and I will not undertake to judge our Southern friends for tardiness in this matter.

His conclusion: I’m not sure what the best course of action is. Hardly hate-filled racist speech.

His ’62 speech is, I think, accurate of the conclusions he had come to in his life’s experience. Disparity and hatred in his lifetime gave little hope for reunification between the races. Again, look at the next 100 years. Race is an issue even today

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 10:47 PM

I have lived my entire life in southeast Tennessee. Five of my gggrandfathers from here fought in the “war”. Four of the five went Union. One of the Union died in battle in Tennessee. This area is a microcosim of the national schizophrenia (no I don’t have spell check) that the country has over this subject. We have learn to just let it go. I suggest everyone else do so.

JonRoss on August 6, 2008 at 10:39 PM

I had ancestors who fought on both sides as well. The war was as much about State’s rights as it was for slavery. Politics veered it into being about slavery.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:47 PM

No one was ever even as much as charged with treason over the entire affair.

JonRoss on August 6, 2008 at 10:43 PM

The only person punished over anything thing to do with the entire four year blood bath was Henry Wirz because of his role at Andersonville. That was it.

JonRoss on August 6, 2008 at 10:48 PM

You are 100% correct. The states did have the right to secede as they saw fit. However, the South also made the choice to attack Ft. Sumpter and starting the war.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:45 PM

Except that the Federal Government was possessing/trespassing on land they did not own, nor have any right to in possession of it.

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 10:48 PM

Why could they not secede using the same method that they joined? I saw this question posed by a judge once and I’ve never heard an answer that I would call satisfactory.

Oldnuke, we’ll never know because they forced the issue by firing on Ft. Sumter. Lincoln is called a fascist by some who claim he expanded the power of the central government by nullifying state’s rights. But suppressing insurrection is a Constitutional obligation (To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; that’s Art 1, Sec 8). Had they not started a violence course of action, who knows what would have happened.

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 10:50 PM

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 10:46 PM

Yes, I agree (read previous comment) that the South had every right to secede. The South’s decision, no matter what the reasoning was, to fire upon Ft. Sumpter started the conflict.
Okay, I am actually impressed with your knowledge in your last post.
But your Lincoln is a ‘murdering racist’ crap is stupid as hell and everyone here knows it but you.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:50 PM

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 10:47 PM

True. And recall Lincoln by decree freed slaves in the 11 seceeding states but did not in the others.

JonRoss on August 6, 2008 at 10:51 PM

Wow, we hijacked this thread in a big way. Sorry Allah.
Tim, I take back my calling you a fool and an idiot.
However, the ‘stupid’ label still applies to your Lincoln hating.
; P
Goodnight everyone.
Enjoyed the ‘history lesson’.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:53 PM

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:45 PM

I’m not clear on this but hadn’t the Union been given notice to remove it’s troops from the property and hadn’t the Confederate government offered just compensation for the property? They were, in effect, foreign troops on sovereign soil.

Oldnuke on August 6, 2008 at 10:53 PM

Also, you probably don’t know, but Lincoln was willing for the Corwin Amendment to pass to preserve the Union. Don’t know what the Corwin Amendment is? It would have made Slavery eternal in the United States.

I am absolutely aware of that. It was commonly believed by both sides that slavery was not a viable economic system as the country was progressing. Which is why the forefathers believed that it would die of it’s own accord.

The Corwin Ad was to restrict the expansion of slavery permanently. And then allow slavery to die it’s natural death in the states it was already legal in.

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 10:53 PM

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:45 PM

I’m not clear on this but hadn’t the Union been given notice to remove it’s troops from the property and hadn’t the Confederate government offered just compensation for the property? They were, in effect, foreign troops on sovereign soil.

Oldnuke on August 6, 2008 at 10:53 PM

That sounds correct. But the onus of starting a civil war over that technicality was upon the South. They acted first.
Odd thing is, when I read or watch documentaries on the Civil War, I find myself torn between the North and the South. I see both sides, disparate as they were.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:56 PM

Everything he says pre-war is said with the mindset that Union must be preserved first. Like many of the fathers, he thought slavery would die of it’s own. None of his political positions were about race equality, they were about preserving the Union with the understanding that preventing the expansion of slavery would kill it.

His conclusion: I’m not sure what the best course of action is. Hardly hate-filled racist speech.

His ‘62 speech is, I think, accurate of the conclusions he had come to in his life’s experience. Disparity and hatred in his lifetime gave little hope for reunification between the races. Again, look at the next 100 years. Race is an issue even today

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 10:47 PM

Some of the other quotes are just damning. I will grant you that there he was more “moderate”.

Ultimately, he was willing to let slavery be forever if it just brought back the Union. His allowing the moving of the Corwin Amendment shows that intent.

Also, we need to remember that slavery was dying. Do not forget that Jefferson Davis was working on ways to teach slaves how to be a part of society. This included teaching his slaves to read. He also never punished slaves, he allowed the slaves to bring charges and have a jury of other slaves make the judgment. He couldn’t increase the penalty, but he could commute it. He also was very active in a group who sought that when slavery was ended to keep it from being such a mess-up as occurred in England. While many Southerners wanted slavery forever, many wanted it ended. They found it offensive that the North free their slaves slowly with enough time to allow the owners to take them south.

That isn’t even getting into the dirty little secrets about slavery, such as:

1. Blacks owned slaves, including at a higher per a capita rate than whites in NOLA.
2. A black man brought lifetime slavery to the Colonies (Antonio the Negro)
3. There where white slaves.

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 10:57 PM

That sounds correct. But the onus of starting a civil war over that technicality was upon the South. They acted first.
Odd thing is, when I read or watch documentaries on the Civil War, I find myself torn between the North and the South. I see both sides, disparate as they were.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:56 PM

That is like saying someone is wrong for shooting someone who invading your house.

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 10:59 PM

The Corwin Ad was to restrict the expansion of slavery permanently. And then allow slavery to die it’s natural death in the states it was already legal in.

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 10:53 PM

Except, have you read the Admendment? It didn’t do that:

No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.

Nothing about it would have limited slavery from any state that chose to allow it.

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 11:00 PM

Odd thing is, when I read or watch documentaries on the Civil War, I find myself torn between the North and the South. I see both sides, disparate as they were.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:56 PM

Yeap. We are all still schizoid over the thing. I guess that is what makes it all darned interesting and why have a wall full of books on the subject.

JonRoss on August 6, 2008 at 11:03 PM

That sounds correct. But the onus of starting a civil war over that technicality was upon the South. They acted first.
Odd thing is, when I read or watch documentaries on the Civil War, I find myself torn between the North and the South. I see both sides, disparate as they were.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:56 PM

That is like saying someone is wrong for shooting someone who invading your house.

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 10:59 PM

Huh? Okay, I return to my original statement; you are, indeed an idiot.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 11:03 PM

Some of the other quotes are just damning.

Then lets talk about those quotes in their context.

Ultimately, he was willing to let slavery be forever if it just brought back the Union. His allowing the moving of the Corwin Amendment shows that intent.

Yes, but you must understand that he thought slavery would die. Almost everyone thought that. The founding fathers certainly did. And that’s is part of the South wanted to expand it. You make it sound like he wanted slavery forever; it is simply not true.

He did not believe that the government at the federal level had the power to tell the states what they could do with regard to slavery. What he did in freeing the slaves during the War he did with War Powers. He believed (you can read this in Cooper’s Institute Speech, 1860) that the forefathers believed that Congress had the right to restrict the expansion of slavery, but not to dictate to the states that signed the Constitution. That’s not racism, that’s an adherence to the forefathers.

Your points 1,2,3 not contested. Nor is the points about Jefferson Davis. Many southerns sought to improve the lives of blacks, from the beginning in the South Jefferson/Washington to the end, Gen Jackson, etc.

I don’t think the North had all the morality, I’m not trying to paint that picture.

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 11:04 PM

Wow, we hijacked this thread in a big way. Sorry Allah.
Tim, I take back my calling you a fool and an idiot.
However, the ’stupid’ label still applies to your Lincoln hating.
; P
Goodnight everyone.
Enjoyed the ‘history lesson’.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:53 PM

That is fine, we will agree to disagree. Just next time, try not to devolve into name calling, it just makes you look dumb.

And by the way, I have a whole branch of blacks in my family tree. I also have a branch of Mexicans too. So think about it before tossing the “racist” word around.

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 11:05 PM

Oh lord, kumbaya

JonRoss on August 6, 2008 at 11:05 PM

If yall haven’t yet, Tim – go read Horwitz’s Condederates in the Attic. Carbon, you need to read White’s study of Lincoln’s Second Inagural Address. After taking cold showers.

JonRoss on August 6, 2008 at 11:08 PM

No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.

Yeah, that’s the text. The intent was to assure the South that the North wasn’t trying to destroy them. This text doesn’t address new territories.

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 11:08 PM

Wow, we hijacked this thread in a big way. Sorry Allah.
Tim, I take back my calling you a fool and an idiot.
However, the ’stupid’ label still applies to your Lincoln hating.
; P
Goodnight everyone.
Enjoyed the ‘history lesson’.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 10:53 PM

That is fine, we will agree to disagree. Just next time, try not to devolve into name calling, it just makes you look dumb.

And by the way, I have a whole branch of blacks in my family tree. I also have a branch of Mexicans too. So think about it before tossing the “racist” word around.

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 11:05 PM

Don’t lecture me.
Just because you have black and Mexican blood does not make you an authority on race. I have black blood as well. So what?
But I digress, we disagree about Abe Lincoln.
It is sad to me that any American would be deprived of a great man of his caliber.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 11:09 PM

JonRoss on August 6, 2008 at 11:08 PM

Will do. Thanks.
And Tim, I take back calling you an idiot (V.2).
Goodnight for real.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 11:11 PM

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 11:11 PM

Night.

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 11:12 PM

I was headed to bed an hour ago but the blood lust here is way too interesting.

JonRoss on August 6, 2008 at 11:12 PM

Without the video, I can’t know which word the emphasis was on, or if there was any at all. There really is no other word that could easily replace the word “our” in normal everyday speech.

Connie on August 6, 2008 at 11:16 PM

Huh? Okay, I return to my original statement; you are, indeed an idiot.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 11:03 PM

Bah, it is a valid logical extension.

The Federal Government had no right to the land. The State asked them to leave. The Federal Government refused to leave, therefore the State executed it’s right to remove the intruder.

A burglar has no right to stay in the owner’s house. The owner asked them to leave (which is more than I would do). The burglar refused to leave, therefore the owner executed his right to remove the intruder by force.

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 11:25 PM

Don’t lecture me.
Just because you have black and Mexican blood does not make you an authority on race. I have black blood as well. So what?
But I digress, we disagree about Abe Lincoln.
It is sad to me that any American would be deprived of a great man of his caliber.

carbon_footprint on August 6, 2008 at 11:09 PM

No, it doesn’t, but it doesn’t give you the right to call me a racist for taking a different view about a man. Especially when you don’t know my lineage.

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 11:27 PM

No, it doesn’t, but it doesn’t give you the right to call me a racist for taking a different view about a man. Especially when you don’t know my lineage.

Tim Burton on August 6, 2008 at 11:27 PM

Tim, I pointed out you were racist because you were the one who called Lincoln a racist; yet, do you know his lineage? I didn’t think so. He has Indian blood. Does that make your horrible accusations about him slaughtering Indians moot?

You called Lincoln a racist murderer and then you turned around and put down John Brown who put his life on the line for the slaves. All of this relativism is making me sleepy.
Goodnight.

carbon_footprint on August 7, 2008 at 12:08 AM

Goodnight.

carbon_footprint on August 7, 2008 at 12:08 AM

Yes, for the third time. The final time.

carbon_footprint on August 7, 2008 at 12:10 AM

“While he’s in our churches, clapping his hands and tapping his feet … he’s the only senator who thought our kids shouldn’t be allowed to pray in school,”

Cohen who? I took this as a jab at Larry Craig. Ladies and gentleman! That’s it for me folks…

Okay, on one serious note… this is a Democrat smacking another Democrat for being against prayer in school? Has everyone lost their minds!?

RightWinged on August 7, 2008 at 12:49 AM

Dang, I missed the whole civil war fight. Oh well. The South lost, get over it.

“While he’s in our churches, clapping his hands and tapping his feet … he’s the only senator who thought our kids shouldn’t be allowed to pray in school,” the announcer says, referring to an old vote against school prayer from when Cohen was a state senator. And remember, this is coming from a Democrat.

It’s always charming when religion and politics mix, isn’t it?

RightOFLeft on August 7, 2008 at 1:04 AM

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 10:02 PM

Ditto.

Oldnuke on August 6, 2008 at 10:02 PM

No yelling :) I’m just tired of all the re-writing of his life. I mean books that say Lincoln was racist, books that say Lincoln was gay, an ape, a transvestite, a devil worshiper, the anti-Christ, a Klingon, a Liberal, books that say that Lincoln wanted war, starvation, leprosy, global warming, high gas prices, etc. Lame Insane.

Spirit of 1776 on August 6, 2008 at 10:07 PM

MB4 on August 7, 2008 at 2:31 AM

It’s always charming when religion and politics mix, isn’t it?

RightOFLeft on August 7, 2008 at 1:04 AM

Muslims think so.

MB4 on August 7, 2008 at 2:34 AM

You have to judge a man in the context of his time and place. Lincoln was probably in the 99th percentile of un-racism. Fools like Burton cherry pick quotes, and judge them based on today’s world.

Mark Twain is another example. People decry his works as being racist, but when put in the context of the time, and particular the time/place of his upbringing (Missouri in the 1840′s) he was extremely un-racist.

But that takes too much thought, and doesn’t fit their world view, so Burton, et al don’t bother.

exhelodrvr on August 7, 2008 at 6:29 AM

You have to judge a man in the context of his time and place. Lincoln was probably in the 99th percentile of un-racism. Fools like Burton cherry pick quotes, and judge them based on today’s world.

Mark Twain is another example. People decry his works as being racist, but when put in the context of the time, and particular the time/place of his upbringing (Missouri in the 1840’s) he was extremely un-racist.

But that takes too much thought, and doesn’t fit their world view, so Burton, et al don’t bother.

exhelodrvr on August 7, 2008 at 6:29 AM

Agreed. Where were you last night when I needed you?

carbon_footprint on August 7, 2008 at 8:12 AM

Comment pages: 1 2