IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New He's compromising on truthiness.
It actually declares the slaves who are in areas that have rebelled against the Union are free but it carves out various provinces, various parts of various states, that are still in the Union, you can keep your slaves.
That's a kind reading. It doesn't matter what it "carved out". Lincoln had no authority in those states in rebellion. So, it actually freed no one.

Now, think about that. That’s -- "the great emancipator" was making a compromise in the Emancipation Proclamation because he thought it was necessary in terms of advancing the goals of preserving the Union and winning the war.
Almost. It was a cave in (not surprising this President can't tell the difference between caving in and compromising) to the majority in the North who would not stand for their slaves to be freed at the time of the proclamation. It was an attempt to weaken the South. That part he got right.
New Remember though, Abe had no Intarweb, from which
to heighten his hyperbole; no digital-think black/white inculcation--to encourage a reductio ad absurdem/that prelude to today's rampant Murder-of-Language Reason.

He had to go it alone, while dealing with ingrained Murican hypocrisy/its roots in Puritan mind-fucking, at the onset of this experiment. Give the mofo a Break!

Is 235 years enough of a run to determine that an experiment: FAILED?
Billions want to Know.


:oTpy
Expand Edited by Ashton July 25, 2011, 03:51:25 PM EDT
New It took less for me. ;0)
Once Reagan was re-elected, I knew it was over.
New 1968..
New me altamonte
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
New TNC's take.
http://www.nytimes.c...ion/28coates.html

In fact, many of Lincoln’s most vociferous critics welcomed the Proclamation. Wendell Phillips, who once derided Lincoln as “the slave-hound of Illinois,” claimed the Proclamation as “the people’s triumph.” Frederick Douglass, who helped wage a primary campaign against the president in 1864 and once charged that Lincoln was “a genuine representative of American prejudice and negro hatred,” hailed the Proclamation as “the greatest event of our nation’s history.”

Douglass was not delusional. With a wave of his pen, Lincoln freed tens of thousands of slaves and opened the Army to blacks, an act that Lincoln himself once derided. “Never before had so large a number of slaves been declared free,” writes historian Eric Foner in his Pulitzer Prize-winning history, “The Fiery Trial.”

“The proclamation altered the nature of the Civil War, the relationship of the federal government to slavery, and the course of American history. It liquidated the largest concentration of property in the United States. ... Henceforth, freedom would follow the American flag.”

In sum, it’s true that the Proclamation was a compromise. But hailing it merely as such is akin to hailing “Moby-Dick” for being a book — technically correct, if painfully thickwitted.


Cheers,
Scott.
     Obama on compromise. - (Another Scott) - (9)
         That was really interesting. -NT - (static)
         Half the truth is still a lie. - (hnick) - (1)
             ^What he said. -NT - (mmoffitt)
         He's compromising on truthiness. - (mmoffitt) - (5)
             Remember though, Abe had no Intarweb, from which - (Ashton) - (3)
                 It took less for me. ;0) - (mmoffitt) - (2)
                     1968.. -NT - (Ashton) - (1)
                         me altamonte -NT - (boxley)
             TNC's take. - (Another Scott)

It's always the small minority of people who are total assholes that ruin it for the vast majority of people who are only partial assholes.
147 ms