ImperialPath
Posts: 215
Joined: 3/11/2016 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote:
ORIGINAL: ImperialPath quote:
ORIGINAL: mnottertail So, since Lincoln freed the slaves (he didnt but the united states did by amendment to our constitution), has the GOP done anything else about freedom? That old chestnut is getting a little long in the tooth. And that wasnt a straight walk down the aisle. One can easily point out the many times since then they have worked towards putting them back on the block. I can without let or hindrance inform you that I know the constitution, the history of America, the history of the US government, the history of the parties, and many other ancillary issues far better than most here and without question far better than you. It is "United States", with caps. Now, a history lesson for you on how the slaves were freed: Emancipation Proclamation. The Emancipation Proclamation was a presidential proclamation and executive order issued by President Abraham Lincoln on January 1, 1863. In a single stroke, it changed the federal legal status of more than 3 million enslaved persons in the designated areas of the South from "slave" to "free". God, the idiots on this thread...they need to shut the fuck up and go play XBOX or something with their stupid thumbs up their asses from where they normally keep their ideas. Just who again are the idiots here ? The EP was nothing but talk, read from a piece of paper...didn't free a single slave. In fact, it did NOTHING at all let alone create a new 'federal legal status' even up to and including Antietam. (if that were so, then Obama EO's would have the same effect and every repub is running to and getting courts to strike them down) Read on..... Lincoln knew he had to have at least one battlefield victory before issuing it, to back it up with some federal action and even Antietam was a draw that only sent the confederates back south out of Md. (it was also BTW when McClellan still exhibiting extraordinary and almost cowardly caution, failed to go after the rebels and end the war right there) The EP also did not free any slave by proclamation or otherwise any in any northern state including W. Va and Md. but only in states that were in rebellion and not even then at least until 1864 when Grant and Sherman went south and proved it. Since it was executed by a president exercising greatly expanded wartime powers, the president and his supporters were concerned that courts might rule the Emancipation Proclamation a temporary emergency measure invalid once the war concluded. Gee, where have we heard that before and from the great 'party of Lincoln ?' The legal, codified, federal freeing of the slaves otherwise known as 13th constitutional amend disallowing 'involuntary servitude' wasn't passed until January 31, 1865 and there was a whole lotta horse trading to get that done. So the amendment would still not become the law of the land until the approval by three-fourths of the states, which occurred when Georgia approved the measure on December 6, 1865 The 'party of Lincoln' was...was the party of progressives up until TR voting against monopoly and for anti-trust and labor laws...now they aren't and don't. The democrats are now the progressives and seek more business competition and regulation against the greedy capitalist scum of America we have now, similar to what the repubs went after in the early 20th cent. The democrats were the 'dixiecrats' or 'boll weevil' democrats were against it all...now they aren't. The repubs are. The democrats got civil rights laws passed and weren't the country's political racists. During that fight, the repubs fought civil rights leg. even some forming a new party and were and remain the country's political racists. That's what's become the 'party of Lincoln' I see you have been reading up on American History. That is good. What is not good is how you interpret what happened and when: 1) The Southern states secede over a loss of sovereign states rights. 2) The Confederate Army fires on Fort Sumter SC to drive elements of the U.S. Military from sovereign territory. 3) The North halts Lee's Army in Maryland near Sharpsburg and Antietam Creek. Lee withdrawals back to Virginia and the North halts and licks it's wounds. 4) Lincoln decides it was a victory and uses this opportunity to proclaim all slaves will be free in the rebelling states by January 1 of the following year unless the South stops it's rebellion. The South does not seem to notice. 5) Eventually the South must surrender and the North enforces the Emancipation Proclamation by military force but only in the rebelling states. 6) Soon thereafter Congress makes the EO law as the 13th amendment because the Constitution allowed slavery which kinda made freeing the slaves illegal. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What Civil Rights legislature is both good and necessary over and above the Constitution? Or, why after over a 100 years of freedom do blacks need special targeted legislature to protect their already given and equal rights under the Constitution? And, given these Civil Rights laws are indeed targeted toward non-whites, then how has this not been divisive? Are whites and black even more separated by separate treatments, i.e. targeted laws, targeted holidays and even targeted cable channels as if somehow we do need black lives matter but not white lives matter or white targeted cable channels? I frankly feel strongly that the Dems enacted these laws to capture votes and keep whites and blacks separated and decisive so they can take advantage of this atmosphere to be relevant to the black population, 100 years after they were freed, or enslaved in some minds, by an emancipation proclamation used to threaten the South and perhaps stop their rebellion for states rights and sovereignty I think we are turning the corner on this in this election and that turn frightens the party of slavery, the Dems.
|