The Lincoln Myth

XLVIII DOMINATORS said:
So you acknowledge the profound blindness the Founders had of their own bigotry. As I already noted to another poster there no doubt existed a profound hypocrisy.

But yet again you offer only explanations of why and how slavery existed. We all already know this. You keep wanting explanations to be justifications-they just are not.

The Civil War, was a Just war, because it emancipated the slave. Amen!
Click to expand...

The Negroes are worse off today than they were back then.....they are a people(not fully human)who are the closest relatives to the chimpanzees. a species who are not morally or intellectually fit for freedom....look at africa...not one African Nation capable of governing itself......slavery and cannibalism still exsists there....this is a people designed to be servants to all other races....trying to turn them into something they are not aka...make them act like white civilized people is a crime against nature....no matter what country they are in...they always cause problems....the only time they contributed to society was when they were slaves....deal wid it chumps. That is reality. Even the Jews do not want negroes around>>>>>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/11/israel-african-migrants-deportation_n_1586998.html

http://www.thephora.net/forum/showthread.php?t=84109
 
Jarod said:
My fraternal Grandmother was born on a Cotton farm just outside a town called Ramer in 1909. Her family was wealthy owning the first automobile in the State of Alabama. They lost almost all of their wealth in 1920 in the Cotton Crash. My grandmother's father died of a heart attack in 1921. The family moved to Montgomery to live with relatives in 1921. My Grandmother went to college at Huntington College in Montgomery and got a degree in music.

My fraternal Grandfather was born in 1906 in Montgomery to a wealthy family that owned much of the property that became the downtown area of Montgomery. My grandfather quit High School to volunteer to service in WWI, however the war ended before he finished basic training. He never graduated HS, but was accepted to Auburn University where he attained a Masters Degree in Civil Engineering. The family retained most of their wealth but it was distributed amongst his brothers and sisters. Both of my fraternal Grandparents worked for the Government. She was a high school teacher (later director of music education for the State of Alabama) he was a civil engineer for the Highway Department. (ultimately running the highway department under Governor Wallace).

Because they worked for the State, both retained steady income during the great depression.

They were not colored and never lived outside the State of Alabama.
Click to expand...

Why did they never teach you about the so called reconstruction era?
 
My Defense of The Word 'Irregardless'.

"irregardless" is a word. It is, at least according to Merriam-Webster and Scrabble.

But I'm not going to stop there. No. I would also like to contend that "irregardless" is the baddest-ass word of all time. This is for several reasons, which I will now explain.

It's the only word where attaching the "ir-" prefix to the root word has the exact same meaning as the root word: Throwing an "ir-" in front of normal, less bad-ass words that begin with "R" changes the meaning to the opposite of the word. Irrefutable. Irreverent. Irrelevant. Irresponsible. Not "irregardless." It doesn't care what the rules of grammar are. It means exactly the same thing as "regardless," and that's the way it likes it.
Against all odds, against all logic, and (ir)regardless of everyone hating it, it has achieved official word status: How can you not pull for the underdog in this case? "Irregardless" went up against the rules of grammar, stick-by-the-book lexicographers, and the fact that it's a completely redundant word. Didn't matter. Whatever didn't kill it made it stronger. It's the hardest-working word in the dictionary, and it should have earned your respect by now.
Even though it's a word, Merriam-Webster says you shouldn't use it: Can you name another word in the dictionary that the dictionary says you shouldn't use? Even really bad swear words don't have a dictionary-imposed boycott. That just makes me want to use it more.
It simultaneously makes sense and doesn't make sense: You can think of the word in one of two ways: (1) it should mean the opposite of "regardless," or something along the lines of "keeping the facts in regard," or (2) it could mean "regardless of the fact that something is regardless." The latter of the two is like double-super regardless, and it's the meaning I prefer. "Irregardless" really, really doesn't care what the facts are or what you think. It should only be used in extreme circumstances, such as when a course of action is ridiculously counterintuitive. "Irregardless of the fact that you are very thirsty, you should eat this pile of salt." Stuff like that.
It practices what it preaches: Irregardless of the rules of grammar, "irregardless" is a word. It's self-reflexive. It's the exception that proves the rule. It talks the talk and walks the walk. Is there another word like that? No, because "irregardless" is bad-ass. It is a text-based Chuck Norris, roundhouse-kicking everything else in the dictionary into submission.
If you think about it long enough, it will blow your mind: It's the Mobius Strip of words, but it's also packed with Eminem's aggressively apathetic attitude. It's completely unique, completely confusing, and it couldn't give a rat's ass about any of that. It just is what it is. If you don't like it, don't use it.
So that's my argument. I think "irregardless" should be embraced and celebrated. And damn it, I'm going to use it every chance I get.
 
philly rabbit said:
Address his point cultural bigot liberal. There were no southern democrats in congress. Why was the second 13th amendment proposal which would have included vocational training for the freed slaves thrown out?

It was thrown out because Lincoln wanted to turn his failing war to preserve the union into a righteous crusade to free the slaves.
Click to expand...
You don't know what the fuck you're talking about you hypocritical southern apologist. The Civil War ended the day after Congress passed the 13th amendment and it wasn't ratified by the States until December of that Year well after Lincoln had been assassinated. There were no Southern Democrats in congress cause they had committed treason! Talk about being completely clueless.
 
XLVIII DOMINATORS said:
The reasons, be they high minded or self serving, matter not one wit. The only thing that matters, is that slavery was evil and it needed to be stopped

I made this statement BTW without agreeing with the claims made in your post.
Click to expand...

As long as you understand that slavery ended in the northern states for economic reasons and not for moral reasons which is the point I'm driving home here because this unnecessary war on the south was not motivated by freeing the slaves.
 
philly rabbit said:
As long as you understand that slavery ended in the northern states for economic reasons and not for moral reasons which is the point I'm driving home here because this unnecessary war on the south was not motivated by freeing the slaves.
Click to expand...

Do you really believe the two can be separated? Your economic interest is HOLY, man. That's why the Republican nutters are so self-righteous!
 
So now Lincoln is a bad guy? This thread is truly a testimony to the reality that Libertarians are as fucked up in the head as Liberal Marxist dunces.
 
Last edited:
Truth Detector said:
So now Lincoln is a bad guy? This threads is truly a testimony to the reality that Libertarians are as fucked up in the head as Liberal Marxist dunces.
Click to expand...


You sound like a coinfused pc republican....irregardless.....yes, the truth about Lincoln is gradually getting out much to the discernment of the pc crowd...both liberal and republican....very little difference in them...confusion being the keyword in regards to both segments of the two parties that have conspired to bring America toi its knees...deal wid it chump
 
President Lincoln opposed treason and defeated it on the battlefield. So should President Obama. I'd say the traitors are more active now.
 
SmilinJack said:
You sound like a coinfused pc republican
Click to expand...

You sound like an irrational fool.

SmilinJack said:
....irregardless.....yes, the truth about Lincoln is gradually getting out much to the discernment of the pc crowd...both liberal and republican....very little difference in them...confusion being the keyword in regards to both segments of the two parties that have conspired to bring America toi its knees...deal wid it chump
Click to expand...

America isn't on it's knees by any stretch of the imagination. That is the shrill alarmist nonsense of lunatic twits.

What I find fascinating about lunatic Libertarian twits who, in many instances, sound as irrational as Liberals, is that whenever I ask them if they support solutions and ideas that would fix our political dilemna, they reject them.

So let's see where you stand: (1) would you support abolishing the current tax code and supplanting it with the Fair Tax?; (2) do you support the establishment of term limits on House and Senate members? ; (3) do you support abolishing ALL government subsidies; (4) do you support abolishing all foreign aid?; (5) do you support abolishing the Department of Education, Health and Human Services, Agriculture, Energy, and Housing and Urban Development?

If not, then you really are not interested in REAL reforms that will get us back to our Constitutional foundations.
 
Truth Detector said:
You sound like an irrational fool.



America isn't on it's knees by any stretch of the imagination. That is the shrill alarmist nonsense of lunatic twits.

What I find fascinating about lunatic Libertarian twits who, in many instances, sound as irrational as Liberals, is that whenever I ask them if they support solutions and ideas that would fix our political dilemna, they reject them.

So let's see where you stand: (1) would you support abolishing the current tax code and supplanting it with the Fair Tax?; (2) do you support the establishment of term limits on House and Senate members? ; (3) do you support abolishing ALL government subsidies; (4) do you support abolishing all foreign aid?; (5) do you support abolishing the Department of Education, Health and Human Services, Agriculture, Energy, and Housing and Urban Development?

If not, then you really are not interested in REAL reforms that will get us back to our Constitutional foundations.
Click to expand...

I support taxes for everyone but The White Working Class....the class that has fought all of America's Wars, built this nation and who are the only class in America without any representation in Washington.

I support a uprising of True Conservatives who should have no limits on their terms as long as they remain true to the American Ideals of Truth, Justice and The American Way.

Limiting terms as some sort of remedy for bad government is an illusion........the problem lies in who is being elected...bad people constantly being elected cannot be remedied by term limits...if a foolish people keep electing bad people...the obvious solution is to elect the right kind of people. Duh

I support only government subsidies that help The White Working Class

I support Foreign Aid only for our true friends...of which we have very few.

I do support support abolishing the Department of Education, Health and Human Services, Agriculture, Energy, and Housing and Urban Development?
 
The 'Coinfused Party'

I used to always find it amusing when people would bash President Bush and point the finger at him for so many issues. Some were deserved. But his most failed policies had nothing to do with conservatism. They were a total break from conservative ideals. To blame liberals in my view is to blame all of Washington. Because if you define modern day liberalism as big gov't solutions, both parties are to blame. In fact I blame the Republican establishment more, since they actively try to purge true conservatives from their ranks. At least big gov't Democrats like Dennis Kucinich's of the world were admitting what they wanted for America. I always respected him for his honesty, regardless of how ridiculously impractical his ideas were. I could count on both hands how many true conservatives exist in DC today and still have some fingers left over.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top