City Club Presents Doris Kearns Goodwin on Abraham Lincoln

[MrGrevy]

She's a plagiarist. Zero credibility. Next?

[joe2stones]

Lincoln was one of the few truly great men in our history.

[bighitter42]

Because only great men kill between six and seven hundred thousand Americans. Only great men revoke habeas corpus. Only great men imprison anti-war journalists and senators. Great men certainly don't pay attention to the rule of law. Great men need not have the slightest respect for truth. And only the greatest of men propose during their inaugural speeches a constitutional amendment that would make slavery permanent in the states where it already existed.

[GirlyNation]

A nation that looks to leadership from women is a nation in decline.

[charles43110]

The founding fathers who did not have the courage to oppose slavery from our beginning assured our eventual divisions would play out in a civil war.

Lincoln altered his views when the weight of a nation lay before him. Many people have abandoned the views of youth when full maturity presents itself. Those who wanted us to continue as a slave state butchering the lives of innocents for generations caused that carnage. And they were willing to destroy our country to sustain that evil.

[roygbiv330]

she was talking without pause during 45 minutes. are all american historians required to be able to talk like she?

[warbler44]

Lincoln was far from perfect but put yourself in his place and think of how you would have done things differently. It's only then that I think the wisdom of Lincoln can be appreciated.

[bighitter42]

Respected the rule of law? Perhaps I would have chosen to follow the constitution and not restrict freedom of speech or imprison people for exercising it. Perhaps buying the slaves would have been a better option than slaughter nearly 700,000 American lives. Perhaps I wouldn't get into a war over tax revenue.

Not only was he a tyrant, he was a bad person to boot. There was no reason to endorse the slaughtering of civilians or the burning of towns.

[Joseph565112]

"Times of war always require some kind of suspension of "civil liberties"? No sir imprisoning newspaper editors and ordering the Army to shut down printing presses is never needed. Not because of "war" or "when public safety may require"-the suspension of Habeas Corpus. Lincoln personally endorsed a 13th amendment that would forever protect slavery in his inaugural speech! He spent the 1850s and early 1860s proclaiming blacks were not equal, and that he wanted no equalit. Stop the revisionism.

[DougCock]

Please read something. Try the book she's promoting.

At the end, even Frederick Douglass, who critiqued Lincoln's presidency relentlessly during his administration, after spending a few hours with Lincoln,

came to understand the reasons for his actions...and just as importantly, the reason for the timing of his actions. I have no doubt, that the more you come to know Lincoln, the more you will come to respect and even love him, as did the vast majority of his contemporaries.

[paradiddle1]

Times of war always require some kind of suspension of "civil liberties" even at the inception of our country with the Alien and Sedition Acts by John Adams...the key here is the judgment and character of our leaders; something I think you all aren't taking into account. I'd rather have Lincoln suspend them than a Napolean or a Hitler...Go Loncoln!!

[barrongirlsllc]

I don't pray too much, but if I did, and had only one prayer, I'd be half the woman that Dosis Kearns Goodwin is.

[bighitter42]

An admitted plagiarist? Or a revisionist of history?

You pray that you'd defend a tyrant?

I pray that we never suffer a president so awful as Lincoln again. My prayers were almost totally ignored when we got GWB.

[joe2stones]

you are an idiot

[bighitter42]

And you make silly attacks based on emotions instead of facts.

If you're going to defend the indefensible you need to come with more panache(since the facts aren't on your side that's all you have.)

Try saying something of value. Hell I'd have more respect for you if you simply regurgitated this revised version of history.

[joe2stones]

Being it on. I warn you, this will end with both your neurotic delusion and self esteem laying in tatters.

[bighitter42]

I notice you didn't respond to my response to your other comment. Interesting....

I'll "being" it on when you make an intelligent comment. If you can refute the horrendous acts Lincoln perpetrated against the northern and southern Americans alike, then I think we'd all like to hear it.

And do you honestly think that a person(on the internet no less,) who apparently can't spell or use punctuation consistently can hurt my self esteem? Lame.

[joe2stones]

I notice you haven't responded to my question about the Constitution. Probably because you can't. And yes, I do think I can hurt your self esteem, because you are neurotic and very emotionally invested in this debate. Still waiting for a reply regarding the constitution.

[barrongirlsllc]

I wish I and my daughter lived in a democracy, so that this might be part of my granddaugher's school curriculum.

[bighitter42]

"Political Genius" simply means that he was good at the things we hate politicians for. Was he a genius? Probably. But he used his genius in a most tyrannical way. Just because we agree with one of the consequences of the civil war, doesn't mean that we should clear him for all the harmful consequences.

[DougCock]

The greatest man this country has produced.

[bighitter42]

Really? We're a shit nation then.

This is a guy who in his first inaugural explained that he was ready to make slavery permanent in the south. A guy who killed 650,000 Americans in a war he didn't have the authority to declare. A guy who suspended habeas corpus, imprisoned journalists, imprisoned politicians, and started yet another central bank.

So as a nation we haven't produced one man that achieved his goals without tyranny? Please.

[DougCock]

Read...the...book.

[bighitter42]

Make...a...point.

I suppose if I were trying to defend the indefensible, I wouldn't make a point either.

[DougCock]

We win. You lose.

Not arguing with you. No point.

Never try to teach a pig to read. It wastes your time and annoys the pig.

See ya later, Mr. Booth.

"Useless...useless."

[bighitter42]

You're really going to compare me to an assassin because I don't share your warped view of history, and because I don't disregard liberty and the constitution?

It would appear that you are the one who is useless, since you cannot make one valid point to someone whom you apparently find to be of lesser intellect. Did you get your debate skills from Eric Cartman?

BTW...at least Booth only killed one person. Lincoln enabled the slaughter of scores of Americans.

[bighitter42]

The way I hear it told, she's an admitted marxist and an admitted plagiarist. Whether or not that's true...she totally ignores the parts of Lincoln's history that she doesn't like to tell. Why the idol worship? If I'm picking an idol I'll pick someone who didn't suspend civil liberties, trample the constitution, and who wasn't responsible for 650,000 American deaths.

[DougCock]

Read the book, and gain a hero.

[Joseph565112]

You and Doris here must not be talking about the same Abraham Lincoln as me. I am talking about the Lincoln who waged war unilateraly, explicitly used the mass starvation of innocents in his plan for that war, the Anaconda Plan, the one who used the United States Army to seize and shutdown over 300 printing presses of papers and journals that dared to "critique" him and his tactics. The Lincoln who reinstated a common war criminal and on top of that congratulated his crimes and promoted him.....

[MrGrevy]

@Joseph565112 Stfu racist moron.

[Joseph565112]

@MrGrevy, I am a moron? What, were you homeschooled? I only described Lincoln by his actions documented in well known documentaries, like those of Ken Burns, and in public school text books.

I never gave my personal support for an amendment that would forbid the U.S. Congress from ever interfering with slavery, as Lincoln did on March 4th, 1861.

Please attend and satisfactorily complete a degree program at an accredited university before responding to me, thanks.

[MrGrevy]

@Joseph565112 Oh brother here we go with the arrogant pseudo academic nonsense. Lincoln starved people...ok, citations? Any peer reviewed journals going to back up that claim? Let's see you support that one for starters. Stay classy.

[Joseph565112]

@MrGrevy, one does not need to provide a citation for common knowledge. Honestly, what we are discussing is literally junior high level history. Lincoln's approved plan and all constituent measures for war, including the Anaconda Plan and his naval blockade, were designed, in part, to starve the Southerners into submission. New York state alone produced more food crops and slaughtered more livestock than did all eleven confederate states. I implore you to revisit your history lessons.

[MrGrevy]

@Joseph565112 There is no evidence they were 'designed in part' to starve southerners. You're doing what a lot of southern sympathizers (good lord, of all the causes to support...) do and twisting some things around and tweaking others to make it look like Lincoln was an evil tyrant. Again, asking for sources supporting your SPECIFIC claim. Second chance...here we go.

[Joseph565112]

@MrGrevy, that is ridiculous, I am not trying to make Lincoln out to be any more of a monster for this action than do Clinton's actions for him or Bush's, etc., etc. Lincoln's plan was indeed in part to starve the people out, knowing full well that they could not sustain themselves with home-grown food stuffs, it's an ancient tactic.

Kennedy, David M., Lizabeth Cohen, and Thomas A. Bailey. The American Pageant. 14th ed. Vol. 1. Boston, MA.: Wadsworth Publishing, 2008. 487. Print.

[MrGrevy]

@Joseph565112 What's the name of that article

[Joseph565112]

@MrGrevy, article? I cited the name and page number of a college text that speaks to the United States' approved measures for war, including but not limited to the naval blockade which blocked the entry of food and weapons and the export of cotton.

[MrGrevy]

@Joseph565112 That's not an academic journal...it's an AP High School text book. Sounds like you don't have a degree from an accredited university if you don't know the difference.

[Joseph565112]

@MrGrevy, LOL, no professional historian is going to write an article about something that is common knowledge amongst high school students. Just who do you think writes college texts and where do they get their information...?

Are you a history revisionist, I provide a citation in a standard college level text book yet you tap dance around the facts...?

[MrGrevy]

@Joseph565112 Not the same as an academic journal. It's used in high schools. Seriously have you not gone to college? With all of you arrogant bluster I thought you would have had at least a bachelor's degree. Sounds like you're a National Honor Society type, filled to the brim with PC nonsense and repeating things you heard a teacher say. My guess is you're a high school kid with blind, aimless ambition, but you're overreaching here. Nice try.

[Joseph565112]

@MrGrevy, that's a non-answer. If you actually think anyone with a doctoral degree would write and attempt to publish just that, high school and undergraduate level history facts, then you are completely vexed with respect to academia.

As for myself, I hold a B.S. in physics and a minor in history from the University of Iowa where I graduated Magna Cum Laude.

[MrGrevy]

@Joseph565112 Sure you do. I find your comment funny and ironic. And kinda sad.

[Joseph565112]

@MrGrevy, I sure do, I would suggest that we talk physics because I prefer the field over history; however, I fear that your vexation would only increase exponentially. The negative connotations associated with historical revisionism center around being unable to come to grips with well known facts about historical leaders, politics, the causes of conflicts, etc., all the while refusing to accept what historical texts and journals have to say.

You fit the description to a tee.

[bighitter42]

He was a tyrant in every sense of the word. No book apologizing for his behavior will change his acts.

[DougCock]

Read...the...book.

[bighitter42]

Make...a...point.

[DougCock]

Grow...a...brain.

[joe2stones]

Please cite for me the part of the constitution where it says a state may secede from the Union once it has ratified the document.

[bighitter42]

It doesn't say that a state may secede. It doesn't say that it can't either.

What the constitution DOES say, is that the government can't imprison you for no reason. It says that outside of it's very limited and stated scope, everything else is left to the states.

If you had reading comprehension skills instead of being an aggressive dumfuck, you would have noticed that I didn't say anything about the constitutionality of secession.

[joe2stones]

You project a lot. A characteristic of the neurotic mind. Geez, you think the founders would have mentioned it if a state was allowed to secede from the Union after they ratified the constitution. They must have just overlooked it. Trouble is, putting down an insurrection (aka, rebellion) is listed as a specific power of the Federal government. See article 1 section 8. So is suspending the writ of habeus corpus during a rebellion, see article 1, section 8 once again.

[bighitter42]

Where was the rebellion? The Union invaded southern states, not the other way around.

The federal government was breaking it's end of the contract so the states were no longer bound to participate. This principle was in fact written about by the founders...something to the effect just might have been included in the Declaration of Independence. Nevermind the resolutions Jefferson and Madison penned in 1798.

[bighitter42]

continued....I meant to add that it was the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions that Jefferson and Maddison wrote in 1798. One might call them rather important fathers.

By the way, neurosis doesn't include projection, delusion, nor hallucination. Get your insults right.

When are you going to "being" it smart guy?

[joe2stones]

Lol. A classic feature of neurosis is the use of projection.

Never heard of "James Maddison" Lol. On the other hand, James MADISON wrote the constitution, a document you clearly have no knowledge of.

[joe2stones]

Wow, this is just too easy. Where was the rebellion? Gee, maybe throwing the federal garrison out of Fort Sumter by the use of force? Notice you didn't respond the the point about habeus corpus.

[bighitter42]

First of all, don't you dare get on your high horse regarding typos Mr. Being It.

The primary founder you can claim was on your side was Hamilton and to a lesser degree Adams. The notion that Madison was in favor of Lincoln style federal government is beyond absurd.

Where is Fort Sumter? South Carolina? Say it ain't so.... So a state has no ability to kick out an occupying army from a foreign government?

Suggest you read The Virginia Resolutions of 1798, which Madison wrote.

[bighitter42]

continued...And so let's assume for a moment(incorrectly) that you're correct and the states had no right to secede. You still haven't addressed what made Lincoln "one of the few truly great men in our history."

Great men don't do the things I listed as in my response to that comment.

[bighitter42]

Since you've decided to remove the bulk of your comments, I suppose I'll respond to your last here.

Pseudo scholar? Sure. I'm not a historian, I majored in finance. What I am is someone who respects freedom.

Did you manage to read what I told you to? No? Then I suggest you ETADIK.