The Judge on Secession.

[Carehn]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=vaUOx6IO1WA

[Travlyr]

That was a good interview, but sorry Judge. I've got to disagree on a couple of points. Abraham Lincoln was an abolitionist morally opposed to slavery. Also, Abraham Lincoln gets too much credit for the Civil War and too much credit for Reconstruction as well.

In 1854,

"If the negro is a man, why then my ancient faith teaches me that `all men are created equal;' and that there can be no moral right in connection with one man's making a slave of another." - Abraham Lincoln

[jcannon98188]

That was a good interview, but sorry Judge. I've got to disagree on a couple of points. Abraham Lincoln was an abolitionist. Also, Abraham Lincoln gets too much credit for the Civil War and too much credit for Reconstruction as well.

He was not an abolitionist. He could care less about slaves. That was an afterthought. He needed something to rally the troops halfway through the civil war. Slavery was his rallying call.

[wrestlingwes_8]

That was a good interview, but sorry Judge. I've got to disagree on a couple of points. Abraham Lincoln was an abolitionist. Also, Abraham Lincoln gets too much credit for the Civil War and too much credit for Reconstruction as well.


He was not an abolitionist. He could care less about slaves. That was an afterthought. He needed something to rally the troops halfway through the civil war. Slavery was his rallying call.

I thought the latter was the case, as well..but I could be wrong... Which side can show me the strongest argument?

[Travlyr]

He was not an abolitionist. He could care less about slaves. That was an afterthought. He needed something to rally the troops halfway through the civil war. Slavery was his rallying call.

No, that is not true. Thomas Lincoln, Abe's father, was a passive abolitionist. Lincoln did not want expansion of slavery in the West.

His speeches in 1854 bear this out as well.

Lincoln's Peoria Speech, 1854

Lincoln laid out his objections to the Kansas-Nebraska Act and resurrected his political career in a brilliant speech at Peoria, Illinois on October 16, 1854. In it he criticized popular sovereignty, questioning how it was that this doctrine could supersede the famed Northwest Ordinance and the sacred Missouri Compromise. Congress had purchased the territory, yet under Douglas' reasoning, it had no control over the disposition of slavery there. The entire nation was interested in the slavery issue, and properly so. Lincoln dismissed arguments that climate and geography rendered slavery impossible in Kansas and Nebraska. Only an explicit statutory prohibition was a true guarantee. Most importantly, Lincoln attacked the morality of slavery's extension and of slavery itself, while tempering this assault on the "peculiar institution" with moderate rhetoric toward the South. Douglas's contentions were perfectly acceptable if the black man (Lincoln used the archaic term "Negro") were no different than a hog. But Lincoln argued for the humanity of the slaves. They were people, not animals, and consequently possessed certain natural rights. "If the negro is a man, why then my ancient faith teaches me that `all men are created equal;' and that there can be no moral right in connection with one man's making a slave of another." Still, Lincoln attached no blame to the South for slavery, and confessed that he was not ready to accept black social and political equality. Though he strongly condemned any extension of slavery, he was still willing to tolerate even that to preserve the Union. Despite the radical nature of some of his statements, Lincoln was still a Whig, not an abolitionist.
Perhaps calling Lincoln an abolitionist was not exactly a correct statement, but he had abolitionist leanings and the Southerners were quite aware of that fact.

http://lincoln.lib.niu.edu/gal/lincolnpeoriaspeech1854.html

[Origanalist]

I thought the latter was the case, as well..but I could be wrong... Which side can show me the strongest argument?

mises.org/misesreview_detail.aspx?control=173

Forced Into Glory - Ludwig von Mises Institute

[jllundqu]

I wish Texas would grow some nuts already. I would move there in a heartbeat.

Slap me sill and call me TEX!

[HOLLYWOOD]

I wish Texas would grow some nuts already. I would move there in a heartbeat.

Slap me sill and call me TEX!Congressman Kevin Brady (R-TX) this morning stated on C-SPAN, "no succession for Texas". "Texas is very proud to be apart of Amerika"

[matt0611]

That was a good interview, but sorry Judge. I've got to disagree on a couple of points. Abraham Lincoln was an abolitionist. Also, Abraham Lincoln gets too much credit for the Civil War and too much credit for Reconstruction as well.

Lincoln certainly didn't want slavery to expand to the territories or the north, but he really didn't have any moral problems with slavery, it was almost all for political reasons.

Lincoln was a white supremacist.

[Occam's Banana]

From his 1st Inaugural Address (repeating himself from one of his own prior speeches):

I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.

From a letter to Horace Greely (editor, New York Tribune):

My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union.

[Travlyr]

In 1854,

"If the negro is a man, why then my ancient faith teaches me that `all men are created equal;' and that there can be no moral right in connection with one man's making a slave of another." - Abraham Lincoln


From his 1st Inaugural Address (repeating himself from one of his own prior speeches):


From a letter to Horace Greely (editor, New York Tribune):

Lincoln believed that slavery was wrong according to the moral argument but that he had no authority under the Constitution to do anything about it. For Lincoln, it was a moral argument not a legal argument. The Union Lincoln wanted to save was not the Union as people see it today. Lincoln's Union was a Union of States. Samuel Lincoln came to America in 1637 because he was left penniless in England, so he came here to make his fortune, and he did. The Lincoln family were well established freedom loving Americans who knew the value of liberty and opportunity.

The Civil War had been brewing for several years prior to 1861. The war was going to happen no matter who became president. Lincoln was killed immediately after the war. Therefore to attribute to Lincoln what the United States of America became after the war is blame him for events over which he had no control.

[Occam's Banana]

Lincoln believed that slavery was wrong according to the moral argument but that he had no authority under the Constitution to do anything about it. For Lincoln, it was a moral argument not a legal argument. The Union Lincoln wanted to save was not the Union as people see it today. Lincoln's Union was a Union of States. Samuel Lincoln came to America in 1637 because he was left penniless in England, so he came here to make his fortune, and he did. The Lincoln family were well established freedom loving Americans who knew the value of liberty and opportunity.

The Civil War had been brewing for several years prior to 1861. The war was going to happen no matter who became president. Lincoln was killed immediately after the war. Therefore to attribute to Lincoln what the United States of America became after the war is blame him for events over which he had no control.

Interesting. Lincoln may very well have had personal qualms about slavery. (He was a politician, so parsing his words is not always helpful. That's why I noted that the quotes I posted earlier were only "possibly" illuminating.)

I think you hit the mark in post #5, though. Whatever he actually thought, it's not really accurate to call him an abolitionist. When I think "abolitionist" I think of people like Frederick Douglass & William Lloyd Garrison. There was no doubt whatsoever about their position on the issue. Of course, they weren't politicians, so they had much greater leeway in expressing their actual opinions & beliefs.

[TheTexan]

That was a good interview, but sorry Judge. I've got to disagree on a couple of points. Abraham Lincoln was an abolitionist. Also, Abraham Lincoln gets too much credit for the Civil War and too much credit for Reconstruction as well.

Doesn't really matter what he thought. The war was not fought over slavery. It was fought over two things: money and power.

Even if you are correct, that Lincoln was but a puppet for the bankers who told him what to do, every man is still responsible for his own actions. He is not absolved of the many hundreds of lives lost in that war, or the oppression and tyranny that followed due to the consequences of the idea of the inseparable-union.

He played his part, and likely got paid handsomely for it, that led us to the tyranny we have today. I don't know why you defend him.

[Origanalist]

Doesn't really matter what he thought. The war was not fought over slavery. It was fought over two things: money and power.

Even if you are correct, that Lincoln was but a puppet for the bankers who told him what to do, every man is still responsible for his own actions. He is not absolved of the many hundreds of lives lost in that war, or the oppression and tyranny that followed due to the consequences of the idea of the inseparable-union.

He played his part, and likely got paid handsomely for it, that led us to the tyranny we have today. I don't know why you defend him.

Correction, hundreds of thousands.

[Travlyr]

Doesn't really matter what he thought. The war was not fought over slavery. It was fought over two things: money and power.

Even if you are correct, that Lincoln was but a puppet for the bankers who told him what to do, every man is still responsible for his own actions. He is not absolved of the many hundreds of lives lost in that war, or the oppression and tyranny that followed due to the consequences of the idea of the inseparable-union.

He played his part, and likely got paid handsomely for it, that led us to the tyranny we have today. I don't know why you defend him.

Lincoln did not get paid handsomely. He took a bullet in the head. After studying his life, I believe that bullet in Lincoln's head is what allowed Salmon P. Chase and the bankers to actually take over the government and expand the Fed's powers.

Lincoln didn't want to go to war. That much is obvious from his pre-war speeches. He wanted to keep the pre-Civil War Union intact. And that pre-Civil War Union was a Union of States. Read about Brother Jonathan (http://www.sonofthesouth.net/uncle-sam/brother-jonathan.htm). That is what Lincoln grew up with and I believe that that is what he was fighting to keep.

[matt0611]

Lincoln did not get paid handsomely. He took a bullet in the head. After studying his life, I believe that bullet in Lincoln's head is what allowed Salmon P. Chase and the bankers to actually take over the government and expand the Fed's powers.

Lincoln didn't want to go to war. That much is obvious from his pre-war speeches. He wanted to keep the pre-Civil War Union intact. And that pre-Civil War Union was a Union of States. Read about Brother Jonathan (http://www.sonofthesouth.net/uncle-sam/brother-jonathan.htm). That is what Lincoln grew up with and I believe that that is what he was fighting to keep.

You know Lincoln and the Republicans advocated for a central bank right? and corporate welfare? and high taxes? as well as high protective tariffs which basically was a wealth distribution scheme from the south to the north?

“I presume you all know who I am. I am humble Abraham Lincoln. I have been solicited by many friends to become a candidate for the legislature. My politics are short and sweet, like the old woman’s dance. I am in favor of a national bank…in favor of the internal improvements system and a high protective tariff.”

Also a white supremecist

"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, [applause] — that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, not to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality."

[Travlyr]

You know Lincoln and the Republicans advocated for a central bank right? and corporate welfare? and high taxes? as well as high protective tariffs which basically was a wealth distribution scheme from the south to the north?

“I presume you all know who I am. I am humble Abraham Lincoln. I have been solicited by many friends to become a candidate for the legislature. My politics are short and sweet, like the old woman’s dance. I am in favor of a national bank…in favor of the internal improvements system and a high protective tariff.”

Also a white supremecist

"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, [applause] — that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, not to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality."

I certainly do have more to learn about Abraham Lincoln. I do not claim that he was a great president or even a good one. I do wonder what kind of president he would have made if allowed to live out his second term after the war. Do you have verifiable evidence that Lincoln campaigned to be president in order to war on his southern brothers, that he advocated for a central bank, that he proposed high taxes and high protective tarrifs before he became president? Or did all that happen after he was elected? I don't know the answer to those questions at the moment, but I will be researching to learn. If you have that information, please post it. Thanks.

Also, nearly everyone of his day was a white supremacist. That is not a legitimate argument.

[puppetmaster]

You know Lincoln and the Republicans advocated for a central bank right? and corporate welfare? and high taxes? as well as high protective tariffs which basically was a wealth distribution scheme from the south to the north?

“I presume you all know who I am. I am humble Abraham Lincoln. I have been solicited by many friends to become a candidate for the legislature. My politics are short and sweet, like the old woman’s dance. I am in favor of a national bank…in favor of the internal improvements system and a high protective tariff.”

Also a white supremecist

"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, [applause] — that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, not to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality."
These quotes are very familiar.

[Travlyr]

These quotes are very familiar.

And this one is when he was running for State Legislature when he was 22. Perhaps the world was much different in those days.

“I presume you all know who I am. I am humble Abraham Lincoln. I have been solicited by many friends to become a candidate for the legislature. My politics are short and sweet, like the old woman’s dance. I am in favor of a national bank…in favor of the internal improvements system and a high protective tariff.”

[GeorgiaAvenger]

In 1854,




Lincoln believed that slavery was wrong according to the moral argument but that he had no authority under the Constitution to do anything about it. For Lincoln, it was a moral argument not a legal argument. The Union Lincoln wanted to save was not the Union as people see it today. Lincoln's Union was a Union of States. Samuel Lincoln came to America in 1637 because he was left penniless in England, so he came here to make his fortune, and he did. The Lincoln family were well established freedom loving Americans who knew the value of liberty and opportunity.

The Civil War had been brewing for several years prior to 1861. The war was going to happen no matter who became president. Lincoln was killed immediately after the war. Therefore to attribute to Lincoln what the United States of America became after the war is blame him for events over which he had no control.

That's like those that say abortion is immoral but they won't stop it from happening. He was a pro-white land Republican, not an abolitionist. Unions strongly supported the free west. Lincoln saw himself as the heir of Henry Clay and his American system, which is derived from Hamilton's ideas. Pro-central bank, pro-protective tariffs, pro-business subsidies.

Lincoln obviously had no respect for the Constitution. This guy was a crafty lawyer.

[GeorgiaAvenger]

The National Banking Act was established during the Civil War when even favorable historians have called Lincoln a benevolent dictator.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_School_%28economics%29

[phill4paul]

A little-known fact of the Constitution is that two of the largest states -- Virginia and New York -- made the right to withdraw from the union explicit in their acceptance of the Constitution. And in such an agreement between parties as is represented by the Constitution, a right claimed by one is allowed to all.

I found this here: http://www.etymonline.com/cw/secession2.htm

I am in the process of looking for the original Virginia and New York documents.

[Travlyr]

That's like those that say abortion is immoral but they won't stop it from happening. He was a pro-white land Republican, not an abolitionist. Unions strongly supported the free west. Lincoln saw himself as the heir of Henry Clay and his American system, which is derived from Hamilton's ideas. Pro-central bank, pro-protective tariffs, pro-business subsidies.

Lincoln obviously had no respect for the Constitution. This guy was a crafty lawyer.

Thanks for this information. Do you have links? I am going to do my own research, yet those claims seem exaggerated. Please point me to where you are getting this info. Thanks.

[phill4paul]

It's really quite simple. The tenth amendment states...

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Since there is no specific Constitutional prohibition on secession and there is no Constitutional affirmation on the right to secede the power to do so remains with the states and the people.

[GeorgiaAvenger]

Thanks for this information. Do you have links? I am going to do my own research, yet those claims seem exaggerated. Please point me to where you are getting this info. Thanks.I read it in DiLorenzo's book. I posted a link about the American System.

[Travlyr]

I read it in DiLorenzo's book. I posted a link about the American System.

I knew about the national banking act of 1861 under President Lincoln and his Secretary of Treasury Salmon P. Chase. My question is did they campaign on waging war, central bank fiat, high tariffs, and high taxes? Or did those moves come after the election? That is the information I'll be looking for.

[Travlyr]

Doesn't really matter what he thought. The war was not fought over slavery. It was fought over two things: money and power.

Even if you are correct, that Lincoln was but a puppet for the bankers who told him what to do, every man is still responsible for his own actions. He is not absolved of the many hundreds of lives lost in that war, or the oppression and tyranny that followed due to the consequences of the idea of the inseparable-union.

He played his part, and likely got paid handsomely for it, that led us to the tyranny we have today. I don't know why you defend him.

It does matter what he thought. The more I look into this period of time, the more I am convinced that Lincoln was fighting to keep the pre-Civil War Constitutional Republic intact while resisting centralization of government.


The Bankers Untrust (http://www.federalobserver.com/archive.php?aid=7230)
By R.A. Hawkins

On February 25, 1863 Congress passed the National Banking Act. This created a National Bank with the power and authority to create money to be loaned to the government based not on gold but on debt. This money was created and loaned to the United Sates government with interest. The bill was supported and pushed by the Secretary of the Treasury, Salmon P. Chase.

Lincoln was quick to respond to this nasty little change in America’s financial system. This is what he said: "The money power preys upon the nation in times of peace and conspires against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me, and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. Corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working on the prejudices of the people, until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands, and the republic is destroyed."

A few months after the passage of the National Banking Act, the Rothschild Bank of England wrote a letter to a New York firm of bankers. Here is what it said: "The few who understand the system will either be so interested in its profits, or so dependant on its favors that there will be no opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body of people, mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantages that capital derives from that system, will bear its burdens without complaint, and perhaps without even suspecting the system is inimical to their interests."


That is but one of the things Lincoln was fighting. It was the French and English bankers working a back door on America, and Congress opened it. They were quite busy over here in those days trying many methods to affect the future of this country. They were willing to do anything they could to break back into this country to recoup their losses, never mind the fact they had been repaid after the American Revolution. But it wasn’t the fiscal losses from the American Revolution they were after. It was the potential for making more money.

Those same forces were a little upset with Lincoln for having created Green Backs, a fiat currency that saved the Union from their machinations until the National Banking Act was passed. He undercut them and they paid him for his insolence.

The French and English bankers were also working another back door entrance into the United States but Lincoln slammed that door on them too. It took Congress to open it with the National Banking Act. That however is for next week.

More at link (http://www.federalobserver.com/archive.php?aid=7230).

[green73]

I certainly do have more to learn about Abraham Lincoln. I do not claim that he was a great president or even a good one. I do wonder what kind of president he would have made if allowed to live out his second term after the war. Do you have verifiable evidence that Lincoln campaigned to be president in order to war on his southern brothers, that he advocated for a central bank, that he proposed high taxes and high protective tarrifs before he became president? Or did all that happen after he was elected? I don't know the answer to those questions at the moment, but I will be researching to learn. If you have that information, please post it. Thanks.

He was a whig. Those things in that quote were the core of their platform. He said that in 1832. It's well documented.

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Life_and_Works_of_Abraham_Lincoln/Volume_3/I_Am_Humble_Abraham_Lincoln

You say that you have studied his life. It's probably safe to say you've gotten most of your knowledge from the court historians and Lincoln cultists. You really should read Dilorenzo. It's all footnoted. He'll point you to the works that the Establishment has worked to bury.

[matt0611]

Travlyr, that Lincoln quote is fake.

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/lincoln.asp

Seems like its a fragment of one of many fake Lincoln quotes.

[Travlyr]

He was a whig. Those things in that quote were the core of their platform. He said that in 1832. It's well documented.

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Life_and_Works_of_Abraham_Lincoln/Volume_3/I_Am_Humble_Abraham_Lincoln

You say that you have studied his life. It's probably safe to say you've gotten most of your knowledge from the court historians and Lincoln cultists. You really should read Dilorenzo. It's all footnoted. He'll point you to the works that the Establishment has worked to bury.

Some of my knowledge comes from the fact that my ancestors knew him and his family. My ancestors had similar experiences as the Lincoln family in the same areas of Kentucky, Indiana, and Illinois during the same time period. I grew up just a few miles from where Thomas Lincoln and Sarah Bush Lincoln lived. Thomas married Sarah after Abe's mother Nancy died when Abe was 9. Sarah was a very good step-mother to Abraham and proved to be an affectionate mother. Abe lost much of his immediate family to disease and hardship. The Lincolns were not part of the aristocracy. Abraham worked his way up through hard work and diligent study. While I have more research to do, it does not make sense to me that he would be an agent of the aristocracy.

[Travlyr]

Travlyr, that Lincoln quote is fake.

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/lincoln.asp

Seems like its a fragment of one of many fake Lincoln quotes.

I am not yet convinced that that quote is fake.


What Lincoln Foresaw: (http://www.ratical.org/corporations/Lincoln.html)
Corporations Being "Enthroned" After the Civil War and Re-Writing the Laws Defining Their Existence
by Rick Crawford

Here is a sobering quote by Abe Lincoln:
"I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. . . . corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed."
-- U.S. President Abraham Lincoln, Nov. 21, 1864
(letter to Col. William F. Elkins)
Ref: The Lincoln Encyclopedia, Archer H. Shaw (Macmillan, 1950, NY)
Some people expressed doubts about its authenticity, given Lincoln's work as an attorney for railroad corporations! It was an interesting job tracking it down and verifying its authenticity.

Fortunately, after some burrowing in the univ. library, I was able to confirm its authenticity. Here it is, with more surrounding context:

"We may congratulate ourselves that this cruel war is nearing its end.
It has cost a vast amount of treasure and blood. . . .
It has indeed been a trying hour for the Republic; but
I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes
me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of the war,
corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places
will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong
its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth
is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.
I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety
of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war.
God grant that my suspicions may prove groundless."
The passage appears in a letter from Lincoln to (Col.) William F. Elkins, Nov. 21, 1864.
For a reliable pedigree, cite p. 40 of The Lincoln Encyclopedia, by Archer H. Shaw (Macmillan, 1950, NY). That traces the quote's lineage to p. 954 of Abraham Lincoln: A New Portrait, (Vol. 2) by Emanuel Hertz (Horace Liveright Inc, 1931, NY).

And here is another quote by Lincoln in 1837,

"These capitalists generally act harmoniously and in concert to fleece the people, and now that they have got into a quarrel with themselves, we are called upon to appropriate the people's money to settle the quarrel."
speech to Illinois legislature, Jan. 1837.
See Vol. 1, p. 24 of Lincoln's Complete Works,
ed. by Nicolay and Hay, 1905)

[jcannon98188]

Some of my knowledge comes from the fact that my ancestors knew him and his family. My ancestors had similar experiences as the Lincoln family in the same areas of Kentucky, Indiana, and Illinois during the same time period. I grew up just a few miles from where Thomas Lincoln and Sarah Bush Lincoln lived. Thomas married Sarah after Abe's mother Nancy died when Abe was 9. Sarah was a very good step-mother to Abraham and proved to be an affectionate mother. Abe lost much of his immediate family to disease and hardship. The Lincolns were not part of the aristocracy. Abraham worked his way up through hard work and diligent study. While I have more research to do, it does not make sense to me that he would be an agent of the aristocracy.

No, that is wrong. Abe's parents were killed by vampires at a very early age. That is why Abe hated the south, because the south was where the vampires were.

[matt0611]

Travlyr, that quote that referenced "The Lincoln Encyclopedia, Archer H. Shaw (Macmillan, 1950, NY)" is a fake. That letter that they got it from is a forgery. I don't believe any modern historians believe otherwise.

The quote was even in a book of fake quotes: "They Never Said It: A Book of Fake Quotes"

[green73]

Some of my knowledge comes from the fact that my ancestors knew him and his family. My ancestors had similar experiences as the Lincoln family in the same areas of Kentucky, Indiana, and Illinois during the same time period. I grew up just a few miles from where Thomas Lincoln and Sarah Bush Lincoln lived. Thomas married Sarah after Abe's mother Nancy died when Abe was 9. Sarah was a very good step-mother to Abraham and proved to be an affectionate mother. Abe lost much of his immediate family to disease and hardship. The Lincolns were not part of the aristocracy. Abraham worked his way up through hard work and diligent study. While I have more research to do, it does not make sense to me that he would be an agent of the aristocracy.

The same could be said of Bill Clinton. Lincoln was cutthroat and an ambitious climber. When Hayek said the very worst in society rise to the top in government he probably had Lincoln in mind.

[Conza88]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37tEeO-qTYo