Ron Paul and the lincoln "controversy"

[tsetsefly]

edit: I forgot to mention this but did so in another post, this is completely irrelevant to the campaign, because its a non-issue, having said that it is interesting to see Paul seems to be correct on this issue.
Also isn't interesting that the media wants to ignore his policies and instead focus on nonsense like this?

Watch this Judge Napolitano speech on the constitution situation today, where he mentions Lincoln for a few minutes(minute 10) including saying this:

"Who [is] the greatest violator of the Constitution?" asks Napolitano. "George W. Bush has shown less fidelity to the Constitution than any president since Abraham Lincoln."

Among the various constitutional atrocities commited by Lincoln:

- Imprisoning many journalist in the north for criticizing him
- imprisoning state representative Clement Vallandigham for "uttering disloyal sentiments"
- suspended habeas corpus
- burned down cities, towns etc.

seems some people (me included) need to revisit history...

[dircha]

It may very well be that some people need to revisit history, but I think you're mistaken if you believe that it benefits his campaign for president in 2008 to do anything but diffuse this.

He's running to be president, not representative, not radio talk show host. Americans expect him to be able to show restraint and leadership in diffusing this, not arguing to the bitter end, not going back at it when the host gives him an opportunity to move on.

Americans are not with him on this. Maybe they should be, but that's not the point. They don't care about this, and by not showing leadership and immediately diffusing these situations, he is doing more harm than good.

Congressman Paul says that Lincoln started the war for the specific purpose of undermining the founding intent of the Constitution. That is a conspiracy theory. That is claiming to have known Lincoln's intentions. Something he refused to speculate on in regards to Bush and Cheney in the leadup to Iraq.

Lincoln went to war to preserve the union at all costs, and there were disastrous consequences. But to suggest that his intent in doing so was not to preserve the union at all costs, but rather secretly to start war as an opportunity for the specific purpose of carrying out his long standing hidden agenda of undermining the founding intent of the Constitution, IS nutcase bullshit.

There's no one else I'm willing to support, but I don't want my candidate for president going around throwing fuel on the fire of conspiarcy theories surrounding a war that happened over 140 years ago, not when there is so much more important to talk about.

[LionHeart87]

fyi dircha you just proved Paul's "conspiracy" true.

Saving the Union at all costs meant to Lincoln destroying the original intent of the Constitution to allow states to secede if they wish. Lincoln knew states had the right to seced but he disregarded it because he was a nationalist and not a federalist. He ignored states rights for federal power.

Lincoln murdered the Constitution and all of its meaning when he went to war with the South and to pretend he didn't know what he was doing it plain stupidity.

I think you need to read the book Paul mentioned on Morning Joe: The Real Lincoln by Dilorenzo.

[Just Come Home]

The Real Lincoln by Thomas Dilorenzo (http://www.mises.org/store/search.aspx?Keywords=DiLorenzo,%20Thomas%20J.)

[Just Come Home]

Ron Paul is absolutely right about this, and we'll see it reflected in the South Carolina poll numbers.

[Dan Klaus]

I think you're mistaken if you believe that it benefits his campaign for president in 2008 to do anything but diffuse this.

Agreed....let the truth be what it is...trying to convince the general public that the IRS should be abolished and troops should come home from Iraq is tough enough...trying to get them to learn the real history of Lincoln is not going to happen...Hope Ron drops this issue and does not entertain any more questioning that doesn't pertain to current issues...

[newbitech]

I think the issues are related at a level that most people do not go to. I really believe that the truth is the truth no matter what level it is understood on.

The truth has a very distinct ring to it and the more the old media try to obfuscate the truth, the more people will open their ears to hear it.

Remember, this isn't something that Dr. Paul brought up, but the fact is, states rights are indeed part of Dr. Paul's platform and we cannot go around talking about Revolution and founding fathers if we are not willing to hold Dr. Paul up next to the likes of Abe Lincoln.

People need to hear the truth no matter how much the old media tries to twist it up. I care less if the old media is setting traps. If you believe in this movement like I do then you know that the only thing that is going to change this country is to let the truth come to light. If we need to rewrite history in order to do so, then so be it. However in this case, it is the old media that is trying to shape public opinion and I am proud of Dr. Paul for standing his ground and defending something that the masses don't care about.

I don't think this interview hurts Paul as much as it reinforces what we already know about him. That is important because more than half of the Republican base can't figure out who they want to vote for.

Ron Paul > Abe Lincoln ? Who cares?

Ron Paul educating the public on all levels every time he opens his mouth? That is his legacy.

[NewEnd]

It may very well be that some people need to revisit history, but I think you're mistaken if you believe that it benefits his campaign for president in 2008 to do anything but diffuse this.

He's running to be president, not representative, not radio talk show host. Americans expect him to be able to show restraint and leadership in diffusing this, not arguing to the bitter end, not going back at it when the host gives him an opportunity to move on.

Americans are not with him on this. Maybe they should be, but that's not the point. They don't care about this, and by not showing leadership and immediately diffusing these situations, he is doing more harm than good.

Congressman Paul says that Lincoln started the war for the specific purpose of undermining the founding intent of the Constitution. That is a conspiracy theory. That is claiming to have known Lincoln's intentions. Something he refused to speculate on in regards to Bush and Cheney in the leadup to Iraq.

Lincoln went to war to preserve the union at all costs, and there were disastrous consequences. But to suggest that his intent in doing so was not to preserve the union at all costs, but rather secretly to start war as an opportunity for the specific purpose of carrying out his long standing hidden agenda of undermining the founding intent of the Constitution, IS nutcase bullshit.

There's no one else I'm willing to support, but I don't want my candidate for president going around throwing fuel on the fire of conspiarcy theories surrounding a war that happened over 140 years ago, not when there is so much more important to talk about.

Amen.

[DrNoZone]

Lincoln went to war to preserve the union at all costs, and there were disastrous consequences. But to suggest that his intent in doing so was not to preserve the union at all costs, but rather secretly to start war as an opportunity for the specific purpose of carrying out his long standing hidden agenda of undermining the founding intent of the Constitution, IS nutcase bullshit.


I'm sorry, but Lincoln going to war to "preserve the Union at all costs" IS undermining the intent of the Founders and the Constitution!

[tsetsefly]

It may very well be that some people need to revisit history, but I think you're mistaken if you believe that it benefits his campaign for president in 2008 to do anything but diffuse this.



I agree and said this in another thread, just added to this one, this is and should be a non-issue... although it does show Paul's understanding of the constitution when he criticizes Lincoln over his unconstitutional policies..

[malibu]

The tongue-in-cheek title is precisely what some southern belle's Dad once called me - LOL.

"The Mythic Lincoln is an oversimplified figure. It leaves out all the interesting and troublesome details about the real man. The real Lincoln was a complex, tragic figure, in many ways scandalous by today’s standards. Since he’s been dead now for 136 years, it’s about time we saw him in the round, without the halo."

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b17d7e64fdc.htm

[moostraks]

The right to secession was and is a very important right that was taken away. Some in the South have not forgotten or forgiven. There are movements that still abound which make this topic very relevant:

For South Carolina : http://christianexodus.org/

For Vermont: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/06/04/national/main2881111.shtml

This is an important subject to more people than some may realize. By divine providence the old media thought they could use this topic to portray Dr.Paul as a racist and instead it has opened another kettle of fish that may just draw more support then some of you may realize. Relax, breathe deep, and trust the candidate. If he gets half a chance to open his mouth he shows just how well read he is on many fronts and how constitutionally bound he feels the government to be...

And NO...not everyone is a kook who believes the states should have the right to secede. It was(and is)still important in order to retain the power of the states over the oppression of big federal government....

[Just Come Home]

I don't understand the criticism that recognizing that Lincoln was a Hamiltonian who favored strong central government is a conspiracy theory.

Dr. Paul is a Republican. He favors The Republic. He confirms this with every answer he gives, no matter how unpopular the position. And I love the fact that they're bringing this up, as South Carolina might prove to be a firewall for us.