It’s Better Than Mike Huckabee’s MySpace Friends!

Oh, my God, you guys, the forums at gop.com are comedy gold.Here’s a thread advocating increasing black GOP turnout in the South. Comment number FOUR:

The
Republican Party needs to be honest about Abe Lincoln and stop
pretending that he was worthy of respect. Lincoln was a white
supremacist who once proposed sending blacks off to their own colony.
For more information on Lincoln and racism, read the free chapter
(chapter 6) posted online from Judge Andrew Napolitano’s newest book, Dred Scott’s Revenge.http://www.judgenap.com/dsr6.pdf

Most southerners did not own slaves. The Civil War wasprimarily
about state sovereignty, not slavery. Lincoln was a statist tyrant and
most definitely was the worst president in U.S. history. You can see a
list of some of Lincoln’s abuses athttp://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo56.html

It goes, if you can imagine, downhill from there:

Why would we want those people in our party. We would just end up supporting them here as well.

The gop.com genius plan for getting minority folks to vote Republican: FUCK ABE LINCOLN AND FUCK YOU.

A.



19 thoughts on “It’s Better Than Mike Huckabee’s MySpace Friends!

  1. gene214 says:

    Lincoln was the worst president in U.S. history? Really? Quite an astounding statement, even from a gop-zombie. Memo to the goopers: If not for the leadership of Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War, there would be no U.S. now.

    Like

  2. Jude says:

    I like how they’ve decided to use “statist” as a pejorative term. Where the hell did that one come from? I’ve been around and among nutty conservatives for most of my life, and I hadn’t seen that one pop up until the campaign season last year.
    P.S. Camille Paglia still sucks.

    Like

  3. Gummo says:

    Comments like those need to go viral.
    They deserve more scrutiny than a few condescending chuckles at a liberal blog.
    Just like every Democrat during Bush’s terms was asked if he or she supported MoveOn.org or some other silly nonsense, people should be asking every Republican representative in every public forum if they support statements like these.
    The resulting flopsweat would not only be fun to watch, it would result in even more right-wing namecalling and fracturing, a la the reception Lindsay Graham got recently from his “supporters.”

    Like

  4. CrispyShot says:

    I remember back in the 70s being in grade school in Texas and hearing my teacher state (and repeat, to make sure we all got it), “The Civil War was NOT about slavery; it was about states’ rights.”
    That’s truly what they tell themselves.

    Like

  5. Jude says:

    Of course it was about states’ rights. Specifically, their rights to have their citizens own slaves.

    Like

  6. mdh says:

    +5 points to Jude for taking those words out of my mouth.

    Like

  7. MapleStreet says:

    Crispy et al. I’m from SC and Georgia. That is absolutely what they tell themselves. I even had a boss who was an old Southern Gentleman type whose state representative relative (?uncle) was named firstname States Rights lastname.
    In SC, States Rights is a gigantic rallying cry. Politics hold that the national govt should have almost no power, the State should hold an almost supreme power, and the local govts and people have little power. So bringing the War of Northern Agression into the States Rights bandwagon is a nice fit.
    Back to the thread, admittedly Lincoln didn’t start out as a friend to the black man and emancipation likely had strong political overtones, but what I can’t understand is why the GOP wants to increase black turnout in SC.??????
    While the GOP has groomed some young blacks in SC as rising stars of the party – so that it can appear diverse – the percentage of blacks who vote GOP is relatively low.

    Like

  8. whet moser says:

    Damn, A. – that comment is a new form of wingnut crazy, like a rare insect in the Amazon. Lincoln was a statist racist + the Civil War wasn’t about slavery = wow.

    Like

  9. pansypoo says:

    ‘state’s rights’. the sons of the south were played by the limbaughs/becks/fux gnews of the time. it was about keeping the blacks in their place PERIOD.

    Like

  10. Snarki, child of Loki says:

    Hey, if the GOP wants to retroactively excommunicate Lincoln, and accuse him of being a “Liberal” and a “Democrat”, that’s fine with me.
    In fact, if Abe were around to see the current state of the GOP, I bet it would be okay with him too.
    “Hey, it’s just too bad that William Tecumseh Sherman didn’t have nuclear weapons, isn’t it? Well, there’s always next time.”

    Like

  11. MapleStreet says:

    Dumb Question: Didn’t Bush II say that Lincoln was his idol / hero?

    Like

  12. Josh says:

    I know this will probably go over like a lead balloon on this thread, but in the interests of enlightenment I feel compelled to suggest that some of you guys read a bit more into the circumstances surrounding the Civil War.
    For instance, I wonder if you knew that New England actively practiced nullification and tried to secede over 40 years before the South. They didn’t actually do it, but not because secession was unconstitutional. The Hartford Convention simply voted to remain in the Union.
    But when the Civil War began, it was almost universally acknowledged that the right to secede was one that all states possessed. Of course, Abe Lincoln didn’t share that view. And he proved his point at the expense of 620,000 American lives and incalculable damage to the Constitution.
    By the way, do you know why Jefferson Davis was released from prison instead of executed for leading a so-called “rebellion”? Because legal scholars of the day knew that he would never be convicted, that he had in fact acted legally. And that it was Lincoln himself who disrespected the highest law of the land almost from his first day in office.
    If you’re still reading this, you have a more open mind than most. If you want to know more stuff about this country that they never taught you in public school, click my name above for a further history lesson.

    Like

  13. MapleStreet says:

    Hi Josh,
    Followed your link. But to argue the point you’re making, you would have to hold that you file a “5th amendment” income tax return and/or refuse to pay as there are strong arguments that an income tax is unconstitutional.

    Like

  14. Josh says:

    Maple,
    Thanks for reading my piece on federalism and progressivism, but I’m not sure I follow what you mean about the income tax. While I personally am not a fan of the complex and politically motivated system we have now, it’s hard to argue that the 16th Amendment is unconstitutional. After all, it is in the Constitution.
    On the contrary, regarding the larger point I made above and in the article I linked to, requiring our leaders to follow the Constitution is the only protection we have against the sort of tyranny for which Abraham Lincoln is infamous.
    The Constitution says that only Congress may suspend habeas corpus, but Lincoln did that himself. The Constitution says that Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, but Abraham Lincoln imprisoned tens of thousands of people because they wanted him to end the Civil War peacefully, and said so publicly.
    Nowhere does the Constitution say that any of its protections may be suspended whenever the president thinks it’s necessary. That is the entire point of laws; they must apply at all times.
    Lincoln violated the people’s trust and paved the way for every president after him to treat the Constitution as a malleable document with no fixed meaning, thereby rendering it meaningless and all of its protections moot.
    None of this is a secret, feel free to check for yourself. Constitutional relativism is Lincoln’s legacy to this country.

    Like

  15. Shadi Beidas says:

    It is true that Lincoln’s original plan was to ship off the majority of Africans back to Africa, but the Republican blog left out the part that he was going to offer that as an option (not a compulsion) financed by the US government. In today’s light, his policies would have been labeled as racist, but for the time, he was quite liberal.
    As for the state’s rights claim, it is true that the states that formed the Confederacy were diametrically opposite in governmental ideology to the States that would form the Union. Slavery was likely to have eventually given way to indentured servitude or low-wage labor in the South, but that was likely decades away.
    What we have to take from these two viewpoints is the impact revisionist history can have on true history. While Lincoln may have had racist notions and the Civil War fought to some extent for states’ rights, neither notion was the driving force behind either. Lincoln abhorred the idea of slavery, and the southern states had to learn that the part cannot govern the whole. The Confederacy left the Union because they didn’t want to be told what to do with their slaves.

    Like

  16. Josh says:

    Shadi,
    You just contradicted your own point. Leaving aside questions of who was racist and who was liberal for the time period concerned, as you said, the Confederacy LEFT the Union.
    They were not trying to govern the whole. They sought to peacefully end a voluntary arrangement, and for that Lincoln started a war.
    In his inaugural address, Lincoln clearly stated that he would not use force of arms to end slavery, only to collect the taxes that were due his federal government.
    He also ignored numerous attempts by the southern states to negotiate a peaceful settlement of the conflict.
    Why would he prefer death and destruction to the peaceful settlement his own people desired? Because Lincoln used the war to dominate the South and, by extension, any state that would ever dare to question his central authority.

    Like

  17. Mark Douglas says:

    Lincoln was dealing with Confederate insanity. Confederate leaders were threatening to kill the slaves — literally execute them — if they had to free them. Davis said this several times — so did other Confederate leaders — KILL the slaves. Davis was enraged when he found out about Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation, so much so that in response, he said slaves would have to be “exterminated”.
    Funny – you don’t hear the South tell about their own leaders talking bout exterminating the slaves if they had to free them.
    LIncoln was trying to do anything to blunt the genocidal threat to kill the slaves. He did talk bout colonization — but he was for freeing the slaves regardless if there were provisions for their deportation or not.
    Did you notice that Lincoln freed the slaves WITHOUT a word about colonization? Including the EP,and the 13th Amendment.
    For you lunatics that my not know, Lincoln not only did the EP- he was PERSONALLY responsible for getting the 13th Amendment passed in the House. It had to pass the House and Senate first – and it was hopelessly stuck. LIncoln personally got it unstuck. Notice Lincoln made sure the blacks were free in the South first,and that the Southern Army were already running, the leaders were hiding, before he pushed the 13th through.
    Who spoke about exterminating the slaves? Davis. Who freed them? Lincoln. Who kicked the Confederate’s slave raping ass? Lincoln.
    The South were Taliban like violent thugs who got their asses kicked, and have been crying bout it for 150 years
    http://confederatecrybabies.blogspot.com/

    Like

  18. Mark Douglas says:

    States rights my ass. The south hated – detested — states rights when it meant less slave profit.
    First of all – the south ITSELF said why the seceded. And they didnt say states rights. Texas said the North had “advocated the debasing doctrine” of racial equality”
    Here is the quote from Texas — your teacher should have had you memorize this.
    Texas Official Declaration of Causes of Secession .February 2, 1861
    “We hold as undeniable truths…the African race is inferior – that the servitude of the African race is the revealed will of the Almighty Creator,
    “[the North has] proclaimed the debasing doctrine of the equality of all men, –a doctrine in violation of Divine Law.
    There are many more “Declaration of Causes” like Texas, all amazing in their Nazi like insanity. Gee – I wonder why the South has hid them for 150 years.
    Second — the South detested states rights. They hated, and prevented, any new state from deciding to have slavery or not. If you lunatics would learn about Dred Scott, you would see the South position was blacks are not human, so states had no rights to decide for slavery or not. Hows that fucking fit with your excuse of states rights?
    Plus the lunatic South hated states rights when states wanted to decide how they would handle the issue of blacks accused of being run away slaves, or the CHILD of a run away slaves. According to the luntic slave raping child selling Confederacy, states had no right to decide their OWN trials on things happening in their OWN state.
    So no dumb fuck – Confederacy was based on slavery, slave pussy, and slave profit. The States right shit was just fucking excuse – -and an excuse they didnt use at the time/. You dumb fucks dreamed up that excuse years later/
    The excuse the South used then wasn’t states rights – it was the “will of Almighty God”
    But even you dumb fucks don’t buy that shit bout slavery being the will of God. People believed it then, but not now. SO you dumb fucks dreamed up a different excuse/
    Its all bullshit. The simple truth is, Confederacy was based on exactly what the leaders said it was — SLAVERY/ That meant slave rape, slave beating, selling children.

    Like

  19. Mark Douglas says:

    One more comment for you dumb fucks/ Lincoln told you fucks to secede – Legally. Not by violence.
    You dumb fucks should have listened. If you did, you maybe coudl still be raping your slaves and selling your own children from rape even today. Who knows.
    YOu dumb fucks didnt have the right to use violence to rebel. Got that dumb fuck? Lincoln had the duty to put down violent insurections. But you dumb fucks only new violence.
    Violence to get slaves, violence to drive slaves to work harder, violence to rape slaves, violence to sell slaves. Violence to burn slaves alive who rebelled, violence to torture slaves who ran away.
    Violence to spread slavery, violence to deny free speech and free press.
    Violence to deny fair elections, violence to threaten those who held real elections/
    You fuck heads tried violence with Lincoln, and he kicked your fucking ass.
    In 150 years you dumb fucks have not tried that shit again. Even when other US presidents sent troops down there — IKE and JFK – you better fuckingi believe it, you stood aside and obeyed the laws.
    You were forced to free slaves, forced to stop raping slaves, forced to stop beating slaves, forced to stop discriminting. And for 150 years you bitched cried and moaned, but you havent shot US troops.
    And you wont start now. IF you lunatics secede – you will do it how Lincoln said — legally. Not by violence.

    Like

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: