MT and the rest of Hillary lovers

[Ack-Ack]

Yeah, what do a bunch of guys who've studied history and earned PHD's know anyway?

Silly MT, if they disagree with Laser they obviously aren't credible.  To disagree with Laser just means you're a Communist. 



ack-ack

[Chalenge]

The real irony is that you think you are saying something by quoting Lincoln, one of the worst presidents this nation has ever had.

Worst? Without Lincoln we would be two nations and likely one of them rife with tyranny of the majority. You were taught in school that we are a democracy werent you? Im from the south and STILL think Lincoln was the greatest President the U.S. has ever had. The man was a genius far far beyond anyone contemporary to him. ONE year of formal education and look what the man achieved.

[lasersailor184]

Ignoring for a moment that he abolished slavery (which I believe that any president at that time would have done), Lincoln would be viewed as a sub-rate president.  He bumbled his way through the war.  He got 600,000 americans killed.  He likely had no right to start the war anyway.

This country is a union of states.  The states stay only because they agree with the current laws.  The entire diddlying foundation of this country is based on the fact that states may join and leave (not casually albeit) when they agree or disagree with what this country is doing. 

Then you remember that Lincoln got 600,000 americans killed.  He subverted American rights in war time.  He instituted illegal income taxes, which later led to the 16th amendment. 

Lincoln did nearly every single thing we as Americans hold as evil.  But he freed Blacks, and killed 600,000 americans, so he must be one of the greatest presidents ever.



As for FDR and Wilson?  I'll tell you something about them you don't know.  Musolini, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and Adolf Hitler had IDENTICAL SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC PLATFORMS (minus hitler's penchant for killing jews, like I've mentioned already).  If you think that Hitler and Mussolini were evil men, then by default you think that Wilson and Roosevelt were evil men.  And the converse is true.  If Wilson and FDR were great men, then so were Mussolini and Hitler.

Plus the WSJ didn't rank them high.  The results to their polls did.

The results to the polls show one of two things.  First is that people, including these so called historians, have no clue as to what actually happened in History.  The second, and more scary option, is that these Historians DO know these facts, and they DO agree with them. 

For the sake of my sleep and sanity, I can't possibly think it's the second thing (though it may be true).

[Carrel]

The real irony is that you think you are saying something by quoting Lincoln, one of the worst presidents this nation has ever had.

Actually the "irony" is you thinking GWB is a great President. 

[lasersailor184]

Actually the "irony" is you thinking GWB is a great President. 

Please point to where I said that.



I'll wait.

[bongaroo]

whoops

[Chalenge]

I dont think Lincoln started the war. I dont know where you could have possibly gotten that! The nation was on the brink of war for years before Lincoln was ever in consideration for office (in fact Buchanon would be the worst President in history for avoiding the issue of war had not Carter been elected). Lincoln did the one thing all liberals hate; he defended the Constitution in its original form. Lincoln did throw a few newspaper reporters in jail for attempting insurrection which as President he had to do. I applaud the man for that. Recent Presidents should have done the same thing and even Pelosi should be in prison for attempting to subvert the Constitution (which she swore to uphold).

You do have some facts but your conclusions are twisted. I suspect a liberal influence from public schooling.

[bongaroo]

I dont think Lincoln started the war. I dont know where you could have possibly gotten that! The nation was on the brink of war for years before Lincoln was ever in consideration for office. Lincoln did the one thing all liberals hate; he defended the Constitution in its original form. Lincoln did throw a few newspaper reporters in jail for attempting insurrection which as President he had to do. I applaud the man for that. Resent Presidents should have done the same thing and even Pelosi should be in prison for attempting to subvert the Constitution (which she swore to uphold).

You do have some facts but your conclusions are twisted. I suspect a liberal influence from public schooling.

"beware the evil liberals with their agenda to subvert your edumacations!!!!"  I don't know where your from but my teachers were anything but liberal.  hateful maybe.  liberal?  no.

[Motherland]

"beware the evil liberals with their agenda to subvert your edumacations!!!!"  I don't know where your from but my teachers were anything but liberal.  hateful maybe.  liberal?  no.

Anything that has anything to do with a public program that does not force Christian values has got to be full of Liberal Communists. Didn't you know that?

[Chalenge]

Im sorry I should have said 'liberal government schooling.' Your sarcasm is noted but the digression doesnt decrease the strength of my argument in the least.

[lasersailor184]

I dont think Lincoln started the war. I dont know where you could have possibly gotten that! The nation was on the brink of war for years before Lincoln was ever in consideration for office (in fact Buchanon would be the worst President in history for avoiding the issue of war had not Carter been elected). Lincoln did the one thing all liberals hate; he defended the Constitution in its original form. Lincoln did throw a few newspaper reporters in jail for attempting insurrection which as President he had to do. I applaud the man for that. Recent Presidents should have done the same thing and even Pelosi should be in prison for attempting to subvert the Constitution (which she swore to uphold).

You do have some facts but your conclusions are twisted. I suspect a liberal influence from public schooling.

The nation was on the brink of division for years.  But nothing mandated bloodshed.  Lincoln did start the war.  When the confederate states broke off, he could have left them to do whatever they want.

"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

[culero]

Because he saved the Union and abolished slavery?


ack-ack

He was a war criminal.

We've covered this material before, try to keep up

[Motherland]

So... the nation would be better off split in two?

[bongaroo]

You ended your tirade by accusing liberal public schooling.  I in fact attended public schooling and found it anything but liberal.  Hence your argument is dubious in and of itself.

[lasersailor184]

So... the nation would be better off split in two?

Perhaps not.  However we are often guilty of refusing to study history.  The original government the United States set up was a confederacy, which was mostly a total failure.  The new confederacy was probably going to fail within 10 years of formation anyway.


However that does not mean we have a right to kill 250k(?) former americans to demand their obedience.