Tag: Fugative Slave Act

Democratic Party is Evil, Republican Party is Stupid: More Evidence on the Later

Americans seriously never have had a choice for an honorable political party led by statesmen (and women) that would honor the principles that this country was founded on.

From the very beginning, the Federalists, the Republican-Democrats that morphed into the Democratic Party, the Whigs that morphed into the Republican Party has always had an evil-to-stupid ratio, which I believe is caused by the common ingredient = POLITICS. Politics will quickly cause good people to become bad and turn everything it touches to s**t.

So today, in support of the Republican Party being the stupid party, it seems that Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) proposed a bill aimed at the Democratic Party:

Gohmert’s resolution, proposed on Thursday, would mandate that “any political organization or party that has ever held a public position that supported slavery or the Confederacy shall either change its name or be barred from participation in the House of Representatives.”

How stupid is that, unless your only history data is from government schools that basically said only the Democratic party supported slavery. Do yourself a favor and look up the 1860 Republican Platform:

Item #4: That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the states, and especially the right of each state to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgement exclusively, is essential to that balance of powers on which the perfection and endurance of our political fabric depends; and we denounce the lawless invasion by armed forces of the soil of any state or territory, no matter what the pretext, as among the gravest of crimes”

Translated, “domestic institutions” is institutional slavery, and the Republican platform of 1860 supported slavery.

One should also note that the proposed 13th Amendment, passed by Congress, after the seven southern states had seceded, with much Republican support (see below) would guarantee any state to keep their institution of slavery (domestic institutions) forever, like permanently!

Lincoln in his 04MAR1861 inaugural address supported this saying:

I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution–which amendment, however, I have not seen–has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid misconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose not to speak of particular amendments so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.

Called the Corwin Amendment, it was ratified by many northern states as I showed in a previous post, until the progress of the Civil War made this offer not necessary.

This passed the US House of Representatives 133 to 63 on 28FEB1861 and passed the US Senate 24 to 12 on 02MAR1861. Lincoln proceeded to send a letter to each governor explaining this amendment.

With Lincoln’s encouragement, the following states ratified:

  • Kentucky 04APR1861
  • Ohio 03MAY1861
  • Rhode Island 31MAY1861
  • Maryland 10JAN1862
  • Illinois 02JUN1863

Pretty amazing that the “Land of Lincoln” voted for cementing slavery into the US Constitution as late as 1863. What is this all about?

Beyond this, I think it is very timely to point out the racist tendencies of the Republican Party hero Abraham Lincoln himself. Whereas current day (vintage 2020) Republican Party cheerleaders very did a serious study of Lincoln himself and true to form issued stupid statements like this:

Lincoln never acknowledges black inferiority – Dinesh D’Souza

.. I will hopefully bring some light your way so that you don’t have to remain stupid as a Republican.

Lerone Bennett Jr. said it best when he said:

“[T]he level of ignorance on Abraham Lincoln and race in the United States is a scandal ..”

What follows is just a teaser before we get into Lincoln’s raw quotes.

Historian James Oakes, winner of multiple Lincoln Prizes for best book of the year on Lincoln historiography said:

Lincoln .. earned a reputation as a brutal partisan attack dog. He published pseudonymous letters and anonymous editorials satirizing the religious convictions of his opponents or belittling their manhood. Worst of all was Lincoln’s penchant for race-baiting. He implied that Democrats would give blacks the vote and that Illinois would ‘be overrun with free negroes’. He described Martin VanBuren’s running mate as “the husband of a negro wench, and the father of a band of mulattoes” ..

How long will it take for the evil party (Democrats) to find this dirt on the stupid party that brought this up (Republicans)? Well if they have Joe Biden on this effort, we can be assured that the Republican party roots and DNA will remain well hidden from society at large here in 2020.

Lincoln’s own words below are directly from The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln (CW), complete with specific citations for every single quotation:

  • “Free them [blacks] and make them politically and socially our equals? My own feelings will not admit of this . . . . We can not then make them equals.” (CW, Vol. II, p. 256)
  • “There is a natural disgust in the minds of nearly all white people, to the idea of an indiscriminate amalgamation of the white and black races” (CW, Vol. II, p. 405)
  • “What I would most desire would be the separation of the white and black races” (CW, Vol. II, p. 521)
  • “I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and black races . . . . I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong, having the superior position. I have never said anything to the contrary.” (CW, Vol. III, p. 16)
  • “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 . . . . I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people . . .” (CW, Vol, III, pp. 145-146)
  • “I will to the very last stand by the law of this state, which forbids the marrying of white people with negroes.” (CW, Vol. III, p. 146)
  • “Senator Douglas remarked . . that . . . this government was made for the white people and not for negroes. Why, in point of mere fact, I think so too.” (CW, Vol. II, p. 281)

Note that until his dying day, Lincoln plotted to deport all the black people out of America:

  • “I have said that the separation of the races is the only perfect preventive of amalgamation . . . . Such separation . . . must be effected by colonization” [to Liberia, Central America, anywhere]. (CW, Vol. II, p. 409)
  • “Let us be brought to believe it is morally right , and . . . favorable to . . . our interest, to transfer the African to his native clime . . .” (CW, Vol. II, p. 409)
  • “The place I am thinking about having for a colony [for the deportation of all American blacks] is in Central America. It is nearer to us than Liberia.” (CW, Vol. V, pp. 373, 374)

Lincoln actually STRENGTHENED the institution of slavery, and kept slavery intact in the slave states that remained in the Union until after his death:

  • ” I think no wise man has perceived, how it [slavery] could be at once eradicated, without producing a greater evil, even to the cause of human liberty himself.” (CW, Vol. II, p. 130)
  • “I meant not to ask for the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia.” (CW, Vol., II, p. 260)
  • “I believe there is no right, and ought to be no inclination I the people of the free states to enter into the slave states and interfere with the question of slavery at all.” (CW, Vol. II, p. 492)
  • “I have no purpose directly or indirectly to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists.” (CW, Vol. III, p. 16)
  • “I say that we must not interfere with the institution of slavery . . . because the constitution forbids it, and the general welfare does not require us to do so.” (CW, Vol. III, p. 460)

Lincoln supported the Fugitive Slave Act that mandated the return of escaped slaves to their owners. You do know that this is why the Underground Railroad did not stop in Indiana or Ohio or even Michigan, but ended only when the slaves made it to Canada!

  • “I do not now, nor ever did, stand in favor of the unconditional repeal of the fugitive slave law.” (CW, Vol., III., p. 40)
  • “[T]he people of the Southern states are entitled to a Congressional Fugitive Slave Law.” (CW, Vol. III, p. 41)

So I think you now have some insight into the real Lincoln, not the myth that school teachers and media may have taught you about the “Great Emancipator”

Better yet, you might want to test drive this book by Lerone Bennett Jr. called Forced Into Glory: Abraham Lincoln’s White Dream

Lerone is an African-American scholar, author and social historian, known for his revisionist analysis of race relations in the United States. His best-known works include ‘Before the Mayflower’ and ‘Forced into Glory’. He is most notable for his decades as executive editor for ‘Ebony Magazine’, to which he was promoted in 1958. It has served as his base for the publication of a steady stream of articles on African-American history, some of them collected into books.

Here are some excerpts from Lerone’s works:

I was a child in whitest Mississippi, reading for my life, when I discovered that everything I had been told about Abraham Lincoln was a lie….for I discovered that I lived in an Orwellian world where scholars with all the degrees the schools could give could say in all seriousness that a separatist was an integrationist and that a White supremacist was the ultimate symbol of race relations and the American Dream. Lincoln or somebody said once that you can’t fool all of the people all the time. By turning a racist who wanted to deport all Blacks into a national symbol of integration and brotherhood, the Lincoln mythmakers have managed to prove Lincoln or whoever said it wrong. This is the story of how they fooled all of the people all the time and why.

Lerone explains about the Emancipation Proclamation itself:

The testimony of sixteen thousand books and monographs to the contrary notwithstanding, Lincoln did not emancipate the slave, greatly or otherwise…. John Hume, the Missouri anti-slavery leader…said the Proclamation “did not…whatever it may have otherwise accomplished at the time it was issued, liberate a single slave.” …Lincoln himself knew that his most famous act would not of itself free a single Negro. The second and most damaging point is that “the great emancipator” did not intend for it to free a single Negro, for he carefully, deliberately, studiously excluded all Negroes within “our military reach.”

Only Honest Abe could pull this off, was to “free” slaves in Confederate-held territory where he couldn’t free them and to leave them in slavery in Union-held territory where he could have freed them.

We all know of the Thirteenth Amendment, officially outlawing slavery and involuntary servitude in December 1865.  In his book, Lerone Bennett recounts two earlier Thirteenth amendments, both supported by Lincoln, neither of which (obviously) successfully amended the Constitution.

The first of these was passed by Congress just before Lincoln took office and was sent to the states for ratification like I said before in this post. This amendment would have permanently made America half slave and half free.

The second proposed  Thirteenth amendment, proposed by Lincoln himself, but never approved by Congress, was the first of three amendments Lincoln proposed for buying and deporting native-born African-Americans.

Lerone Bennett provides so much more in this book of over 600 pages – all of it focused on exploding the myth that Lincoln was the friend of the slave, the great emancipator, and the champion of equal rights.

All BS, all the time.

Do your own research y’all, Lincoln was never the friend of the slave before, during or after his War Against Southern Independence.

Peace out.

-SF1

Yesterday’s Decisions Impact Tomorrow’s Options – How Lincoln’s Reaction Crippled the USA

USA Communist Party Convention – 1930s

I am not sure I am the only one thinking this, but why does it seem that NO ONE is really about assisting the PEOPLE here in July 2020? It is almost as if there is this standoff that prevents common sense from prevailing. I guess that is the definition of politics, the absence of common sense and logic.

In my last post I said:

In an effort to mask the underlying financial hole that consumes a large part of the world, Covid-19 followed by accusations of racism and white supremacy have been followed by … Covid-19 again. Take 3.

Yes, it should be very obvious by now that in spite of declining Covid-19 deaths, the emphasis has changed to “cases” (more accurately called ‘positive tests’ that mean one may have had Covid-19 or another corona-virus, including one that can cause the common cold).

The psychological effect of this is the ability to easily make face coverings the norm even though the science clearly states that these masks are not effective with this 120nm virus. The social impact of everyone in public being masked up like the OK Corral in the Wild West is to clearly accelerate the distrust factor in this country towards continued division. Governments are great at distracting the masses, so this election year there is plenty of “stuff” to cover up their own critical failures, especially with the US economy and the US debt.

But I digress.

My purpose here is to give a bit of insight into the bind we (USA) find ourselves in. It is rather obvious from the accusation of systematic racism to the cancel culture that everything can be a potential target for those that have no use for other’s property (their bodies and their legal possessions). We have unveiled the great cultural divide in the USA that has been here for decades.

Thomas Jefferson faced a similar issue during and after his presidency, but his approach is never considered.

In a 1803 letter to John C. Breckinridge of Kentucky:

if there is to be a separation .. then God bless them both and keep them in the union if it be for their good, but separate them if it be better

In 1804 Jefferson wrote:

Those of the Western Confederacy will be as much our children and defendants as those of the Eastern, and I feel myself as much identified with that country, in future time, as with this, and did I now foresee a separation at some future day ..

I can understand why the GOP can’t say this, but why can’t the Democrats? (Hint – Marxism requires the WHOLE country to feed on)

SECESSION is the only path forward .. but the US is stuck!

Sometimes, in any relationship, parting can actually be therapeutic for both parties. We can see this with divorce as well as with business partnerships. None of these are really “perpetual” relationships UNLESS both parties work on making it all work without abusing each other.

The GOP is stuck because the DNA in their party rests with Abraham Lincoln and his reaction to having seven states PEACEFULLY secede from the united States of America (written as it was inked in the 1783 Paris Peace treaty with the British Empire). As a result, Trump’s options are like this:

Lincoln forever made the barrier to peaceful secession almost impossible when 80 years after the 13 colonies seceded from the British Empire he decided that “union” was to be achieved at all costs, even that of 750,000 American lives.

It seems that American Exceptionalism is a myth. How come, could Maine seceded from Massachusetts in 1820, Hungary secede from Austria in 1867, Norway secede from Sweden in 1905, Singapore from Malaysia in 1965, the Czech Republic from Slovakia in 1993 and especially the 15 republics that seceded from the USSR? Instead, a four year war is waged on Americans to make permanent something that never was, by invading his OWN nation.

You see, by Lincoln’s logic, the southern states NEVER left the union and its citizens were still American citizens when he direct his armies into the 11 states that eventually voted to secede. This legal gymnastic was needed to allow Lincoln to utilize George Washington’s actions during the Whiskey Rebellion that was described as an “insurrection” so he could unilaterally, WITHOUT Congress, move forward with violence and a plan of war. Legally, secession was not forbidden by the US Constitution and three states, New York, New Jersey and Virginia all had clauses in their ratification document to voluntary join the union.

Another S-word was also not forbidden by the US Constitution, slavery. While most lazy historians accept that slavery caused the southern states to secede, what they don’t know is that the US Constitution would have PROTECTED the slave owners and that Lincoln offered to protect them as well .. FOREVER! There was zero to be gained by any southern state to secede regarding slavery as the Fugitive Slave Act mandated run-away slaves had to be returned to their owners, something Lincoln was also 100% in favor of.

I have seen so many posts that claim the Democrats are the party of slavery and the KKK, however, one only has to look at Lincolns words and actions to know that the birth of the GOP centered on a platform that kept slavery intact!

Here is part of the 1860 Republican Platform:

Resolved: That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and especially the right of each State to order and control its own domestic institutions (chattel slavery) according to its own judgement exclusively, is essential to that balance of power on which the perfection and endurance of our political fabric depend ..”

Lincoln himself quoted the above statement word for word during his 1st inaugural address on 04MAR1861. He also reiterated his support of the Fugitive Slave Act.

Earlier in his address he said:

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.

Interestingly, near the end of his address, he says:

I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution–which amendment, however, I have not seen–has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid misconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose not to speak of particular amendments so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.

Total support of an amendment he has not seen? Come on Honest Abe!

Seriously, this is the 1st 13th Amendment (it was never fully ratified so it never because part of the law of the land) called the Corwin Amendment and it is a very interesting part of our history, as well as that of the GOP which were the primary sponsors since seven southern states has already left by FEB1861 when this was first put on the floor of Congress.

The hope was that this amendment would entice the seceded seven southern states to return to the union.

No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.

This passed the US House of Representatives 133 to 63 on 28FEB1861 and passed the US Senate 24 to 12 on 02MAR1861. Lincoln proceeded to send a letter to each governor explaining this amendment.

With Lincoln’s encouragement, the following states ratified:

  • Kentucky 04APR1861
  • Ohio 03MAY1861
  • Rhode Island 31MAY1861
  • Maryland 10JAN1862
  • Illinois 02JUN1863

Pretty amazing that the “Land of Lincoln” voted for cementing slavery into the US Constitution as late as 1863. What is this all about?

It is pretty apparent that one more piece of the puzzle needs to be looked at here. Why invade the south if slavery was not the issue? Why ramp up the war machine and NOT call Congress into session until 04JUL1861? The War Aims Resolution that Congress passed on 25JUL1861 has a clue.

this war is not waged upon our part in any spirit of oppression, nor for any purpose of conquest or subjugation, nor purpose of overthrowing or interfering with the rights or established institutions of those States, but to defend and maintain the supremacy of the Constitution and to preserve the Union ..

‘Save the Union‘ was Lincoln’s motto until that inspiration to the masses lost steam in 1863, and then he shrewdly wove in to end slavery as something to keep the masses engaged. (this is not unlike the Covid-19 –> Racism –> Face Coverings –> ??? we are seeing today)

So in summary, in 2020, the Trump administration would never concede to have GOP majority states secede from the US and allow the Democrats to have the empire. The GOP’s DNA is war and empire.

However, could the Trump administration stray from their DNA (I mean with politicians, “principles” are easily discarded)? Could the GOP part with large sections of California, New York and New England? Could the city-states of Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland and Cincinnati (along with other Democratic majority cities in various states) be allowed to go on their own and pay their own way?

Somehow I doubt that. The Marxism agenda is really about taking the whole enchilada and to redistribute whatever survives this process. This is why Marx himself was so encouraged by Lincoln that the two exchanged letters!

Isn’t it a bit ironic that the GOP figurehead and the Democratic party’s role model are one in the same? Totalitarianism of the right boot or the left boot feels the same to “we the people”. The US is crippled in being able to address this rift in culture and society. Splitting up is hard to do!

Something to think about when you might be looking forward to a Republican (stupid party) or Democratic (evil party) win in NOV2020.

Peace out

-SF1