13

Subject: Tall Skinny Lawyers

Posted by richrobinson 10 years, 5 months ago to The Gulch: General
178 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag



This may be old but it's the first time I saw it.

Subject: Tall Skinny Lawyers



You might be quite surprised ...Most of us know of the comparable relationship between Lincoln and Kennedy, but have you ever considered the comparisons between President Obama and President Lincoln?

Parallels of Abraham Lincoln and Barack Hussein Obama.

1. Lincoln placed his hand on the Bible for his inauguration. Obama used the very same bible Lincoln used for his inauguration.

2. Lincoln came from Illinois. Obama comes from Illinois.

3. Lincoln served in the Illinois Legislature. Obama served in the Illinois Legislature.

4. Lincoln had very little experience before becoming President. Obama had very little experience before becoming President.

5. Lincoln rode the train from Philadelphia to Washington for his inauguration. Obama rode the train from Philadelphia to Washington for his inauguration.

6. Lincoln was highly respected by some, but intensely disliked by others. Obama is highly respected by some, but intensely disliked by others.

7. Abraham Lincoln was a tall, skinny lawyer. Barack Obama is a tall, skinny lawyer.

8. Lincoln held to basic Conservative and Christian views. Obama is a tall, skinny lawyer.

9. Lincoln volunteered in the Illinois militia, once as a captain, twice as a private. Obama is a tall, skinny lawyer.

10. Lincoln firmly believed in able persons carrying their own weight. Obama is a tall, skinny lawyer.

11. Lincoln was undeniably, and without any doubt, born in the United States. Obama is a tall, skinny lawyer.

12. Lincoln was honest - so honest that he was called 'Honest Abe'. Obama is a tall, skinny lawyer.

13. Lincoln preserved the United States as a strong nation, respected by the world. Obama is a tall, skinny lawyer.

14. Lincoln showed his obvious respect for the flag, and the military. Obama is a tall, skinny lawyer.

15. Lincoln followed the U.S Constitution faithfully. Obama is a tall, skinny lawyer.


Amazing isn't it!!

All Comments

Previous comments...   You are currently on page 4.
  • Posted by freedomforall 10 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Until you have read DiLorenzo's work, we can't continue to discuss it because you can't analyze information you haven't seen. Its like a jury only hearing from the prosecution in a trial.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 10 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The issue isn't slavery. It never was slavery. Until you have also read the additional information available regarding the reason for the war we have no basis for further discussion.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I don't disagree that slavery would have, eventually, gone away on its own in the US. But slavery still exists today around the world. It is evil and should be eliminated as quickly as possible. I cannot see a moral principle like elimination of slavery being "balanced" with an economic argument. There is no comparison. The evil of slavery should be a moral imperative. A moral people should do whatever is possible to eliminate slavery at every possible opportunity.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I think that you way overstate the impact of Lincoln. Most of the damage came later as a consequence of progressivism, and Lincoln was no progressive.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 10 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Every other place that had slavery gave it up peacefully because it became economically unsound. The merit of my argument is the economics of slavery.
    See comments above and read DiLorenzo's books. They are very rational and thorough. There is no point in discussion if we don't have a common body of knowledge to analyze.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 10 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Until you go look at the data that DiLorenzo assembled it is pointless to continue because you have done exactly what the historians want you to do: change the discussion ignoring Lincoln's political excuse for making war on his own people.
    It wasn't about slavery, it was about looting from one group of people in order to gain power for another group who could not compete with manufacturers in Europe, and increase of power for Lincoln and central government. Ultimately slavery was increased in that the sovereign people of the states were enslaved by government and the republic was destroyed. That is Lincoln, the politician's, legacy.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Not at all. If a tornado wrecks homes in a town and I'm a builder and suddenly get more business because of it, does that mean the builder is suddenly evil? Whether the Civil War was directly caused as a war to end slavery or not, that was the result, and that result was good.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Unfortunately, progressivism flows directly from the Enlightenment and a sense that the intellectuals can solve problems merely by thinking them through. That I think had more of an influence than any precedent on "violating" the Constitution. The 17th isn't a "violation" in the strictest sense, as it used the methods identified in the Constitution to make the change. It was wrong headed and stupid, but not a violation.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Technocracy 10 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Funny, I don't recall the Fed ever asking permission to change the terms. Which they do on a near daily basis.

    Or are you arguing that the Fed is allowed to do whatever they want and we have no option other than compliance.

    If so, you have agreed with me as to the outcome of the civil war (oxymoronic but I did not pick the name).

    But again I disagree that a contract exists, and even if it did the Government violates it daily, so to me if it existed it would be null and void
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    When you say that "I find the motivations much less important than the results", you open yourself up to the Dark Side of the ends justifying the means.

    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The South was not going to peacefully give up slavery. There was no other economy other than that supported by slavery. Nor was the culture ready to give it up, hell, we were still fighting to eliminate the vestiges of it a hundred years later. So your argument is without merit.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    But certainly not better for the roughly 4 million blacks in the south at the time, nor likely their children or grandchildren. Not until the industrial revolution in the early 20th century would their burden POSSIBLY been lifted.

    You are right that those other things likely would have been the case. Does that good override the evil of those left in slavery?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I have invested in two different versions of Dragon Naturally Speaking over the years, and have been terribly disappointed both times. Dragon wouldn't install onto a computer that was more than six months old; it expected only an upgraded RAM and the latest operating system. Moreover, when I did get Dragon to install, it recognized fewer words that I use in technical papers (heavily chemistry-laden) than Microsoft's built-in speech recognition. Both MS and Dragon's speech recognition is still inferior to Apple's speech recognition from the 1990's. That is the one thing worth keeping a Mac from that era for.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    No, of course not. However, as events unfold, if good can come about from bad, that can overcome some of the bad that was caused.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The federal government would disagree with you. They think they have assumed all sovereign power.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Unquestionably, the 17th Amendment flowed from progressivism, but it would not have been likely if Lincoln had not previously established a precedent of getting away with violating the Constitution.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by plusaf 10 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Yep.. the only times I agree with what he says is when he says "Um" or "Uh..."
    :)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 10 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    If the war had not been fought, 620,000 soldiers would have lived a lot longer, and millions of people would have lived better lives. The southern states would not have been destroyed economically and might have been a significant competitor to Lincoln's political supporters. The expansion westward might have occurred much faster, without that pesky war causing all those poor investments in armaments.
    Americans might have had a very different attitude toward central government and individual liberty might have survived much longer than it has.
    Results would have been quite different, and possibly much better.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 10 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    You are right about one thing. Slavery would have gone away without the war.
    If you check the facts you will find that Lincoln refused even to meet with members of congress from the south who wanted to discuss a peaceful resolution just days before the fighting began. By his actions (not historical propaganda) it appears that Lincoln wanted to punish the south for defying his 2nd tariff of abomination. Historians have perverted the history for 150 years and they continue to offer their perverted propaganda today.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Why? When in a contract, all parties must agree on changes to the terms. Otherwise, the original terms stand.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo