Quite relevant when talking about the War between the States and the matter of slavery. I should add, I'm northern born and raised. Even so, I think for myself.

"Abraham Lincoln's Letter to Horace Greeley (August 22, 1862):

The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.

I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men every where could be free. Yours, A. Lincoln."

You can't deny his own words.

I really good explanation, and an honest one, is in the link from Monticello below.

Hello libertyBelle. My understanding is that it was illegal to free slaves in Jeffersons state. It's also my understanding he freed them when he died. It's been a long time since I've studied this and can't remember my source. Based on my previous comment, apparently I read it in a credible source or I would not have commented. I suspect if you search the library of Congress the documents can be found.

I guess it was more convenient to talk about freedom than to actually practice it !! He wanted the monetary benefits of a plantation that could only survive with slaves. He probably didnt want to look bad to this neighbors who were also slave holders. I wonder why he didnt just tell them he would pay them some and let them live on his land if they worked for it, or leave and brave the dangers out there of being caught with black skin and no owner

The history after 1865 was written by the victors of the war, and they needed a smokescreen to hide why they pursued a war that killed 600,000 Americans.
If you care to hear the other history, read DiLorenzo's The Real Lincoln.

Agreed. But slavery was an economic factor in the agricultural South. Lincoln use the issue of slavery only when the Union armies were splintering as losses were mounting.

Yes, he did.
https://www.monticello.org/site/resea...

I dont think the civil war was about slavery. From what I can tell, it was about the north taxing the south and trying to eliminate any competitive advantage the south had. The north had slaves also, so they shouldnt have complained. Slavery is not particular efficient in the long run, so it was going OUT all on its own, maybe more slowly than todays leftists would have wanted.

So he could have sold some of his land, used the money to pay off the debt(s), and then freed his slaves, couldn't he?

They had no right to secede as a means of hanging on to their slaves. Someone once said that the phrase "'states rights' is a contradiction in terms; there can be no such thing as the 'right' of some men to violate the rights of others."

DID Jefferson finally free his slaves on his death? I was under the impression that Washington did do that with his slaves, but Jefferson never did. I should be glad to find he did. But if he couldn't free them because he was in debt, couldn't he have sold some of his land, used the money to pay the debts, and then freed his slaves?

Yeah, I read this book for the first time just last year. I was blown away by it.

A pattern, yes. But not a consciously directed pattern. It does, so far, appear we may be repeating the pattern that gave rise to the Fascists in early 1900s Italy. But it isn't the one everyone seems to think it is.

Does any one see a pattern in these demonstrations? It seems to me that there is a nefarious hand with money paying the way for them.I believe it could be George Soros who is behind this march to the real 1984 State. I'm not saying the the those other small white ignorant groups are in the right. But, I will resist in my own way and make my voice heard. Money can buy temporary power or even upset the balance in our country for awhile. A backlash will happen before the !984 State' which could leave the USA physically divided. A Civil War would erupt along different lines. Then whose statues will be erected?

Marx popped into my head as a response to NealS below for answering responses in my email. Then I saw your question while catching up on a ton of email upon my return from watching a total eclipse in Tennessee.
Let's not forget Mao. His face was found and photographed on a Christmas tree ornament during Ogrinch's (for coal miners) first term.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/...

Who says allosaurs have healthy thoughts?
Now that I'm back from Tennessee to see that total eclipse, I feel all the more warped.
Me dino saw these little weird wriggly things slither sideways across the ground when the sun peeked back out.

Karl Marx jumps into my dino head.

I must correct myself as I have found a contradictory Virginia law of the time at the following link: "https://www.gettingjeffersonright.com..."

So Jefferson could have filed a "instrument of writing" to free his slaves after all.

Jefferson, like many others, could not release his slaves because it was against the law if you were in debt. Slaves were considered collateral property and thus could not be freed until all debt was settled.

“He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.” George Orwell, 1984.

Not yet. Not yet. There is still time.

Actually, I prefer the original writings, I don't read much of the contemporary 'opinion' stuff. I'm a major document/proposal writer for a living, just not a fan of the grammar mistakes that make it into the final print the hired ghost-writers leave.

The only decent exception would be the original Limbaugh book (See I Told You So) written during the Clinton years. The O'Reilly stuff was awful to read, I made it through about half a chapter before tossing it aside.

TR ejected the colonial powers from North and South America...

You should read Napolitano's "Theodore and Woodrow: How Two American Presidents Destroyed Constitutional Freedom" for some context. The Kindle edition is about $10.

"Theodore and Woodrow is Judge Andrew P. Napolitano’s shocking historical account of how a Republican and a Democratic president oversaw the greatest shift in power in American history, from a land built on the belief that authority should be left to the individuals and the states to a bloated, far-reaching federal bureaucracy, continuing to grow and consume power each day"

"With lessons rooted in history, Judge Napolitano shows the intellectually arrogant, anti-personal freedom, even racist progressive philosophy driving these men to poison the American system of government."

Laughing