Lincoln’s Proclamation Establishing Thanksgiving Holiday
by PubliusThe year that is drawing towards its close, has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added, which are of so extraordinary a nature, that they cannot fail to penetrate and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever watchful providence of Almighty God.
In the midst of a civil war of unequalled magnitude and severity, which has sometimes seemed to foreign States to invite and to provoke their aggression, peace has been preserved with all nations, order has been maintained, the laws have been respected and obeyed, and harmony has prevailed everywhere except in the theatre of military conflict; while that theatre has been greatly contracted by the advancing armies and navies of the Union. Needful diversions of wealth and of strength from the fields of peaceful industry to the national defence, have not arrested the plough, the shuttle, or the ship; the axe had enlarged the borders of our settlements, and the mines, as well of iron and coal as of the precious metals, have yielded even more abundantly than heretofore. Population has steadily increased, notwithstanding the waste that has been made in the camp, the siege and the battle-field; and the country, rejoicing in the consciousness of augmented strength and vigor, is permitted to expect continuance of years, with large increase of freedom.
No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy.
It has seemed to me fit and proper that they should be solemnly, reverently and gratefully acknowledged as with one heart and voice by the whole American people.
I do therefore invite my fellow citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are at sea and those who are sojourning in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next, as a day of Thanksgiving and Praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the Heavens. And I recommend to them that while offering up the ascriptions justly due to Him for such singular deliverances and blessings, they do also, with humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience, commend to his tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners or sufferers in the lamentable civil strife in which we are unavoidably engaged, and fervently implore the interposition of the Almighty Hand to heal the wounds of the nation and to restore it as soon as may be consistent with the Divine purposes to the full enjoyment of peace, harmony, tranquillity and Union.
In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.
Done at the city of Washington, this third day of October, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, and of the independence of the United States the eighty-eighth.
A. Lincoln
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
246 Comments
That man was an incredible orator, writer and humanist. I was humbled to tears just reading his words. His greatness is not likely to be bestowed upon us again in my lifetime, but that does not diminish my hopes that one day another Lincoln will gush forth from our wellspring of humanity and bless us, teach us and deliver us from ourselves.
Happy Thanksgiving!
Of course such a heartfelt and stirring proposal, were it made by a modern president, would be laughed out of Congress in a heartbeat and would be attacked endlessly by Olbermann, Maddow and their colleagues on the left for its constant references to God, Father and the Almighty Hand. NPR, Bill Maher, and 4/5ths of The View would have a field day belittling a president who dared to describe our prosperity as "the gracious gifts of the Most High God."
Lincoln had the last laugh, however. He was clever enough not to make this a proclamation or an edict. Read carefully: it's an invitation and a recommendation and nothing more. He must have had his own 19th-century Lawrence O'Donnells to get around. And being an attorney, he found just the right words to get around them–and at the same time to write one of the most moving pieces of prose a president has ever penned.
"a day of Thanksgiving and Praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the Heavens. And I recommend to them that while offering up the ascriptions justly due to Him for such singular deliverances and blessings, they do also, with humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience, commend to his tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners or sufferers in the lamentable civil strife in which we are unavoidably engaged, and fervently implore the interposition of the Almighty Hand to heal the wounds of the nation and to restore it as soon as may be consistent with the Divine purposes to the full enjoyment of peace, harmony, tranquillity and Union." Give thanks to the lord for his pleasure and divine gifts, but as Lincoln warned, pray to the Lord to protect our government, nation, and people against those who wish to turn our peaceful and beneficent land into a place for devil worshippers (AkA Jihadist) and a land where a few wish to Lord over the many (progressive/socialist). Amen, and thank you Lord for your many gifts and wisdom. ;0)
A war of Northern Aggression by NY Bankers and Mfg…slavery was doomed and would have died out within 10-15 years anyway…slavery was wrong and the war was wrong. Lincoln slaughtered Capitalist Progress, Revolutionary War heros and States Rights advocates by the hundreds of thousands. He is the Father of the corrupt black caucus, OBalamma, Mad-Waters, Rangel, Jesse Jackson and RevoBot Sharpton and the communist MLK. So many trillions spent and for what?
Theft and insane, unConstitutional Authoritarianism and this damned REEDISTRIBUTION INDUSTRY. Damned Democrats. What a mess now….and wasted opportunity. China thanks Democrats and now funds them. 2 missles launched?????
Thanksgiving Day comes from the Pilgrims' mettle and bravery…a day of thanks that included the Indians. Inclusion was key then, nothing like Lincoln's crushing and murderous treatment of our lower states and people. I suggest the death counts were much higher than reported because the bread winners for so many southern families were killed (their civilization scorched away) leaving the uncounted families to starve in the next winter. There's always another side to any story. This was a story of government gone mad. Apparently a brave war hero agreed. Too many died from poor decision making. We suffer the same insanity witin our government now.
With so many Americans without/losing jobs at the hands of Democrat Communism, and w/ hand rape at the airports for citizens but uncollared and quite illegal entry of foreign armies flowing in through unguarded borders on their way to welfare and revolution: How does it feel to be conquered by the FED….again???
Sorry, Washington established the holiday in1789. The following (in 3 posts) is his proclamation (the first ever), that was lost for about 130 years, and then found…but still he was the first. I am glad that Lincoln re-established the holiday and Happy Thanksgiving to all!
"Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me to "recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:
Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the 26th day of November next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have since enjoyed; for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enable to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and, in general, for all the great and various favors which He has been pleased to confer upon us.
And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions; to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all the people by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have shown kindness to us), and to bless them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and us; and, generally to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as He alone knows to be best.
Given under my hand, at the city of New York, the 3d day of October, A.D. 1789.—(signed) George Washington "
Say, I see there was no mention of the Native Americans or their contribution to the Plymouth Colony. So I guess Rusty the Chickenhawk must be correct. The only problem I have is most of the Pilgrims were not farmers or fisherman, so who did teach them how to fish and farm in a strange land? Oh, and one more thing. Lincoln did not mention that the Southerners were simply resorting to their "Second Amendment remedies".
May even you be blessed today beyond your wildest expectations.
I will specifically remember you in my prayers, that God may soften your heart, and make you see the error of your ways.
Credit to the artist, Larry Winborg. I do wish Publius would recognize those with artistic talent that inspires us.
We should study Lincoln's words. They are a perfect example of the Biblical admonition, "In everything give thanks…"
Whether Washington or Lincoln was first to exhort our nation to a day of thanksgiving, their respective remarks epitomize what it means for a man to have an authentic relationship with his God, and a genuine gratitude for His watchful care over our nation. I give thanks to the Almighty for blessing us with their example.
Ahhh,……..he's OK there Cowboy,…..
he is just a tad upset because the Nebraska Huskers,……….
could only muster up 5 points in there loss last Saturday.
Happy Thanksgiving to all of you on BG….. even you secularist, Jew hating, bigoted trolls.
May we all have a chance to reconnect with family, God and friends today.
Maybe he should switch his allegiance over to their woman's volleyball program…. They are winners!
How do ya get drunk after a volleyball victory,….???????/
Happy Turkey Day!
If you have never read history, you should read all you can find about Lincoln, including his own writings. This country owes its existence to this man. To hear Obama compared to Lincoln is disgusting.
apparently the Pro-RedistributionBots dislike my comment. HmmmmFrack you communist AzzzzBoils…:)) Me? I am dining with the Pilgrims today…in heart and spirit….and not with those who divide and kill America. Have a sparklin' day. God Bless America and Long Live the US Constitution. Thumbs UP, Sarah.
Lincoln is way over rated. Sure he won the Civil War but he started it too.
Well said, father_moray. I was about to rip one of these off, but you beat me to it.
I can't really add anything to that — you nailed it.
He was indeed.
“America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.” Abraham Lincoln
Ah, Ralph. So tell me, who do you cheer for? Notre Dame?
Ah, the joys of revisionist nonsense.
If slavery was going to die out, then why did the Slave Lords of the South rebel?
Given that the "Constitution" they created prohibited ending slavery, how could it die out?
And of course let us completely ignore that slavery is anything but "Capitalist Progress" in defending those who wrapped it up in the absurd and un-American concept of States having "rights".
No, let's ignore all that and just focus on Lincoln's committment to maintaining the Union. Such a horrible, evil, unspeakable concept! Obviously the only solution was to let a clique of perverse individuals, dedicated to an "inevitably" dying economic system, based itself on the unlawful holding of people in bondage, destroy the nation to satisfy their own selfish ends.
Yes, too many did die from the poor decision making of those Southern State governments gone mad.
It is disgusting that in your blind hatred you give them such unrestrained support.
I yield any comments I might add today to father_moray.
Well said father!
"This comment has been deleted by the administrator."
I would like to know why? I would like to know whoever made that decision, to stand up and say why. Granted. I am sure the excuse will be that it was some auto-bot. Yet this comment being removed, simply defies logic.
For those who did not see my original comment, here it is in its entirety, verbatim:
" I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands, and the Republic is destroyed."
~ Abraham Lincoln ~
Lincoln was prophetic.
The deletion has to be a mistake. Maybe an admin is so used to seeing the trolls doing their "I'm first making a stupid troll comment" post that he just reflexively hit delete.
How in the h*ll does Obooby think he is one iota similar to Lincoln in thought or deed?!?!?!
BronxZionist,
I've read your posts, and I greatly enjoy them, but I have to disagree with you here.
The Confederate Constitution said that its congress could not outlaw slavery, but the individual states could do so. That is the very essence of the War — it's why states succeeded from the union.
To answer your question, slavery was dying around the world — except of course the Muslims, who still use slavery today. Jefferson Davis actually helped slaves educate themselves so that they can immediately go out contribute to the country. There were little or no black people in the North because Northerners were so racist that they couldn't even stand having black people in their society with them.
Don't take my word for it: Alexis de Tocqueville wrote extensively about this.
In fact, in the years before the war, most abolitionist movements existed in the South. These died off closer to the war because of the reactions to the Hatian Revolution and the depredations of Nat Turner and John Brown. SInce Northerners encouraged Brown and Turner to kill Southerners, the people of the South knew there were no allies up North.
continued …
I am somewhat of a coarse person. I cuss like a sailor, under the best of conditions. I am not too old to change. When I went to bed last night, I told myself I was going to not cuss today, for any reasons. I told myself i was going to have a wonderful day, and be thankful for all of my blessings.
They say always be careful what you tell God, for you might get tested.
I'm still not going to cuss at something as irrelevant as this, and I would ask that whatever administrator hit delete, that they be blessed. With leprosy.
Doesn't he claim to hail from Illinois?
Doesn't Illinois claim to be "The Land of Lincoln"?
Although, Lincoln was actually, and really born in Kentucky………
Let me ask you this question, BronxZionist:
If preserving the Union was such a moral undertaking, then why did Lincoln wage the war against citizens? WHy did he kill women and children?
Why did Lee and Davis make it a point to wage a defensive war instead of one of aggression. Lee himself wrote "I am opposed to the theory of doing wrong that good may come of it. I hold the belief that you must act right whatever the consequences."
Sherman himself recognized that his war was one of against civilians and of subjugation. He also believed he and Lincoln should've been tried for war crimes for waging a war against farms and livelihoods.
I've got news for you, sir. Succession is LEGAL — it's the reason there is a U.S. Do you think the states would've ratified the Constitution if they couldn't succeed??? Especially after just fighting a war of INDEPENDENCE?
We are not born into a perpetual union, loyal to the federal enclave of of Washington DC, sir.
"Given under my hand at the City of New York the third day of October in the year of our Lord 1789."
Notice he wrote 'our Lord'? Liberals try so hard to remove Jesus from our nation's founding.
Here's a photo of the document.
http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/GW/gw4.jpg
Not to rub it in there Bo,….but
being from Chicago and with so many things to do,….
sports scores are not too high on my,…….
things to do list.
As for Notre Dame,…..
one of the finest interpretations of Gothic architecture.
"I've read your posts, and I greatly enjoy them, but I have to disagree with you here."
With me, or with the documentary record?
"The Confederate Constitution said that its congress could not outlaw slavery, but the individual states could do so. That is the very essence of the War — it's why states succeeded from the union."
Well actually: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_csa.a...
Article IV
Sec. 2. (I) The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired.
Sec. 3. (3) The Confederate States may acquire new territory; and Congress shall have power to legislate and provide governments for the inhabitants of all territory belonging to the Confederate States, lying without the limits of the several Sates; and may permit them, at such times, and in such manner as it may by law provide, to form States to be admitted into the Confederacy. In all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected be Congress and by the Territorial government; and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories shall have the right to take to such Territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the States or Territories of the Confederate States.
So you are not correct. The Confederate Constitution explicitly prohibited the States from ending slavery, and required it in any new territories or states added.
"If preserving the Union was such a moral undertaking, then why did Lincoln wage the war against citizens? WHy did he kill women and children?"
Why did the Confederates do the same? If States "rights" were such a moral undertaking, why did they kill women and children? Surely you will make no pretense that only women and children of the rebelling states were killed.
"Why did Lee and Davis make it a point to wage a defensive war instead of one of aggression."
Which of course is why no batte was fought at Gettysburg in Pennsylvania, and why Washington D.C. was never subjected to bombardment by the Southern rebels?
Or do you assert that bombing a capital and invading are defensive acts?
"Sherman himself recognized that his war was one of against civilians and of subjugation. He also believed he and Lincoln should've been tried for war crimes for waging a war against farms and livelihoods."
The same Sherman who wrote: http://www.academicamerican.com/expansioncw/civil...
"You cannot qualify war in harsher terms than I will. War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it; and those who brought war into our country deserve all the curses and maledictions a people can pour out."
But do tell, please provide your citation to Sherman endorsing war crimes trials. I would like to see it.
"I've got news for you, sir. Succession is LEGAL — it's the reason there is a U.S. Do you think the states would've ratified the Constitution if they couldn't succeed??? Especially after just fighting a war of INDEPENDENCE?"
I've got news for you, sir: http://www.law.ou.edu/ushistory/artconf.shtml
"Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union between the states of . . ."
Article XIII
Every State shall abide by the determination of the United States in Congress assembled, on all questions which by this confederation are submitted to them. And the Articles of this Confederation shall be inviolably observed by every State, and the Union shall be perpetual; nor shall any alteration at any time hereafter be made in any of them; unless such alteration be agreed to in a Congress of the United States, and be afterwards confirmed by the legislatures of every State.
They did in fact ratify articles of perpetual union, barring secession, during the self same war of independence they were fighting.
You must therefore be asserting that in an attempt "to form a more perfect union", they casually intended that it not be perpetual.
So let me see . . .
You are factually WRONG on two critical documents.
You are factually WRONG about the conduct of the war on the part of the rebels.
You are just short of it being direct fact, and thus "merely" subjectively WRONG about another element of the conduct of the war on the part of the rebels, and your characterization of the chief General of the Union Army responsible for the harshest actions.
Given such massive error in your response, you have done more to prove the depth of the revisionism I charged originally than I did.
And it leaves me to ask you:
Given that you are you simply so absolutely WRONG about such basic facts of history, how do you believe that any conclusions you assert from them have any validity?
Dr Jerome Corsi Exposes Cancer Risks From TSA Full Body Scanners
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sp_Fm7leTg
Don't see anything I think would have triggered it. I've had the same thing happen to me and never got an explanation.
Something continuously left out by Civil War revisionists: About twenty years before the South attempted to support slavery as a states rights issue, they attempted to support slavery from a federalist standpoint.
That is behavior which speaks of pursuing an agenda, not defending a principle.
Like I said, a war of northern aggession fought for greed only. Blacks still slaves for the most part. Not all, for some made the jump past Big Brother, bronxAzzzzBot. Unions would have ended slavery.
Lincoln was a mass murderer and profit (as opposed to phrophet) and despite your bullshit, he got what he deserved. Bang! The south bleeds yet today for his demonic intent despite political correction. Now, the communist MLK has a DAY but no president.
The reality of Lincoln looks more like the ObamaNation, in fact. And you sound more like Obama, Rahm or Sherman…so is this where you would expect us to bow and say Thank You? FU:))) Michelle more like Mrs. Lincoln, too…soooooo special she spent the nation to debt. Hmmmmm
I choose freedom…from statists and AzzzBots…and BS….BronxBot.:)))
Like you said, based on false facts and general lies?
And indeed, you are quite free from anything resembling basic history and the truth.
Blacks are still slaves for the most part? You buy and sell them yourself do you?
If anyone sounds like Obama it is you, selling revisionist lies based of economic warfare and racist division. I have no desire to be enslaved by someone as perverted as you "Father" Coughlin.
What's the ANGER about, BronxSnot? You sound pissed off on this wonderful day Freedom celebrated it's short life with our Pilgrim Ancestors. Your dour attitude growls and Scowls at anyone and everyone in your way. Entitlements are chains. Democrats chain their masses by welfare and the death of free markets. Obama sends his generals out to scorch the American soil of jobs and small and large business out of existance.
You do not know me yet call me perverted trading negatively upon the "father" symbol of my identity. The only ones who have done that are Democrats, al qaedaZ and AzzzzBoils…
yes, don't mind me, AzzzBot, for I just fish….I fish for AzzzBots, Communists, DemoRatts, Shariah diarrheas and other unAmerican Shit4Brains …my bait is free speech. The above forementioned hate it and strike again and again at my fishing hooks. Listen to their dark nature and accusing tones. Sooooooo ANGRY. Alas, here you are again.
This is a good fishing hole for I like the action. I like OUTING the AzzzHole Ole'Z who answer my call. I like you. Take you off my hook, rebait and throw you back….come back, AzzzBot…I like to fish…:)
Section 9: Limits in Congress, Bill of Rights
4. No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.
By Congress … get it?
You still don't answer any of the questions about the South's tactics. You just create equivalences, and arguing with a relativist is like trying to nail pudding to a wall.
Like most bigoted trolls, you are deliberately projecting your own anger Father Coughlin.
You are upset that your Progressive lies are being exposed, so naturally you want to project your rage onto others.
No, what I feel is disgust at your perverted ideology.
There is of course also amusement in the sheer absurdity of you blathering about believing in this country, even while you try and celebrate people who wanted to destroy, both by shredding the Union, as well as violating the most fundamental principles of liberty and justice that the country was founded on.
And of course there is sadness that others are so eager to encourage your perversion, all because they are taken in by your parroting of buzzwords that you neither understand nor would believe in if you could understand them.
But you go ahead and wallow in your sickness while you can. Who knows, maybe next year we will all be lucky that you leave the country with Angelina Jolie, and do not celebrate Thanksgiving like all decent Americans do.
You again hook yourself. You spew forth again and call me names. Oh just sooo arrogant and angry….yes, this is a good fishing hole. Take you off my hook, rebait and throw you back….come back, AzzzBot…I like to fish…:) But can you fight a little harder…you roll like a fat, unexercised pond fish. Once an AzzzzBot, always an AzzzzzBot:)
Hilarious! Are you quoting the Articles of Confederation?
You do know that the Articles were replaced by the Constitution … right?
Since you refused to read it the first time:
Article IV
Sec. 2. (I) The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired.
By States . . . get it?
Both the Confederate Congress AND the States were prohibed from impairing the right of property in negro slaves.
States "rights", but not to end slavery.
As for questions about the South's tactics, the only moral relativism is yours. You want to condemn the Union for fighting the same war in the same way as the Southern Slave Lords.
Blah, blah, blah.
Yes, I know you have no rebuttal because you recognize the moral vacuousness of your argument in support of slavery.
You do know that the Articles were signed before the Constitution, right?
It is obvious that it is not mere ignorance of history, but willful and malicious deceit on your part.
That is rather sad.
You lied, and you were caught, plain and simple.
All you have left now is your endorsement of slavery.
I fully grant you the moral worth of that position.
You angrily put words in my mouth since yours must be quite sore by now…I would suggest Neosporin for all those holes and tears from kissing my fish hooks….dude, u r embarassing yourself…and the continuation of anger is really extraordinary….soooo u r thinking about Angelina, too???….LOL sounds like you spent you day with naked wishful thoughts like an airborne Black Congressman also did….Oh, do pull your pants UP and wipe your chin OFF for your PAT DOWN was over hours ago….you missed your flight, BronxMoron.
Did you really compare anything that happened in Washington DC to what happened in Atlanta???? Really … ?
Off the top of my head, probably 40,000 people died in Atlanta.
In DC — I can only IMAGINE you're talking about the Battle of Fort Stevens, which saw well under 500 casualties.
Other than that, DC was pretty safe during the war. Perhaps you need to check your sources.
so angry…apparently you have declared war on everyone who proves you the fool of this ThanksFilled Day….pathetic…are you on welfare, too?
I cannot put words in your mouth Father Coughlin, your foot is crammed in too far.
Your anti-Americanism is apparent in your vehement advocacy for the destruction of the Union in support of slavery.
I am always at war with revisionists and liars.
The Articles were replaced, dude … replaced.
You obviously lost the argument — you're saying I endorse slavery. I'm pretty sure I never said that.
You're hero Lincoln didn't care one bit about freeing slaves. You support a racist terrorist, so I have to think you're a statist big-government tyrant lover.
I suggest Anger Management, SnotBomb. Really should do something about your delusional AzzzMustard Rash and those terribly infected Lips you keep slamming on my U R A TROLL Fish hooks….but I do enjoy your temper tantrums and the way you disclose the shallowness of your peceptions of reality. Yes, you do smell quite like Obama….did I mention that your Pat Down is over….pull up your drawers and go to bed. Tomorrow will be a better day.
Unhook your face, throw you back and put my pole away for another day. Wear my collar proudly…flawless victory….for you have said nothing the entire string that has made one ounce of sense. God Bless America. Long Live the US Constitution and May God Bless her Patriots. Thumbs UP, Sarah, and Good night. DumbBot from the Bronx.:))))))
You are the one who declared the Slave Lords innocent of offensive action, not me.
That was a lie, as you well know, as Fort Stevens is part of Washington D.C., and was bombarded.
If you believe your cause so pure, why are you so determined to lie to defend it?
Off the top of your head, probably 40,000 rebels died in Atlanta, yes. How many civilians though?
Or are you going to play games like Hamass propaganda and deliberately confuse the two to advance your endorsement of slavery?
We could just start comparing civilians deaths on both sides, but since the Union won they will of course have lower casualties. Is that to be your standard for determining the moral high ground, which side kills fewer civilians? Do you also apply that standard to World War II perchance, or is your moral relativism limited to merely endorsing slavery?
I'm sure you do Father Coughlin.
I'm sure you enjoy your pathetic trolling and endorsement of slavery as well.
It does not remain that you LIED.
You asserted the United States would never create a perpetual union and the DID.
Your attempt to overlook the existence of the Articles of Confederation makes you nothing but a liar.
I never claimed Lincoln cared about freeing slaves. The only claim I would make is that he cared to preserve the Union. That defending the Union makes someone a terrorist to you only demonstrates your absolute lack of any moral decency.
You however have LIED repeatedly about the intent of the Southern Slave Lords to maintain slavery at any cost.
You are defending the vile practice of race based chattel slavery.
There is nothing left to think about, you have made your moral position clear.
Nope — it was just my way of showing how ridiculous your equivalent between what happened in a part of DC as to what happened in Atlanta.
And again … the Union TARGETED civilians — made it policy to kill and subjugate civilians. That's a big difference from collateral damage.
You continue to say that I defend slavery, when I never said that. It shows your argument is dying a slow death.
Then you throw Hamas into the argument? That's pathetic — you argue like a liberal. You also ignored my words about John Brown and Nat Turner, and how the North supported their activities.
Before that, Southerners were actually teaching slaves to read and write so they can integrate themselves into society. Lee himself educated slaves. It was ending, and the census data from the time confirms that.
You have no sense of historical context. Slavery is an awful wart on this country's history, but it would've ended peacefully before Lincoln unleashed his army on the people of the South.
After what happened in Haiti and John Brown running around killing civilians with the support of the North, the Southerners feared for their lives. Like Thomas Jefferson said: "Slavery was like holding a wolf by the ears."
Stopping slavery was not as easy as you make it from the top of your great moral high ground.
Personally, I see you as a moral relativist, who shapes information any way he can to support his own revisionist history.
I have an excellent sense of historical context. It is you who are wallowing in blatant historical revisionism.
Slavery could not have ended under the Confederate Constitutiuon, plain and simple. The Constitution explicitly prohibited both the federal government and the individual States from ending it.
To assert it would have just gone away in the face of that is to be willfully and maliciously deceitful.
The only moral relativism active here is on your part, excusing slavery and the attempted destruction of the United States in pursuit of some perverted vendetta against Lincoln for perceived failings on his part.
The Union did NOT make it a policy to kill civilians simply for being civilians.
That is yet another lie on your part.
The had to make it a policy to subjugate civilians, that is how you end a violent insurrection.
That is more moral parsing on your part.
In light of that you are defending slavery whether you want to admit it or not. You have lied repeatedly about facts, attempting to handwave away anything inconvenient to your adoration of the South with its slave economy. If you do not like that then simply stop doing it.
As for arguing like a liberal, you have that sewn up with your lies in support of the destruction of the Union with a "promise" that slavery would have gone away if only we trust you.
Just because you keep saying I'm wrong isn't going to make it true.
I gave you the example of the Confederate Constitution where it said Congress limits. But think whatever you want if it makes you feel better.
You KEEP saying I support slavery, but your insults and attacks are not going to get me off message.
Keep saying it — it's not true. But I know you support the murder of American citizens by the tyrant Lincoln.
Thank the Lord no one like you fought in the War of Independence. You would've said "No, no … we must preserve England's colonial rule."
And I gave you the part of the Confederate Constitution where it said the States are limited. Twice. Here it is a third time, since you are so devoted to your lie you are incapable of admitting to anything that refutes it:
Article IV
Sec. 2. (I) The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired.
Sec. 3. (3) The Confederate States may acquire new territory; and Congress shall have power to legislate and provide governments for the inhabitants of all territory belonging to the Confederate States, lying without the limits of the several Sates; and may permit them, at such times, and in such manner as it may by law provide, to form States to be admitted into the Confederacy. In all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate
States, shall be recognized and protected be Congress and by the Territorial government; and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories shall have the right to take to such Territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the States or Territories of the Confederate States.
With your refusal to acknowledge those passages you make it clear that you are not interested in anything but advancing your lies.
If you oppose slavery, why are you so determined to ignore those sections of the Confederate Constitution?
Simply because it lets you defame Lincoln for preserving the Union?
Why do you hate the Union so much?
And it seems your historical ignorance, or are these more lies, extends to the Revolutionary War as well.
No wonder you have to sockpuppet with Father Coughlin in your support of slavery.
I see Zionist in your name, but I would've hated to have you on the line in 1948.
And it's you who are ignorant about the War of Independence. We had no legal right to secede, and we did what needed to be done. The Southern states were legally correct to secede — that's what you're missing.
That's it?
That's all you've got when faced, yet again, with the fact that you LIED about the Confederate Constitution?
We did not need a "legal" right to declare independence from England, we had an unalienable right to do so. While I'm sure you are as ignorant of the Declaration of Independence as you are of other founding and related documents in American history, it remains that such a right is above and beyond government.
The Southern States did not have a legal right to secede, as they had agreed to a perpetual Union.
As for the moral right, if you compare the list of grievances given in the Declaration of Independence, as well as the YEARS of consideration and debate before the declaration was agreed to and issued, it is easy to see that the Southern States lacked moral standing to claim exercise of the unalienable right to end a government.
However, you do now make it clear that what you are supporting is the destruction of the Union. That is what you do not wish to admit. Why, I cannot say. if you really despise the United States so much be out with it and be done.
As for history, there were people during the Revolutionary War who supported England's rule. They were called "Tories". Many fought for England. Many civilians were, what I am sure you would classify as "tortured", by American troops. Many more fled the U.S. during and after the war, and compensation for their losses was required by the Treaty of Paris which ended the war.
Likewise during the debates over whether to declare independence there were many people, like you denounce Lincoln, who bemoaned the coming conflict, and the deaths of fellow Englishmen that were certain to occur.
You use the name "Candidus", but your rhetoric is nothing of Samuel Adams. It seems you forget he said this in respect to Shays' Rebellion:
"Rebellion against a king may be pardoned, or lightly punished, but the man who dares to rebel against the laws of a republic ought to suffer death."
Show me in our Constitution where it says secession is illegal — I've asked twice. Dude … don't use the Articles please.
For years, the free trading Southern states were subject to the protectionist policies of the North.
I love the U.S. with all of my heart, but Lincoln raped the Constitution, and started a course of events where it is now unrecognizable from what the Founders intended.
The U.S. I love is a pure federalist entity, made up of states that exist independent. If you really think Federalism exists now, you're crazier than I think you are.
Lincoln gave way to WIlson, FDR, Johnson, Carter, Clinton, and Obama and abortion — that's his legacy.
What I do hate is statism and the power of a centralized government, which you obviously support.
Where was Lincoln's moral superiority to attack American livelihoods?
And now you lose track of your own lies.
You have never asked where in the Constitution it says secession is illegal.
You said the Founders would never have approved a document creating a perpetual Union. That is a false statement, as demonstrated by the Articles of Confederation.
Rather than showing the least scrap of intellectual integrity you have since blathered on that the Constitution replaced the Articles of Confederation. What remains that in the Constitution is the provision for courts of law, and that those courts decided against secession: http://supreme.justia.com/us/74/700/case.html
Yet another inconvenient fact I am sure you wish to handwave into irrelevance.
What remains then is that you lie.
You lie when you say you love the United States, as you endorse the attempted destruction of the Union.
You lie when you say you love the United States as a federalist entity, as the states do not exist independently in such a structure.
You lie, and create fantastic structures that help you justify your lies in your own mind. It is those structures that the Founders would find unrecognizable, and far from what they intended.
I liked your Lincoln quote. That is why I also added one. Good question. maybe you should fire off an e-mail & ask for an explanation.
I visit this site almost daily, and the first response is never from a troll.
Oh, nonsense. Politicians make proclamations about liberty and God and who great we are and on and on almost every day.
Boy, was this ever a wacky screed. This was some crazy stuff. If there's something that's a fact in it, it's too distorted to recognize. You're the guy a wild back I remember as saying all that stuff about homosexuals.
Do your friends think like this, too?
Repeating yourself ad nauseum to what end?!. Since my first post spoke well against slavery then I just can't imagine what your tactic is beyong deep welled denial and auto-Bot sophistry. You are so angry and hate-filled you must be Nubian. A Black Panther perhaps? Obama odor over-whelming.
My U R A TROLL collar looks good on you. Nothing sporting left with your lazy responses. Take you off my hook, rebait and throw you back….come back, AzzzBot…I like to fish…:)
Your context is founded upon Hatred and Anger. You would be a slave master who kills their slave to prove authority. No, you are not the one.
Then you are at war with yourself.
Nice shot! Oooops, your member has been seperated and now sticks to your shoe. 
)
Everyone else is lying….psychotic relationship with yourself. How mundane. Pity your room mates….jeepers.
It's a shame having a reasonable discussion with you is prevented by a most irrational anger and accusatory personna. You are an isotope of statist repressionism.
It seems BronxNubian has left his stains on others, too. One Hour Cleaners suggested.
Yes, of course politicians make proclamations about liberty and God and how great we are and on and on almost every day..
And (as I observed) Olbermann, Maddow, their colleagues on the left, NPR, Maher and 4/5ths of The View rake them over the coals for it.
Can there be any question as to wether Lincoln, being the second most written about individual (to Christ) knew exactly what Thanksgiving represented? Lincolns writing is as majestic as any Presidents for any time, has ever been.
Blah, blah, blah.
Since your first lie you've never addressed anything I said Father Coughlin, though you have admitted you are a troll.
I neither lie nor revise history, Father Coughlin.
Those are your "progressive" tactics.
Racist liars like you are incapable of reason.
Except of course you are the one defending slavery and the destruction of the Union.
Not everyone Father Coughlin.
Just people like you who are so filled with loathing for the Union that you will defend slavery to see it brought down.
Just like a statist — quoting case law … how typical. A court can never tell a state not to secede from the union — it would never be upheld. I don't care what the court said.
You keep blathering about the Articles. You probably think John Hanson was our first president.
Liberal plants like you have long sought to replace the Constitution with case law. We're on to you, leftie.
I actually asked about the Constitutional legality of secession twice — look at the previous comments. You turned this debate into the legal and moral authority of secession, which I won on both fronts.
I merely started by adding some historical context to our history of slavery, but you immediately resorted to playing the racist card.
You say you love your country, but you're just a little fascist jingo. You continually praise Lincoln for murdering Americans, and trying to eliminate an entire lifestyle in the South.
News for you, statist … Washington, Jefferson, Mason, and others were Southerners.
You've proved your statist stance by thinking true federalism still exists. In case you haven't been keeping up on current events, Congress just illegally passed a healthcare bill that it's going to enforce on the states with 16,000 IRS agents.
Yo probably applaud that, too.
Just like a Marxist, disparaging the rule of law.
Yet again you prove that you care nothing for the United States, and everything for your perverted ideology that promises everything and produces nothing, and that is willing to excuse slavery as long as it results in the destruction of the United States.
You defend the destruction of the Union. Confederate delegates wanted to work it out with Lincoln.
You keep stammering on about the Union, when two years after the war Congress passed Reconstruction acts that didn't even recognize Southern states.
You bore me … I'm done. Arguing with leftist moral relativists is tiring. You probably say Islam is a "religion of peace."
So you see, my little fascist … Northerners never cared about the Union or ending slavery — just POWER.
You seem to support slavery and indentured servitude.
Hilarious! You actually think the Southerners went against a vastly superior army lead by a bloodthirsty Commander In Chief with his murderous Sherman to … hold on to a few SLAVES …. onto an institution that was rapidly dying. Whatever.
So … that's where we are.
Keep worshiping the alter of moral relativism.
You probably think Islam is a "religion of peace."
I'm bored with you — arguing with relativists becomes tiring.
Have a wonderful holiday weekend.
Why do you think you can lie about such basic facts of history?
South Carolina declared its rebellion on December 24, 1860.
The "government" of the Confederate States of America was created on February 4, 1861.
Abraham Lincoln was inaugurated on March 4, 1861.
How could they "work it out" when they had already rebelled and created their "government" before Lincoln was ever President?
Yet again, more Marxist revisionism and deceit as you continue to defend the destruction of the United States in support of slavery.
Go on, keep lying and defaming the people who fought to preserve the United States.
You blather about Islam. They want to destroy the United States and keep slaves too. And Marxists find them useful allies. Hmmm . . .
If you are finished telling your lies then I will indeed have a wonderful holiday weekend. Sadly I know you are not, and will continue to spread your anti-American revisionism.
Bronx Nubian. That is just so cute. Are all your friends as clever? Let me tell you something, King Kook, you're a tiny ;minority of civilized humanity at this point, both left and right. Bronx's opinion isn't representing something new or that's spreading. This is common knowledge and your revisionism isn't going to work.
I would bet you this, Father Coughlin (good one, Bronx): you don't even represent the people who run this site. You're even too far right for them, and that's saying a lot. You're so nutty in your opinions, I actually enjoy reading your stuff now. You the stereo type of Southern gas-station philosopher who thinks the John Birch Society isn't extreme enough.
If that's what you think, I can tell you never really watch those shows. You read about those shows. If they mention a particular politician who talks like that in such weepy terms, you can bet it's because there's something blatantly hypocritical about them. Like that preacher who got caught with crystal meth and a male hooker. See what I mean by that?
still trying to get one up, I see…hard to do with your member stuck to your shoe…all you have is hatred and faux accusations…yep, u r an Obama NoseBiscuit:))
You haven't spoken the truth in your entire tirade of hateSpeech and perverse accusations….I'd bet you are looking into your bathroom mirrors for inspirations…unHook your Nose, and throw you back…rebait and cast again….not much left to your face or your integrity…all full of holes…LOL
And all you have are the typical feeble Marxist attempts at insults.
But that's okay Father Coughlin, you keep refusing to address anything I said except with your inanity, and just keep proving everything I've said.
dude, Candidus has cut your heart out and eaten it…I can only offer you a tourniquet at this point…u r essentially bleeding to death in denial of your current loss…let's see how long you can lose….not much left to shave off tho…:))
I've written nothing but the truth Father Coughlin.
And naturally its pure light is burning you.
You must be logged in to post a comment.