A Take on Lincoln's Presidency (from a bookseller forum)

[Hardrada]

Not my take but an interesting one!

>> If you want to be in politics, you have ulterior motives and hidden
> agendas
>> that have no place in democracy. Abe Lincoln was a true good politician -
>> the "reluctant" president.
> </snip>
>
> First, it's Abraham not "Abe." He disliked the nickname and never called
> or
> signed himself "Abe." Second, he was not the "reluctant" president. He was
> every inch a politician who vigorously pursued the nomination and fought
> hard to win the election. He wanted the job all right, and it's a damn
> good
> thing he did.
>
> But you all would have hated Lincoln in his day as much as you hate the
> current Republican. Actually you would have hated Lincoln more.
>
> Lincoln was a hayseed from out west, right? The papers made fun of the way
> he looked and talked. He was thought to be a pawn of big business, and
> many
> members of his administration had strong business ties. Lincoln chose to
> plunge America into her bloodiest war rather than to simply let the
> southern
> states peacefully withdraw. Why? Because under his questionable
> interpretation of it the Constitution, technically, did not allow
> secession.
>
> When the war started it was going to be very short--a matter of a few
> weeks,
> really. After all, the loyal states had all the organized military forces
> and arms while the Confederacy was basically starting from scratch. But it
> wasn't over quickly. In fact it went very badly for the North right from
> the
> start. Well, except for Lincoln's big business buddies. There were plenty
> of
> fat and crooked war contracts to provide them with unprecedented profits.
>
> It was generally thought that the smarter members of Lincoln's
> administration were actually in charge and the dull and oafish Mr. Lincoln
> was simply along for the ride. You wouldn't have wanted to say that too
> loud
> though. Fort Lafayette in New York Harbor came to be known as "the
> American
> Bastille" because of the political prisoners jailed there. Under Lincoln's
> "unique" interpretation of the Constitution it was apparently much easier
> to
> discern some obscure, extrapolated barrier to peaceful secession than to
> find that document's obvious protections of civil liberties. He illegally
> suspended habeas corpus, allowing anyone to be thrown into prison at the
> government's whim. Thousands were, mostly for "disloyalty"--i.e., speaking
> or writing against the war or the president. Here in Maryland the
> legislature was considering whether or not to secede and join the
> Confederacy. The vote sure didn't look like it was going to go Mr.
> Lincoln's
> way, so he rounded up the pro-secession legislators and threw them in
> prison
> while the vote was taken. Maryland stayed in the Union. Lincoln's
> "homeland
> security" measures make the Patriot Act look like child's play.
>
> And the slaughter continued. So did the war profits for Lincoln's big
> business buddies. And then the mission began to shift. The original
> rationalization for the war that it was necessary to preserve the Union.
> After the Emancipation Proclamation the war seemed to be more about
> slavery.
> And what about that Emancipation Proclamation? It purported to free the
> slaves, but this effect was restricted to precisely those areas of the
> country where Lincoln could not enforce it--i.e., the states which were in
> rebellion and did not acknowledge him as their president. At the same
> time,
> Lincoln's proclamation did nothing about slavery where it still existed in
> the northern states (and yes, there were still pockets of slavery in the
> northern states). If your state was loyal to Lincoln you could keep your
> slaves.
>
> Meanwhile, the mindless slaughter ground on and on. The whole thing
> finally
> came to an end thanks only to a couple of Lincoln's most controversial
> generals. Grant, with a reputation as a drunk, understood the horrible
> arithmetic of the war. He was not afraid to pay a great price in men in
> order to inflict a great cost in men on the other side because he knew he
> had the advantage in terms of still-living bodies. He never let up until
> Lee
> finally gave up. Meanwhile, Sherman cut loose from his supply lines and
> slashed and burned his way through Georgia and South Carolina in an
> unprecedented campaign against civilians. Thus ended Lincoln's war.
>
> So was Lincoln a great president? You bet. Perhaps our greatest. Would
> today's Left have thought so at the time? Not a chance in hell.
>

[Yupster]

1. No fan of Lincoln's here

I've always thought he was awful.