Friday, November 23, 2007


(Reprinted from the Times Mason-Dixon Gazette - January 5, 1863)

By Laureen Lowd & Hank Itch

Impeach him! The President has lost his mind. Undertaking a war between the states was already a bad idea, but signing this Emancipation Proclamation is clearly evidence that Mr. Lincoln has gone off the deep end.

Two years ago the president asserted that the union could not survive half-free and half-slave. On what basis did he draw such an absurd conclusion? The existing free states abolished slavery of their own volition and on their own timetable. Did not the existing slave states deserve the same opportunity? And now with over 250,000 already dead and no end to this war in sight, he further antagonizes the southern resisance with his executive edict to free the slaves. How many more deaths is it going to take before Mr. Lincoln realizes that the southern states are never going to give up slavery? Apparently Mr. Lincoln will not be happy until he sees another quarter of a million Americans killed and Atlanta burned to the ground.

Will the American public continue to put up with brother killing brother in an endless battle for so dubious a purpose? Is Mr. Lincoln really interested in ending slavery or is he sending these poor souls to their death for the benefit of his friends in the textile industry? The end of slavery will mean the end of cheap cotton products. Will Mr. and Mrs. John Doe America be happy if the end result of hundreds of thousands of dead Americans was a higher cost for clothing?

Two years ago the country was at peace, cotton was inexpensive and the southern slaves were well fed, received free health care and free housing. Are we to believe the great lie that the nation cannot survive half-free and half-slave when it survived just fine prior to Mr. Lincoln's presidency? And should Mr. Lincoln's self-serving vanity war be successful, what will become of the slaves who cannot get hired by the farmers and plantation owners? How will they eat? Where will they live? How will they provide for their unsold children who are presently being fed and cared for? Will the newly freed slaves over 21 years of age be allowed to vote when white women are still denied that right? If Mr. Lincoln was seeking a cause for which to base his presidency, giving women the vote would have been more cogent and less bloody than the endless slaughter of this senseless civil war between the states.

Mr. Lincoln's action eschews our constitutional separation of powers. He has chosen, by fiat, to bypass the legislative process of both the states and federal government. He has abused his position as commander-in-chief of the armed services to thumb his nose at the US Supreme Court in the case of Dred Scott v. Sanford. This is tyranny, not governance! And the alleged nobility of his lone decision cannot bring peace to the loved ones of the hundreds of thousands killed and the tens of thousands yet to be killed on the field of battle in defiance of any of our sacred constitutional processes.

When told that his General Grant was a drunk, Mr. Lincoln was rumored to have remarked that he would like to know what Grant drank so that he could send all of his generals a case of it. The thousands of daily deaths are dishonored by such presidential flippancy. It should not bolster confidence in the American public when the report of the latest death toll is seen as an opportunity for the president to sharpen his wit.

The dishonesty of this war and the president's misleading reasons for it become all too clear when Mr. Lincoln's public acknowledgments are well versed political lambastes of southern slavery while his private moments are spent strolling through the White House whistling "Dixie!"

No comments: