published Friday, February 12th, 2010

Lincoln: triumph, tragedy

On this date, Feb. 12, in 1809, not far north of the Tennessee line in southern Kentucky, a boy named Abraham was born in a log cabin to Thomas and Nancy Hanks Lincoln.

It was backwoods farm country. The youngster had only about a year and a half of formal schooling, but he educated himself primarily by reading borrowed books.

When he was only 9, his mother died. His father remarried. The family moved to Illinois.

As a young man, Abraham served in the Illinois militia, and was elected captain in the Black Hawk War against hostile Indians, but never saw combat.

He was elected to the Illinois Legislature in 1834 as a Whig. He became a lawyer, by "reading law." He ran for the U.S. House of Representatives in 1846 and served for two years. Then in 1854, he ran for the U.S. Senate. The choice of senators then was by the legislators, and falling short, he urged his supporters to vote for another.

Mr. Lincoln ran as a Republican in a second Senate race in 1858, against Stephen A. Douglas. The Republicans won more popular votes, but Democrats won more legislative seats, and thus the legislators re-elected Sen. Douglas.

A notable speech by Mr. Lincoln, in which he deplored the division of the country over slavery, has been long remembered: "A house divided against itself cannot stand," he said, quoting from Mark 3:25 in the Bible.

In 1860, Mr. Lincoln was nominated as the Republican candidate for president -- and defeated Sen. Douglas, John C. Breckinridge and John Bell.

But Southern states seceded from the Union and the War Between the States became inevitable.

In years of bitter fighting, Union forces won victories at Gettysburg in Pennsylvania, Vicksburg in Mississippi, Chickamauga in Georgia and Chattanooga in Tennessee. But the war was to drag on.

President Lincoln called for national healing: "With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan -- to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace, among ourselves, and with all mankind."

But on April 14, 1865, as President and Mrs. Lincoln attended a play, John Wilkes Booth leaped into the Lincolns' theater box and fired a single shot that was to cause the president to be pronounced dead on April 15, 1865.

Conjecture has continued about what might have occurred if President Lincoln had lived, if the bitterness of the Reconstruction had been avoided, and if his intended magnanimous reconciliation from a terribly divisive war had taken place among our states and our people.

Remembering his birthday today, President Lincoln is justly honored as one of our greatest presidents.

Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
Livn4life said...

I thought the Conferates won the Battle of Chickamauga proper. Might want to look that up. In any event, Abe Lincoln was a great man who had to lead in most perilous times. My hat is off to him and I believe the reconciliation would have been much better had he not been killed senselessly.

February 12, 2010 at 9:03 a.m.

Lincoln's words: " God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan -- to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace, among ourselves, and with all mankind."

To all those who insist on 'revising' history, look above at Lincoln's own words. Yes, he was a Christian and read the Bible prolifically (the first book he learned to read); yes, he knew evil had to sometimes be dealt with by war, always with the ultimate goal being peace. Yes, he even thought outside his own 'borders', for the good of all.

Lincoln and our Founders would roll over and weep in their graves over what this country has become. So much blood and tears wasted, to just give it all away. And to our enemies at that.

No politician, Bureaucrat or Grand Poohbah in the White House today is fit to kiss the worn leather of Lincoln's shoes. Never mind wear them. Such a huge pity for our country.

February 12, 2010 at 10:21 a.m.
rolando said...

Even in his greatness, Lincoln had his clay feet. He violated the Constitution numerous times during the War; he ordered his generals to commit war crimes against civilians. All in the name of Union.

Congress couldn't wait to penalize the South for their desire for constitutional state's rights...the same 10th Amendment rights we need today. We are feeling the repercussions of its spiteful, destructive actions even today.

February 12, 2010 at 10:39 a.m.
rolando said...

Happy Birthday, Mr. President. Thank God you were here when we needed you.

February 12, 2010 at 10:40 a.m.

Yes, unfortunately he was human and did err in some things. Still, I don't believe he would be a rabid Leftist-Progressive today if he were alive. Being from the South and raised in the North, Lincoln was probably torn about alot of decisions he made during his Presidency. He had to weigh the moral decision against the 'legal' one on more than one occasion, all the time weighing what was best for the country as a whole. I wouldn't want to be in that position, it must have been heart wrenching.

February 12, 2010 at 12:03 p.m.
rolando said...

'Tis a thankless, killing job to boot. Presidents age almost overnight. Lincoln was indeed a Republican, heart and soul.

Keeping in mind the result of Booth's action against Lincoln, I often wonder if the killer wasn't a closet Northern Radical/Progressive sympathizer. His action certainly resulted in terrible repression in the South...something to warm the heart cockles [so to speak] of any Progressive, then and now. [Look how they treat blacks today...they must abhor the very memory of Lincoln.]

February 12, 2010 at 2:06 p.m.
hotdiggity said...

Lincoln would be today what he was when he lived. To preserve and protect the whole he would not allow the tyranny of the few. He would not allow the status quo of the South to dictate the direction of progress of the nation as a whole.

He did not accept the petty self-interests of the rich landowners, who bought the Southern politicians to continue the vile institution of slavery. He instinctively understood the corrupting influence of special interests, (slave owners).

And yes, he did understand that compromise was the very essence of democracy, and that a group unwilling to compromise, content in their own self-righteousness, was a bane to progress.

De he choose the status quo? Did he stand up for the average man and the country as a whole, as opposed to the ones with the most money/influence? Absolutely.

Call him a Progressive, Conservative, or liberal. He awakened the conscience of the country and accorded the common man the rights entitled to him.

A truly great man who would have been appalled that it took 100 years of conservative hatred to have a signed document of civil rights for the people he freed.

February 12, 2010 at 2:27 p.m.
hotdiggity said...

Rolando-February 12, 2010 at 2:06 p.m.

So you are saying that Lincoln, as a member of the Republican party, was a conservative? LOL, too funny. The Republican party was a progressive party dedicated to the status quo elimination of slavery. Do you consider the institution of slavery a liberal/progressive philosophy?

Do a little research on the origins of your party.

And your infantile conspiracy theory does not even merit a reply.

February 12, 2010 at 2:48 p.m.
Max said...

And Lincoln was a big federal government supporter. He wanted to see the Federal government spend more on canals and railroads to further develop the Midwest and West.

February 12, 2010 at 4:30 p.m.
rolando said...

If you think Lincoln was anti-slavery you have definitely been drinking someone's poisoned kool-aid, hotdig. LOL

Check something besides your usual suspects -- Wikipedia, dailykos, huff, etc. LOL

You are hilarious, indeed. The industry-heavy North kept the food and textile heavy South under its firm grip of economic slavery. Wash, DC would countenance no Southern export of its products nor would it allow it to sell to the highest bidder. The only market it was allowed was the North.

All of which violated the 10th Amendment...something Wash, DC did habitually, then as now.

You don't know much about economics either, I see. You would fit right in with the FreddieMac/FannieMae crowd.

February 12, 2010 at 4:50 p.m.
Max said...

Except for the tons of cotton exported from the South to England?

February 12, 2010 at 5:05 p.m.
Max said...

So how does your statement that Washington DC refused to countenance any Southern exports jibe with the fact that the South exported 5 million bales of cotton worth $300 million in 1860?

February 12, 2010 at 5:10 p.m.
hotdiggity said...

Rolando, I am well aware of Lincolns original stand on slavery. I have read several books about the man.

He rejected slavery on moral grounds. Its true he did not admire Africans, and felt it would be better for both them and whites if they were moved back to Africa.

He was far from perfect. But his actions set in motion a nation changing set of events that are felt even today.

February 12, 2010 at 5:44 p.m.

I see the Schmucks are again revising "Progressive" history. The "progressive/liberal" folks you refer to in Lincoln's time would be considered rabid conservatives today. Lincoln read and believed in the Bible and its Author. You know, the one ya'll hate so much. Lincoln was no Liberal and his country and his economy at that time could in no way be compared to what we have today. Just as we will never know how he would govern today if he were President (if he didn't come back and then run screaming from the sight at what the Schmucks have done here).

The modern Left/Progressives, with Markist/Alinsky/Stalinist teachings rammed into their heads and permeating their souls, (as Hillary and Obama and friends have self-described themselves); THAT Progressive is a product of the early 1900's and culminated in the rabid, evil thinking of Woodrow Wilson who started the "re-structuring" process of American society while trashing the Constitution. Even JFK would be conservative by today's Leftist standards and policies in the DNC.

Lincoln can rest, he was what he was and will answer for his life. Better start looking at and within yourselves (before you learn how to research properly). Your time will come, that is a given.

February 13, 2010 at 10:55 a.m.
hotdiggity said...

Wow, Scmucks, Markist/Alinsky/Stalinist teachings. Canary, your hatred and paranoia is scary, here is a video of the "conservative" Kennedy.

Speaking of Lincoln, one of my favorite quotes from him...

"It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt".

Canary, is this the song where you got your nickname, with special emphasis on the third stanza?

Canary In The Coal Mine

The Police

First to fall over when the atmosphere is less than perfect Your sensibilities are shaken by the slightest defect You live your life like a canary in a coalmine You get so dizzy even walking in a straight line

You say you want to spend the winter in Firenza You're so afraid to catch a dose of influenza You live your life like a canary in a coalmine You get so dizzy even walking in a straight line

Canary in a coalmine Canary in a coalmine Canary in a coalmine

Now if I tell you that you suffer from delusions You pay your analyst to reach the same conclusions You live your life like a canary in a coalmine You get so dizzy even walking in a straight line

Canary in a coalmine Canary in a coalmine Canary in a coalmine

First to fall over when the atmosphere is less than perfect Your sensibilities are shaken by the slightest defect You live your life like a canary in a coalmine You get so dizzy even walking in a straight line

Canary in a coalmine Canary in a coalmine Canary in a coalmine Canary in a coalmine Canary in a coalmine

February 13, 2010 at 1:29 p.m.
rolando said...

You think double posting makes a misleading rebuttal legitimate, Max? lol

Two points:

1) The total cotton production for the U.S. in 1860 was just over 1,100,000 tons. Makes the 500 tons exported seem pitiful, doesn't it?

2) The South seceded Apr 1860...and was promptly blockaded. She was prevented from exporting cotton before that year through excise [export] taxes and by physical force and international law after it. [As full of holes as the blockade was, it still commanded international attention and respect.]

The North brought the war upon itself based upon financial reasons alone...its failing economy simply could not withstand the tremendous loss of the taxes cotton delivered up. They manufactured and promoted the anti-slavery issue as a red herring. As always, follow the money trail.

February 13, 2010 at 2:26 p.m.
hotdiggity said...

Wow, Rolando, that is a pretty revisionist statement of the cause of the Civil War. Not saying slavery was the only cause, but to say the war was "based upon financial reasons alone" is revisionism.

February 13, 2010 at 9:35 p.m.

February 17, 2008

Psychiatrist Confirms: Liberalism Is a Mental Disorder

"As a clinical and forensic psychiatrist, Lyle Rossiter has treated over 1,500 patients and examined over 2,700 civil and criminal cases. Turning his hand to political psychopathology, the author of The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness, has diagnosed an alarming percentage of the population as suffering from the grotesque form of mental derangement known by some as moonbattery".

Among Rossiter's observations:

"Based on strikingly irrational beliefs and emotions, modern liberals relentlessly undermine the most important principles on which our freedoms were founded. Like spoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilities of adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs from cradle to grave. A social scientist who understands human nature will not dismiss the vital roles of free choice, voluntary cooperation and moral integrity — as liberals do. A political leader who understands human nature will not ignore individual differences in talent, drive, personal appeal and work ethic, and then try to impose economic and social equality on the population — as liberals do. And a legislator who understands human nature will not create an environment of rules which over-regulates and over-taxes the nation's citizens, corrupts their character and reduces them to wards of the state — as liberals do. The roots of liberalism — and its associated madness — can be clearly identified by understanding how children develop from infancy to adulthood and how distorted development produces the irrational beliefs of the liberal mind. When the modern liberal mind whines about imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains and seeks above all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their own lives, the neurosis of the liberal mind becomes painfully obvious. Basically liberalism is a willful failure to mature beyond adolescence that can have catastrophic consequences for society. With luck, the official diagnosis of this disease by a mental health professional will facilitate the search for a cure".

February 15, 2010 at 3:32 p.m.
hotdiggity said...

Ho-Hum, is this what you refer to as scientific research??

Refer to my link to see what scientific research truly consists of. Hint: it consists of experimental studies, resources cited, observable and measurable evidence etc.

It does not consist of rambling, biased, opinion exhibited by the "study" of your referenced "phychiatrist".


February 15, 2010 at 6:32 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »


Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.