Trump says better President than both Washington and Lincoln as he hawked trading cards

Author: IwantRooseveltagain

Posts

Total: 55
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Well genius, is ratification accomplished by Congress or the state ratification committees? You are such a dummy

You obviously don’t understand the process for amending the constitution.
I'm well aware of the process of amending the constitution.  And ratification is completed when the Senate approves the resolutions of state ratification committees.

Your wrong

There are various theories about Booth's motivations. In a letter to his mother, he wrote of his desire to avenge the South.[14] Doris Kearns Goodwin has endorsed the idea that another factor was Booth's rivalry with his well-known older brother, actor Edwin Booth, who was a loyal Unionist.[15] David S. Reynolds believes that, despite disagreeing with his cause, Booth greatly admired the abolitionist John Brown;[16] Booth's sister Asia Booth Clarke quoted him as saying: "John Brown was a man inspired, the grandest character of the century!"[16][17] On April 11, Booth attended Lincoln's last speech, in which Lincoln promoted voting rights for emancipated slaves;[18] Booth said, "That means nigger citizenship. ... That is the last speech he will ever give."[19]
How are you going to claim that I'm wrong, while referencing "various theories." I'm not interested in the academic version of events. Booth was an actor, a.k.a. professional liar. What concerns me most is motive, and if you look at the history of presidential assassinations and attempted presidential assassinations, they coincide well with the involvement of International Banks.

IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@Athias
I'm well aware of the process of amending the constitution.  And ratification is completed when the Senate approves the resolutions of state ratification committees. 
No you’re not. You said Congress passed the 13th amendment 9 months after Lincoln was assassinated. You said that because you don’t understand the process for amending the Constitution - even if you went and looked it up in the last hour.

IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@Athias
How are you going to claim that I'm wrong, while referencing "various theories." I'm not interested in the academic version of events. Booth was an actor, a.k.a. professional liar. What concerns me most is motive, and if you look at the history of presidential assassinations and attempted presidential assassinations, they coincide well with the involvement of International Banks. 
Gee, why don’t you just say “it was all done by the Jews”

Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
No you’re not. You said Congress passed the 13th amendment 9 months after Lincoln was assassinated. You said that because you don’t understand the process for amending the Constitution - even if you went and looked it up in the last hour.
It had already been relayed to you that the 13th amendment was passed through the senate before the end of the Civil War, and Greyparrot cited the date on which the amendment was ratified--which required the approval of the senate. No looking up necessary. The "nine months" on my part was a mistake since it's not accurate. The ratification occurred about eight months after the death of Lincoln.

Do you have anything you would like to state, or would you have us continue this contest over "passing through congress" and "ratification"? Because either way, Lincoln was dead when the United States abolished legalized slavery.

Gee, why don’t you just say “it was all done by the Jews
Why don't you look up my name?


Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,057
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Athias
I could go into great detail the amount of corruption and bribery that went on to make the 13th amendment happen, but suspect it would offend most indoctrinated people.
Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@Greyparrot
I could go into great detail the amount of corruption and bribery that went on to make the 13th amendment happen, but suspect it would offend most indoctrinated people.
Please do, if you're willing.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,057
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Athias
Mind you, most historians agree that Lincoln directly ordered Seward to make it happen by any means necessary giving Lincoln plausible deniability.

What occurred later was a few bribes and some patronage appointments including an ambassadorship to a Democrat lame duck senator.

This is what is meant by "democracy" and "the will of the people"


One thing about Lincoln that is widely misunderstood is that he saw abolition as a tactical means to preserve the union as the war dragged on, and he did not justify strategically conducting the civil war as a means to end slavery at ALL, under any metric, at any time.

“My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or 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.”




Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@Greyparrot
Nice read. If you're interested I'd highly recommend Thomas DiLorenzo's book on the subject, "The Real Lincoln."

I'll also leave this here:


One thing about Lincoln that is widely misunderstood is that he saw abolition as a tactical means to preserve the union as the war dragged on, and he did not justify strategically conducting the civil war as a means to end slavery at ALL, under any metric, at any time.
Exactly. And in your reference it even points out how the emancipation proclamation did more to bolster Union forces and diminish confederate forces. It's grating and vexing when I hear or see people state that Lincoln instigated a war to "free the slaves" when the information on that matter is inconsistent with the narrative.

“My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or 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.”
Yeah, I read that part, too. His statements in the Lincoln-Douglas debates are even more damning.


Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,057
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Athias
There is so much emphasis on the tragedy of the native Indians being conquered and subjugated, that we are made to forget the Americans that endured similar treatment at the hands of other Americans.
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6

This is what is meant by "democracy" and "the will of the people"
So if the (white) people wanted to keep slavery, then Lincoln should have let slavery stand and he was wrong to abolish it?

IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@Athias
You two idiots found another idiot to validate your nonsense. This author, Thomas DeLorenzo, is a quack.

“Writing for biased, Rich Lowry described DiLorenzo's technique in this book as the following: "His scholarship, such as it is, consists of rummaging through the record for anything he can find to damn Lincoln, stripping it of any nuance or context, and piling on pejorative adjectives. In DiLorenzo, the Lincoln-haters have found a champion with the judiciousness and the temperament they deserve."[26]
Reviewing for The Independent Review, a think tank associated with DiLorenzo, Richard M. Gamble called the book a "travesty of historical method and documentation". He said the book was plagued by a "labyrinth of [historical and grammatical] errors", and concluded that DiLorenzo has "earned the ... ridicule of his critics."

In a 2009 review of three newly published books on Lincoln, historian Brian Dirck linked the earlier work of Thomas DiLorenzo with that of Lerone Bennett, another critic of Lincoln. He wrote that "Few Civil War scholars take Bennett and DiLorenzo seriously, pointing to their narrow political agenda and faulty research."[36]

Who would publish this guy?

Regnery Publishing is a politically conservative book publisher based in Washington, D.C. The company was founded by Henry Regnery in 1947,[2][3][4] and is now a division of radio broadcaster Salem Media Group. It is led by President & Publisher Thomas Spence. Regnery has published books by former Republican Party chairman Haley Barbour, Ann Coulter, Sarah Palin, former Speaker of the United States House of Representatives Newt Gingrich, columnist Michelle Malkin, Robert Spencer, pundit David Horowitz, U.S. Senator Ted Cruz, former U.S. Vice President Mike Pence and his family, U.S. Senator Josh Hawley, and Barbara Olson.

There is money to be made selling moronic books to morons. 



YouFound_Lxam
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 2,182
3
4
7
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
YouFound_Lxam
3
4
7
-->
@Double_R
Genuinely curious… If Biden proclaimed himself to be a better president than Abraham Lincoln and George Washington, how would you react?
George Washington was the first president, and the one who decided that presidents should only serve two terms. 
Abraham Lincoln was the president who abolished slavery. 

So, if Biden was to say he was a better president, I think that me, and many other people would find that highly offensive, and false.
YouFound_Lxam
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 2,182
3
4
7
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
YouFound_Lxam
3
4
7
Kind of rare to see a Republican care about black people
You are extremely biased, like......wow.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,057
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
George Washington was the first president, and the one who decided that presidents should only serve two terms. 
Abraham Lincoln was the president who abolished slavery. 
That is not correct.

FDR's tyranny created the 2 term rule. Not Washington.

Lincoln was 3 months into becoming worm food when Slavery officially became illegal and the 13th amendment became the law of the land.

 President Johnson used his power as the Chief Executive to force Southern states to ratify the amendment as part of his Reconstruction policy on December 6, 1865.
YouFound_Lxam
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 2,182
3
4
7
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
YouFound_Lxam
3
4
7
-->
@Greyparrot
Yep.....
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,057
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
Details matter.
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
So, if Biden was to say he was a better president, I think that me, and many other people would find that highly offensive, and false.
So are you offended by Trump saying he was better than Washington and Lincoln?

IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
FDR's tyranny created the 2 term rule. Not Washington.

Lincoln was 3 months into becoming worm food when Slavery officially became illegal and the 13th amendment became the law of the land.

Details matter.
The 13th amendment - Passed by Congress January 31, 1865. Ratified December 6, 1865. Lincoln dies April 15, 1865. 

Check your facts bonehead. And what does tyranny mean to a guy who lives with his mother?


YouFound_Lxam
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 2,182
3
4
7
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
YouFound_Lxam
3
4
7
So are you offended by Trump saying he was better than Washington and Lincoln?
Yes, I would be. Same goes for Trump and Biden.
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
Yes, I would be. Same goes for Trump and Biden.
 So are you aware Trump said he was a better President than Washington and Lincoln when he announced his baseball cards? That was the point of this OP.
Are you slow or what? What’s going on?

Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,057
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Athias
Fun fact: Lincoln's Corwin Amendment can technically be ratified today, making slavery constitutionally legal in America...

Athias
Athias's avatar
Debates: 20
Posts: 3,192
3
3
9
Athias's avatar
Athias
3
3
9
-->
@Greyparrot
Fun fact: Lincoln's Corwin Amendment can technically be ratified today, making slavery constitutionally legal in America...

Nice read. All the more reason I don't engage those who prioritize criticizing the source rather than the argument/fact.

Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,057
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Athias
And yet another sketchy sticking point...

President Andrew Johnson, encouraged the "reconstructed" Southern states of Alabama, North Carolina, and Georgia to agree to ratify, which brought the count to 27 states, leading to its adoption before the end of 1865.


It's possible any of the reconstructed states could also today bring a case before the Supreme Court that they were pressured to ratify in order to receive "reconstruction."

Like Capt. America said, "I can do this all day."

IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
It's possible any of the reconstructed states could also today bring a case before the Supreme Court that they were pressured to ratify in order to receive "reconstruction."
OMG, what an idiot. It appears you think “reconstruction” refers to physically rebuilding the war torn south? 

Too funny. The ignorance of Republicans never ceases to amaze me.
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
Nice read. All the more reason I don't engage those who prioritize criticizing the source rather than the argument/fact. 
The source is critically important you idiot. If your source is not credible, like a liar in a jury, or someone who does not have the  credentials to speak as an expert, then what to you have? You certainly don’t have facts on your side.