• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NC legislator compares Hitler to Abraham Lincoln in Facebook post

Beaudreaux said:
A little late to be concerned over it now. The term is unconstitutional, BTW.
Click to expand...

I thought the 'spelling police' cluster of silly posters was extinct, snuffed out a while back! Regardless,
Maryland played an important role in the American Civil War. Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus in Maryland, and
dismissal of the Supreme Court Chief Justice's ruling that such suspension was unconstitutional.

In the presidential election of 1860 Lincoln won just 2,294 votes out of a total of 92,421,
only 2.5% of the votes cast, coming in at a distant fourth place. In seven counties, Lincoln received not a single vote.
 
Last edited:
TheGoverness said:
Why do people compare everything to Hitler? Stop it, you just make yourself look like a complete idiot when you do.
Click to expand...

Ask your Liberal buddies. They invented it. :lamo
 
Tigerace117 said:
Lincoln didn't round up the innocent civillians in the south and have them put to death. There-in lies the rub.
Click to expand...

Are we to judge past leaders by the laws and standards of the period they lived in, or by modern standards?
 
slick said:
I don't see how it's possible to compare Lincoln to Hitler but:

There is however a unique comparison of Lincoln to Assad:
My pet peeve is the assertion that Assad is a butcher because he is using his arsenal "To kill his own people'
What was Assad supposed to do when the rebellion began? As any leader would do he tried to quell the rebellion,
that's exactly what Lincoln did when the confederate states rebelled.

The problem for both Lincoln & Assad was that the efferts to stem the rebellions took much longer than was
expected leading to much more death & destruction than either man preferred or expected. Our Civil War
led to more deaths than any war in our history 600,000, Syrian's so far maybe 400,000.

So those who say Assad's a butcher for killing his own people' should think before criticizing him for only
imitating Lincoln's solution to rebellion.
Click to expand...

I think your argument is a reach of Olympic proportions.
 
apdst said:
Are we to judge past leaders by the laws and standards of the period they lived in, or by modern standards?
Click to expand...

Both. Does this mean you have homework before making a claim or you're ready.
 
Beaudreaux said:
Republicans do not. Idiots that just happen to have registered at their local board of elections as a Republican may, but not Republicans as a party or as a practice.
Click to expand...

C'mon, man! You cannot distance yourself from these guys with that stance!
 
Rexedgar said:
C'mon, man! You cannot distance yourself from these guys with that stance!
Click to expand...

Of course we can. Are Liberals responsible for every single stupid comment made by Liberals?
 
ecofarm said:
I can have both, it's not complicated. And I'm not clicking on any link. What's your claim.
Click to expand...

Yeah, if you open the link, you won't want to have your cake and eat it, too.

Finally, over a month after the outbreak of the Sioux uprising, Lincoln responded, assigning Gen. John Pope, fresh from his defeat at Bull Run, the task of ending the uprising. A pompous, self-righteous man, Pope declared his “purpose to utterly exterminate the Sioux…. They are to be treated as maniacs and wild beasts.”

https://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/opinionator/2012/08/20/lincoln-and-the-sioux/?referer=
Click to expand...

The Sioux who surrendered were promised safety. But once the hostilities were over, hundreds of Sioux – some of whom had had nothing to do with the uprising – were arrested and summarily tried by a five-man military commission. The trials were perfunctory affairs, some lasting less than five minutes. More than 40 cases were adjudicated in one day alone. Due process played no part; most of the defendants hadn’t a clue what was happening. Of the 393 tried for “murder and other outrages,” 323 were convicted, and 303 sentenced to hang – including those who had surrendered with a promise of safety.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/opinionator/2012/08/20/lincoln-and-the-sioux/?referer=
Click to expand...
 
danarhea said:
Attention: Sean Spicer disease is becoming an epidemic. Get your vaccinations against the ghost of Adolf Hitler now, while there is still time. LOL.
Click to expand...

Lol.....Spicer didnt start that.

 
I'm guessing that's pro-comparison (who reads wall of text links), pro Godwin. How funny.
 
apdst said:
Are we to judge past leaders by the laws and standards of the period they lived in, or by modern standards?
Click to expand...

Assad lives in modern times, so this post is rather odd.
 
apdst said:
Did you notice the thread title, by chance?
Click to expand...

The poster "slick" was attempting to justify Assad's actions by claiming Lincoln ordered the same sort of activities during the Civil War.

Even so, nothing Lincoln did was ever even remotely comparably to Hitler.
 
Tigerace117 said:
The poster "slick" was attempting to justify Assad's actions by claiming Lincoln ordered the same sort of activities during the Civil War.

Even so, nothing Lincoln did was ever even remotely comparably to Hitler.
Click to expand...

The extermination of the Indians isn't comparible?
 
apdst said:
The extermination of the Indians isn't comparible?
Click to expand...

1. Considering that the Lakota/Sioux weren't actually exterminated, seeing as there are still plenty of them around, no, it's not comparable.

2. Given how the Georgians treated the Cherokee, who weren't even actively fighting against the US government like the Sioux were, it's rather amusing how you only care about such matters when you think you can smear Lincoln with them.
 
i wouldn't put anything past the north carolina government, except humanity
 
slick said:
I don't see how it's possible to compare Lincoln to Hitler but:

There is however a unique comparison of Lincoln to Assad:
My pet peeve is the assertion that Assad is a butcher because he is using his arsenal "To kill his own people'
What was Assad supposed to do when the rebellion began? As any leader would do he tried to quell the rebellion,
that's exactly what Lincoln did when the confederate states rebelled.

The problem for both Lincoln & Assad was that the efferts to stem the rebellions took much longer than was
expected leading to much more death & destruction than either man preferred or expected. Our Civil War
led to more deaths than any war in our history 600,000, Syrian's so far maybe 400,000.

So those who say Assad's a butcher for killing his own people' should think before criticizing him for only
imitating Lincoln's solution to rebellion.
Click to expand...

um it also ended slavery and he even acknowledged as much was the point in his 2nd inaugural - "let every lash of the whip be repaid by the sword"

but leave out that small detail. The south got what it deserved
 
Tigerace117 said:
1. Considering that the Lakota/Sioux weren't actually exterminated, seeing as there are still plenty of them around, no, it's not comparable.

2. Given how the Georgians treated the Cherokee, who weren't even actively fighting against the US government like the Sioux were, it's rather amusing how you only care about such matters when you think you can smear Lincoln with them.
Click to expand...

The Jews weren't actually exterminated, either. There are still plenty of them around.
 
danarhea said:
Actually, it was the Confederacy who started the war by firing on Fort Sumter.
Click to expand...


Although SC firing on Sumter is generally considered the start of the Civil War, there actually were a number of southern attacks on Federal military before Sumter and even before formation of the Confederacy. Some of these were conducted before the involved state(s) seceded. That clearly made them treason under the Constitution, even if one considers secession constitutional.
 
apdst said:
The Jews weren't actually exterminated, either. There are still plenty of them around.
Click to expand...

Those Jews 6.5 million Jews were exterminated like they were animals. Over a million Jewish children under the age of 10 were exterminated. Untold generations of families are gone.

But to say"There are still many of them around."

wow
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom