“Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.” (Unannotated)

It never says anything about slaves or blacks. This is the text that defines the Framers desire to slowly undo slavery. The South wanted to deny slaves citizenship…until it came to number of Seats in the House. Which is barbaric, only allowing 60% of the enslaved population to ensure that slavery would in time be defeated by attrition; or allow the vile practice of only further using those people who are already abused and enslaved as fodder for politicking?

I have never seen a legitimate argument for that, considering that most while most of the Framers where slaveholders, there was those among them who sought to end it, and then those of the 13 states who immediately abolished slavery upon the signing of the Deceleration.

He was anti-slavery from youth. He wasn’t an abolitionist, true, but he opposed the introduction of slavery into the territories, and he wanted to contain slavery to the South. However, in such an unstable nation, it would have been incredibly unwise to be abolitionist, as president. He released the Emancipation Proclomation more than a year before the elections.

“He lives Igor. He Lives. BWAHAHAHAHAHAH”

Really what Lincoln wanted was to abolish slavery gradually in a way that would allow the slave states to adapt economically as slavery ended but the war pushed his hand.

“My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to 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. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause.”

I think it’s quite clear from that that he really didn’t care about whether slavery continued or not, and sure as hell didn’t think blacks deserved equal rights. He ONLY cared about preserving the Union, which is why he was willing to leave slavery, and suspend constitutionally guaranteed rights to do so.

Violations of the constitution are violations of the constitution and are sufficient to say that he did not have strength of character, love of country, or ethics.

The slaves weren’t freed until after Lincoln was assassinated and a constitutional amendment was passed. Learn your history, you ignorant moron.

Take a chill pill and enjoy!!!

And for the record, the “numbnuts” was an affectionate namecalling. If I was being ugly, I would have called you fu(kweasel™

Beautiful TALL women, wimpy ex-Viking men, EXPENSIVE booze and (argh!) pickled herring and cold duck eggs fried in sheep fat for breakfast.

According to the Norwegian women with whom I talked there are NO Vikings left in Norway, just sheep in men’s clothing. That’s a lot worse than alcoholic hillbillies.

Norwegians home-brew, get drunk and THEN go out clubbing, eat like food is a punishment, and the men don’t bathe near often enough.

Beautiful country, though.

Are you saying that ALL of those intelligence agencies “lied” and somehow that only you and your conspiracy theory nutbar compadres know the “real truth?”

The real truth is that you have not the foggiest idea what the President – W or any other – gets in his intelligence briefing every day. I do, because I was in the “Black Ops” world and my post-mission reports were used as part of that daily briefing.

When you get a clearance beyond (not above) Top Secret like I had, come and talk to me. Otherwise, quit your ignorant whining.

REAL history, not folk legend is a lot more interesting that creating a saint out of a sow’s ear.

This is an excellent way to describe what occurred. However, I’d say there was no attempt at the time to hide it, and I don’t see any effort now to hide information about Lincoln’s position on the matter, as represented in his “House Divided” speech.

People disagreed (loudly) then as to whether it is best that we be a union of separate sovereign states, or a single nation. People now are hardly aware of the distinction, but it is far from a forgone conclusion that we should be one or the other. To some people, it seems obvious, but just because they say so isn’t sufficient for it to be true.