Lincoln Discussion Symposium

I saw this piece in The Hill that uses Mr. Lincoln as an example for today's politics. Wanted to share it:

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/un...y-politics

(02-08-2017 10:21 AM)Lincoln Wonk Wrote: [ -> ]I saw this piece in The Hill that uses Mr. Lincoln as an example for today's politics. Wanted to share it:

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/un...y-politics

Glad that you found this and posted it, Linda. It coincides very well with a discussion I had with my grandson on Monday night about the similarities between the Trump/Lincoln first days of "battle."

Those of you who get the Surratt Courier will also see a small article that I inserted at the end relative to claims that Trump is an "illegitimate president" because of lacking the majority vote. It seems that we have had eighteen "illegitimate presidents," if one uses that as the standard -- and Lincoln had the lowest percentage of votes of any of them at 39.9%. We really can learn some things from history. Our country managed to survive 18 "illegitimate presidents."

(02-08-2017 12:56 PM)L Verge Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2017 10:21 AM)Lincoln Wonk Wrote: [ -> ]I saw this piece in The Hill that uses Mr. Lincoln as an example for today's politics. Wanted to share it:

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/un...y-politics

Glad that you found this and posted it, Linda. It coincides very well with a discussion I had with my grandson on Monday night about the similarities between the Trump/Lincoln first days of "battle."

Hi Laurie,

It was actually Kathy Canavan who posted the above article.

Laurie, I thought that was an interesting insert you had in the courier.
I had no idea 40% of our presidents (18 of 45) received less than 50% of the popular vote.

(02-08-2017 01:44 PM)Linda Anderson Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2017 12:56 PM)L Verge Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2017 10:21 AM)Lincoln Wonk Wrote: [ -> ]I saw this piece in The Hill that uses Mr. Lincoln as an example for today's politics. Wanted to share it:

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/un...y-politics

Glad that you found this and posted it, Linda. It coincides very well with a discussion I had with my grandson on Monday night about the similarities between the Trump/Lincoln first days of "battle."

Hi Laurie,

It was actually Kathy Canavan who posted the above article.

Kathy and Linda - I apologize for the error.

Linda - It is so nice to see you posting again... even though I goofed on this one.

---

I hope that it awakened other citizens to the fact that this is not a singular event. Frankly, I didn't realize that Bill Clinton was one both times, so it was somewhat disparaging to the Clintons to have that "illegitimate" term used in this election.

My conversation with my grandson was also beneficial because he finally understands the need for an electoral college in our representative democracy. I do not intend to discuss current politics here, but I recently read an article which easily explained how the Democratic candidate in 2016 could get a plurality of the vote based on carrying just five of the districts outside of NYC - and to heck with the rest of the country.

I am now stepping down from my soap box.

(02-08-2017 10:21 AM)Lincoln Wonk Wrote: [ -> ]I saw this piece in The Hill that uses Mr. Lincoln as an example for today's politics. Wanted to share it:

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/un...y-politics

I do not agree with the conclusion reached in this article:

“We should recall Lincoln's confidence in American democracy as we wade through today's political warfare. Now as then, our country on the other side of the smoke may evolve into a new national consensus that tests us while also making us stronger.”

The big difference is that Abraham Lincoln was President of the United States, then; Donald Trump is President of the United States, now. And, as Democratic vice-presidential candidate Senator Lloyd Bentsen said to Republican vice-presidential candidate Senator Dan Quayle in response to Quayle comparing himself to John F. Kennedy: “Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy.”

(03-04-2017 08:43 PM)David Lockmiller Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2017 10:21 AM)Lincoln Wonk Wrote: [ -> ]I saw this piece in The Hill that uses Mr. Lincoln as an example for today's politics. Wanted to share it:

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/un...y-politics

I do not agree with the conclusion reached in this article:

“We should recall Lincoln's confidence in American democracy as we wade through today's political warfare. Now as then, our country on the other side of the smoke may evolve into a new national consensus that tests us while also making us stronger.”

The big difference is that Abraham Lincoln was President of the United States, then; Donald Trump is President of the United States, now. And, as Democratic vice-presidential candidate Senator Lloyd Bentsen said to Republican vice-presidential candidate Senator Dan Quayle in response to Quayle comparing himself to John F. Kennedy: “Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy.”

Hi David,
I wanted to share it because I thought it thought-provoking, not because I agreed with it. But it does put the current discord in perspective -- we got through a war that killed 700,000 Americans and we'll probably get through this together if all try to see things from the other fellows' perspective.

I would add only one comment to this post (mainly because I am sick and tired of the fiasco that is occurring in so-called "politics" today):

Different times, different threats, and changing culture require different leaders, different strategies, and a different style of common sense to preserve the principles on which this country and its long-standing Constitution were founded. I am not a Lincoln scholar (actually just about fourth-grade level in understanding him), but I admire him because of his pragmatic way of thinking. For some reason, I suspect that Mr. Lincoln and Mr. Trump would get along very well with each other...

That's my belief, and I'm sticking to it. For the record, I will tell you that I am a registered Democrat since the age of 21 and am very disenchanted with my party at the moment. No further comment because I do not feel that this forum should become a political stage for 21st-century discourse.

(02-08-2017 12:56 PM)L Verge Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2017 10:21 AM)Lincoln Wonk Wrote: [ -> ]I saw this piece in The Hill that uses Mr. Lincoln as an example for today's politics. Wanted to share it:

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/un...y-politics

Glad that you found this and posted it, Linda. It coincides very well with a discussion I had with my grandson on Monday night about the similarities between the Trump/Lincoln first days of "battle."

Those of you who get the Surratt Courier will also see a small article that I inserted at the end relative to claims that Trump is an "illegitimate president" because of lacking the majority vote. It seems that we have had eighteen "illegitimate presidents," if one uses that as the standard -- and Lincoln had the lowest percentage of votes of any of them at 39.9%. We really can learn some things from history. Our country managed to survive 18 "illegitimate presidents."

I loved that piece.

(03-04-2017 08:43 PM)David Lockmiller Wrote: [ -> ]I do not agree with the conclusion reached in this article:

“We should recall Lincoln's confidence in American democracy as we wade through today's political warfare. Now as then, our country on the other side of the smoke may evolve into a new national consensus that tests us while also making us stronger.”

The big difference is that Abraham Lincoln was President of the United States, then; Donald Trump is President of the United States, now. And, as Democratic vice-presidential candidate Senator Lloyd Bentsen said to Republican vice-presidential candidate Senator Dan Quayle in response to Quayle comparing himself to John F. Kennedy: “Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy.”

Here's a major test, as reported on the front page of the New York Times, today:

TOP NEWS -- THE 45TH PRESIDENT

Trump, Offering No Proof, Says Obama Tapped His Phones

F.B.I. Chief Urges Justice Dept. to Reject Wiretap Claim

By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT and MICHAEL D. SHEAR

James B. Comey asked the Justice Department to publicly reject President Trump’s unsubstantiated claim that former President Barack Obama ordered his phones to be tapped.

The department has not issued a public rebuttal, which would be a major rebuke of a sitting president.

(03-05-2017 08:04 PM)David Lockmiller Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-04-2017 08:43 PM)David Lockmiller Wrote: [ -> ]I do not agree with the conclusion reached in this article:

“We should recall Lincoln's confidence in American democracy as we wade through today's political warfare. Now as then, our country on the other side of the smoke may evolve into a new national consensus that tests us while also making us stronger.”

The big difference is that Abraham Lincoln was President of the United States, then; Donald Trump is President of the United States, now. And, as Democratic vice-presidential candidate Senator Lloyd Bentsen said to Republican vice-presidential candidate Senator Dan Quayle in response to Quayle comparing himself to John F. Kennedy: “Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy.”

Here's a major test, as reported on the front page of the New York Times, today:

TOP NEWS -- THE 45TH PRESIDENT

Trump, Offering No Proof, Says Obama Tapped His Phones

F.B.I. Chief Urges Justice Dept. to Reject Wiretap Claim

By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT and MICHAEL D. SHEAR

James B. Comey asked the Justice Department to publicly reject President Trump’s unsubstantiated claim that former President Barack Obama ordered his phones to be tapped.

The department has not issued a public rebuttal, which would be a major rebuke of a sitting president.

These certainly are strange times.

(03-04-2017 09:18 PM)Lincoln Wonk Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-04-2017 08:43 PM)David Lockmiller Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2017 10:21 AM)Lincoln Wonk Wrote: [ -> ]I saw this piece in The Hill that uses Mr. Lincoln as an example for today's politics. Wanted to share it:

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/un...y-politics

I do not agree with the conclusion reached in this article:

“We should recall Lincoln's confidence in American democracy as we wade through today's political warfare. Now as then, our country on the other side of the smoke may evolve into a new national consensus that tests us while also making us stronger.”

The big difference is that Abraham Lincoln was President of the United States, then; Donald Trump is President of the United States, now. And, as Democratic vice-presidential candidate Senator Lloyd Bentsen said to Republican vice-presidential candidate Senator Dan Quayle in response to Quayle comparing himself to John F. Kennedy: “Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy.”

Hi David,
I wanted to share it because I thought it thought-provoking, not because I agreed with it. But it does put the current discord in perspective -- we got through a war that killed 700,000 Americans and we'll probably get through this together if all try to see things from the other fellows' perspective.

The following is a quote in today's Washington Post from Peter Wehner, who was the top policy strategist in George W. Bush’s White House:

“We have as president a man who is erratic, vindictive, volatile, obsessive, a chronic liar, and prone to believe in conspiracy theories. . . . And you can count on the fact that there will be more to come, since when people like Donald Trump gain power they become less, not more, restrained.”

Washington Post: "Wiretapping allegations accomplished what Trump wanted – but may backfire bigly"

By James Hohmann March 6, 2017

Unfortunately politics, and the reporting of it, has not risen above the level where we will be very much surprised either way the story plays out.


And once most of the facts are in, we still won't be sure what to believe, because we suspect both sides are capable of committing the allegations made against each other.

(03-06-2017 01:19 PM)David Lockmiller Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-04-2017 09:18 PM)Lincoln Wonk Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-04-2017 08:43 PM)David Lockmiller Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2017 10:21 AM)Lincoln Wonk Wrote: [ -> ]I saw this piece in The Hill that uses Mr. Lincoln as an example for today's politics. Wanted to share it:

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/un...y-politics

I do not agree with the conclusion reached in this article:

“We should recall Lincoln's confidence in American democracy as we wade through today's political warfare. Now as then, our country on the other side of the smoke may evolve into a new national consensus that tests us while also making us stronger.”

The big difference is that Abraham Lincoln was President of the United States, then; Donald Trump is President of the United States, now. And, as Democratic vice-presidential candidate Senator Lloyd Bentsen said to Republican vice-presidential candidate Senator Dan Quayle in response to Quayle comparing himself to John F. Kennedy: “Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy.”

Hi David,
I wanted to share it because I thought it thought-provoking, not because I agreed with it. But it does put the current discord in perspective -- we got through a war that killed 700,000 Americans and we'll probably get through this together if all try to see things from the other fellows' perspective.

The following is a quote in today's Washington Post from Peter Wehner, who was the top policy strategist in George W. Bush’s White House:

“We have as president a man who is erratic, vindictive, volatile, obsessive, a chronic liar, and prone to believe in conspiracy theories. . . . And you can count on the fact that there will be more to come, since when people like Donald Trump gain power they become less, not more, restrained.”

Washington Post: "Wiretapping allegations accomplished what Trump wanted – but may backfire bigly"

By James Hohmann March 6, 2017

I grew up reading the Washington Post nearly every day until I went to college. I continued to subscribe as an adult until I finally grew out of my liberal mindset (as our society forced me to look at reality) and canceled my subscription.

Way back in a Problems of Democracy class in Grade 12, my classmates and I were warned to watch out for the Fourth Estate (the press, now termed the "media") because of their attempts to control our way of life. In 2017, I feel they are more interested in financial gain.

As long as our very vocal politicians on both sides of the aisle insist on making idiots of themselves (and lining their pockets) instead of working together for the common good, we are going to have inflammatory rhetoric and yellow journalism. Good lord, deliver us - we're regressing instead of progressing.

John Botts a delegate from Va to the peace convention wrote his view of the start of the civil war. Its very interesting and free on google books.

He said the peace convention was a sham from the start. The South was going to scuttle any proposal for compromise so they could say to southerners that they tried their best but those damn yankees gave us no choice. Like we haven't seen that tactic used before. Still works!