English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2006-06-06 11:58:36 · 28 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

28 answers

One of the best, for sure

2006-06-06 12:01:10 · answer #1 · answered by Black Fedora 6 · 0 1

Nope. He allowed money to be the determining factor in starting the civil war. Um, no, it wasn't over slavery. It was over cotton tax revenue. Oh, that's right, they've rewritten that part of history for you. Ok boys and girls. Here's the gist. There were more people living in the north, than the south. South didn't have equal representation. Yet, the tax revenues from the south paid to run the country. Hence the south wanted out of the union. Only fair right. Taxation wthout representation. Well, anyhow. Lincoln knew th north couldn't survive without the revenue from the south, so her started the civil war. Oh, and that little slavery deal. The imancipation proclamation. It was only signed after the war had been going on for years. And they didn't tell ya, he had intentions of sending all the slaves back to Africa either. Sorry, look it up for yourself. Or you can sit there and continue believing all the liberal hype.

2006-06-06 12:05:50 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Yes please look it up for yourself.
Though Lincoln was not in favor of slavery he didn't believe he had the right to impose his beliefs on states that where already practicing it, his proposal was that no other state in the union existing or new could adopt the practice. It was his hope that on their own these states would realize that slavery was not right.
Unfortunately though it did not effect some southerners some of their governing parties took issue with this and thus the war began.
So yes please by all means check your facts.
Lincoln was a great and decent President

2006-06-06 12:41:12 · answer #3 · answered by clk 2 · 0 0

Well, he must have put out some real bullsh*t because Americans STILL believe the civil war was fought over slavery when, in fact, it was fought over State's Rights and the ONLY reason for the Emancipation Proclaimation was to frighten the Southern States back into line. When the ruse failed, then Lincoln was stuck with freeing the slaves... BUT IT WAS NEVER HIS INTENTION TO DO SO... and if you don't believe THAT... then look it up.

2006-06-15 11:42:33 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

He was one of the most important America has had so far. The Neocons just hated Lincoln, they were Confederates back then. Lincoln went against politics and wrote the Abolition Act by himself solely..... The Neocons just pissed and moaned about it. That is why the North had to put the South (Confederates) in their proper place. George Bush goes against everything Abraham Lincoln stood for and isn't a friend to America...... I believe he should be impeached for war crimes and the looting of America with Corporate welfare.....Bush is a criminal...

2006-06-06 14:03:45 · answer #5 · answered by Jenny_is_Hot 6 · 0 0

Lincoln was definitely a great president, since he got us through the Civil War, and reunited the country.

My personal favorite is George Washington. As the first President, the Congress wanted to make him King, but he refused, believing in the democratic system. And our history since then is a testament to his wisdom.

2006-06-06 12:56:25 · answer #6 · answered by Karl the Webmaster 3 · 0 0

I kind of admire James Garfield, the stealth president who proved to be an adroit political player, but unfortunately got shot down (literally) just months into his presidency. He was the only president who created an original proof for the Pythagorean theorem. Sure, Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves...

2006-06-06 12:10:58 · answer #7 · answered by just♪wondering 7 · 0 0

Well one of his "achievements" was supposedly going to war with the south to free the slaves but this wasn't the main issue on the agenda and some say it was actually quite low. The war was against succession from the union and the creation of a competitor for states, land, and resources. As to whether or not this makes him not the "greatest" president ever really depends on what you are taking into consideration.

2006-06-06 12:18:31 · answer #8 · answered by glenda c 3 · 0 0

NO. He was the President who split the nation and took it to war against itself. If Bush divided the nation and declared war, would you ask if he was the best president? What if Clinton did it? I would say the best would have to be Roosevelt because he engineered a plan that got the country out of the great depression.

2006-06-16 01:50:52 · answer #9 · answered by jnrockwall@sbcglobal.net 3 · 0 0

No he really wasn't. way to indecisive, the civil war wasn't about the slaves in the first place, it just end up that way. more solders died in three days at Gettysburg than 10 years in Vietnam. And his policies after the war where worse than G.W.'s now. The only 2 that actually did something good for someone besides their own party was Washington, and Roosevelt

2006-06-06 12:22:17 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

yes and as for bush being linked to lincoln I have one thing to say.
sir I knew lincoln,lincoln was a friend of mine and sir you are no lincoln.

2006-06-15 16:57:20 · answer #11 · answered by chuckleslovesjesus 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers