Quote:
Originally Posted by Soccermom
http://www.lewrockwell.com/dilorenzo/dilorenzo14.html
"Lincoln used war to destroy the U.S. Constitution in order to establish a powerful central government," says Roberts. This is certainly a strong statement, but in fact Lincoln illegally suspended the writ of habeas corpus; launched a military invasion without consent of Congress; blockaded Southern ports without declaring war; imprisoned without warrant or trial some 13,000 Northern citizens who opposed his policies; arrested dozens of newspaper editors and owners and, in some cases, had federal soldiers destroy their printing presses; censored all telegraph communication; nationalized the railroads; created three new states (Kansas, Nevada, and West Virginia) without the formal consent of the citizens of those states, an act that Lincoln?s own attorney general thought was unconstitutional; ordered Federal troops to interfere with Northern elections; deported a member of Congress from Ohio after he criticized Lincoln?s unconstitutional behavior; confiscated private property; confiscated firearms in violation of the Second Amendment; and eviscerated the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.
|
Oh-k, thanks for the link to that opinion piece. It's actually rather interesting and I think I will look at it again later.
I will not begin to defend Lincoln at all though. I have little invested in what Lincoln did during the civil war. If it was wrong and unconstitutional then it was wrong and unconstitutional. Did he have to do it? I don't know. I am neither a Civil war buff nor up on the details of Civil war history. I am more concerned with what's going on now and maybe since 1900. But again, you have sparked a little bit of interest in that. I will get into it later.
For now, thought, I'm sure others would love to debate the Civil war,.