You are once again sounding insane.
First, "conservatives" barely exist, and you are not one.
Neocons, like yourself, still believe in enslavement...they claim to be the "law and order" party, which means they write ridiculous laws (drug war, debtors prison, privatize prisons and let prison guards write laws, etc.) that put people in jail/prison for money...a type of enslavement.
Regulation is not enslavement.
Yeah, I see you can't even read yourself....they "haven't changed since Lincoln", but they have changed positions 100% since Nixon....and you don't seem to have the capacity to understand the two things are mutually exclusive.
What...you don't think there are enough highways, but there are too many salamanders? That seems like a typical assessment from you.


Oh, and for your last post, you are absolutely clearly racist. No question about it for anyone who's read your posts. When you separate people by race then talk crap about the other groups, that's racist, and you do it daily. You seem to just not know what the word means, that's the only explanation for you claiming to NOT be racist. The rest of your post is just insane straw men you made up....as in "only white people can be racist"...no one said or implied any such thing...you just WISH they had so your argument would make sense.

Oh I under stand - Conservatives understand. Liberals don't .

Both parties have not evolved. Liberals still believe in enslavement. Republicans still believe that enslavement is bad and this idea have not changed since Lincoln.



With respect your silly EPA analogy Yes it was started by Nixon. But today they have too much overreaching power. When you can stop a Highway from starting because of a simply salamander habitat will be lost then Yes their powers do need to be greatly curtailed.

Your video, Tommy Chong's "Lincoln Advertisement", has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I think I can explain the democrat hate: pure romanticism

Lincoln was a Republican, arguably our best president in history. I think people still try to attach to that and ignore the fact that the parties basically flipped because of the Southern Strategy after the Civil Rights Act. That and Republicans weren't always hijacked by the crazies. I think too many people don't want to admit their party has changed. It's also indoctrination. I've met plenty of people that agree with me point by point, yet they still manage to do these crazy mental gymnastics to rationalize to themselves that they HAVE to vote Republican. It's how they were brought up. Hell it almost happened to me, as a kid, long before I had any political identity. I always assumed I was Republican simply because I believed what everyone told me "Republicans are good with money, Democrats waste it" It wasn't until much later that I realized how untrue that was. Hell, even my first presidential vote in 2000, I listened too much to a Republican friend of mine ( one of the people I mentioned before that agreed with me on most everything, but still voted Republican) and because of his influence, I did vote for Bush in 2000 (so so sorry...not that it mattered in my red non-swing state)

One of my best friends is like this. he doesn't vote purely along party lines, and we agree on most political points, yet he still identifies as a Republican when in my opinion, he's an Independent like me. I think it's mainly because he was brought up by a military family and he was brought up to believe that the dems were the devil...despite how much he tends to agree with them.

its totally dysfunctional.

Its also part of the human condition IMO. There is a human need to have an enemy. Back in WWII we were pretty much united because we had to defeat the Axis. In the Cold War we were mostly united because we had to defeat the Russkies. America kinda stands alone now. No other military on earth can really challenge us. Sure the Taliban and ISIS are a source of terrorism, but they're still not a real threat, they could never invade or occupy us.

So there just aren't any real big threats out there...and when that happens...that's when infighting begins. People need an enemy, and when you can't find one without, you find one within.

*backup=[...snipped...]

He's funny. But naive.

When the gov't takes all the guns, only the gov't will have guns. I don't like that.

Sounds totally unfair. And don't tell me the politicians are giving up their guns. Those fuckers live by their own rules, while trying to lay other rules on the hoi polloi.

In 1927, a crazed mental killed 38 children at a school...with explosives.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

'Most people who force their way in only want your tv'...

well...not everyone!

Every day someone defends themselves from criminal attack with a 'protection gun'...there, see, I just renamed the assault weapon. At any rate...every firearm is an assault weapon. It doesn't fire posies.

As for slavery, Lincoln used GUNS to free the slaves. A soliloquy or well-crafted bit of prose wouldn't quite cut it.

So...the comedian depends on cops (armed with guns) to protect him.

Where is Lincoln? Their children's petting zoo has pandas?!? Good for them.

Your video, Conan: Matthew McConaughey's new Lincoln Ad, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Your video, Awesome Wave Clouds Rolling over Lincoln, Nebraska, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

The world is on fire and this funny man spends his time slamming the country that's making him rich. So what else is new?

Don't bring up the muslims! Don't bring up radical Islam! Don't talk about sharia law!

Let's instead have a hiphopping Lincoln and easy targets like an African potentate with Christian aspirations.

DOOOOD...he's lover of life and a philosopher's friend....Peter J's in another realm of his own fucking mind-Never said you were stupid, on the contrary-Yer smarter than the average bear here on VS, and twice as goddamn fun-School was a shit-storm of disinformation for ya?? Welcome to world of the real



There's no debate here abnout htis recent news for a single reason-Most fucks here could give a rats-ass about anything that isn't coated with the indoctroeducation they all had to suffer....


and Abraham Lincoln had a batshit insane wife just like his crazy fucin' asss

Freed the slaves MY ASS!

You know, we thought there was nothing left to say when 2 Live Crew rapped "Abraham Lincoln was a good ol man, jumped out the window with his dick in his hand -- said excuse me lady, this is my duty, so pull down your pants and gimme some booty."

Next thing you know he's fighting vampires and Lil Wayne intoxicates an Asian man to smash his cock through the roof of an apartment building.

I fail to see ANYTHING new, just higher production value.

I'm not used to my posts being ignored, but since you did I'll reiterate. Nobody has busted the "Myth of Lincoln" in this video. I don't know what you think happens when people say something, but words said by just some person don't trump historical evidence.

If you would like to present an argument or point me towards a well researched book that presents the argument that's different. But just being surprised that someone doesn't accept something they've just heard and hasn't been substantiated is stupid.

I'm surprised that Jon, being as liberal as he is, cannot see through the myth of Lincoln. I guess it's indoctrinated thoroughly into most Americans that Lincoln free the slaves. Sure he counters Napolitano's arguments, but he doesn't touch the sacred myth of Lincoln.

Let's see, Judge Andrew Napolitano is a Judge who went to law school. He doesn't have a degree in history, he hasn't presented a book with citations or even notes. Nothing tangible about this, it's not supported by any facts whatsoever, I suggest he write an essay at least that can be backed up.

This is the problem with a lot of academia, anyone can claim anything for history because it's a soft science. You should be forced to demonstrate your findings with evidence, none of which is presented here. So it's just hard to take seriously.

I'd love to see an essay written on this subject, and references to the evidence on which this idea comes from. So far though I've only seen stuff that's ethereal.

Also maybe it's just me but why is this being brought up again? If you want to take down Lincoln whatever you can do this to every president, they're world leaders who make hundreds of decisions. To me though this is most likely about racists trying to show that the country isn't that racist and the real baddies are those who stopped the racists.

Specifically this new challenge to the Civil War reminds me of a book that came out awhile ago arguing that the Palestinians aren't actually from Palestine, so they don't belong there. There's no issue, they don't belong so the Jews are doing nothing wrong occupying their land and keeping them in a giant open air prison. This book was praised in the media for obvious reasons that Israel is one of our close allies. It didn't take long though before it was destroyed academically by some intelligent people. It has largely been forgotten because it's a waste of fucking paper.

This in my opinion is a waste of breath and time, please prove me wrong.