Curse you, John Wilkes Booth!!

What are the odds that we could get this plan back in action now? Better late than never!

Uhhh, is it too late to implement this wonderful idea?

Yes. But there's nothing preventing YOU from leaving. Is that a possibility?

Blacks can't live in any kind of civilized society without the help of Whites because the Blacks destroy it. Whites don't need Blacks for anything.

Of course you need blacks!! How else will serious losers like yourself manage to feel superior?

No, we don't need you for that either. If you people weren't such criminals, parasites and trouble makers it wouldn't be so angering...but you ARE most of the time.

Oh, stop all your miserable whining!! Especially since you sound like a pretty worthless person in your own right. I would call you a racist @$$hole, but I'm sure you've heard it all before.

Not really. I consider name calling from you wastes-of-space Leftists to be badges of honor. You know, like everything obama loves, most Americans hate and vice versa. You're on the wrong side, but then again about 95% of you are.

The fact is lincoln had already purchased 7 clipper ships and was buying even more,those 7 ships had already sailed to liberia repatriating freed slaves back to africa........thats the fact that this so called author isnt telling anyone!

Lincoln rode rough-shod over the Constitution. Suspending habeas corpus; closing opposition newspapers; jailing opposition editors; and even jailing the entire Maryland legislature to prevent them from voting on succession. Slavery only became a rallying cry after two years of the war. Follow the money. High tariffs forced the South to purchase goods form Northern suppliers rather than trade directly with Great Briton for their goods. Fort Sumter was basically a Custom House. Lincoln said he didn't care if the South succeeded as long as The Union could continue to collect the tariffs through southern ports. Obviously that wasn't going to happen, so Lincoln was able to raise an army and deftly maneuvered the South into taking the first shot. All of this was done without Congressional approval as Congress was not in session at the time. After the fact, when Congress convened, the action was approved. Look it up.

It has been well documented for a while that Lincoln was not motivated by the well-being of the slaves but by a deep seated feeling that blacks were inferior. Indeed, one author has long claimed that Lincoln opposed slavery because he thought that any contact between whites and inferior blacks would diminish the white race.

He was correct, too.

This information is not new. Instead of listening to the politically correct dumbed down idiot historians of today, go back to the source documents and see what the people actually alive during the civil war had to say about their own actions and motivations. For instance, did you know thatin 1962 Lincoln said:

" 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. "

Oh, and he was right about recolonization. Imagine how much more intelligent, wealthy, powerful and safe this country we would be if we didn't have to continue to pay for and incarcerate the stupid, lazy, shiftless portion of black subculture that brings this country down in every way.

They came to Detroit from the south during WWII. Considered not intelligent enough to be soldiers, they took the free ticket to Detroit for factory job, and eventually burned it down like Grant did to Atlanta.

Sherman burned Atlanta not Grant

You sir, are correct.

"The newly released documents underscore just how hot a topic colonization was in the 1800s, when prominent statesmen debated whether blacks and whites could ever live together in a functioning society."

Mind telling us how that debate ended, because it's been about 150 years and we STILL haven't figured this one out. We have to lock up a significant percentage of the black population for most of their prime years why now? How can 12% of the country be HALF our prison population? Either there is something fundamentally wrong with the way the black community functions, or there's something fundamentally wrong with how law enforcement functions. Either way we have a problem, with entirely too many people willing to look into the latter problem, but few even asking if the former might indeed be the issue.

Look across the ocean to see how blacks live in Africa, any more questions?

I'm pretty sure that there are quite a few of you losers who would prefer that the former (fundamental 'wrongness') be put forward as the only cause of so many Blacks being incarcerated.

Blacks are inherently lazy, violent and immoral. You're just stupid, as most of the rest of you are.

And you are a sadly pathetic little nobody, aren't you? And boring, as well. Tsk, tsk...what a shame.

What I said is the truth. Your post is just typical nonsense. You can't argue facts so you use personal insults on those who state facts. You people are your faults, no one else's.

Oh, dear! I must have missed your "facts" because stating that "Blacks are inherent lazy, violent and immoral." actually shows YOUR inherent stupidity.

Sorry, toots.....most people KNOW about you people. Denial never helps the problems though, so maybe try some reality for a change.

One only has to read the various editions by Thomas J. DiLorenzo to discern that Lincoln sought this solution for many years. While these archive findings may booster the discussion, the fact that Lincoln did NOT want a biracial society has been no secret (except from the general, liberal education public).

My grandmother was born in 1870-something. She had an expression which she used whenever we walked into a room where she was speaking, and asked her what was going on: ""Oh, we're talking of shipping the blacks over to Africa."

Her family wasn't strongly political, although they were Republicans from northern Illinois; but evidently the prospect of relocating the blacks had been discussed in her home even after the plan was dropped.

She had taught school in Iowa beginning when she was just past 18, and perhaps the history books back then dealt with the deportation situation.

No matter how you view this ... Lincoln obviously saw this train wreck from a mile away. We still have problems with integration. Not just in the South, but also in the North. In fact, there are areas in the north, which, at least when I lived there, were extremely segregated and this segregation was enforced by both blacks (citizens mostly) and white (police mostly). After the race riots, many whites fled urban areas and were very protective of suburban strongholds. I don't know how it is today, because I live in DC, which is very well integrated (as is most of the south for the most part). Though, I did go back this summer and noticed particular areas of Cleveland being gentrified by whites. This is happening in Columbus as well. It's kind of funny. Back in the 60's and 70's, if blacks moved in, the saying was, "there goes the neighborhood". Well it's the same thing, in reverse. You have a bunch of gay white guys and single females invading poor black neighborhoods. And they are pissed and somewhat bewildered. Like, "why in the hell would you want to move here? Or what are you doing here?". I saw the looks on their faces for myself and heard some of the comments. Anyways, it's amuzing and incredible, because this country is always on the move ... always changing. Nothing is etched in stone, because people always find a way around the impediment in order to find a better life.

What a joke the whole Lincoln myth really is. His comments during the Lincoln-Douglas debates make plain what Lincoln thought about blacks; of course he wanted to deport them. America's mainstream historians persist in portraying him as the saintly father-figure of America; yet he got 623,000 men killed in his war against the South, primarily to assure that he would get reelected in 1864.

To all you history "teachers" out there, remember, "The truth shall set YOU free!" Sic Semper Tyrannis.

Lincoln changed his opinion over time. By 1865, after Gen. Sherman had seized plantations in South Carolina and distributed the land to the freed slaves, Lincoln went along with it. He also supported a bill for a kind of Homesteader Act for the freed slaves. This was passed by Congress, but then vetoed by new Pres. Andrew Johnson.

Had any of you paid attention in your high school American History class you would have already known this. Before the next shocking revelation jumps up, I'll tell you a little known secret. The country Liberia was founded by the United States so blacks could be repatriated to Africa after the Civil War. Don't let this out but you could also have found this information in your American History class.

it took Lincoln nearly 2 years to sign the EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION and only did it to punish the south by taking away property

he didn't give a damn about slaves, just the union being all slavery or no slavery

United States
Constitution

Examination

The so-called
"Progressives" have, for many years, been pushing this country down
the "slippery slope!” The current administration is close to sealing
its doom when it hits the very near bottom. The administration is
lawless, and the administration and country is increasingly being populated and
threatened by those who are following suit in the accelerated effort to compel
government dependence.

Reading of the below
document will inform you of just how visionary Ronald Reagan was in his
evaluation of where the country stood prior to his venture into office and
where we stand today. The document is found on the Hillsdale College web
site and is a component of one of the free courses they offer.

A Time for Choosing, by
Ronald Reagan (1911 - 2004): http://online.hillsdale.edu...

Alternate Site for A
Time for Choosing: http://www.donmcelyea.com/A...

United States
Constitution

Education

Visit the following link for a preview of the free Hillsdale
College course on the United States of America Constitution: http://online.hillsdale.edu...

I highly recommend this
outstanding, free, course about the United States of America Constitution.
Speak with authority when discussing it or challenging the direction our
Government is going. Learn about the environment in which it was developed and
the provisions made to keep it relevant. Observe the dangerous ways in which
the current administration is deviating from it without the authority to do so.
View the following link:

http://lp.hillsdale.edu/con...

This was commonly debated back then and it was a prominent in the discussions in the Lincoln Douglas debates. Unlike what many like to frame it, he wasn't trying to 'get rid of them'. The point was they were taken by force from their homes so they should have the option to return to their homes. This wasn't by force. At that, the nation of Liberia was founded to give them a home if they so desired.

Many try to spin this as a disregard for black people and wanting to deport them, in reality, he was trying to give them an opportunity and choice.

Good ideas have no shelf life.

It would have been a good start. Allowing, not forcing, people to return to their homelands.

If colonization projects are news to some of you, here'e some more stuff that might be of interest. Lincoln's only goal at the beginning of the war was to preserve the union. Freedom for blacks became a logical idea as the South kept victory in doubt. So it was a war strategy. This explains why it really freed no slaves (technically). It freed slaves only in states in rebellion where such law was not recognized, and it did not free slaves in border states like Kentucky and Missouri and others. Lincoln could not run the risk of those border slave states joining the Confederacy. Lincoln was also in favor of paying planters for their financial losses. This was not because he favored slavery which he did not, but again, his major aim was to preserve the union. And it is of course true that if you do not preserve the union, you cannot end slavery. Eventually, slavery was ended. But what about political equality, what about the write to vote for MALE blacks? Even the leader of the Radical Republicans, Thaddeus Stevens balked at given blacks the right to vote. Why? If we do away with the 3/5's Compromise and all blacks in the South are counted, the agrarian South combined with agricultral regions elsewhere would control both houses of Congress and be able to elect the President as well. While the South was out of the Union, the industrial North had had it their way completely. So the right to vote would have to wait, and wait, and wait, etc. So there was obviously no racial utopia in the North. Many in the North were only concerned about getting cotton from the South at the cheapest price possible (Southern wealth and Northern profits as some put it.), and concern for slaves was not a high priority. Of course, the South was certainly no racial utiopia and some in the North were sincere in their concerns for ending slavery from beginning to end. Lincoln, sort of Obama-like in his lack of experience, did quite well guiding the nation back together, but it is time for us to realize that he was not saintly when it came to emancipation. Ol Hank

This is nothing new. Sorry, but historians, both liberal and conservative, have written at great depth on ths subject. However, it is also true that both liberal and conservative historians have been selling out as they write history that is slanted to meet not the demands of good history and the truth, but rather to cater to the similarly slanted views of those most likely to buy books of that sort. After reading the slanted history they run here and proclaim that history backs every word they say. Again, both liberals and conservatives are guilty of this form of malpractice.

I recently went back and read ol C. Vann Woodward's THE BURDEN OF SOUTHERN HISTORY which I think was first published around 1960. What a refreshing read! What scholarship! Especially after looking through a book entitled THE PATRIOT'S HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES which had introductory by Rush Limbaugh! Rush has no degree in anything, especially history. Rush, however, was quite honest on the Haney Project when he said on anything he was ever involved with, he followed his instincts. Folks, you cannot instinctively know history. On the other hand, I would follow Rush's instincts without much knowledge of history before I would follow the type of historian all too prevalent today, whose research is characterized by throwing out anything in disagreement with his beginning hypotheses. The result is always a distortion. I guess the historians are trying to cash in as are the professional blowhards. Sadly, money wins over truth again.

If you are a history buff but have no familiarity with C. Vann Woodward, give him a try. Richard Hoffstadter is another good one. And it is amazing how pertinent their writings are to the present times. That is one important mark of great history. Ol Hank

I suggest that Lincoln understood the crisis he would unleash by creating a class of citizens from unwilling immigrants who held foreign allegiances. He was proven right by history as the contempt for both the law and the culture are still brewed and imbued in enclaves across the nation at our peril and expense. The time has come to recognize the folly of caving in to false claims of racism which only support the next generation of irresponsible malcontents who never were slaves to anything but politically ambitious ideologues and should assimilate or suffer the consequences that any other miscreants suffer when trying to upset a culture without legitimate purpose. Gradual change in this regard would do best but encouraging every person willing to throw off their racial chains they have chosen by vote and become citizens that seek to retain liberty from the same abusive government type that has prevented their assimilation. There is no other choice today but to stand up as an American or become one more of the socialists dupes dividing the nation into class war.

Too bad Lincoln did not live long enough to do that. Multi-culturalism does not work--anyway. Actually, I think Liberia was the start of this.

1. Ft. Sumter was a tax office, not a slave market.
2. The Emancipation Proclamation was a 'War Powers Act' and as such, according to Lincoln during his tour of Richmond, could be repealed when the war was over. It was intended to encourage Southern soldiers to return to their homes to protect their wives and children in the event, as Lincoln hoped, there was a slave rebellion as in Haiti years before: but it didn't happen. The Missouri Compromise was as much to keep Negroes (free or otherwise) out of the North as it was to limit slavery.

Lincoln hated slavery, there is no doubt; but he was one of the most racist presidents until current times.

Quite a bit of racism here! And those of you who are infected with that racism will not make matters any better. I am a Southerner from Louisiana and I am proud of it. Of course, I am an American first and am proud to have served in both the USAF and the US Army. Those who have written posts with such racist views, well, I have no doubt as to how you vote. When LBJ came up with his War on Poverty, getting civil rights legislation passed and such, Democrats in the south over-whelmingly shifted to the Republican Party making it possible for Republicans to win national elections. It was no miracle comeback for Nixon to have risen from the ashes. It was simply that he could win more southern states. Kennedy being a Catholic had given Nixon a chance in their battle. When some of you start sounding like Klansmen of the past, remember you got to be against Jews, Catholics, immigrants, as well as blacks.

Also, you cannot just read something Lincoln (or anyone else) might have said and think that was exactly how he felt personally about the matter. Again, he was no saint and was certainly a politician (Thank goodness, he evolved into a statesman! Most politicians never do.). There can be no doubt from what he has written and said privately that he hated the institution of slavery, that it troubled him deeply that in a land that said it was based on equality, there were those who were slaves. For people with a conscience, it was a most depressing situation. Jefferson, much earlier, had expressed his worries about the nation's future knowing that God's wrath with us would someday manifest itself.

So Lincoln often said things in the effort to get Southerners and those living in Border States to not take up arms, not secede, and in return the institution of slavery would continue. And from our vantage point in time, we now see that if all had followed that course, slavery would have died a natural death as mechanization was introduced into agriculture.

I think the election of Barrack Obama brought out the best in people and the worst in people. Some of you clearly would like to turn history around and have it go in reverse. Some of us have a better feeling about our nation as we go in a direction in which our actions better match the ideals this nation was founded on as well as what the Good Book says about how we treat one another. A House divided against itself cannot stand. We will either shift into reverse or keep on trucking ahead. I am not certain as to which road we will take, but the House will cease to be divided. I think. Ol Hank

Looks like President Obama and his team were close to accurate as to how Egypt would go. He is not nearly as bad as some of you think. I am close to giving him a solid B. Time will tell.

Knowing the truth doesnt make one racist. Playing a victim over slavery does.Blacks should be grateful their anscester were slaves. Where would they be today? In the jungle ?

Racism is basically natural. It will always result when multiculturalism effects a nation in the worst ways possible.

From Detroit, you are dead on!

I've just found newspaper articles from the Daily Mountain Eagle, Jasper, Alabama, post 1865 announcing the shipment of freed slaves to colonize on foreign shores. It wasn't just an idea, it actually happened more than once.

Wow. The article leads one to believe this is new information. This is college level history. Lincoln had a plan to place the slaves off shore around Haiti. Nothing new here. First thing you note at university is that high school history does not even remotely resemble what you learn in college history. Going back even further, it's astonishing the items about the founding fathers that are left out in high school history. Significant info but a little harsh at that age...tmi for teens I guess.