The Instigator
clsmooth
Pro (for)
Losing
12 Points
The Contender
Jlconservative
Con (against)
Winning
24 Points

Lincoln was the most 'liberal' president of all time; his supporters are NOT conservatives!

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/22/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,493 times Debate No: 2069
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (18)
Votes (12)

 

clsmooth

Pro

First, the definition of "liberal" from the perspective of this debate.

1. Growing the government.

2. Centralizing control in Washington, as opposed to decentralization (federalism) where power is in the hands of the states and the people.

3. Instituting new taxes and raising existing ones.

4. A Keynesian monetary policy -- i.e. manipulation of the currency, as opposed to a hard-money, commodity standard.

5. Antipathy for free-market capitalism.

6. Bastardization of the Constitution and its original intent.

Secondly, by accepting this debate, you must not resort to "Lincoln was not quite as liberal as FDR, Wilson, or LBJ." You must argue that he was in fact a conservative, or at the very least, no more liberal than average.

To support Lincoln's political philosophy, to embody it, is NOT conservatism. Conservatism is the opposite of all the points listed below. Instead, a minimalist government; states' rights and federalism; free-market capitalism with a hard-money standard; and support for the Constitution and its Original Intent are all hallmarks of traditional American conservatism.

It is my assertion that Lincoln embodied all six elements of liberalism, as above. Your task is to either suggest that he didn't, or to spit in the face of the founding fathers by suggesting that in destroying everything they stood for, Lincoln was "conserving" it. This, of course, is Lincoln's own assertion, indicative of his deceitful and/or insane nature.

To be conservative in America is to preserve our traditions of limited government, federalism, free enterprise, and the Constitution. Lincoln was opposed to and/or abused all of the above. He was the biggest liberal in our history, because he made possible the abuses by later tyrants such as Wilson, FDR, Truman, and LBJ. To call oneself a "conservative" and support Lincoln is no less illogical than to call oneself a Jew and support Adolf Hitler.
Jlconservative

Con

Mr. Clsmooth this is as fair a debate as being against the topic Bill Clinton is a liar. Of course Abraham Lincoln was a liberal, government loving, opposition towards the free market and free speech. This is common sense, anyone that has studied history knows that the above topic is accurate except for the latter end of the statement.

Look I should probably not have accepted this debate but since you were not responding to my comments on my anti-confederate flag debate I decided this was probably the best way to speak to you. I agreed to debate you against the statements you made in the comments section that are untrue, pathetic,naive,false,moronic, and stupidity in its truest form. For instance:

"By the way, JLLiberal is a perfect example of what government indoctrination centres (public schools) do to the mind. He is like an Orwellian caricature."

"First, he's a government-worshiping, central-statist liberal calling himself a conservative; and then he has the audacity to suggest I learned an Austro-Jeffersonian perspective from the Lincoln-worshiping, government-exalting concentration camp I was forced to attend from age 5 to age 18. Oh boy, another liberal passing himself off to students as a conservative and thus turning them against conservatism... If the neocons aren't part of the Left's master plan, then they are certainly doing their bidding."

You offended the hell out of me, by suggesting such things, as listed above I get more crap for being a part of the republican party every day that you have your entire life, and to suggest I am part of the government worshiping, central-statistic liberal, to me is insulting. Also you made these statements

"A better way of saying it would be to call Hitler the German Lincoln. Hitler praised Lincoln in Mein Kampf for destroying state's rights and centralizing authority." which of course is absurd and ridicules you make a debate and topic it " Hitler was the German Lincoln" I will debate you then, this topic is as moronic as arguing if a demoractic president would be good for this country, its common knowledge and a pointless debate that one wouldn't be.

Also I wanted to apologize for my jab about Ron Paul, I agree with Mr. Paul on many many things, but I do not believe that he is strong enough on his views about radical Islam and its threat to our national security, however his economics,immigration,taxation, and health care views are perfect. However its clear to me at least that he is not going to be elected as the nominee and I am afraid that most of you guys are jumping ship to support McCain which is scary.

And final about Lincoln yes he was an extreme liberal, he supported strong government and little individual rights, he did have his own secret police, he did many things that in this day would be considered communistic ideas however to call him a Hitler is almost a disgrace, Many Southern states made it clear that if Lincoln was elected, they would secede (leave the Union). The South was against Lincoln because he opposed slavery. South Carolina was the first to secede in December 1860. Six other Southern states followed: Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas. After Lincoln's inauguration, Virginia, Arkansas, Tennessee, and North Carolina also left the Union. These states became known as the Confederacy. The secession of the Southern states led to the first shots of the Civil War when the Confederates seized Fort Sumter in South Carolina in April 1861.

Lincoln faced the greatest national crisis of any U.S. President. He hated war and the death and destruction it would bring. However, he accepted war as the only means of saving the Union. He warned the South in his Inaugural Address:

"In your hands, my dissatisfied fellow countrymen, and not in mine, is the momentous issue of civil war. The government will not assail you... You have no oath registered in Heaven to destroy the government, while I shall have the most solemn one to preserve, protect and defend it." (Abraham Lincoln Web Site)

As the nation neared the third year of the bloody Civil War, President Lincoln issued the historic Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863. The proclamation declared "that all persons held as slaves" within the rebellious states "are, and henceforward shall be free."

This proclamation actually freed few people. It did not apply to slaves in the Border States of Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland, and Delaware; nor did it affect slaves in southern areas already under Union control. Naturally, the states that had seceded did not act on Lincoln's orders. But the proclamation showed Americans — and the world — that the war was being fought to end slavery.

Although the Emancipation Proclamation did not immediately free a single slave, it changed the way black men were accepted during the war. Black men could join the Union Army and Navy. The liberated could become the liberators. By the end of the war, nearly 200,000 black soldiers and sailors fought for the Union and freedom.

On November 19, 1863, President Lincoln gave his famous Gettysburg Address in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. The speech dedicated the battlefield to the soldiers who had died there. The battle site became a military cemetery. Lincoln stated in his moving speech: "...we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth." (The National Archives.)

You insulted me in your comments don't take my apologies as being friendly and I look forward to obliterating you in a debate, however make it a topic that is not so obviously started in order for you to win an easy non-controversial topic that no one is denying.
Debate Round No. 1
clsmooth

Pro

JLConservative concedes the point that Abraham Lincoln was a liberal. In fact, he says Lincoln was as much of a liberal as Bill Clinton was a liar. Wow, that's a powerful indictment against the "Great Liberator."

JLConservative then cites a statement I made against him, accusing him of being "a perfect example of what government indoctrination centres (public schools) do to the mind." But I didn't insult him out of nowhere. You see, it was he who first accused ME of obtaining my Austro-Jeffersonian historical/economic perspective from a public school -- which is the height of absurdity. Here is what JLConservative said: "I wonder where you got all this information because the Lincoln I have been studying for 12 years has had absolutely nothing to do with what your suggesting wow....is this what government school does to you?"

Now what he was referring to there is the following laundry list I posted elsewhere:

----

Like Hitler, Lincoln was a hardcore white supremacist. He opposed the expansion of slavery because he wanted to keep the North exclusively for white people. After the Civil War, he intended to deport all blacks to Africa and Haiti.

Like Hitler, Lincoln waged war on civilians. He micromanaged the Civil War and ordered destruction of private property and killing of innocent civilians; including women and children.

Like Hitler, Lincoln abhorred free speech. He destroyed the printing presses of anti-government newspapers and had editors jailed. He jailed any opponents of his without trial. It was not only a crime to criticize Lincoln, but also to NOT defend him in the face of criticism.

Like Hitler, Lincoln was an imperialist. He invaded the sovereign South with no declaration of war, and had his eyes of Mexico, too. After Lincoln's death, his party organized mass genocide of the Plains Indians.

----

All of which is absolutely true.

From JL's Round 1: "yes [Lincoln] was an extreme liberal, he supported strong government and little individual rights, he did have his own secret police, he did many things that in this day would be considered communistic ideas however to call him a Hitler is almost a disgrace."

Almost a disgrace? Let's see, Hitler was for a strong government and little (no) individual rights, Hitler had his own secret police, and he was a National Socialist (like Lincoln). How is it "almost disgraceful" to point out the similarities?

In the comments of another debate, JL said that Abraham Lincoln was the best president ever. Later, he changes his mind to Reagan. Which is it?

How can a conservative, who admits that Lincoln was a horrendous liberal, think that Lincoln (as liberal as Clinton was a liar) was the best president ever? That makes no sense!

Moving on, JL says the southern states threatened to secede because Lincoln was "against slavery." This is false. Lincoln was against the EXPANSION of slavery, but he was not against slavery. He made it very clear when he said: "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."

Southern leaders falsely labeled Lincoln an "abolitionist" as a mere slur. He was not an abolitionist, and in fact, was an ardent white supremacist. Below is a disgusting quote from Lincoln on the subject of race (posted elsewhere, too):

"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races - that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."

The truth is that some Deep South states seceded when Lincoln was elected president, but only a few. The other states you mention only seceded once Lincoln illegally invaded their sister states. The right to secession was one recognized not only by Jefferson and the Democratic-Republicans, but also Hamilton and the Federalists! Secession is clearly protected by the 9th and 10th amendments of the Constitution, as it is nowhere expressly prohibited, and all powers not prohibited to the states are reserved to the states and to the people. Even most northerners at the time acknowledged this!

The truth, of course, is that the South seceded because Lincoln was a National Socialist and anticapitalist. The Republican platform -- like the Whig and Federalist platforms before it -- was expressly fascist. The South already paid the lion's share of taxes (despite having fewer people) through protectionist import tariffs. The proceeds of these tariffs were then used to subsidize "internal improvements" (corporate welfare) in the North. Lincoln, upon his inauguration, sounded his intention to collect these tariffs by military force. The South was an exporting region, and it depended on imports. Protectionist tariffs hurt the South three ways: 1) It made the cost of imported goods more expensive, 2) It allowed northern industrialists to charge higher prices, since they were protected from foreign competition, and 3) other nations retaliated with countervailing duties and reciprocal tariffs, thus hurting the South's ability to export. THIS is why the South seceded, and any student of history would know this.

As you admit, the Emancipation Proclamation freed few (actually, ZERO) slaves. Even slaves in areas of the South that were occupied by the North were not freed by it. The fact is, the Proclamation served two purposes: 1) To make the Civil War look like a moral crusade to Europe -- Europeans would never stand for their governments aiding the pro-slavery South in a war to end slavery; and 2) to hopefully cause slave revolts within the Confederacy. The first part worked, the second part didn't. But it's also important to note that Lincoln intended to send every black person, slave and free, back to Africa (or to Haiti) whether they liked it or not. Money was appropriated for this purpose, but in the horrendously corrupt administrations that followed, it was squandered.

So what are we arguing here? Lincoln was a tyrant and a traitor. I lament John Wilkes Booth's killing of him, because I would have preferred for him to be hung for treason.
Jlconservative

Con

Jlconservative forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
clsmooth

Pro

Like all Lincoln lovers, JLLiberal ran for the hills when confronted with historical facts. Let's see if he comes back for Round 3.
Jlconservative

Con

Sorry Clsmooth, I have six classes to teach on Friday's and then I actually work the rest of the day preparing for my Saturday class. I apologize for your inconvenience I just don't have time to sit here and argue a moronic topic with you all day.

Look all you can show me is a one scrap a tiny piece of a speech from Lincoln and since that is your entire case against one of the great men in American History I will give you some quotes made by Mr. Lincoln from speeches

"As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master. This expresses my idea of democracy. Whatever differs from this, to the extent of the difference, is no democracy." The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume II, (August 1, 1858?), p. 532.

"Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves; and, under a just God, can not long retain it." The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume III, "Letter To Henry L. Pierce and Others" (April 6, 1859), p. 376.

"I leave you, hoping that the lamp of liberty will burn in your bosoms until there shall no longer be a doubt that all men are created free and equal." The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume II, "Speech at Chicago, Illinois" (July 10, 1858), p. 502.

"In giving freedom to the slave, we assure freedom to the free - honorable alike in what we give, and what we preserve. We shall nobly save, or meanly lose, the last best hope of earth. Other means may succeed; this could not fail. The way is plain, peaceful, generous, just - a way which, if followed, the world will forever applaud, and God must forever bless." Lincoln's Second Annual Message to Congress, December 1, 1862

"A house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure permanently half-slave and half-free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved - I do not expect the house to fall - but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing or all the other." Lincoln's 'House-Divided' Speech in Springfield, Illinois, June 16, 1858.

"Fourscore and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal." Lincoln's Gettysburg Address on November 19, 1863.
"Whenever I hear any one arguing for slavery I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally." The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume VIII, "Speech to One Hundred Fortieth Indiana Regiment" (March 17, 1865), p. 361.

"You think slavery is right and should be extended; while we think slavery is wrong and ought to be restricted. That I suppose is the rub. It certainly is the only substantial difference between us." The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume IV, "Letter to Alexander H. Stephens" (December 22, 1860), p. 160. (Stephens was the future Confederate vice-president.)

After Lincoln's election, many Southern states, fearing Republican control in the government, seceded from the Union. Lincoln faced the greatest internal crisis of any U.S. president. After the fall of Ft. Sumter, Lincoln raised an army and decided to fight to save the Union from falling apart. Initially Lincoln anticipated a short conflict; he called for 75,000 volunteers to serve for three months. Despite enormous pressures, loss of life, battlefield setbacks, generals who weren't ready to fight, assassination threats, etc., Lincoln stuck with this pro-Union policy for four long years of Civil War. On January 1, 1863, the Emancipation Proclamation went into effect. This was Lincoln's declaration of freedom for all slaves in the areas of the Confederacy not under Union control. Also, on November 19, 1863, Lincoln gave his famous Gettysburg Address which dedicated the battlefield there to the soldiers who had perished. He called on the living to finish the task the dead soldiers had begun.

Lincoln's domestic policies included support for the Homestead Act. This act allowed poor people in the East to obtain land in the West. Also, Lincoln signed legislation entitled the National Banking Act which established a national currency and provided for the creation of a network of national banks. In addition, he signed tariff legislation that offered protection to American industry and signed a bill that chartered the first transcontinental railroad. Lincoln's foreign policy was geared toward preventing foreign intervention in the Civil War.

In 1864 Ulysses S. Grant was named general-in-chief of the armies of the United States. The South was slowly being worn down. Lincoln was reelected president with Andrew Johnson as his running mate. Lincoln defeated the Democrat George McClellan on November 8, 1864. On April 9, 1865, General Robert E. Lee surrendered to Grant. Two days later Lincoln addressed a crowd outside the White House. Among other things, he suggested he would support voting rights for certain blacks. This infuriated a racist and Southern sympathizer who was in the audience: the actor John Wilkes Booth who hated everything the president stood for.

On Good Friday, April 14, 1865, the Lincolns attended a play entitled Our American Cousin at Ford's Theatre. During the performance Booth arrived at the theater, entered the State Box from the rear, and shot the president in the back of his head at about 10:15 P.M. Lincoln was carried across the street to the Petersen House where he passed away the next day at 7:22 A.M. This was the first presidential assassination in American history, and the nation mourned its leader. His death was the result of the deep divisions and hatreds of the times. Lincoln's body was taken to Springfield by train, and he was buried in the Lincoln Tomb in Oak Ridge Cemetery on May 4, 1865. Because of the assassination, Reconstruction took place without Lincoln's guidance and leadership.

Abraham Lincoln is remembered for his vital role as the leader in preserving the Union during the Civil War and beginning the process that led to the end of slavery in the United States. He is also remembered for his character, his speeches and letters, and as a man of humble origins whose determination and perseverance led him to the nation's highest office

Look, It is completely foolish and naive to say that Lincoln was a dictator, or a Hitler. It is in the constitution not word for word, but it is in the laws of our land when the Union is in threat from within it is the right and the duty of the people to overthrow such government. The fact is the Union WAS in risk of being destroyed because of segregation; the fact is that the Union invaded the south AFTER the attack BY the rebellion on Fort Sumter. You make the lie that Lincoln for no justifiable act invaded the south and killed innocent women and children and he was a terrible person ect ect. The south were the aggressors not Lincoln, the southerners were responsible for ANERSONVILLE prison which is considered as bad if not worst than a Nazi concentration camp, all you can say is repeat passed down information that derives from confederate hate groups such as the Klu Klux Klan and other anti-Lincoln groups in order to justify your hatred and your bile against a man who preserved, saved, liberated, and united us all.
Debate Round No. 3
18 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by MarxistKid 9 years ago
MarxistKid
And you can tell the future?! What can't you do?
Posted by clsmooth 9 years ago
clsmooth
Marxist Kid is a self-professed "Communist." Or in other words, he's a budding neocon. Twenty years from now, a 37-year-old "Marxist Kid" will be a Weekly Standard-subscribing, Fox News-watching, Brown Shirt fascist.
Posted by MarxistKid 9 years ago
MarxistKid
"I'm against the income tax. That makes me "unamerican" in yoru eyes, but you are a socialist, so what do I care what you think?"
Oh Clsmooth, your so right! Because he is a socialist, everything he says is BS! Wow, your really something, eh!?
You've given me a sickly taste in my mouth. Thanks.
Posted by clsmooth 9 years ago
clsmooth
Just as the Free Soil Party was the choice of 10% of white males who would not vote for slavery in 1848, my choice will be Ron Paul, the Libertarian or Constitution parties, because I cannot vote for a candidate who supports the Federal Reserve. That is the all-encompassing issue.

When is the last time a Republican has cut taxes? The runaway inflation and debt load imposed by Bush is a net tax hike of the highest order; much higher than anything Clinton levied. You cannot cut taxes without cutting spending. Inflation itself is a tax -- a hidden tax on wages and savings. And the inflation tax, which is judged in real inflationary terms (money-supply growth, not CPI!), is out of control, thanks to Bush's policies, (including his appointment of arch-inflationist Bernanke to the Fed).

Statistically speaking, government grows more slowly under Democratic presidencies. That's because Republicans in Congress act like Republicans when a Democrat is in the White House; but they act like Marxist-Leninists when one of their own is in.

Bush has presided over the greatest growth in government since LBJ. Clinton (and his adversarial Republican Congress) accomplished a balanced budget and surplus and massive welfare reform. What has Bush done by comparison?

I have no interest in a border wall. The market demands immigrant labor and the welfare state acts like a magnet, subsidizing the labor at the taxpayer's expense. I'm interested in ending the welfare state, not in reserving it only for natural-born citizens. I care not if the person picking my pocket is a citizen or an alien, they're both thieves.
Posted by Jlconservative 9 years ago
Jlconservative
sorry I also forgot to mention, you need to realize the way you think no candidate is going to give you what you want in 2008, and I don't see how Ron Paul can possibly come out on win the nomination, and I know none of my guys are going to choose him for vp. So you guys need to choose who your going support republicans that will limit government, will cut taxes, will end illegal immigration and place a border fence (a tax that you already pay) and make certain our nation is secure. Or are you going to vote for the libs who I hope are so far from your views its not even a chance of votes, but this election will be a turning point for us and everyone should and hopefully will vote.
Posted by Jlconservative 9 years ago
Jlconservative
oh yes forgot to mention, I saw this on your debate on religion and the constitution

"But for MY STATE, I want as limited of government as possible. I don't need the government to restrain my state. I only need ME, MYSELF, AND I. If my neighboring state wants to be a totalitarian socialist dictatorship, then that's fine by me. Just leave me out of it"

haha well if you want more state freedoms I would be moving out of the north and coming down south then pal.
Posted by Jlconservative 9 years ago
Jlconservative
well I have no argument with that except for the fact that its easy to criticize and dissect wars and intentions, different outcomes, and how we could or should have done things better when its passed and gone.

A little to optimistic but your perfectly correct on slavery, history proves that slavery dies of natural causes in every situation. Would we be a better country if Lincoln had chosen to support pacifism? its difficult to predict, but in all pointless to even consider. I recommend the book "Gods and Generals" Personally it may surprise you but I think that launching a crusade against the south was a poor decision and not thought threw well enough. However it is also my opinion that we are a truly united people because of it.

The only argument that I truly have with your way of thinking is that enemies have changed, war has changed, people have changed, the world has changed. We need to look back on the constitution as laws and government that should be fulfilled but we must not cripple ourselves in this knew world that the founding fathers had no understanding of.
Posted by clsmooth 9 years ago
clsmooth
I am not for "no government." I am for constitutional government.

Here is what I think would have happened if the South had been allowed to secede:

1. If Lincoln hadn't attacked South Carolina, only the Deep South would have seceded, not the entirety of what became the Confederacy. That's important to remember.

2. The remainder of the U.S. would have been largely anti-slavery (though still thoroughly white supremacist). The Fugitive Slave Act would not apply to slaves that escaped from the Confederacy, and thus, slaves would find freedom in the North, most likely making easier passage to Canada. This would have greatly increased the cost of maintaining slavery in the South, and the practice would have withered away within a few decades. The amazing thing is that the South was not as racist as the North -- see de Tocqueville. It is entirely believable that blacks would have become free laborers in the South, although admittedly as second-class citizens.

3. As mechanized labor and advancements in technology spread, slavery in the North and South would have ceased being profitable. Without the horrible ill will towards blacks by Southern whites, engineered by the Civil War and Reconstruction, the standing of blacks would have improved over time. DO NOT FORGET: WE ESSENTIALLY HAD APARTHEID IN THIS COUNTRY FOR ONE HUNDRED YEARS AFTER THE CIVIL WAR. I'm not going to lie and say "everything would have been fine and dandy right away if not for the Civil War," but I think it's reasonable to assume blacks would have gained equality by 1964.

4. Most importantly: The Republican Party's National Socialism would have failed miserably without expropriating wealth from the South, and Lincoln would have been vooted from office in 1864. The Union would have reunited within a few more decades, WITH THE ORIGINAL INTENT STILL IN EFFECT, and we would look back to this time as "the time we almost lost the republic."

Too optimistic? Maybe. But not overly so.
Posted by Jlconservative 9 years ago
Jlconservative
(ran out of room)

but anyway I see what you mean I just don't believe a society can function without any means of law. Also you calling me a Liberal is sort of jumping off the deep end. I may not be a supporter of no law, no regulations, no government controlled military, no order. However I am far from a lunatic lefty, oh yes also you wrote earlier I was in support of taxation, my candidate (Rudy) is prepared to launch the largest tax cut in American History, in todays world with nuclear power, weapons of mass destruction, war fare so different from the times of the Romantic wars of Napoleon or even the Revolutionary war. I just don't see a lawless country with only a militia based military lasting long. We would be taken over not by a foreign power but by power seeking citizens. Take a look into the bloody past of the Romans. Little Government does not mean no government at all which I believe the founding fathers understood.

But again, you have a pretty compelling argument to my ears at least. I think we should debate on this topic instead of Lincoln being a dictator which in your eyes I would call any government leader a dictator. But I apologize clsmooth I get what your saying now. I would love to have a debate on this.
Posted by Jlconservative 9 years ago
Jlconservative
Look, I am tired of this it takes a strong person to make his voice heard and be correct, but it takes an even stronger person to admit when he is wrong. So with that quote I will say that after reading your list, showing the faults of the major conservative leaders I can actually see where your coming from. Being a person who has studied American history I am almost sure more than you or anyone on this website has I get it, I understand what your saying. However let me ask you something, I agree with what your saying to a certain extent but it stops at the civil war for me. If the government had been run by the views your expressing we would not be here today, a functioning society cannot exist without any form of government it has NEVER been achieved in the annals of history. The United States of America is as close as a society can reach to complete freedom which is why we have so many issues, freedom does not come free. I suggest that you read about the Greek city states, which is a perfect example of what happens to a nation without any law. A Free society is not a chaotic society that is lawless and uncontrolled. The founding fathers based this country off of government being something that is placed by the people and for the people. They did not seek a society ruled by no one that is lawless and unable to function. They wanted a government that was ruled by the PEOPLE, which is exactly what the loony lefties are opposed of today.

Clsmooth I can finally see your point, your ideas are in a way a form of what the founding fathers wanted, but the founding fathers also recognized that small government did not mean no government at all. You cannot have freedom with a large government, but you cannot stay alive without one entirely.
12 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by FreedomPete 9 years ago
FreedomPete
clsmoothJlconservativeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by 08tsuchiyar 9 years ago
08tsuchiyar
clsmoothJlconservativeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by thepinksquirrel 9 years ago
thepinksquirrel
clsmoothJlconservativeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Pluto2493 9 years ago
Pluto2493
clsmoothJlconservativeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by blond_guy 9 years ago
blond_guy
clsmoothJlconservativeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by righty10294 9 years ago
righty10294
clsmoothJlconservativeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by mmadderom 9 years ago
mmadderom
clsmoothJlconservativeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by soundofgravity 9 years ago
soundofgravity
clsmoothJlconservativeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Larryg 9 years ago
Larryg
clsmoothJlconservativeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by skiies23 9 years ago
skiies23
clsmoothJlconservativeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03