Emmy insight

I noted while watching the Emmys that barely 10 percent of the employed comedy writers nominated were women.

[human too]

Marshall Burke, comparing the trials of President Obama to the trials of President Lincoln is laughable.

Even before the election of 1860, several State governments had publicly sworn that if Lincoln were elected, they would secede from the United States. Seven of them had made good on that pledge even before Lincoln was inaugurated on March 4, 1861. Lincoln issued his call for troops to help quell the uprising on April 15, exactly six weeks after he was sworn in (Fort Sumter had been fired upon on April 12), and within five more weeks, four more States had joined the earlier seven.

There was a large-scale assassination attempt (not just a lone lunatic, but an entire "hit-squad,") determined to kill him before he ever reached Washington. We view Lincoln today as a martyr and a saint, but while he was in office he was often portrayed as either a tyrant on the order of Nero, or else as an ape in a suit.

He presided over the bloodiest and most destructive four years in US history, and as commander-in-chief presided over more military deaths than any other President, before or since.

His assassination at the hands of John Wilkes Booth came just six weeks after his second inauguration.

People who, with a straight face, compare the trials of Obama to the trials of Lincoln, need to read more history.

[Former Ranger]

Susan Gibbons, you gathered all that from watching the program? They had ALL the comedy writers there for you to count? Get a life.

[Former Ranger]

human too, okay let's forget the comparison to Lincoln. That just leaves the comparisons to JFK and FDR to deal with. Sheesh

[Mellers]

Thomas J. Lyons Sr: It's often been said that those who need the help the most have the smallest voice (or something like that).

The 30+ million people without health insurance are in a minority. Even those who have it but are under-insured are in a minority. And once again, it's about "me" and not "you", or better yet, "we."

I have great health insurance, but I also know many who don't. That's who I'm fighting for.

[Gndydncr]

Is it possible, Thomas J. Lyons Sr., North St. Paul, that the product produced by the liberals in congress was junk? Could it be that John Kline fully recognized that the health insurance plan on the table failed miserably when put up against the health care he experienced from the government in his lifetime. You really do need to understand that not everything that comes from government is good.

[tww]

The Emmys? Who cares?

[Independent Voter]

human too wrote:

Marshall Burke, comparing the trials of President Obama to the trials of President Lincoln is laughable.
Even before the election of 1860, several State governments had publicly sworn that if Lincoln were elected, they would secede from the United States. Seven of them had made good on that pledge even before Lincoln was inaugurated on March 4, 1861. Lincoln issued his call for troops to help quell the uprising on April 15, exactly six weeks after he was sworn in (Fort Sumter had been fired upon on April 12), and within five more weeks, four more States had joined the earlier seven.
There was a large-scale assassination attempt (not just a lone lunatic, but an entire "hit-squad,") determined to kill him before he ever reached Washington. We view Lincoln today as a martyr and a saint, but while he was in office he was often portrayed as either a tyrant on the order of Nero, or else as an ape in a suit.
He presided over the bloodiest and most destructive four years in US history, and as commander-in-chief presided over more military deaths than any other President, before or since.
His assassination at the hands of John Wilkes Booth came just six weeks after his second inauguration.
People who, with a straight face, compare the trials of Obama to the trials of Lincoln, need to read more history.

One more thing should be noted about Lincoln. Lincoln put the United States ahead of his political amibition. Lincoln refused to negotiate for peace with the Confederates because such a peach would have resulted in the wholesale destruction of the United States. After the Confederates California and Oregon would have left, Texas would have left the Confederacy and taken Oklahoma, New Mexico, and probably Arizona with them, and even Minnesota may have left the union.

This decision not to negotiate peace with the confederates was not only unpopular with the public but also with his own party. In fact Lincoln expected to lose the 1864 election because of it. The capture of Atlanta in September of 1864 is what saved the election for Lincoln

When President Obama is willing to make that kind of sacrafice to this country then you can compare him to Lincoln.

[human too]

Independent Voter wrote:

<quoted text>
One more thing should be noted about Lincoln. Lincoln put the United States ahead of his political amibition. Lincoln refused to negotiate for peace with the Confederates because such a peach would have resulted in the wholesale destruction of the United States. After the Confederates California and Oregon would have left, Texas would have left the Confederacy and taken Oklahoma, New Mexico, and probably Arizona with them, and even Minnesota may have left the union.
This decision not to negotiate peace with the confederates was not only unpopular with the public but also with his own party. In fact Lincoln expected to lose the 1864 election because of it. The capture of Atlanta in September of 1864 is what saved the election for Lincoln
When President Obama is willing to make that kind of sacrafice to this country then you can compare him to Lincoln.

Thank you, Independent Voter, for these further insights on President Lincoln.

As the war drew toward a close, and the defeat of the South appeared increasingly inevitable, Lincoln adopted a more conciliatory tone. It was apparently at Lincoln's insistence that Andrew Johnson, a Democrat from Tennessee, was selected to be his running-mate in 1864.(Johnson was the only Senator from a Southern State to remain loyal to the Union).

It is sadly ironic that at his second inaugural address, where he preached "with malice toward none, with charity for all," he did not know that he himself had only six weeks to live.

[Randie K]

Thomas J. Lyons Sr, hilarious letter coming from an ambulance chaser.

[Bob the Bilderberg]

Mellers wrote:

Thomas J. Lyons Sr: It's often been said that those who need the help the most have the smallest voice (or something like that).

No, it's "those who have the least to contribute to the collective are the biggest supporters of collectivism."

[gzaiger]

"We view Lincoln today as a martyr and a saint, but while he was in office he was often portrayed as either a tyrant on the order of Nero, or else as an ape in a suit."

Interesting. Sounds like what Obama is going through now, except the words are more like Socialist, etc. Lincoln was the one who started Income Tax, and he was resoundedly hated for it, at the time, that is.....

And, "When President Obama is willing to make that kind of sacrafice to this country then you can compare him to Lincoln."

I would put forth that Obama knows he is taking a huge chance on trying to fix health care, and that if he fails, he will most likey lose his party's majority in Congress and be a one-term President himself - not much different that Lincolns political sacrifice, hmmmm? Even if you don't agree with Obamas plan, how can you not give him credit for trying to fix something that is bankrupting our country, at great personal risk?

[Bob the Bilderberg]

gzaiger wrote:

Lincoln was the one who started Income Tax, and he was resoundedly hated for it, at the time,

No he wasn't. Income tax was proposed by the democrat congress to help pay for the civil war but it was defeated by the supreme court as unconstiutional. That's why the socialists had to push through a constitutional amendment (16th) in 1913.

[Gndydncr]

gzaiger wrote:

... at great personal risk?

Great personal risk of what? Humiliation? He could use a little of that.

[Gndydncr]

Randie K wrote:

Thomas J. Lyons Sr, hilarious letter coming from an ambulance chaser.

Thank you for that piece of insight.

http://www.lyonslawfirm.com/about.htm

[gzaiger]

Bob the Bilderberg wrote:

<quoted text>
No he wasn't. Income tax was proposed by the democrat congress to help pay for the civil war but it was defeated by the supreme court as unconstiutional. That's why the socialists had to push through a constitutional amendment (16th) in 1913.

Sorry, Bob, you're wrong. Here's the scoop:
"On this day in 1861, in order to finance the Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln signed the Revenue Act, imposing the first federal income tax in U.S. history.
Before asking Congress to act, Lincoln sent letters to cabinet members Edward Bates, Gideon Welles and Salmon Chase requesting their views as to whether the president had the constitutional authority to “collect [such] duties.” " That date was Aug 5, 1861, and Abe initiated it, as you can read.

If you want the whole story, here's a great link:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0809/257...

If you do a google on Abe Lincon income tax, you'll see he's even called the Father of the Income Tax.
It was in 1895 that the Supreme Court declared the tax unconstitutional, and it was re-passed again in 1913. But it all started with Abe - Republican, by the way.....

[gzaiger]

Gndydncr wrote:

<quoted text>
Great personal risk of what? Humiliation? He could use a little of that.

Um, the exact same risk referenced for Abe Lincoln - not getting re-elected. If that risk is notable for Lincoln, it should be for other Presidents, too.

[tjwillie]

gzaiger wrote:

<quoted text>
Um, the exact same risk referenced for Abe Lincoln - not getting re-elected. If that risk is notable for Lincoln, it should be for other Presidents, too.

Lincon risked losing the country, Obama only risks some popularity. Not even close to a good comparison. During the Civil War there was a lot more at stake than an election.

[Independent Voter]

gzaiger wrote:

"We view Lincoln today as a martyr and a saint, but while he was in office he was often portrayed as either a tyrant on the order of Nero, or else as an ape in a suit."
Interesting. Sounds like what Obama is going through now, except the words are more like Socialist, etc. Lincoln was the one who started Income Tax, and he was resoundedly hated for it, at the time, that is.....
And, "When President Obama is willing to make that kind of sacrafice to this country then you can compare him to Lincoln."
I would put forth that Obama knows he is taking a huge chance on trying to fix health care, and that if he fails, he will most likey lose his party's majority in Congress and be a one-term President himself - not much different that Lincolns political sacrifice, hmmmm? Even if you don't agree with Obamas plan, how can you not give him credit for trying to fix something that is bankrupting our country, at great personal risk?

Gzaiger, my personal opinion on the subject is no President should ever be compared to President Lincoln. No President has faced the troubles or experienced the trials that this man did. President Lincoln is truly the father of the United States.

Prior to him the United States was a collection of states where public loyalty was at the state level. After the Civil War a nation was born, one where the word "Nation" had a meaning. While this transformation was both painful and bloody President Lincoln was able to guide the nation with a steady hand.

How much respect did the Confederates have for Lincoln. Prior to the 1864 election General Robert E. Lee confided that the only way the Confederacy can win this war is if Lincoln is defeated in the election. When that did not happen Lee confided that the defeat of the Confederacy was not a question of if but a question of when.

After the Assasination of President Lincoln this same Robert E. Lee stated that the Confederacy has lost it's strongest supporter in Washington. Lincoln made it a point not to humilate the Confederacy in defeat and to not punish them for their rebellion. This went a long way towards healing the wounds. Unfortunately his assisination allowed Congress to impose punishment for the rebellion.

President Lincoln actions demonstrated that it's OK to disagree. That is something our current President has not shown.

[gzaiger]

Whoa! Dont get me wrong - I think Lincoln is the greatest President ever, I would never inply otherwise. But part of what made him great was his willingness to do what needed to be done in spite of public opinion. As one person said, putting the country before political ambition is a huge indicator of real patriotism and leadership. Lincolns demonstration of that is beyond doubt.
But I still say there have been others who have faught for what they beleived in despite the risks. I beleive Obamas very politically erisky push to solve the health care crisis is an example. Though I would concede it does not make him an Abe Lincoln, it does warrent respect for the effort.
Pres F. Roosevelt fought for Social Security, Pres Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act, Pres Adams avoided war with France when every one wanted to go, and Pres Lincoln brought us the Income tax. All needed, all brought them defeat or hardship or scorn at the time.
I just encourage us to remember that Obama is just carrying on a proud tradition of fighting for a cause he beleives will help the country, though like Lincoln, it may come at the cost of political ambition. Time will tell......

[gzaiger]

Though hopefully, like Lincoln, and Roosevelt Obama will get re-elected too.