Presidential march began at Gettysburg

Presidential march began at Gettysburg

There are 15 comments on the Evening Sun story from Dec 11, 2008, titled Presidential march began at Gettysburg. In it, Evening Sun reports that:

When documentary filmmaker Ken Burns delivered the keynote speech last month on the 145th anniversary of President Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, it wasn't just to honor the Great Emancipator.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Evening Sun.

Since: Sep 08

Rockville, MD

#1 Dec 11, 2008
In the context of his time, Abraham Lincoln would be appalled at Obama's election since he shared the same racial views as most other whites in the U.S.(North and South) in the mid-nineteenth century. His plan, strictly a military measure devised in 1862, a full year after the Civil War started, was to emanicpate the slaves (only those in Confederacy, but NOT in Maryland, Delaware, or Kentucky) and then send them all back to Africa or to new colonies in the Carribean or in Latin America. There is nothing simialr between Lincoln and Obama, other than the fact they they both rose in Ilinois politics.

As for Ken Burns, he's a skinny little twerp who I wouldn't give the time of day to, based on some of his more outrageous liberal pronouncements, particularly with regard to the Civil War.
UnInspired

United States

#2 Dec 11, 2008
It's easy to be a critic. Why don't you state your primary sources of your information so people can look it up. Keep in mind Lincoln's plan was never set in motion becasue he was assasinated. Lincoln's first priority was bringing the union back together and rebuiling the South. The economy in the South was devistated. Once Lincoln was assiasinated Andrew Johnson wanted nothing to do with Lincolns plan to emancipate the slaves. He didn't agree with making slavery illegal.
Snake-Eyes wrote:
In the context of his time, Abraham Lincoln would be appalled at Obama's election since he shared the same racial views as most other whites in the U.S.(North and South) in the mid-nineteenth century. His plan, strictly a military measure devised in 1862, a full year after the Civil War started, was to emanicpate the slaves (only those in Confederacy, but NOT in Maryland, Delaware, or Kentucky) and then send them all back to Africa or to new colonies in the Carribean or in Latin America. There is nothing simialr between Lincoln and Obama, other than the fact they they both rose in Ilinois politics.
As for Ken Burns, he's a skinny little twerp who I wouldn't give the time of day to, based on some of his more outrageous liberal pronouncements, particularly with regard to the Civil War.
Gettysburg resident 4ever

Lancaster, PA

#3 Dec 11, 2008
Snake-Eyes wrote:
In the context of his time, Abraham Lincoln would be appalled at Obama's election since he shared the same racial views as most other whites in the U.S.(North and South) in the mid-nineteenth century. His plan, strictly a military measure devised in 1862, a full year after the Civil War started, was to emanicpate the slaves (only those in Confederacy, but NOT in Maryland, Delaware, or Kentucky) and then send them all back to Africa or to new colonies in the Carribean or in Latin America. There is nothing simialr between Lincoln and Obama, other than the fact they they both rose in Ilinois politics.
As for Ken Burns, he's a skinny little twerp who I wouldn't give the time of day to, based on some of his more outrageous liberal pronouncements, particularly with regard to the Civil War.
Make sure your facts are straight! Better yet worry about where you are. Let us Gettysburgians worry about if this is right or wrong or if we want a procession with PRESIDENT ELECT NOW/BUT WILL BE PRESIDENT OBAMA come January 20, 2009.
Wow

Since: Sep 08

Rockville, MD

#4 Dec 11, 2008
Gettysburg resident 4ever wrote:
<quoted text>
Make sure your facts are straight! Better yet worry about where you are. Let us Gettysburgians worry about if this is right or wrong or if we want a procession with PRESIDENT ELECT NOW/BUT WILL BE PRESIDENT OBAMA come January 20, 2009.
Wow
Guess what! My facts are straight and I live and work in Adams County.

Since: Sep 08

Rockville, MD

#5 Dec 11, 2008
UnInspired wrote:
It's easy to be a critic. Why don't you state your primary sources of your information so people can look it up.<quoted text>
Ask and ye shall receive...

http://www.dinsdoc.com/wesley-1.htm

http://www.lib.niu.edu/1997/ihy970228.html

http://lincolnstudies.blogspot.com/2007/08/li...

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/featured_doc...

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/emanc...

Since: Sep 08

Rockville, MD

#6 Dec 11, 2008
[QUOTE who="...with PRESIDENT ELECT NOW/BUT WILL BE PRESIDENT OBAMA come January 20, 2009.
Wow[/QUOTE]
Unless the liar gets impeached before he's even inaugurated because of his deal making with Tony Rezko and Governor Blagojevich in Illinois.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/...

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/279535.php
Unhappy Veteran

Gwynn Oak, MD

#7 Dec 12, 2008
We now have a soon to be president who will NOT say the Pledge of Allegiance. WOW I am sure the veterans just love this. I know I don't. Keep Obama in the corrupt cities that the Democrats run. Keep him out of safe and clean Adams County.
Gettysburg resident 4ever

Lancaster, PA

#8 Dec 12, 2008
Unhappy Veteran wrote:
We now have a soon to be president who will NOT say the Pledge of Allegiance. WOW I am sure the veterans just love this. I know I don't. Keep Obama in the corrupt cities that the Democrats run. Keep him out of safe and clean Adams County.
From the WikiAnswers site-Yes. One time he didn't. It was at an event in Indianola Iowa when Obama was photographed as the sole person on the platform not holding his hand over his heart while the National Anthem was being played. It is widely considered appropriate to stand in reverence of the flag even when one does not put ones hand over ones heart, which is what Senator Obama was doing at the event.
The implication, obviously, is that failing to display the proper hand-over-heart etiquette proves Obama is unpatriotic and therefore unfit to hold the office of president. Some have even speculated that it was an intentional gesture of dissent on the candidate's part, to which an Obama spokesperson replied on Inside Edition, "Sometimes he does, sometimes he doesn't [put his hand on his heart]. In no way was he making any sort of statement, and any suggestion to the contrary is ridiculous."

From: http://www.usflag.org/flagetiquette.html

The Pledge of Allegiance and National Anthem

The pledge of allegiance should be rendered by standing at attention, facing the flag, and saluting.
When the national anthem is played or sung, citizens should stand at attention and salute at the first note and hold the salute through the last note. The salute is directed to the flag, if displayed, otherwise to the music.

The Salute
To salute, all persons come to attention. Those in uniform give the appropriate formal salute. Citizens not in uniform salute by placing their right hand over the heart and men with head cover should remove it and hold it to left shoulder, hand over the heart. Members of organizations in formation salute upon command of the person in charge.

Perspective:
While Flag Etiquette is in fact interesting, it isn't in law -- it's a custom, and one that every American is left to follow or not, at their own discretion. Whether one salutes, places their hand over their heart, stands there respectfully, or does not, is neither illegal nor is it improper. It -- like so much else -- is intended to be a matter of choice.

How could any one state that "One time he didn't" did they witness him every time he was present when the natioal anthem was being played. The Bias is showing.

THANK YOU!!!!
Gettysburg Native

United States

#10 Dec 12, 2008
Gettysburg Resident 4ever, I couldn't agree more with your comments. Thank you for your insightful posts and for making Gettysburgians proud to be from Gettysburg. More importantly, it saddens me that others do not share in how wonderful it is that a president elect would choose to start the march in a small town of monumental and symbolic historical significance. Go Gettysburg!
Gettysburg Native

United States

#11 Dec 12, 2008
Snake-Eyes wrote:
In the context of his time, Abraham Lincoln would be appalled at Obama's election since he shared the same racial views as most other whites in the U.S.(North and South) in the mid-nineteenth century. His plan, strictly a military measure devised in 1862, a full year after the Civil War started, was to emanicpate the slaves (only those in Confederacy, but NOT in Maryland, Delaware, or Kentucky) and then send them all back to Africa or to new colonies in the Carribean or in Latin America. There is nothing simialr between Lincoln and Obama, other than the fact they they both rose in Ilinois politics.
As for Ken Burns, he's a skinny little twerp who I wouldn't give the time of day to, based on some of his more outrageous liberal pronouncements, particularly with regard to the Civil War.
I more inclined to think that Dr. Gabor Boritt's research on Lincoln is more accurate than the above comments.

Dr. Gabor Boritt explains:

In the 1850s, according to Boritt, as Lincoln was "pulled...toward Republicanism," he continued to believe "the economics of prosperity, freedom, and this democracy." In several places, Boritt observes that Lincoln believed in the inevitability of material progress. In contrast: "Slavery was a relic of barbarism." In 1856, according to Boritt, Lincoln noted that the "`central idea' of America was equality." To Lincoln, in Boritt's view, "equality" meant "opportunity to get ahead in life." Boritt explains: "Since the central idea of America was economic, the measure of the nation's success had to be economic, too." In this respect, according to Boritt, Lincoln "institutionalized the American Dream - made it perhaps the most central idea of the nation," and slavery had to be extinguished because it "subverted the Dream." According to Boritt: "Lincoln could perceive America only through nationalist eyes....As Lincoln saw it, the nation was to become either free or slave, one or the other."

During the 1850s, according to Boritt, Lincoln became increasingly absorbed with the slavery issue. Once elected president, according to Boritt, "Lincoln's eyes remained set on one foremost goal: stopping slavery extension in the name of the American Dream." According to Boritt: "Lincoln defended the Union on many occasions and in almost as many ways, but by far his most extensive and determined defense was a largely economic defense." In his annual message in 1862, according to Boritt, Lincoln declared that the "United States could not be broken up...because it formed am indivisible economic unit." In Boritt's view, "Lincoln's first important military act was essentially economic: the proclamation of a blockade of Southern ports....The adaption of economic policy to military strategy, thus began a few days after the fall of Fort Sumter, continued to Appomattox." According to Boritt: "Emancipation by itself ran counter to the President's policy of enticing Southerners back into the Union through economic means." Boritt writes: "Lincoln appreciated the need for an economic base for the former slaves." The employment of former slaves liberated by the circumstances of war, Boritt explains, "transformed the slave into a wage-earning free laborer." Nevertheless, in Boritt's view, Lincoln "failed to come to grips fully with the needs of the masses of blacks." In the final chapter, Boritt writes: "For Lincoln, unobstructed upward mobility was the most important ideal America strove for....Mobility was the ideal and slavery its antipode." For Lincoln, in Boritt's view, "the most `central idea' of the Union war effort was the preservation of man's right to rise.'"

Since: Sep 08

Rockville, MD

#12 Dec 12, 2008
Gettysburg Native wrote:
<quoted text>
I more inclined to think that Dr. Gabor Boritt's research on Lincoln is more accurate than the above comments.
Dr. Gabor Boritt explains:
In the 1850s, according to Boritt, as Lincoln was "pulled...toward Republicanism," he continued to believe "the economics of prosperity, freedom, and this democracy." In several places, Boritt observes that Lincoln believed in the inevitability of material progress. In contrast: "Slavery was a relic of barbarism." In 1856, according to Boritt, Lincoln noted that the "`central idea' of America was equality." To Lincoln, in Boritt's view, "equality" meant "opportunity to get ahead in life." Boritt explains: "Since the central idea of America was economic, the measure of the nation's success had to be economic, too." In this respect, according to Boritt, Lincoln "institutionalized the American Dream - made it perhaps the most central idea of the nation," and slavery had to be extinguished because it "subverted the Dream." According to Boritt: "Lincoln could perceive America only through nationalist eyes....As Lincoln saw it, the nation was to become either free or slave, one or the other."
During the 1850s, according to Boritt, Lincoln became increasingly absorbed with the slavery issue. Once elected president, according to Boritt, "Lincoln's eyes remained set on one foremost goal: stopping slavery extension in the name of the American Dream." According to Boritt: "Lincoln defended the Union on many occasions and in almost as many ways, but by far his most extensive and determined defense was a largely economic defense." In his annual message in 1862, according to Boritt, Lincoln declared that the "United States could not be broken up...because it formed am indivisible economic unit." In Boritt's view, "Lincoln's first important military act was essentially economic: the proclamation of a blockade of Southern ports....The adaption of economic policy to military strategy, thus began a few days after the fall of Fort Sumter, continued to Appomattox." According to Boritt: "Emancipation by itself ran counter to the President's policy of enticing Southerners back into the Union through economic means." Boritt writes: "Lincoln appreciated the need for an economic base for the former slaves." The employment of former slaves liberated by the circumstances of war, Boritt explains, "transformed the slave into a wage-earning free laborer." Nevertheless, in Boritt's view, Lincoln "failed to come to grips fully with the needs of the masses of blacks." In the final chapter, Boritt writes: "For Lincoln, unobstructed upward mobility was the most important ideal America strove for....Mobility was the ideal and slavery its antipode." For Lincoln, in Boritt's view, "the most `central idea' of the Union war effort was the preservation of man's right to rise.'"
That may be Boritt's particular interpretation, but the primary sources, several of which I've already cited don't lie: Lincoln thought that blacks were inferior to whites and wanted to transport both free and freed blacks out of the country. Frederick Douglass oppoed him and his plan quite fiercely. There's no getting around that. If Lincoln were alive today, he would not approve of Obama's election.
Ms Pussyfoot

Gettysburg, PA

#13 Dec 12, 2008
Get over it. The man won the election, give him a chance! We gave yours 8 years to get his act together.Whether you like it or not, he will be our new President!

Since: Sep 08

Elizabethtown, PA

#14 Dec 13, 2008
Ms Pussyfoot wrote:
Get over it. The man won the election, give him a chance! We gave yours 8 years to get his act together.Whether you like it or not, he will be our new President!
And whether you like it or not, your new president is already neck deep in the Blagojevich scandal and may very well be the first to ever be impeached before he was even inaugurated.

CHANGE IS ON THE WAY!

Hahahahahahaha!!!!!!
Gettysburg Native

Silver Spring, MD

#15 Dec 13, 2008
Snake-Eyes wrote:
<quoted text>
That may be Boritt's particular interpretation, but the primary sources, several of which I've already cited don't lie: Lincoln thought that blacks were inferior to whites and wanted to transport both free and freed blacks out of the country. Frederick Douglass oppoed him and his plan quite fiercely. There's no getting around that. If Lincoln were alive today, he would not approve of Obama's election.
First of all, trying to situate a Lincoln of the 1800's within a 2000s context is simply assymetrical, which is why the most respected Lincoln historian, Dr. Boritt, analyzes history in its appropriate context.
Regardless of why you think that it is so important to "keep Obama out of Gettysburg," it is a very monumental event for the town. As a Gettysburg native, I couldn't be more excited for my hometown. Further, it seems quite bizarre to me that you are trying to politicize a president's march. It should not matter the political affilation of the candidate; it simply is great for our town to be involved in the upcoming presidential march.
Ms Pussyfoot

Gettysburg, PA

#16 Dec 21, 2008
Yeah right, whatever you say redneck. Impeach this!Go drink a few more brews & kick the dog. you lost cause your man picked a dipshit for a running mate!
Snake-Eyes wrote:
<quoted text>
And whether you like it or not, your new president is already neck deep in the Blagojevich scandal and may very well be the first to ever be impeached before he was even inaugurated.
CHANGE IS ON THE WAY!
Hahahahahahaha!!!!!!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Ken Burns Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Lincoln's enduring words (Apr '14) Apr '14 Davenport 2
News Hollywood helps turn Gettysburga (Jul '13) Jul '13 Colorado Chick 1
News County parks are a treasure (Oct '09) Oct '09 York city taxpayer 5
News Fresh perspectives on famous battle (Jul '09) Jul '09 Jon 4
News If Abe were able to celebrate 200 (Feb '09) Feb '09 Chuckie 5
News Ken Burns speaks at Gettysburg Address anniversary (Nov '08) Dec '08 fdgfd 4
News Historic moments in freedom linked (Nov '08) Nov '08 Wow 1
More from around the web