Do you really think the modern Neocon Republicans give a rip what Lincoln would do? They have no interest whatsoever in the traditional republican party, which they infiltrated and systematically destroyed since the Goldwater days. Neolibs like Nancy Pelosi are slowly working away at destroying the traditional Democratic Party of JFK, Thurgood Marshall, etc.

Lincoln refused to be blackmailed into usury by the private banks of Europe to fight the Civil War. He invoked the Constitutional authority for the government to be its own banker and created the greenback dollar, thereby denying facism and funding the war without going into debt. There is one Republican candidate, Ron Paul, who would like to see the private Federal Reserve Bank shut down and put an end to "soft fascism" but he can't even get included in polls and debates by his own party.

Do you really think the modern Neocon Republicans give a rip what Lincoln would do? They have no interest whatsoever in the traditional republican party, which they infiltrated and systematically destroyed since the Goldwater days. Neolibs like Nancy Pelosi are slowly working away at destroying the traditional Democratic Party of JFK, Thurgood Marshall, etc.

Lincoln refused to be blackmailed into usury by the private banks of Europe to fight the Civil War. He invoked the Constitutional authority for the government to be its own banker and created the greenback dollar, thereby denying facism and funding the war without going into debt. There is one Republican candidate, Ron Paul, who would like to see the private Federal Reserve Bank shut down and put an end to "soft fascism" but he can't even get included in polls and debates by his own party.

A moderate R friend of mine sent me this in response to my sending an email with the link to "Penny for your thoughts".

would certainly hope that the Republican Party is a "diverse group." I believe the reason the R Party is struggling is because of the emphasis on conservative principles only, which means that the R Party seems to have little interest in recruiting more moderate Rs.

Anyone who thinks all Republicans are neo-cons should read Victor Gold's book "Invasion of the Party Snatchers". Gold worked for Goldwater and was so fed up with the GOP in 2006 he was glad the Republicans lost control of Congress for their misdeeds.

Paul thinks Lincoln was a "tyrant" and Lincoln took us off the gold standard, it is a comparison that does not make a lot of sense. Sort of like comparing Fred Thompson James Brown.

I saw your post yesterday and thought about responding, but I didn't. Now that you've posted again on the same topic, I guess I have to.

I'm a Democrat, and I give money to the DNC and other Democratic groups and candidates. As a result, I get similar push polls from the DNC every time they want some more money. They couch the poll in terms designed to steer you toward a particular answer, and at the end they ask for money.

Both parties do it.

21st century Republicans would label A. Lincoln a RINO: Republican In Name Only!

Theodore Roosevelt was another great Republican President who wouldn't be able to win a Republican primary today either.

But seriously ...

We know that the Republican leaders are for the most part hopeless. But what about those poor folks that have been following them since they were hypontized by Ronald Reagan?

I tend to think of the still loyal and unquestioning followers as being in a couple of different groups -

Surely some of them are clinically mentally ill. To create and believe in a delusion and to engage in pathological lying are all clinical symptoms of mental illness. They need our sympathic understanding, and referrals to qualified mental health professionals.

Some of them appear to be spiritually affected. They have lost their way in life and have lost the depth of meaning in their lives. This is evident by displays of anger, shouting down others, and general rudeness. They need to be treated with kindness, as they are adrift in a rudderless life. If possible, they should be walked through the doors into a Unitarian Church.

-- So, I sent an image of Lincoln to a total stranger, and asked them "what would Lincoln do?" It serves both types noted above. Clinically, it is a crossed transaction meant to create some confusion, geared to deflect away from straight on conflict. Spiritually, it is a question that if pursued will add more depth of meaning to life.

We need to start working to heal the Republicans from their ailments.

As someone who has Republican friends, I have found that thought questions like "what do you think of Huckabee" make people actually think for a change.

Robert H. writes, "I'm a Democrat, and I give money to the DNC and other Democratic groups and candidates. As a result, I get similar push polls from the DNC every time they want some more money. They couch the poll in terms designed to steer you toward a particular answer, and at the end they ask for money.

Both parties do it."

Robert, I don't think so. Yes some Democratic candidates and some groups associated with Democrats have done some push poll sorts of things. But this package from the Republican National Committee literally said that if more Democratic are elected our troops on the ground will have to surrender and lay down their arms. Now in my book, "surrender" means to give up your freedom, and be taken prisoner. That perception of mine is reinforced by the phrase, "lay down arms".

I have NEVER seen anything from a Democrat or Democratic organization that was so far off base. That statement in particular, and other statements that would lead one to believe that Democrats were for lessening national security are in fact outright lies. In the few cases when I have seen Democrats use outright lies (Bill Clinton / Monica comes to mind), a heavy price was paid. Democrats who lie have been kicked out of Congress and basically black listed from further public life. But it seems that the head of the Republican Party and the House and Senate minority leaders that put their names on this document get a free pass.

This then is more than "we do it too". It is a huge double standard in play. Democrats are playing on an uneven field when it comes to basic honesty.

We have consequences for lying, and the Republicans get raises and praise.

So Robert, respectfully, I disagree.

"In the few cases when I have seen Democrats use outright lies (Bill Clinton / Monica comes to mind), a heavy price was paid. Democrats who lie have been kicked out of Congress and basically black listed from further public life."

Ha ha ha ha ha...yeah right. Clinton still lies like a dog and sure doesn't seem to be "black listed"...although I sure wish he was.

I am not Republican, but have to admit very anti Clinton. Even more so the last few weeks.

I don't have examples off the top of my head, but it's not obvious to me that Lincoln never did any of those things. I mean, probably every politician ever has made deliberately false or misleading statements about his political opponents.

Steve Bucknum:

Would Lincoln ever lie about the state of our nation, about his political opponents, about foreign affairs, about the security of our nation, and about our troops?

Bob T:

Unless you think he was justified in shutting down newspapers that questioned the war or parts of it, and in jailing people w/o trial because of what they were saying, or might do, then maybe Lincoln did lie about why he did those things.

I've had mixed feeling about Lincoln from time to time, but one must conclude that he was great for this country. But let's talk about the real Lincoln and not the mythical Lincoln who never existed (like the mythical JFK).

<h2>Bob Tiernan</h2>