12

Happy Worst President’s Day

Posted by freedomforall 1 week, 3 days ago to Government
63 comments | Share | Flag

Excerpt:
"Here is what the state tells you to celebrate today, Lincon’s birthday: Lincon destroyed the voluntary union of the Founding Fathers and replaced it with a union held together by war and the mass murder of Southern civilians (at least fifty thousand according to Princeton historian James McPherson), turning it into something resembling the old Soviet Union more than the original American union.
Brion McClanahan
Best Price: $3.84
Buy New $8.21
(as of 06:45 UTC - Details)


The uniquely American system of federalism was destroyed along with the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution and the states’ rights of nullification and secession, and Americans became the servants rather than the masters of their own government. Government’s “just powers” no longer came from the consent of the governed, as stated in the Declaration of Independence, but from the barrel of a gun. Are you beginning to get why the state celebrates Lincoln’s birthday?"
----------------------------------------------
D.C. NIFO
SOURCE URL: https://www.lewrockwell.com/2025/02/thomas-dilorenzo/happy-worst-presidents-day/


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by $ jbrenner 1 week, 2 days ago
    Lincoln is far from my favorite president, but he isn't even close to the worst. Biden is clearly the worst. Obama and Woodrow Wilson are very close behind.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by teri-amborn 1 week ago
      IMHO:
      LBJ is by far the worst president ever.

      Not only did he institutionalize the corrupt welfare system, he destroyed black families and then (never-to-be corrected) laid the foundation for white guilt and unfettered self-destrucion of those who would be intelligent (instead of emotionally reactive).

      We now have an increasingly expanding subculture of the 'hood' and a Superbowl halftime show celebrating cultural decline.

      I long for the days of romance and uplifting culture.

      Thank you, President Johnson.
      May you enjoy your own BBQ.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ jbrenner 1 week ago
        Ironically, Abaco and I had BBQ lunch together, but I left Woody's make it.

        LBJ is definitely at least close to the worst president ever. We may soon know that he came to the presidency in a coup as nefarious as Biden did.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by teri-amborn 1 week ago
          No doubt in my mind.

          At least we are now sophisticated enough to realize that there are other players involved in running and ruining our government.

          That's changing rapidly for the better.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ jbrenner 1 week ago
            How the FBI got such a sterling reputation is unclear to me. They have always had their dark side. With the CIA, you expect a dark side at least.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by teri-amborn 6 days, 2 hours ago
              I once knew a man who "contracted" from time-to-time.
              He told me that in order to be in the FBI you have to be smart and in order to be in the CIA, you have to be crazy.
              Add manipulative to that and perhaps all are currently prerequisites for all potential hires ?
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 1 week, 2 days ago
      Buy-dem didn't kill several million Americans and doom the rest to life under the boot of the feds.
      Buydem was a treasonous puppet pissant following orders; Lincoln was a treasonous war criminal giving orders meant to destroy constitutional liberty.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ jbrenner 1 week, 2 days ago
        I know that being anti-abortion is not popular with Ayn Rand or this site, but Biden's abortion policy did actually kill several million Americans and is thus anti-life. Biden's tyranny was the worst in the history of America, with Lincoln's being tyrannical but not on the same level.

        The set up of January 6th is as exemplary as an indication of the jackbooted thuggery of a tyrannical government as there is in the history of America (no longer United States thereof).
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 1 week, 2 days ago
          At least it hasn't taken 165 years for the truth to become known to some of the people. ;^)
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ jbrenner 1 week, 2 days ago
            At least Lincoln was truthful, having to hear A is not equal to A for 12 of the last 16 years, particularly the last four, has been more than I and many others could tolerate.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 1 week, 1 day ago
              Truthful?
              Lincoln was a corrupt, lying politician from day one.
              For example, we still hear that he 'freed the slaves' when his proclamation was only on lands where he had no control to do anything.
              Typical.
              Lincoln set the example for the Deep State's suppression of the truth by arresting
              and imprisoning journalists and congressmen that criticized his policies, and closing
              the newspapers that published critical truth.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ jbrenner 1 week, 1 day ago
                Multiply that by the entire world of social media, and you have what Biden did.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by 1 week, 1 day ago
                  I can't even consider that Buydem's fault.
                  He has been a clueless puppet since before 2020.
                  History may blame him, but if the traitors are exposed, imo,
                  Buydem will be a minor player, just a frontman for the Deep
                  State, as John Gill was in Patterns of Force.
                  Scum like McConnel are far worse.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by $ jbrenner 1 week, 1 day ago
                    Buydem isn't quite as clueless as his stereotype, and his vindictiveness is underestimated by at least a factor of 10. He may not be solely responsible for the media suppression, but he played a much more significant role than people think - mostly by letting his subordinates do their malevolence, particularly his Secretary of State coordinating with the 51 intelligence people saying that "This looks like Russian disinformation."

                    The entire Buydem administration was fradulent from before its inception until its very last day.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by mhubb 1 week, 1 day ago
            did Lincoln enrich himself or his family?

            at the expense of others?

            how many dead in Europe over biden's war?
            and the threat of nuke war?

            i cannot read Lincoln's mind.

            we can all se what biden's motives were
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 1 week, 1 day ago
              You have no way to know how Lincoln was rewarded because historians have done their best to hide the truth about Lincoln.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ jbrenner 1 week ago
                Actually, most of the history about the "Civil War" has been written by Southern historians. This is the exception to the rule: "Those who win the war writes the history". I certainly would agree to call this "The War Between the States". The War of Northern Aggression is a stretch. After all, the first weapons fire was toward Fort Sumter by the South Carolinian militia.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by 1 week ago
                  Your comments illustrate that the history was written by people who were not "Southern".
                  At that time the military in the fort inside seceded SC had been given the chance to leave peacefully and Lincoln would not even talk to the representatives of the south to negotiate peaceful withdrawal from what was SC territory.
                  So the people holding the fort were an invading force in Sumter who was ordered by Lincoln to stay there (from the point of view of the Confederacy, which is rarely considered.)
                  The contemporary history was written under 'reconstruction' which is a propaganda description in itself. Where were the predominant publishers and who did the editing?
                  The South was under occupation by an invading army and nearly everyone has been brainwashed about the war.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by $ jbrenner 1 week ago
                    Indeed, they were given that choice, and I know that. However, Fort Sumter was the property of the United States, not the Confederacy. They were not an invading force; they were a defensive force, primarily not against the Confederacy, but to protect the port of Charleston. Charleston had been invaded successfully by the British in the Revolutionary War and was a foothold for them. The soldiers at Fort Sumter had been there for quite a long time before the war. If you take tours of Charleston, you will get a surprisingly unbiased view of what happened. There was plenty of blame to go around on all sides.

                    Charleston and Savannah's ports were critical to defend long before there was adequate protection for them.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by 1 week ago
                      Sure, we have all heard the history as written by the north, and that was my point.
                      Potential invasion was just another propaganda excuse by historians. There was no danger of invasion from European powers. This was 85 years after the revolution and the ability of the people and industry of the States united was so much stronger than in 1776 that no European power would even consider such a foolish thing. If they had, they would have directly assisted the South during the war, but they knew how foolish that would be. No doubt there were powers that wanted to see fighting between the north and south, but an invasion was not any danger even in Lincoln's warped criminal mind.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by $ jbrenner 1 week ago
                        The British instead aided the Confederacy via trade, rather than invasion. Certainly, the United States looked ahead to an eventual war with the Confederacy. Their main purpose in maintaining Fort Sumter was to prevent the British from using the South in a proxy war.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by mhubb 1 week, 1 day ago
    remember one thing
    not that the War Between the States was to end slavery

    the North was wrong, but for the right reason (states had the right to leave, but ending slavery was needed)

    the South was right, for the wrong reason (slavery was a clear moral wrong)

    the South could not allow slavery to end, most of their money was tied to the value of slaves

    war is NOT nice, the South fired the first shot....
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 1 week, 1 day ago
      Lincoln effectively had troops in SC which had seceded and would not remove them.
      Southern congressional reps repeatedly asked to negotiate and Lincoln refused.
      These 2 facts expose that Lincoln wanted to force the confederacy to fire the first shot so
      he wouldn't be blamed for the war that he insisted on.
      Southern state governments wouldn't stand for Lincoln's tariffs that explicitly transferred
      wealth from southern people to northern industrialists who paid for Lincoln's election.
      The slave owners were wrong but very few people of the "South" owned slaves,
      so most people in the north and the south were gaslighted by the governments.
      It was a war that should never have occurred, but for the pig-headed politicians on both sides.
      The people suffered the consequences - slavery of all people to the force of the federal union - for 160 years.
      Secession is constitutional.
      Lincoln should have been strangled in the crib.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by 1 week, 3 days ago
    Many 'inconvenient truths' in this factual article exposing some of Lincoln's war crimes and treason.
    -
    It's time to institute a constitutional amendment that approves a legal path for secession by anyone.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ allosaur 1 week, 2 days ago
      Before me dino landed in The Gulch and started reading freedomforall's posts on the subject of Abraham Lincoln, I had long been brainwashed into thinking "Honest Abe" was equal in stature to George Washington and Thomas Jefferson.
      Recall being awed as a child by the huge magnificent stature of Abe at the Lincoln Memorial during a family vacation.
      Now I only regard that statue to be no more than an excellent overgrown work of art as a homage to nothing for an ancient pagan god such as Zeus aka Jove aka Jupiter.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Eyecu2 1 week, 1 day ago
    Being that I am a Southern boy born and bred, I have always disliked Lincoln.

    I know that Biden is the worst in modern memory but there are quite a few that for one reason or another were horrible. Carter, Obama Biden, Wilson and Lincoln. Obviously determining who is the worst depends on how one looks at it. Wilson with the Fed, and income taxes, starting so much of what we are currently suffering.

    All of this said there is no doubt that Biden has had the single largest negative monetary impact to the economy.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CaptainKirk 1 week, 1 day ago
    Worst President and Most Destructive President are two different things.

    Conceptually, I agree with you that Lincoln destroyed the power of the States and handed it to a central government. Without that, the Federal Reserve Act would have been boycotted, IMNSHO.

    But the truest impacts of what Lincoln did are more comparable to Reagan with Amnesty and the Vaccine Protections. It wasn't clear, in real-time, the damage that would come.

    In the case of Carter and Biden. It's a different level. They were personally really bad at leading the country. Whereas Lincoln won a war and helped end slavery. You ask... "At what cost?"

    But he WAS A LEADER. His errors just took a lot longer to see...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 1 week, 1 day ago
      Pol Pot was a leader. Hitler was a leader. Stalin was a leader.
      Might makes right.
      Winners define recorded history.
      Lincoln was a war criminal who today would be convicted for his actions.
      In his time, Lincoln was Pol Pot.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by CaptainKirk 1 week, 1 day ago
        To your point. Many years ago, I read a book that said "they" were starting to White Wash Lincoln. Rewriting his Biography (with an "acceptable" author), etc. This was about the time when I realized how "mis-educated" we truly were. And the criminal class is always at it.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ jbrenner 1 week ago
        During the time after the war, Lincoln was not viewed nearly as well as he is in the 20th and 21st centuries. U.S. Grant, on the other hand, was viewed very well during the vast majority of his life, and only modern historians changed that perspective. At the time of his death, U.S. Grant's memoir kept his family out of destitution.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ jbrenner 1 week ago
        "Winners define recorded history". The "Civil War" is the exception to this.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 1 week ago
          It has taken 160 years for the winners lies to come to light for only a few people. For most the false history is still their 'truth.'
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ jbrenner 1 week ago
            Lincoln really had a thorny situation to navigate through. Is America better off as one country, or would it have been better off as two? My parents moved from the north to Texas just before I was conceived. Slavery is an affront to Galt's oath, but the use of force is as well. Life is complicated.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 1 week ago
              Lincoln chose the path of corruption and destruction of individual liberty when a real leader would have chosen not to make war on his brothers.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ jbrenner 1 week ago
                In the 19th century, there was a much higher premium on "manifest destiny" than there is now. By allowing the Confederacy to exist, the United States would have a VERY long border to defend.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by 1 week ago
                  But there was no need for the Confederacy to exist if Lincoln had held to the spirit of the Constitution, but instead he chose to serve the industrialists who wanted to bleed the South and enrich themselves.
                  Lincoln was a power mongering traitor and his choice was to pursue power by going to war against his own countrymen.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by $ jbrenner 1 week ago
                    On that point, we can agree. That is why Lincoln ranks low on the presidential list, but not the lowest. There have been a number of power-mongering traitors amongst the presidents, several of whom were worse than Lincoln.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by 6 days, 23 hours ago
                      On that we disagree. imo, none of the others would have had the path to such power if Lincoln hadn't set the tyrannical example and destroyed states rights, not to mention the murder of 600,000+ innocent Americans and destruction of civilian private property. Yes, someone would likely have set that example somewhere eventually, but it should never have been in America.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo