Abraham Lincoln: “I am not… in favor of… equality of the… races.”

The more things change, the more they remain the same.

That oxymoronic statement is likely more moronic than oxy. And yet, we as human beings are capable of change. Change is the only constant. Sometimes, we change for the better, while at others, the worse. But change we must. Again, change is the only constant.

Change implies that a state of being exists in which either progress or regress is possible. (I have opined on that subject previously.) There is no such thing a genuine stasis. Even within the human body, stasis ulcers, also known as venous stasis ulcers, bought about by blood “pooling” – typically in the lower extremities – causes a deterioration in the character and quality of the surrounding flesh. Venous stasis ulcers develop because of venous valve malfunction, and accompanying high return pressure, and occur typically in the feet, ankles, and lower legs. In turn, swelling occurs in the extremity. If you’ve ever wondered why blood only goes in one direction, it’s because of one-way valves in the veins. When the valves malfunction, the return pressure is transmitted AWAY from the heart (venous blood circulates returning TOWARD the heart, in order to be re-oxygenated by passage through the lungs).

But again, let one thing break down, and the entire surrounding environment starts deteriorating. (I would say “goes to hell,” but some might say that’s “unprofessional.”)

Point being, is that condition itself demonstrates that change occurs, and that not all change is good.

On the other hand, positive change yields positive results, and positive change is possible.

What you’re about to read may shock you.

It did me.

For whatever reason, I long had the impression that Lincoln had always been a proponent of racial equality.

That’s not true.

However, he changed.

Exactly how, and when that change began to occur is largely unknown, but his changing opinions about slavery reflected the development of his thought on racial equity. And for that, he became a target, literally, of Southerners who sought his assassination for that reason.

They did mange to succeed in killing him following Lee’s surrender to Grant at Appomattox, in Washington, D.C. at Ford’s Theatre, through John Wilkes Booth who throughout the Civil War was a Confederate spy.

Lincoln’s remarks in full may be found via the link to the National Park Service website.
A New York Times article dated December 28, 1860 which addresses Lincoln’s remarks may be found here:
https://www.nytimes.com/1860/12/28/archives/mr-lincoln-and-negro-equality.html

---

“While I had not proposed to myself on this occasion to say much on that subject, yet as the question was asked me I thought I would occupy perhaps five minutes in saying something in regard to it. I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of

GOP: Laws Do Not Apply To POTUS Trump

Where in America can you, I, or anyone, go to be immune from the law?

It’s a “trick question,” or… is it?

And yes, it’s a VERY serious question; in fact, it is an argument of which – believe it, or not – Federal Appeals Court Judges are considering the merits.

POTUS John Adams (1735-1826) c.1800-1815, painting by Gilbert Stuart (175-1828)

One simply can’t imagine the notion – that in our nation, a nation of laws, and not of men, that anyone could be above the law – and yet… here we are.

In February 1775, John Adams published a collection of essays entitled “Novanglus” – popularly known as the Novanglus Essays – where the idea that foundling nation which became “The United States of America” was a nation of laws, and not of men – was first known to be expressed.

James Harrington, oil on canvas, feigned oval, circa 1635, on display at Gawthorpe Hall, Burnley

Historians argue that the idea, or thought, was almost certainly derived from James Harrington (1611-1677), an English political philosopher, whose most renown work, “The Commonwealth of Oceana” (1656) was owned by Adams (3rd edition-1747), contains his signature on the title page, and is found in The John Adams Library of Boston Public Library, and may found online here:
https://archive.org/details/oceanaotherworks00harr/page/n5

On page 38 of the work, in the essay entitled “Oceana,” Harrington wrote in part that,

“Government, according to the Ancients, and their learned Disciple Machiavelli, the only Politician of later Ages is of three kinds: The Government of One Man, or of the Better Sort, or of the Whole People: which by their more learned names are called Monarchy, Aristocracy, and Democracy. These they hold, though their proponents to degenerate, to be all evil. For whereas they that govern, should govern according to Reason, if they govern according to Passion, they do that which they should not do. Wherefore as Reason and Passion are two things, so Government by Reason is one thing, and the corruption of Government by Passion is another thing, but not always another Government: as a Body that is alive is one thing, and a Body that is dead is another thing, but not always another Creature, though the corruption of one comes at length to be the Generation of another. The Corruption then of Monarchy is called Tyranny; that of Aristocracy, Oligarchy; and that of Democracy, Anarchy. But Legislators having found these three Governments at the best to be naught, have invented another consisting of a mixture of them all, which only is good. This is the Doctrine of the Ancients.”

So it seems almost certain that Adams derived that idea from James Harrington, but it was Adams’s use of the phrase which popularized it. Of note, Adams also wrote the clause “government of laws, and not of men” in the Declaration of Rights drafted for the Massachusetts Constitution in 1780.

Continuing…

In pertinent part, Adams wrote in Novanglus Essay No. VII, that,

“If Aristotle, Livy, and Harrington knew what a republic was,
the British constitution is much more like a republic than an empire.
They define a republic to be a government of laws, and not of men. [emphasis added]
If this definition be just,
the British constitution is nothing more nor less than a republic,
in which the king is first magistrate.
This office being hereditary,
and being possessed of such ample and splendid prerogatives,
is no objection to the government’s being a republic,
as long as it is bound by fixed laws,
which the people have a voice in making,
and a right to defend.
An empire is a despotism,
and an emperor a despot,
bound by no law or limitation but his own will;
it is a stretch of tyranny beyond absolute monarchy.
For,
although the will of an absolute monarch is law,
yet his edicts must be registered by parliaments.
Even this formality is not necessary in an empire.
There the maxim is quod principi placuit legis habet rigorem,
even without having that will and pleasure recorded.
There are but three empires now in Europe,
the German or Holy Roman,
the Russian,
and the Ottoman.”

George Santayana

The aphorism written in 1905 by philosopher/author George Santayana in The Life of Reason, vol. 1: Reason in Common Sense, seems apropos here:

“Those who cannot remember the past
are condemned to repeat it.”

And so, that begs the question…

How could we have possibly gotten to this so very corrupted point?

Samuel Johnson

Again, let the words of the wise guide us, because when ideas or thoughts are repeated, it re-emphasizes their importance.

Renown lexicographer Samuel Johnson (1709–84) expressed that idea as much in Rambler No. 2 (24 March 1750) when he wrote in part that,

“Men more frequently require to be reminded than informed.”

It is of unimaginable necessity that it is incumbent upon us to recollect this saying made by a GOP Presidential nominee candidate upon the campaign trail heading toward the Republican national convention:

“I could
stand in the middle of 5th Avenue
and shoot somebody,
and wouldn’t lose any voters…
okay?
It’s, like, incredible.”

POS45

–– Donald J. Trump, then-candidate for the Republican nomination as President, at a campaign rally 23 January 2016 at Dordt College, in Sioux Center, Iowa

On October 23, 2019, William S. Consovoy, an attorney defending Trump against a suit filed by the House of Representatives seeking his tax returns, told the three-judge panel (en banc) of the Second United States Circuit Court of Appeals that Trump was LITERALLY immune from ANY type of prosecution.

Judge Denny Chin asked Mr. Consovoy, “What’s your view on the Fifth Avenue example? Local authorities couldn’t investigate, they couldn’t do anything about it?”

Mr. Consovoy replied, “I think once the president is

Women Belong In The Picture

Women, as today’s gospel (Luke 8:1-3) makes clear, accompanied Jesus in his ministry. They left their families to follow Him and offered financial support for His mission. They stood by Him at the cross, and all four gospels place women at the tomb when the resurrected Christ is revealed. As scripture scholar Elizabeth Johnson points out in her groundbreaking book Consider Jesus: Waves of Renewal in Christology, “Jesus Christ

Answering @chrkirk: Electoral College’s Voting Problems Violates Equal Protection Clause

How Much Is Your Vote Worth?
From: New York Times Op-Chart November 2, 2008
This map shows each state re-sized in proportion to the relative influence of the individual voters who live there. The numbers indicate the total delegates to the Electoral College from each state, and how many eligible voters a single delegate from each state represents.
Source: The United States Election Project at George Mason University.

Having read the article How Powerful Is Your Vote? by Chris Kirk several times, I still disagree with it. The article’s premise is that by using the Electoral College (EC) system, the votes cast in less populated states are somehow “more powerful” than those in more populated states. To posit such an assertion is to demonstrate a wholesale lack of understanding of the system. That is not to say the EC system is perfect, nor that changes to it are not needed; rather, it only acknowledges the author’s fundamentally deep misunderstanding of the manner in which the system is established, and a virtually wholesale ignorance of the Constitution.

Apparently, as evidenced by the graphic seen herein, others are similarly misguided. However, one would expect more from George Mason University. Much more, in fact. However, to understand – as I mention later – the bias is strictly and exclusively from including 2 Senators in the number of Electors. Dr. Mark Newman, PhD, who is the Anatol Rapoport Distinguished University Professor of Physics in the Department of Physics and Center for the Study of Complex Systems at the University of Michigan correctly writes that “The electors are apportioned among the states roughly according to population, as measured by the census, but with a small but deliberate bias in favor of less populous states.”

According to the Constitution in Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 & 3, Electoral Votes in each state are equal to

Inequality in Government: Is there Racism in Mississippi? In 2014? Say it ain’t so!

It occurred to me recently in a couple conversations I had with friends in various parts of our United States, that equal representation is a matter with which we still struggle.

While on occasion I’ve opined about injustice through inequality – the United States’ Constitution guarantees Equal Protection and Equal Rights under law via the 14th Amendment – it occurred to me recently that there are some who “just don’t get it.”

More to the point, I was spurred by a photograph sent to me by a friend in one of our Northern sister states – the Land of the Frozen Chosen, sometimes also referred to as “The Great White North.”

In gentleness, I refer, of course, to Minnesota.

It was a photograph of my friend’s co-worker which sparked my interest, and subsequent curiosity.

The co-worker was Afro-American, aka “Black.”

I was somewhat surprised to see a Black person in Minnesota, so I queried the Census Bureau for some Quick Statistics about our United States.

Here’s what I found:
Only 5.5% of Minnesota’s population is Black.

In comparison to the United States at large, 13.1% of our American population in general is Black. And in Alabama, 26.5% are Black, while in neighboring Mississippi, 37.4% of that state’s residents are Black. Alabama’s Eastern neighbor Georgia has a closely similar percentage with a 31.2% Black population, while Tennessee is nearly half, with a 17% Black population.

Examining some other states, I found that Alabama’s Southern neighbor, Florida has a very closely similar Black population with 16.6%, while Louisiana’s Black population is just about double with 32.4%. The “Natural State” of Arkansas has a 15.6% Black population, while North and South Carolina are almost evenly tied with 22 & 28% respectively.

On the other hand, Texas has a lower Black population than either Tennessee or Arkansas with only 12.3%.

Kentucky? Only 8.1% of Kentuckians are Black.

Interestingly, of the 16 players on the Kentucky Wildcats Basketball team, only 6 are not Black. In other words, 62.5% of the team is Black – a clear majority. And yet, the state’s general population is completely and disproportionately unrepresentative of the team.

What about Virginia? With a 19.7% Black population, Virginia stands in distinct contrast to West Virginia, which only has a 3.5% Black population – a very stark contrast, indeed.

But what about some of the other Midwestern states?

Missouri has an 11.7% Black population, while only 3.2% of corn-fed Iowans are Black.

From Minnesota moving West, South Dakota has a mere 1.7% Black population, while Montana…

Well.. there just about no Black folks in that state, at all. Only a mere 0.6% – 6/10ths on one percent – of that state’s residents are Black.

A casual observation would be that it’s mighty White up North.

But let’s bring it back on home to Mississippi…

In a recent post shared by someone else on

Some “are more equal than others.”

American manufacturing has taken flight to overseas locales thus contributing to our nation’s overall, (and in my opinion) abysmal decline.

The problem is systemic.

A very wrong-headed and misguided political theory has emerged in our nation, which has been, and continues to be promulgated by and through various outlets, including but not limited to governance, private enterprise and most especially by Protestant religious adherents, predominately of the non-traditional inter/trans/non denominational variety.

It is the promotion of the so-called “Prosperity Gospel” – the message of which in essence says “you too can be rich,” but only if you do what I say, and give a generous donation, then you will be “blessed” with good fortune.

It is – contrary to what its adherents may claim – an extraordinarily self-centered ideology, one which is philosophically based upon the idea of increased materialism, or consumption. Essentially, it is heresy, for it contrary to the Christ’s teachings. The “me and what I want” value structure of society has not served humanity well, and in fact, never has.

The pressure to choose their own interests and concerns above and over, and to the exclusion of the just rights, expectations and legitimate needs of others in the community, state and nation is what makes such a philosophy evil. It is essentially contrary to our nation’s constitution and the principles upon which it was founded and established.

When those more powerful than you or I (meaning the über-wealthy, and increasingly their denizen corporations and armies of corporate lawyers) have the ability to wage war against the common man (the average citizen) and the so-called “level playing field” upon which they make the rules, there is no “game,” no competition, no sense of inherent justice or fairness, and certainly no equality.

They are, as the George Orwell novel “Animal Farm” intoned, “more equal than others.”