President Obama's UN Speech

[Gaspar]

Watched this on YouTube this morning.  Not a very good speech for the President and he said some things that really make me question the education he received in his high-dollar private schools.  In particular, he was addressing human trafficking and noted the 150th anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation stating that it said "... all persons held as slaves would henceforth be forever free."

Unfortunately that's not what it said.  The Emancipation Proclamation was a start but the abolition of slavery was actually a states issue for the non confederate states.  The Emancipation Proclamation only freed the slaves in those 10 states that were at war with the Union.  Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland and Delaware, were still allowed to practice slavery, and did for quite some time.  

Slavery is without a doubt the darkest stain in American history, and it's important that we understand that history.  

He also mentioned the attack on our embassy and made the statement "There is no video that justifies an attack on an Embassy."  This is after his own intelligence has reveled that the attack was orchestrated well in advance by Al Qaeda led by an ex GITMO detainee, Sufyan bin Qumu.  Not really sure where he was going with this, but I suppose it's easier for him to pretend this is a social issue rather than a national defense issue, that way he can apologize instead of leading.  

All, in all, he looked weak and ill-informed from both a historical and national intelligence stance.  It was more like he was addressing a high-school graduating class than an international body.

[Teatownclown]

Gassie, your rants are like runts. Get a grip. 4 more years.

[nathanm]

Gassie, your rants are like runts. Get a grip. 4 more years.

He thinks that proving his ODS on this forum will somehow keep Obama from getting reelected. What he doesn't seem to understand is that it makes no difference whether Romney gets 70% of the Oklahoma vote or 100% of it. Adding to his tally here is just wasted effort. More interesting his his apparent excellent command of classified information. I didn't realize he was a CIA analyst.

[Gaspar]

He thinks that proving his ODS on this forum will somehow keep Obama from getting reelected. What he doesn't seem to understand is that it makes no difference whether Romney gets 70% of the Oklahoma vote or 100% of it. Adding to his tally here is just wasted effort. More interesting his his apparent excellent command of classified information. I didn't realize he was a CIA analyst.

What classified information would that be?  I wasn't aware they classified the contents of the Emancipation Proclamation?

[erfalf]

He thinks that proving his ODS on this forum will somehow keep Obama from getting reelected. What he doesn't seem to understand is that it makes no difference whether Romney gets 70% of the Oklahoma vote or 100% of it. Adding to his tally here is just wasted effort. More interesting his his apparent excellent command of classified information. I didn't realize he was a CIA analyst.

On that note, is the electoral college still necessary?

[nathanm]

What classified information would that be?  I wasn't aware they classified the contents of the Emancipation Proclamation?

I wasn't aware that you had lost all of your reading comprehension skills.

[Gaspar]

I wasn't aware that you had lost all of your reading comprehension skills.

You're games are old.

[nathanm]

You're games are old.

I love it. When you completely misinterpret someone's comment and they call you on it, accuse them of playing games. I am impressed by your mastery of the Republican way.

[erfalf]

So the proclamation only prohibited slavery for those states fighting with the Union, but union states were still allowed to continue the practice. Doesn't that fly in the face of those that say this war was over slavery?

In this light, the proclamation would seem to be more of a blow at the south's war chances than a "doing the right thing" type of deal.

[nathanm]

In this light, the proclamation would seem to be more of a blow at the south's war chances than a "doing the right thing" type of deal.

More of a "don't make your allies turn against you in the middle of a war" type of deal. Remember that several slave states chose not to secede.

[Gaspar]

More of a "don't make your allies turn against you in the middle of a war" type of deal. Remember that several slave states chose not to secede.

Actually, it was more of a War Powers thing. . .

Lincoln was a Republican, part of a new party founded by Amos Tuck.  It was basically a group of anti-slavery protesters that started as "Conscience Whigs", and Democrats that believed slavery was morally wrong. http://grandoldpartisan.typepad.com/blog/2012/08/amos-tuck.html

The problem was that once elected, Lincoln had to get through congress to officially end slavery. 

Durring the Civil War he had the luxury of War Powers granted to him, and the Emancipation Proclamation was his exercise of those powers.  With that momentum, three years later he was able to pass and sign the 13th amendment, officially ending slavery in the remaining states, but this made powerful enemies for him and the other members of the Republican party, as we well know.

[nathanm]

Yeah, you're missing the point. He arguably had the power to emancipate in any contested area, but he chose to do the opposite. Because losing the slave states that hadn't seceded would have been a disastrous blow to the war effort.

[Gaspar]

Yeah, you're missing the point. He arguably had the power to emancipate in any contested area, but he chose to do the opposite. Because losing the slave states that hadn't seceded would have been a disastrous blow to the war effort.

That's probably accurate, but the 13th amendment was passed by the senate before the war was over.  The remaining slave states knew their time was nearly up.  Pushing it through congress before the end of the war avoided any pushback from the inactive states.

[nathanm]

Finally getting around to watching the speech, and the first thing that jumps out at me is Gaspar's cool restraint. He did not freak out when the President of the UN General Assembly referred to Obama as "His Excellency".

[Gaspar]

Finally getting around to watching the speech, and the first thing that jumps out at me is Gaspar's cool restraint. He did not freak out when the President of the UN General Assembly referred to Obama as "His Excellency".

I thought that's what you guys called him anyway?