Heat and Light: Abraham Lincoln
OK, so it’s Oscars time and all the buzz is about the movie Lincoln. It’s really past time to dispel some of the myth surrounding Honest Abe. The movie is based in part on the Lincoln biography by Doris Kearns Goodwin, titled Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln. Not everyone agrees with Goodwin’s take on Lincoln, a view that I would term the orthodox view. In defense of Ms. Goodwin, I have not read her book although I have read numerous other pieces on Lincoln and the antebellum period of U.S. history. As stated, Goodwin’s views are quite orthodox with respect to Lincoln and I have endeavored to get at the truth by shying away from the “path most taken” and therefore looked elsewhere.
So, why the war? Was it to preserve the Union, after all, that’s what we’re told when not being told it was to end slavery? These are the words of the man who buried the U.S. in four long, bloody years of brother killing brother in the name of the preservation of the Union to the tune of 700,000 dead Americans, “Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better… Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can may revolutionize and make their own of so much of the territory as they inhabit.”
The preceeding are the thoughts of Mr. Lincoln on secession when it involved Texas, a legal part of Mexico, breaking ties with the homeland to form its own government. It’s called the right of self-determination and was the foundation of the Declaration of Independence as well as the impetus of the Southern Confederacy.
When it came to reducing the power of the U.S. government, however, Mr. Lincoln sang a much different tune. And therein lies part of the rub…power; and I will come back to this thought in a moment.
Looking in other directions, did Lincoln go to war to end the evil of slavery? Surely you jest! It’s really not beneficial to even entertain this argument so I will keep my comments here to a minimum. If someone should so desire to debate the merits of Lincoln and slavery, I am up for the task and welcome any that want to debate such from history.
“I have said a hundred times, and I have now no inclination to take it back, that I believe there is no right, and ought to be no inclination in the people of the free States to enter into the slave States, and interfere with the question of slavery at all” (Lincoln, Chicago, IL, 10 July 1858).
“I have never sought to apply these principles to the old States for the purpose of abolishing slavery in those States. It is nothing but a miserable perversion of what I have said, to assume that I have declared Missouri, or any other slave State shall emancipate her slaves. I have proposed no such thing” (Final Lincoln/Douglas debate, Alton, IL, 15 October 1858).
“I say that we must not interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists, because the constitution forbids it, and the general welfare does not require us to do so” (Lincoln, Cincinnati, OH, 17 September 1859).
By the time of Lincoln’s first inaugural address (4 March 1861), seven Southern states had already seceded from the Union. Lincoln’s address was primarily addressed to the people of the South as an attempt to heal the breach his election had created. On the issue of slavery, Mr. Lincoln stated he had “…no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so."
Have you heard of the Corwin Amendment? Doubtful, so allow me to elaborate. Mr. Lincoln stated that he had no objection to the Corwin Amendment to the Constitution which had already been approved by both houses of the U.S. Congress and was a formal protection of slavery where it already existed as well as assuring each state the right to establish or repudiate slavery as they so desired. In fact, Lincoln expressed his belief that such rights were already provided for in the Constitution and that the Corwin Amendment was merely a reiteration of such. Finally, Lincoln asserted that the Constitution did not address slavery either way in the Territories (those areas not yet designated as states) and that he would enforce the Fugitive Slave Act as long as it was not misused via kidnapping and the subsequent sale of free slaves – i.e., he would support the apprehension and return of escaped slaves to their rightful homes but would not support the kidnapping and transport of freed slaves to slave states.
What about the Emancipation Proclamation? “I view the matter (Emancipation Proclamation) as a practical war measure, to be decided upon according to the advantages or disadvantages it may offer to the suppression of the rebellion…I will also concede that emancipation would help us in Europe, and convince them that we are incited by something more than ambition" (Abraham Lincoln).
The words of one of Lincoln’s closest cohorts in the execution of the war, Secretary of State, William Seward, are instructive on this point. "We show our sympathy with slavery by emancipating slaves where we cannot reach them and holding them in bondage where we can set them free." The Emancipation did not even free the salves in the several states of the Union where it was still legal (Maryland, Delaware, Kentucky) but purported to free slaves in places where the U.S. government had no real jurisdiction. This was the hypocrisy of Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation; mere political grandstanding and Seward as much as acknowledged that.
At this point it would do us well to “follow the money.” Doctor of Economics, Walter Williams, informs us on some of the economic issues that faced the nation at the time of the War Between the States. For many years the center of American thought and power could be understood to have been centered in Virginia. At the time, before the War Between the States, Virginia was much bigger than its current size and included the state now recognized as West Virginia. Even though Philadelphia was named as the birthplace of our nation it is of note that four of our first five presidents (Washington, Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe), and eight in all, were natives of Virginia along with the likes of Patrick Henry and George Mason.
The fact is that the rising industrial northern states were jealous of the prestige, power, and wealth of Virginia and the South and attempted to balance the scales through the passage of laws favorable to the North and harmful to the South.
Pay very close attention here because this is the crux of my argument; the main source of federal revenue throughout our early history came from the imposition of excise taxes and tariffs. In fact, tariffs were the main source of federal revenues prior to the 1850s. During the period before the War Between the States, 90 percent of federal revenues came through tariffs and (HERE IS THE CLINCHER) Southern ports paid a whopping 75 percent of those tariffs in 1859. Try withholding that kind of revenue from your government and see who and what shows up at your door. That, in itself, might explain Mr. Lincoln’s change of heart when it came to his views on the self-determination of the South with respect to the Union versus the situation between Texas and Mexico; Lincoln was no fool.
I’m sure there are advocates for Lincoln that will be scandalized by what I have written but I welcome any challengers and would be more than happy to take on any questions or accusations of inaccuracy in what I have posted.
Big Daddy 1
8:34 am on Tuesday, February 26, 2013
Lincoln (a republican) proposed and signed the first federal income tax act. I wonder what all those tea party folks think about that.
Paul J. DiBartolo
9:47 am on Tuesday, February 26, 2013
I'm not aware that Lincoln was necessarily held in high regard by tea party folks but, then again, my understanding of Lincoln did not come from the tea party. Is there something that you know about it?
Big Daddy 1
10:34 am on Tuesday, February 26, 2013
No, I was just curious about the current Tea Party folks. What a change in direction for Republicans, from starting a graduated tax to doing just about anything to bring it down.
Great Job Gt
6:22 pm on Thursday, February 28, 2013
Paula like I said boring. Started to read and drifted off. Keep your day job. Your blogs are very boring. Find a hobby.....
Great Job Gt
7:30 pm on Thursday, February 28, 2013
Trying to read but you loose me. Very boring. Keep your day job. I don't even think the shoppers guide would have hired you. Boooring
Jimmy Durante
10:31 am on Friday, March 1, 2013
Great food for thought Paul! It is curious how "others" seem to just criticize rather than discuss or offer rebuttal. I believe the South lost the moral high ground because of slavery. This is not to condone the trampling of other constitution rights. People on both sides died to protect said rights. The money aspect on both sides is what the war was fought over. The "free labor or indentured servitude" and the tax base help in the north. How ugly slavery was and even is today. Great job Paul! There is so much more to say yet not enough time.
Great Job Gt
12:29 am on Saturday, March 2, 2013
Paula, as it clearly shows from the people writing the blogs above no one cares what you write because your blogs are boring . Just look at how many people made a comment. Stop crying and keep your day job. Let us know if you are going to run for mayor so we can laugh at you when Dave beats you. Step to the plate if gt is so bad.
Paul J. DiBartolo
9:10 am on Saturday, March 2, 2013
My apology to any of my readers for the ass formerly known as "Great Job Gt". I know you all get it but it's just a shame that the Patch needs to be cluttered with the likes of him/her.
Andre Bademos
9:55 am on Saturday, March 2, 2013
Paul the next time you try to patronize Lincoln try telling the truth about the president. Tell us his documented real intentions for blacks. Lincoln freed the slaves, this is true, but he never made them citizens, because his intention was to deport them to. Lincoln according to history was worse for blacks then even his predecessors Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and the rest of his Republican predecessors. At least they fed them and gave them shelter, Lincolns plan was to deport them to 3 foreign colonies 2 of them they again would have been nothing more than slaves to lawless owners in countries where there were no laws guaranteeing freedom and the other was a deathtrap with no food government or housing. Lincoln was no hero, maybe your home schooling did not teach you all the truth about Lincoln. Had you grown up in Haiti you could have learned the truth, this president was a bad man. Freeing the salves was the first part of the plan to get rid of the blacks. Blacks did not gain citizenship until well after Lincoln was dead.
Lincoln could not deport slaves under the constitution because The 4th Amendment prevented seizure of property. Slaves were considered property of slave owners. His Intention was to free them, then deport blacks since he would not be taking property from owners which at the time would have been considered a crime. Fortunately Lincoln your hero was killed before he could finish his master plan.
Paul J. DiBartolo
10:02 am on Saturday, March 2, 2013
Andre, I can't think of which is more pathetic, someone that's ignorant of the true facts and trying to comment on an issue or someone who possibly understands the facts but doesn't take the time to read what they pretend to comment upon. I believe you fall into the latter category. Seriously, read the blog. I think I posted at least three if not four quotes that showed Lincoln had no inclination either way for the black man and woman. Lincoln was a politician through and through and a big-government one, at that.
Again, Andre, a mind is a terrible thing to waste. I'm not sure how anyone could read my blog and think that I was a fan of Lincoln. Heat and Light concerning the Lincoln Myth...don't you get it, Andre?
Andre Bademos
10:25 am on Saturday, March 2, 2013
Paul, My comment was pretty clear and I agree a mind is a terrible thing to waste. That said why when you ask people to waste time reading your blog the least you can do is tell them the whole truth. Hence my comment, "the next time you try to patronize Lincoln try telling the truth about the president." Leaving parts missing is nothing short of lying.
Trivializing Lincoln as just a president, or making comments that claim he somehow did not intend to end slavery is intentionally misleading people. Lincoln had every intention to free slaves nobody in history except you has ever doubted or debated that. Lincoln is now known for things that are just not true. "His real Intentions" are always hidden when describing his presidency maybe because people just can’t handle the truth.
1 of 2
Andre Bademos
10:25 am on Saturday, March 2, 2013
Lincoln was a bad man given false credit for ending slavery. That was never his intention. His intention was to deport them and because under the constitution they were recognized as property of their owners, the owners were protected by the 4th amendment. Even as president he could not just round up the slaves and deport them no matter how badly he despised the black man. He had to free them to deport them and this is why he never gave them citizenship when he freed them.
Freeing the slaves was a major driving force of the war unfortunately it was not the true intention he was given credit for in history. Lincoln being killed was made a martyr. John Wilkes Booth's biggest regret was killing Lincoln because by botching the vice presidential killing Lincoln became a hero. Had Booth left Lincoln alive history would see him very differently, as his real plan would have been carried out.
2 of 2
Debbie Shinn
10:39 am on Saturday, March 2, 2013
The Amancipation Proclimation which took effect on 1/1/1863 freed the slaves only in the states in rebellion. Ie: Not the border states. Slaves in the CSA were freed as Union troops came in but slaves in the deep south were not freed until as late as June 1865 or Juneteenth. The 13 amendment passed in late 1865 freed the slaves. Most historians agree that Lincoln did not feel blacks and whites were equal but he felt slavery was tearing the union apart and wanted to end slavery to save the Union. The current Republican Party traces origins to 1854. That makes Lincoln the first republican President. Earlier parties aka Demorcrat/Repbulicans, Whigs, Democrats and Federalists. There was a Back to Africa movement that established Liberia in the early 1800's. There is no history that I am aware of that would indicate Lincoln was a member of that movement or believed in it's cause.
Debbie Shinn
10:53 am on Saturday, March 2, 2013
The only real part of history that may have been avoided if Lincoln had survived is the terrible effect of Reconstruction. Lincolns death assures southern blacks would not be provided rights under 14 and 15 amendenments until the 1960's. Nobody can really know or speculate as fact what would have really happened if Lincoln had lived.
Andre Bademos
10:59 am on Saturday, March 2, 2013
Debbie Lincoln himself has divulged his plan numerous times prior to his death. He has written his intentions in his memoirs and historically his own party tried to invoke Lincolns intentions. They even attempted to impeach Johnson because he refused to round up and deport blacks to the 3 colonies Lincoln intended them to be deported to.
Debbie These are historical facts and are undeniable did you ever read a history book?
Paul J. DiBartolo
11:06 am on Saturday, March 2, 2013
Really, Andre? I don't think Lincoln necessarily had an agenda regarding the slaves either way when he first got into politics...of course, that would be a spoiler for your conspiracy theory about Lincoln's true agenda to get the slaves out of America. Yes, one of the options that Lincoln considered was deporting the slaves but I'm not sure how much time was wasted on that because of how difficult that would have been to accomplish. As evidence of the difficulty is the fact that it didn't happen.
BTW, Andre, this is a blog and try as I may, my blogs are always longer than I would like which increases the chance that people won't read them. As it is I sweat over chopping them down to as small as I can get them so don't expect a book length investigation on any subject. I attempt to bite off small pieces to chew. That said, one of the reasons I wrote this one was because of the fact that Lincoln was once again in the news with the release of the movie. Furthermore, I specifically stated my intention up front to discuss the War Between the States.
So, again, i will ask that you give a little more attention to what I write before going off on me. And I quote, "So, why the war? Was it to preserve the Union, after all, that’s what we’re told when not being told it was to end slavery?" I think that pretty much explains why I was writing and what I was writing about. Your agenda is not my agenda and I never implied that my thoughts were exhaustive. Opps, already out of space...
Andre Bademos
10:49 am on Saturday, March 2, 2013
Debbie please, learn your history before you invoke it. Here is a little known historical fact Debbie, Lincoln was not elected as a Republican. He shunned the Republican Party when he ran for president. In fact his vice presidential mate was Andrew Johnson, a Democrat. Prior to that the last time we had a president from one party (and not the Republican party) and a vice president from the opposite party was John Adams presidency. The republicans are so desperate to cling to Lincolns legacy they have adopted him as a republican. I find it ironic that the party that immortalizes Lincoln has dinners and fund raisers in his name is the same party he turned his back on when he ran for president. So Debbie put the bottle down and pick up a book for a change.
Debbie Shinn
11:07 am on Saturday, March 2, 2013
Enlighten me then Andre, what party did he run for President under. What party was he elected under. Again I am not asking Andre, stop talking down to me, it is hot necessary to insult me. That behavior does nothing to support you in what I hope is a discussin of history. Or, maybe I'm wrong, this thread is the Andre way or the highway? You have no idea what my drinking habits are, if I even have any. You also have no idea what my reasding habits are. Do you want to engage in dialog or not. Your choice! I have other things I can do....
Andre Bademos
11:34 am on Saturday, March 2, 2013
Debbie I only have your posts in which you have historically describe your own drinking habits numerous posts for that matter. I for one have no reason to believe you are telling us the truth when you continuously end comments saying you "need a drink." Your irrational comments seem to also make me a believe that you are actually doing what you say
Now as far as what party was Lincoln elected as? Pick up a history book and read it. Since you feel I am talking down to you I would hate to do the research for you and have you feel like I think your not smart enough to find the information and read it on your own. Sometimes the best help we can give to another is the ability to let them do things for themselves. Debbie If I do this for you how will you ever learn, I tell my children 11 and 14 years old the same things. Now if your wrong I will point it out to you so you don't go around life misguided, but I will not do your homework. That's how one learns. I would be cheating you out of a learning experience if I just gave you the answers, wouldn't I?
Darren Gladden
9:45 am on Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Na
Paul J. DiBartolo
11:15 am on Saturday, March 2, 2013
Additionally, I might interject that I don't hear a lot of Republicans claiming any special ties to Lincoln. I'm not saying it doesn't happen but you really don't hear much of it rising above the noise of Obama and his minions, including the press, telling us 'ad nauseam' that Obama is the re-incarnation of Lincoln. Give us all a break...
Andre Bademos
12:09 pm on Saturday, March 2, 2013
As far as Obama being referred to as re-incarnation of Lincoln I would have to dispute that. I never saw anything Obama did to deport blacks to Liberia, Chili or Haiti for that matter, did you? I have never seen Obama make statements like this one:
"You and we are different races, We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races" Lincoln said, "This physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both and affords a reason at least why we should be separated . . . . It is better for us both, therefore, to be separated."
Have you seen Obama make statement like that? No I haven't either. Lincoln was a supreme racist and if he were around today starting wars and deporting people to desolate locations of the world as he did in 1860's, he would have been charged with war crimes and hate crimes for our civil war.
Paul I do believe you’re not up to date on the local Republican Party if you truly do not believe they have "Special Ties" to Lincoln. They hold a huge fund raiser where they actually charge a donation of $150 minimum to attend it’s called a "Lincoln Day Dinner." It is a huge fund raiser for them they usually make about $300.00 in donations its always well attended it’s just nobody pays because they would have to actually use their own money.
Andre Bademos
12:16 pm on Saturday, March 2, 2013
Lincoln may be portrayed historically as a nice man, as a religious man too. He may have been nice to blacks in person. I am not saying he was a hateful racist like people of today's world, I don't honestly believe he was, I do believe he was a kind person but his motives were to remove blacks from our country, and that can not be denied or forgotten. Just because he was not a murderous hateful racist he still was a racist. He believed the USA was for white people only. He was the only president in our history to not only suggest but to attempt to deport blacks to 3rd world nations.
Paul J. DiBartolo
1:51 pm on Saturday, March 2, 2013
Andre, it's really a shame when a person is so consumed with an issue that it somehow shades everything that person says as well as being overlain onto anything and everything that anybody else says to that person. Obama never attempted to deport blacks...well, DUH!, he is half-black. Anyway, that's not where the similarities exist between Lincoln and Obama...the similarities exist in the mind of Obama and his loyal subjects. They are the ones that continually try to cast Obama in the mold of the Great Emancipator. In my opinion it's ridiculous. Get a clue, Andre. There is no love lost for me concerning Lincoln. I prefer men like Robert E. Lee who actually set his slaves free and was principled enough to refuse Lincoln's offer to lead the Union troops because he chose to fight with his brothers and defend his homeland against the invading hoards of the North...or Stonewall Jackson who actually broke the law and taught slaves how to read. I did not attempt to cover up Lincoln's attitudes towards slaves...I really had no intention of discussing such because, as I've already pointed out, I was discussing the reasons for the War Between the States. It's really a prelude to the discussion about the self-determination of Americans and why I'm against big government as practiced by Lincoln and Obama.
Andre Bademos
3:32 pm on Saturday, March 2, 2013
Paul nice debate seems we are starting to find common ground, it just irks me when people put Lincoln on a pedistool since most of them would cringe if they knew the truth about his real intentions. or the real thoughts and comments he made about blacks. history the way it is tough in schools just does not line up with the way things really happened.
Debbie Shinn
11:16 am on Saturday, March 2, 2013
PS Anrde: My post regarding his party affiliation was in response to your own post and I quote: "Lincoln according to history was worse for blacks then even his predecessors Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and the rest of his Republican predecessors." Who is the "his" you were referring to, I thought we were discussing Lincoln.
Andre Bademos
11:41 am on Saturday, March 2, 2013
Oh Debbie I suppose you think you got me right? This is why I say when you only quote part of a topic you are misleading people. Debbie you would not be trying to mislead people would you? Now go back and read the whole thread and it will educate you. There is no debate that Lincoln AT ONE TIME WAS a Republican, My quote was clear if your mind was not altered with substances you would have continued and read the entire thread and saw that I said, Lincoln was not elected PRESIDENT as a Republican, try to keep up Debbie put the bottle down pick up a history book. Knowledge will empower you.
Debbie Shinn
11:30 am on Saturday, March 2, 2013
"They even attempted to impeach Johnson because he refused to round up and deport blacks to the 3 colonies Lincoln intended them to be deported to."
Johnson fought with the Radicals. He WAS impeached for violation of the Tenure of Office act. He was later acquitted by 1 vote.
Andre Bademos
11:51 am on Saturday, March 2, 2013
Debbie Debbie, really? Did you get by in high school on the cliff notes too? Put some effort into it please? This is starting to get embarrassing and I am a god loving man I do not wish to "Pile It On." That is not god’s way. They say the devil tempts us to do evil, I for one have given into my human weakness long enough it is obvious you are not educated in this subject and you just here to tempt me to do the devils bidding.
Your right Debbie I should not give into human nature and talk down to you but I fear anything I say has that effect, how can't it, you obviously have no clue what you are talking about. I suggest you educate yourself on the issue then post something logical and we can discuss it, until then I suppose you will feel better about yourself only by getting the last word so have fun with that.
Debbie Shinn
11:49 am on Saturday, March 2, 2013
Andre. You are a really nasty mean bully and I no longer have time for you. CLICK!
Big Daddy 1
10:03 am on Monday, March 4, 2013
I'm with you on that Debbie. This site has become just a place for nasty people to go off on one another.
Andre Bademos
10:10 am on Monday, March 4, 2013
Big Daddy 1, Debbie, Paul and Darren should know about the bulling, going back in the history of the posters. Nobody on here ever made a comment that opposes something you supported that you four have not criticized ridiculed or made up fictitious stories.
Big Daddy 1
11:06 am on Monday, March 4, 2013
My comments are directed at government officials that don't do their jobs and correcting lies with facts. There is only one other personn that I had harsh words for because he started going off on me just as he continues to do with several others. You, BAdemouth, started going off on me on other posts. Repeatedly calling me a liar was one of your milder comments. Especially annoying was calling me a liar when your own post proved you were the liar.
,
Andre Bademos
11:32 am on Monday, March 4, 2013
Big Daddy1 I am not sure if I am supposed to answer you or not since you "directed your comments claim they are :"directed at government officials that don't do their jobs and correcting lies with facts."
That said you further when on to include me in your remarks by stating:
"There is only one other personn that I had harsh words for because he started going off on me just as he continues to do with several others. You, BAdemouth..."
so this is why I have reason to respond despite not being a "government official."
Dig daddy1 I have never lied about anything I posted EVER and I have Never attacked anyone. I will see the lord one day with a clear conscious. I have on the other hand responded to people that have attacked me you being one of them. Now if you feel you are being attacked because I as well as others have choose to correct your lies and misstatements. The easy fix is to post the truth Like I do.
You can end all of this by posting the proposed budget but you refuse to do so. If you were telling the truth you would look forward to ending all the he said she said and back up your comments with facts. Like I did. Instead you cross post on numerous articles making remarks that turn out to be lies, again here is the proposed 2010 budget signed by Cindy Rau-Hatton as presenter:
http://www.glotwp.com/pdfs/etc/Proposed2010Budget.pdf
http://gtrmc.com/index.php?topic=90.0
Big Daddy 1
11:58 am on Monday, March 4, 2013
You just posted the Rau-Hauten Budget for 2010 proposed on 12/31/09 for 44 million. See sheet 3a. The Mayer actual budget you previously posted for 2010 is 50 million. 50-44 =6. That is not zero and it is not Rau-Hauten. And you are calling me a liar and posting that somewhere else under ymbfa or whoever else call youself. And you may want to reread your comments on the Ho's to see who is going off on who.
Andre Bademos
10:59 pm on Monday, March 4, 2013
Big Daddy1 are you really that ignorant that you can not see that is a link two a second website showing proof that you are wrong? Now you want to accuse me of being another poster on another website? Seriously do your attempts to lie and mislead the people of GT have no bottom? Wow I would say talking to you is like talking to a wall but at least a wall has a logical reason for refusing to speak the truth.
why do you refuse to post a link to your information? Oh because you can't because you are lying. You do know the difference between the municipal budget and the other 5 parts of your tax bill right or do you need an education on that too? Eithor was again post your proof give us a link to the website that contains the budget you keep referring to and show us who signed it. The proposed budget for the tax year 2010 was introduced an signed by Cindy Rau-Hatton. You obviously refer to it numerous times so you have a link to it share it with the rest of us. Nobody is going to take your word because even your own lapdog Darren Gladden called you a liar in this thread.
Andre Bademos
11:15 pm on Monday, March 4, 2013
Big Daddy you are proving yourself to be a really scummy low life in your post you claim I am going off on you? Not sure what that means because while I do pity you for being so ignorant in refusing to post your information, that is nothing compared to the sleazy comments you called an innocent women on another blog that has nothing to do with this conversation yet you choose to call her a HO? Wow you are a piece of trash. You obviously will not stop posting your disgusting comments about people and I have no time left to speak to you. your a complete scumbag and not worth my time. If you want to go through life lying to people have fun its not like anyone listens to you anyway I have proven that. All one needs to do is read this blog and they will see you have an attack lapdog, a drunk, and Paul. One of your followers called you a liar the other just likes to make off the wall insults and the other one is probably to incoherent to understand she's blogging anyway. Post your link or make another comeback with false claims it doesn't matter nobody except the insignificant believe you anyway and if they are that blind to facts they are not voting beyond their party lines anyway. In fact its about a 95% probability Gladden won't vote anyway so really none of you are worth my time...Paul is there something you want to tell me about why your stalking me? how else would you know I'm frothing at the mouth...weirdo!
Darren Gladden
12:21 am on Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Watch how you throw around that Gladden name my friend , Like I stated before FAKE one , I'm nobody lapdog . You ARE all a bunch of NutJob that need to be school that assuming and playing OUT untruth;s in your MIND .......Well that mental. Get Help , GET on some type of Meds
Darren Gladden
12:29 am on Tuesday, March 5, 2013
PS...... you might be right about me not voting ,;-)
Andre Bademos
1:03 am on Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Darren now that you got your poor voting record off your chest, do you feel better?
Great Job Gt
7:34 pm on Saturday, March 2, 2013
Paula DiBartolo (aka very boring blogs). There is no need for you to apologize to "any of your readers." Comments clearly show no one really reads your posts (shocker). I have every right to give my opinion. Your blogs just stink. Are you running for Mayor. Let us know
Paul J. DiBartolo
7:42 pm on Saturday, March 2, 2013
I'll tell you what, GTGjr, Meyer is definitely going to want to move on to bigger things which will leave an opening for you. You run and I'll run against you. Now put up or, please, give us all some peace. You are a nothing but a whining child. Take a step back and just think how people see you when they read your trash.
Great Job Gt
7:50 pm on Saturday, March 2, 2013
Paula DiBartolo (aka very very boring blogs) how many people in gt? I thought you were very educated. It's Mayer not Meyer. Give him the respect he earned. How many people?
Darren Gladden
11:52 pm on Monday, March 4, 2013
Pipe Down Great Job Gt , Your so called mayor GET'S not one once of RESPECT from me ..........Please tell me anything Good you think he has done . Wait he shave his stache....So there One ,NAME another one ......SMH , You clowns just don't get it . To be respected you MUST EARN it . Have a Nice day Clown .......;-) http://youtu.be/6FOUqQt3Kg0
Big Daddy 1
12:02 am on Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Ok yamby. Time to take your meds and go back to your padded room.
Andre Bademos
12:09 am on Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Big Daddy 1 did that make you feel good? Awe you just love to lie to people don't ya? Try posting the truth, maybe people will listen. Big Daddy 1 if you are write and I am what did you call me yamby? that would make you a fool wasting a week arguing with me now wouldn't it. Don't worry Big daddy you may have wasted the week but it's not because of me being this yamby person, its purely because you posted so many lies you have been exposed as the fraud you are. Understand this Big Daddy1 You get to know what I decide you should know and not more. Now go give your son a hug.
Paul J. DiBartolo
8:01 am on Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Hey Andre, do you try hard at being a bona fide ignoramus or does it just come naturally to you? How about a picture and a profile so we can see who you really are?
No? I didn't think so. You're obviously somebody's alter ego, it's just not exactly clear who yet...