datdude said:

My point is the song is not about Prince getting in touch with his African American heritage as was mentioned before... or in touch with his blackness...

The song is about the crimes of white people. The subject of the song is white people, not black people.

crazydoctor said:

He's singing about historical events that involved manipulation, lies and mistreatment, by those with power and wealth "at that time". It's a period of time in history that's embedded in the fabric of American history, and they are ugly truths that can't be erased, regardless of who the race of the individuals were who committed those crimes, as well as, those who suffered at the hands of the individuals who committed those crimes.
[Edited 5/21/10 18:56pm]

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

That's fair, but what is delusional about "Avalanche"? The things that he asserts in the song actually happened. My grandmother once told me that even a broken clock is right twice a day. Prince may have said many things with which you and others don't agree or even find as false, but with "Avalanche" he is just retelling facts and then stating how he feels about those facts. You can disagree with how he feels about the facts, but the facts are the facts. (Of course, I think that sometimes you just like poking people.)

crazydoctor said:

Others have done a good job of explaining how oppressed people often identify with other oppressed people and will trope or reference the circumstances of others as a way to make their point more understandable or crucial. That said, Native Americans and African Americans were displaced, slaughtered, and enslaved by their white brethren. Accordingly, most art will use a specific issue or subject as a trope or metaphor for a deeper or larger issue. So, the enslavement of African Americans speaks to the greater issue of the historical injustice or inhumanity of America. I hope that when we hear "Avalanche" we don't just think, "Damn, that was messed up what happened to African American." I hope that a song like "Avalanche" causes us to think, "Man, when do we stop all acts of man's inhumanity to man." I wrote a poem once about a white father who took the life jacket from his daughter and allowed her to drown while he lived. In the poem, I'm asking myself, as a socio-political poet, should I have as much empathy for the white child as I would for a black child. Wrong is wrong. If I feel bad for it happening to a black child, I must feel bad for it happening to a white child. Yes, "Avalanche" is meant to be sensational. I've been a Prince fan for too long not to know how he operates. He wants our attention. He is willing to shock us to get it. However, as critical listeners, as most of us on this site claim to be, we must be able to move pass our own shock and personal affronts to see if the song can help create constructive discussion about the various complexities of race in America and about what it means to help other people. Was Lincoln helping blacks or whites? He said that if he could save the Union and keep slavery then so be or if he needed to end slavery to save the Union then so be it. The Union of whites was Lincoln’s prime directive, and slavery was just a pawn in his game. Now, understanding this information should give us a better understanding of race in America, the reason why it took three more amendments (13th, 14th, and 15th) to grant African Americans freedom and citizenship, and why even after these three amendments it took the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to finally secure the rights of citizenship for African Americans. A song like "Avalanche" should cause us to ask why did America need all of this if Lincoln freed the slaves? What does all of this say about America? And how can we use all of this information to make better decisions in regards to justice and equality?

As for the notion that Prince is labeling all whites guilty, I don't see that. Even in an actual avalanche, not all the snow participates or is part of the actual event. Some of the snow on the mountain never moves. So, not all of the snowflakes are guilty of the avalanche. I think, and this is just my take, that the line you quoted is meant to assert or suggest two things. One, to be aware of injustice and say that one has no responsibility to act because one is not committing the act makes one guilty by silence. (Check out King’s "Letter from a Birmingham Jail".) If I watch somebody get car-jacked and do absolutely nothing, even though I may be afraid for my life, my inaction makes me complicit in the crime because criminals and all people who commit evil acts depend and thrive on the notion that many people will not get involved due to fear or apathy. Another, and I'll admit more controversial, way to interpret the line is that Prince is asserting that if you are white, then more than likely you may benefit from white privilege (the avalanche is a symbol of slavery and Jim Crow, which worked to create a system where whites were better educated than blacks, which allowed them better jobs, more say in the politics, better homes/neighborhoods, which leads to better education for the next generation of whites). Thus, it is naive in the best case and hypocritical in the worst case to be angry about the song or about the issue being raised in any way. Now, when applying for a job, I don't expect anyone to be concerned about anyone but themselves. However, given the history of America, it would not be strange to me if a highly qualified white candidate asked the interviewer how many African Americans have been interviewed? Again, I wouldn't expect anyone to do that. But, when Prince says, "nobody wants to take the responsibility," he seems to be asserting that African Americans don't want to take the responsibility to learn the truth of American history and whites don't want to take the responsibility of actually investigating how much, if any part, of their lives is enhanced by skin privilege that has been established by slavery, Jim Crow, and a continued system where African Americans with the same degree and experience of their white counterparts still earn about thirty-five cents on the dollar less than their white counterparts. Therefore, if a white person in America does not investigate whether or not one benefits from the history and legacy of skin privilege, then one may be guilty of perpetuating the system of injustice. To not know how and why one arrived at the place and status one has may cause one to be complicit in the evil acts that allowed one to enjoy one's life. For instance, my mortgage is with Chase Bank. Records prove that Chase and other banks and businesses that exist today earned their wealth from the slave trade or slavery. Many banks, such as Chase, would make loans to slave traffickers, plantation owners, and others working within the slave trade, and then the banks would reap great profits in the interest that they earned. So, yes, there are people today who benefit directly from the slave trade. The loan that I received to purchase my house is earned from slavery. So, I must ask myself is my loan from Chase an act of reparations or is it an act of me profiting from slavery? By addressing the truth of Lincoln, "Avalanche" seeks to have us realize these issues and discuss them.

Now, a white person has the right to say, "Man, I don't know about all of this, and I don't want to know about all of this. I am not oppressing anybody, and I don't want anybody accusing me of oppressing anybody." But, not wanting to know the facts and truth does not absolve one of benefiting from evil, and it should not make Prince the bad guy or idiot or racist for seeking and discussing the facts and the truth. Sure, Prince has been off base or wrong about some things, but with "Avalanche" he is correct. Now, how we all deal with the emotions and thoughts that we have about these facts says more about us than it does about Prince.

errant said:

Somebody learned some new words today!

whodknee said:

But I do agree the song struck me as something new to Prince-- something he heard rather than researched. He seemed to still be processing it. Maybe it's a good thing (writing the song) if it gets others to question what we're taught in U.S. HIStory classes. After all if you don't know your past your bound to repeat it as they say.

Well, we have to try to be at peace with all of it. If not, the bitterness will definitely consume us, that's why I try to lower expectations for White behavior and thought. It's enough for us to be aware that we come with a package, that the system as it is doesn't even give us much of a chance to even get into the door of good oppurtunities and if they do there will be some real concessions in identity. That is to say, I don't have a single decent job to put on my resume that would enable me to get a better one, so there really isn't any point to trying, that's not racism as such but it functions even better so the story stays the same. I could try to pass for white (I never, ever would) and that would circumvent all the ideas that come into a white persons mind when I say I am "Indian" (drunk, lazy, dirty, stupid, immoral, wild,etc..,) but it still wouldn't trump the entire system which sets so many of us up to be nothing and makes sure we never become nothing. Throw on top of that the fact that black and indian have lost so much of the things that made them human beings and replaced them with colonized notions of capitalism and pure selfishness and it's almost no point to coming home. My relatives all are either drunk, scared of each other or otherwise so divided that the divide and conquer policies have slammed down right into the very family life of Indian and black too. Like I say, It's ok, because now the pressure for everyone is going up and we all see the stories on the news about how poorly white people deal with all the same pressures we have always had to endure in huge portions;not very well. And White people need to remember that just as they have probed, studied, analyzed Indian and Black, looked at them as scientific specimens or animals, we have been watching them too and we know them much better than they know us. So when Prince says a couple out of character things and it upsets his white fans I say "it's ok".

I can't listen to it because he tries to preach history while being so historically wrong. Also, I don't like now the song is so counter to the message of the song "race".



Which completely ignores that Lincoln is the reason the 13th amendment passed.

"I think Slavery is wrong, morally, and politically." - Lincoln on slavery

"I have made it equally plain that I think the negro is included in the word "men" used in the Declaration of Independence. I believe the declara[tion] that "all men are created equal" is the great fundamental principle upon which our free institutions rest; that negro slavery is violative of that principle;" - Lincoln again on slavery

"Abraham Lincoln was a racist" - Prince on Lincoln

"The first great man that I talked with in the United States freely who in no single instance reminded me of the difference between himself and myself, of the difference of color." = Frederick Douglass on Lincoln

Lincoln didn't end slavery when he took over as president because the constitution prevented him from doing so.

"He was not or never had been in favor of letting us vote" - Prince on Lincoln

The reality is that the original plan was to kidnap lincoln, but two days before he was assassinated, John Wilkes Booth heard Lincoln say blacks should be given the right to vote, which is why he decided to assassinate him instead of kidnap him.
[Edited 5/22/10 20:44pm]

alandail said:

With all due respect, it seems that you, not Prince, are twisting history to make Lincoln to be something that he was not. Lincoln was nothing more than a normal two-faced, hypocritical liar/politician who only used slavery as a pawn to move America toward a factory or industrial based economy rather than an agricultural based economy, which would benefit the North more than the South. Also, Lincoln was never in favor of giving African Americans the right to vote because he said that he saw blacks as inferior beings. See the quotes of Lincoln below.

"Free them, and make them politically and socially, our equals? My own feelings will not admit of this; and if mine would, we well know that those of the great mass of white people will not." [If he does not see African people as political equals, why would he be in favor of giving them the right to vote?]

"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."

"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."

"It does not follow that social and political equality between whites and blacks, must be incorporated, because slavery must not."

"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." [I guess the welfare of free whites is more important that the welfare of African people suffering slavery.]

"My paramount object in this struggle, is to save the Union and it not either to save or destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it..." [So, the freeing of slaves is not a moral issue but an aspect or tool of his prime directive, which is maintaining the Union and prosperity of whites.]

Lincoln was never against slavery or in favor of aiding African Americans. His rhetoric about the ills of slavery was just propaganda to justify the war that would be needed to shift America from a more agricultural based economy to a more industrial based economy. Abraham Lincoln was a racist, and the passing or ratifying of the 13th Amendment is due to the work of Abolitionists, many of whom were white, not Lincoln. Now, who is it that is historically wrong?

^^ Not only did Lincoln lead the cause of getting the 13th amendment passed by the house, he also led the cause of making Nevada a state to give the amendment enough votes to get ratified.

Also, prior to all of this, he blocked the spread of slavery to other states. A lot of what you posted was in relation to Lincoln's belief that slavery had to be abolished in a way that would stand up in court. The war gave Lincoln war powers, which allowed him to legally abolish slavery in the confederate states, but not in the union states, which is why he said it didn't abolish slavery in Missouri.

Lincoln spoke out against slavery before he was ever elected president, that's why the southern states succeeded, they feared what would happen to slavery once he took office. He didn't start the war, the southern states succeeding started the war.

You quoted yourself several statements that are completely consistent with what i just said, especially the part "because the constitution forbids".
[Edited 5/23/10 23:29pm]

I will say about the song, it did inspire an open discussion on the topic.

I think that's more than Taylor Swift can say

mozfonky said:

I actually agree with this.

While you're coming from a specific POV and it might come across a little negative for some to read about lowering expectations, more generally I think the larger issue is one of acceptance--and I don't mean YOUR acceptance only (that would be totally unfair), I mean everyone's. Isn't that what compromise is? And isn't compromise simply accepting people's differences and learning to live with them?

alandail said:

Once again...Lincoln's interest in freeing the slaves was not because he was compassionate about them. He did not want free blacks living among whites. If he was so compassionate and saw Blacks as "equal" to his own, he would have seen them that way, but he didn't. The emancipation proclamation only freed slaves in specific southern states. If it was Lincoln's intention and compassion to "free the slaves for humanitarian/compassionate reasons" then the freedom of slaves everywhere in the U.S. would have been in his priority and best interest, but that was not his reasons for wanting slaves free in southern states.

His intentions was to cripple the economy of the south which solely depended on human trafficking to put bread on their tables and clothes on their backs. It's what made many southerners wealthy. They didn't want that taken from them. That's a fact. That's why the south fought so hard because they knew what would happen if slavery ended.

It's not that difficult to accept the truth of historical facts. That's why this nation still does not have peace when it involves race issues, because many prefer comfortable lies rather than to embrace historical truths, so they continue to sugaroat the reality and ugliness of it. In Prince's track "Avalanche" he spoke a truth that may have ruffled feathers, but at least it initiated some discussions and research on the topic, and that's a good thing.
[Edited 5/24/10 16:51pm]

NDRU said:

Good thing everything changes, the sooner there's acceptance and compromise, the better it will be for ALL of us.

^^^yeah sometimes I have to remind myself, though!
[Edited 5/24/10 16:54pm]

NDRU said:

NDRU said:

Sure it was important, and I believe there were many people at that time who had compassion and wanted to see slavery end, and knew it was wrong, but were afraid to speak out, not to mention those whites and blacks that did put their lives on the line to lead many slaves to freedom, but their names gone unknown. I see those as the real troopers who had real compassion who didn't do it for political reasons but for humanitarian reasons. Abraham's intentions were definitely for political reasons, but I would have respected him more had he not feel that Blacks were not equal to all humans, as he did not see them that way at all, despite the fact that he basically has received all the credit for "freeing the slaves". He did die before the 13th Amendment was passed, and it was the 13th Amendment that put the icing on the cake, to free the enslaved. Sad thing is many people pay homage to Lincoln, but bring up the topic and details of those who suffered under those barbaric conditions, and you will get comments like: "I wasn't responsible for that so I don't owe them anything" or "Get over it, it was the past". Yet Lincoln is honored with a holiday, and remembered for "freeing the slaves" as though he was responsible for the actual freedom of all Blacks. I remember someone saying that "The Black race should be kissing Lincoln's feet or they would still be in chains".

Well, these lips will never kiss the statue of Lincoln or his feet for something he should not be given all the credit for, when so many others who fought and died against slavery and will never be recognized or remembered for it, let alone the slaves that suffered and never knew freedom. Secondly, people need to remember that there was transport of Black slaves from America to the Caribbean, so there is no way that Lincoln is responsible for the freedom of all Blacks, especially since slavery in the Caribbean for black slaves there, basically ended almost 30 years before it ended in the U.S. That's why folks need to do their research before believing Lincoln was responsible for the freedom of the entire Black race. He certainly is not responsible for the freedom of black slaves in the Caribbean, so people need to do some research and get their facts straight.
[Edited 5/24/10 17:43pm]

2elijah said:

I think he's revered for saving the country as much as ending slavery

My only problem with bashing him is I haven't seen that he ever actually did anything wrong other than possibly having some negative personal opinions. Is there any evidence he acted upon those feelings in a way that hurt people? It seems that what he actually did in his life was good, and that it was to save the country, not for personal gain.

But I do see your point about the difference between being an actual civil rights leader and simply being the one who signs something into law that happens to be good. I don't believe he was a great civil rights leader in the true sense. He's an important figure in the movement, but not because he fought for it, just because he played a role.

NDRU said:

His best interest was for his own race, so naturally he will always be a hero to them. It is unfortunate, that slavery had become the "norm" of that time period for so many, but it's hard not to wonder where was the humanity and compassion among the masses for so many years, during that time period that slavery went on for so long? I can't help but wonder about that. Lincoln's reasons for freeing the slaves were political, not because he loved the slaves, not because he saw them as equal to his own race, because he didn't. He didn't want them living among whites and having the same privileges as whites, because he basically felt they did not deserve or were not worthy of those rights. How do you offer "freedom" to a specific group, yet set limits on their privileges but allow full privileges to another group? That's not freedom, that's racial hatred in raw form.

Once again, there was nothing hateful or false about that line in "Avalanche" regarding Lincoln, it was only the truth, based on a fact. It was shocking to some because, well, sometimes the truth cuts deep.

Anyway, I'm sure this won't be the last time this song will be discussed here, it's been done before.
[Edited 5/24/10 17:51pm]

I saw the debut performance of this track on the first date of the "One Nite Alone" tour in Saginaw, Michigan. Me and a couple of my friends were in the 2nd row and before the show I was able to get the setlist from a very well known music critic from Detroit. We all looked at the setlist and noticed the 2 unknown tracks at the time "Xenophobia" and "Avalanche". We knew what to kinda of expect from "Xenophobia" but knew nothing about "Avalanche". When Prince went into it we were all like cool...it's kinda chill. Well, the further he got into song it kinda of caught us off guard. But once Prince belted out "Abraham Lincoln was a racist" we just fuck'n lost it and started to laugh hysterically. It was just so tense in that theatre and that came out of nowhere. That had to be the whitest audience I have ever seen attend a Prince concert. The song fell flat. Prince lost the audience that night. I did get the song and Prince's point of view but I dont think the rest the of the audience did. People were like "Why Attack Abe" or "this isn't even topical" at the end of the show. Flash Forward a week later, and I find myself talking to Prince. Cool Conversation and then I asked him what was the meaning of "Avalanche". He replied to me that "it was self explanatory". I love the "One Nite Alone" album and I find it to be a great bedroom album, but I always skip "Avalanche". Not because I don't like the song(it has its place). I just can't get my groove on by thinking of Abe, Ammendments, and Record Contracts.
Thats all I can say when I think of "Avalanche"
Big Chick
"Thats security ensuring thee"

2elijah said:

had he said anything differently, he wouldn't be using his war powers, thus his freeing the slaves would be overturned by the court. He had to say the emancipation proclamation was simply about ending the war. Anyone who knew his long established stance against slavery knew there was more to it than that.

He had a clear history of speaking out against slavery prior to his election, blocking the expansion of slavery into new states, freeing the slaves he could when given the opportunity, then leading the charge to free them all. He also clearly said that even as president he didn't have the authority to do more than he did initially as doing more would be overturned by the courts.

When Lincoln took office there were 4 million slaves in the US. 5 years later, there were zero. Lincoln led the way in that effort up until his murder.
[Edited 5/24/10 18:37pm]

Lincoln in 1961, referring to the declaration of independence, and the principle "All men are created equal", said



and as I said earlier in this thread, I strongly prefer the lyrics of Race



Somehow Prince went from taht to Avalance, where he tried to tell about evils, but in doing so he managed to get it all wrong.
[Edited 5/24/10 18:46pm]

BigChick said:

That's interesting regarding your Michigan experience. I saw the song performed in Chicago in front of a diverse crowd. It was one of those moments where the audience is on the edge of their seats listening to every key and lyric. The song was well received, profound and touching- really a highlight of the evening.

And the thought-provoking nature of the song is justified by the interest it has received on this site over the years.

jdcxc said:

True Indeed!

Big Chick

jdcxc said:

thought provoking talk? There's so much talk because nearly every lyric is provably wrong, starting with not giving Lincoln credit for the 13th amendment.

alandail said:

I think it's nice that you're trying very hard to put a humam face on Lincoln regarding how you feel, about involvement in "freeing some of the slaves", but you can't twist facts. He didn't do it out of compassion or humanitarian reasons, but for political reasons. If you think slavery ended when the emancipation proclamation was put into effect, it didn't. If you think slavery ended even after the 13th Amendment was signed, it didn't, slavery was just upgraded into more laws preventing blacks from enjoying the same equal freedoms as others, at that time. Not all, but many (i.e. some womens' rights were still an issue back then) Blacks were still banned from exercising their full freedom as human beings in the U.S..

Doesn't matter how many were free in those states under the EP, fact is, the EP did not free all the slaves. The 13th Amendment did not provide full freedom as well. When you have upgraded forms of slavery like black codes, segregation/jim crow that were basically written into law banning specific groups, that's not freedom, that's just an upgraded version of slavery. Not to mention the lynchings, domestic terrorism and basically ethnic cleansing that were done to many of them, down the road, even when they lived in "segregated" towns. The racial hatred was that strong, that blacks, even when they lived in segregated towns, were still attacked, by racists and jealous, poor whites, who saw blacks living in towns where they were prospering better than them, and the racists did not like that, because they believed that Blacks were below them and should not have more than them, so they terrorized them for years, chased them out of their towns, burned down their houses, lynched/killed men/women/children who did not leave those towns. It was just another era of terrorism on another generation of blacks, after slavery supposedly ended. This is all fact. If you do the research you will find the evidence to back up what I'm telling you. beause the racial hatred and beliefs were carried into many generations of descendants of slave owners, who believed in their minds, that people of Black African-ancestry did not deserve or were worthy of full freedoms as human beings, let alone equal to them as part of the human species.

That's a fact that cannot be erased. The barbarism and terror against those in the past will never be erased from America's history. It's a sore that will not heal until people face tha facts of these past crimes, and stop sugarcoatinig the facts with tablespoons of sugar, because regardless, the truth/facts will always be there lying underneath the surface. It is what it is. Lincoln, in my opinion was no saviour to black people, he may have been to his own, and that is understandable, but he really doesn't deserve all the credit for signing a document that freed "some" slaves, on the basis of political reasons, instead of humanitarian reasons. That's just my opinion on it.
[Edited 5/25/10 7:09am]

Love the song.

2elijah said:

what does what you wrote have to do with Lincoln. He quite clearly said the declaration of independence applied to all men, not just white men. And said assassinate me now if we can't save the union while upholding those principals. He ultimately was assassinated for those very principals that he never stopped fighting for. Given his history, had he not been assassinated (by racists who opposed his actions) he would have been outspoken against the very post 13th amendment laws you want to criticize him over.

As for the EP vs 13th amendment, why do you continue to ignore his vital role in passing the 13th amendment and continue to ignore that the limitation of the EP were not of choice, but rather were due to what he legally was able to do. He expressed great concern that it would be a major mistake to act rashly and outlaw slavery in a manner that would be overturned as unconstitutional by the courts. It took longer, but he ultimately ensured it was constitutional by having the constitution itself amended.
[Edited 5/25/10 7:58am]

alandail said:

I'm guessing we'll have to disagree on whether or not Lincoln was merely using the constitution as a smoke screen. It would have been very easy for Lincoln or any elected official to say that a law or elements of the constitution are wrong or negatively affect the country, and then push to have legislation written. Remember, the American Revolution was based on defying law. If Lincoln was truly against slavery or saw it as immoral, he would have simply asserted that the institution and the laws that protect it are immoral and must be repealed ASAP. Also, the 13th Amendment did not make African people citizens, which is consistent with Lincoln's notion that African people must be kept as second-class citizens.

And the notion about the Civil War giving him "war powers" actually works to show that the Emancipation Proclamation was nothing more than a military move. Since the South had seceded from or was in the process of seceding from the Union, he would not have any powers that they would recognize. Free the slaves where you have power first. Thus, the Emancipation Proclamation was not about the immorality of slavery, it was a way to address the financial advantage that the South had. (How can he take the money or source of money earned from the South's illegal operation, but allow other states to keep their money or source of money earned from the same operation?) You don't deny that the South was winning the war before this act, do you?

Also, Lincoln speaking against slavery before he was elected to office only means that he was making it clear to his state constituents and to the constituents of the North the he supported an industrial economy over an agricultural economy.

Clearly, you and I are viewing these historical events and documents in completely different ways. Thus, my initial point is that Prince is not falsifying or lying about Lincoln. Lincoln did think that African people were inferior. And, it is plausible for many scholars to view the Emancipation Proclamation as a military move and nothing more. Based on the documents and events of his life, Lincoln has never been a hero or someone whom I've respected in the liberation struggle of African people. And I came to this conclusion long before "Avalanche"--twenty years ago when I was in college. You may disagree with Prince's interpretation of Lincoln's words and deeds, but there is nothing in "Avalanche" that is untrue, especially when Lincoln wanted to deport African people to Africa. Now, as a Black Nationalist, some may think that I would think this was a good idea. However, Lincoln's plan did not include any way of repaying all of the African people for their service/labor to America because, in his own words, he did not view them as equal, so they did not deserve a fair wage or payment, just expulsion after they had been used for years of free labor.

alandail said:

How did I ignore his role, when I stated the reason behind why he issued the EP? I believe you are ignoring what his real intentions were for issuing the EP, and that was to cripple the south's economy, because the south depended heavily on human slavery to make a living. When you take food off a man's table, he starves. That was Lincoln's intention, to cripple their economy

There's no reason to be bitter because I am not seeing Lincoln on the same level as you are. We can discuss ugly facts of historical figures without being bitter towards one another. Fact is, Lincoln didn't issue the EP because he was so concerned about the lives of black slaves, nor was it based on compassion for them, especially when he quoted, as you stated "All men are created equal" from the Declarations of Independence", yet he didn't see the black slaves as equal to all men or women from his particular race or accept the fact that they came from the same human species as his people.

You ask what does the comments in my post have to do with Lincoln? Plenty, because even after the EP, 13th Amendment and those that followed, Blacks were still barred from free entry into specific public spaces,and institutiona, and from sitting at the front of the bus in many states, years after those documents came into play. So their struggle to be a "free" people continued and as well as the fight for equal rights. Despite those struggles, as a whole, they've managed to make many achievements and progress, but racism is still an issue that many of them still have to deal with today. If you look at the current political atmosphere, it is not hard to see, that some of those racist beliefs of the past, have been raring its ugly head lately.

Getting back to your opinions on Lincoln, hey, you're entitled to them, as well as I, even if we don't agree based on our responses to one another, so it seems we will have to agree to disagree..Thing is, there were no "untruths" told about Lincoln in the song "Avalanche".
[Edited 5/25/10 9:51am]

1725topp said:

When Lincoln was elected to congress, he introduced legislation to block the expansion to slavery into other states.

THe president doesn't have the power to decide that the constitution is wrong and legislate laws that go against the constitution - they will simply be overturned by the supreme court. The constitution has to be amended to do that, which is what he ultimately helped do.