Reply #176: You wrote:

[Radical Activist]

"The question was should the opponents of slavery fight back, or should they have compromised?"

You present the false choice that those who compromise are not fighting back. Therefore by your viewpoint, Lincoln was not fighting back. I disagree that accepting compromise represents a failure to fight back.

To answer your question, you insult and disregard the efforts of Obama and Lincoln by suggesting that compromise equates to not fighting back.

Once again in your endless attempt to make this an "us v them" issue among liberals, you try to paint me into a corner by suggesting that I'm in an opposition camp who disregards the efforts of abolitionists, and presumably their modern day equivalents, to which you feel you belong. I believe my words were very clear on that point so I'll paste what I already wrote:

"Personally, I believe the efforts of both groups were critical in ending slavery. Likewise, I can appreciate the efforts Obama makes that may not be everything I would like, as well as efforts to push him left."

If you want to make a historical comparison, I would likely have said at the time that I'm disappointed the emancipation proclamation didn't do anything right away, but disagree with those who call Lincoln a worthless pro-slavery sell-out (as you apparently would have done).

You also underestimate just how calculated a compromise it was. It promised to protect slavery in Southern states that agreed to rejoin the union by a certain date. By the standard I see you use with Obama, that cynical disregard for ending slavery made it worthless.