I agree with Leonard.

I don't usually agree with Leonard Pitts, but he wrote a column this week that perfectly articulated what I've been thinking for weeks. Despite Barack Obama's attempts to project the image that he and Abraham Lincoln are two of a kind, Leonard says that Lincoln would likely be appalled at Obama's election. Or as I said to Mr. Essie May last week when the Obama's visited the Lincoln Memorial one evening -- "Lincoln is spinning in his grave!"

Two major points Pitts makes are that Lincoln did not believe in equality of the races, and Lincoln did not free the slaves. People who honor him for those things either have never learned history or they've fallen for the revisionist junk taught in many schools today.

The truth is that Lincoln said in 1858, "There is a physical difference between the white and black races, which . . . will forever forbid the two races living together upon terms of social and political equality." Lincoln did not believe that blacks should be able to vote. Had Lincoln not been assassinated, it's possible we wouldn't even have very many blacks in the United States -- he wanted to exile the freed slaves to Central America.

Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, in essence, freed no slaves. It freed only those slaves in the states in rebellion -- the states where Lincoln's authority was not recognized. States still in the Union were not included in the Emancipation Proclamation though there were slaves in some of those states.

Here's where Mr. Pitts and I part ways. Leonard Pitts believes in Barack Obama. My take on Barack Obama allying himself to Abraham Lincoln is consistent with my general opinion of Barack Obama -- all show, no substance.

"What would Lincoln really say?" The Dallas Morning News; January 20, 2009; p. 13A.