
Speech: “I Speak to You as an American Citizen” speech, Oct. 1, 1870, Douglas Papers, ser. I, 4:275
1870s
As quoted in "Iowa state senator is first elected official to leave Republican party over Trump" http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/07/david-johnson-iowa-state-senator-leaves-republican-party-trump (7 June 2016), by Ben Jacobs, The Guardian, United Kingdom
Speech: “I Speak to You as an American Citizen” speech, Oct. 1, 1870, Douglas Papers, ser. I, 4:275
1870s
2010s, Voting Democratic for the next 200 years (2014)
Speech to the Virginia Convention (1861)
Context: These are pregnant statements; they avow a sentiment, a political principle of action, a sentiment of hatred to slavery as extreme as hatred can exist. The political principle here avowed is, that his action against slavery is not to be restrained by the Constitution of the United States, as interpreted by the Supreme Court of the United States. I say, if you can find any degree of hatred greater than that, I should like to see it. This is the sentiment of the chosen leader of the Black Republican party; and can you doubt that it is not entertained by every solitary member of that same party? You cannot, I think. He is a representative man; his sentiments are the sentiments of his party; his principles of political action are the principles of political action of his party. I say, then; it is true, at least, that the Republican party of the North hates slavery.
Democratic National Committee spokesman Hari Sevugan, quoted in * 2009-11-06
Bachmann leads rally opposing health plan
Kevin Diaz & Eric Roper
Star Tribune
http://www.startribune.com/politics/69284347.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUUsZ
About
The Cornerstone Speech (1861)
Context: The surest way to secure peace, is to show your ability to maintain your rights. The principles and position of the present administration of the United States the republican party present some puzzling questions. While it is a fixed principle with them never to allow the increase of a foot of slave territory, they seem to be equally determined not to part with an inch 'of the accursed soil. Notwithstanding their clamor against the institution, they seemed to be equally opposed to getting more, or letting go what they have got. They were ready to fight on the accession of Texas, and are equally ready to fight now on her secession. Why is this? How can this strange paradox be accounted for? There seems to be but one rational solution and that is, notwithstanding their professions of humanity, they are disinclined to give up the benefits they derive from slave labor. Their philanthropy yields to their interest. The idea of enforcing the laws, has but one object, and that is a collection of the taxes, raised by slave labor to swell the fund necessary to meet their heavy appropriations. The spoils is what they are after though they come from the labor of the slave
Source: Abiy Ahmed (2021) cited in: " Ethiopia civil war: How PM Abiy led fight-back against rebel advance https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-59552888" in BBC News, 16 December 2021.
Official Twitter account (24 September 2019) https://twitter.com/repcummings/status/1176601699466776578?lang=en
Speech http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/the-nations-problem/
“The Republican Party of 2005 bears no resemblance to the Republican Party of 1994.”
Source: Hardball with Chris Matthews, 11 February 2005