A Tale of Two Lincolns

13 Feb
Printer-friendly versionSend by emailPDF versionIn this corner, we have King George the Lincoln:

Republican presidential hopeful Rudolph W. Giuliani praised President Bush's war leadership on Saturday and mocked supporters of a nonbinding congressional resolution condemning the U.S. troop buildup in Iraq.

The former New York City mayor came to Bush's defense as he promoted his White House candidacy at a California Republican convention. Drawing parallels between Iraq and America's Civil War, Giuliani compared Bush's political troubles to Abraham Lincoln's. When the Civil War was unpopular, Giuliani said, Lincoln "kept his eye ahead."

"He was able to say, 'I know my people are frustrated, and I know my people are angry at me.' " But after weighing public opinion, Lincoln had "that ability that a leader has — a leader like George Bush, a leader like Ronald Reagan — to look into the future," Giuliani said.

And in this corner, we have a pot-smoking-quasi-black-inexperienced-Satan-worshiping Barack Hussein the Anti-Lincoln:

This morning on Fox News Sunday, Weekly Standard editor William Kristol attacked Obama’s Iraq policy, saying he wants to appease terrorists like pro-slavery politician Stephen Douglas tried to appease slave-owners. Kristol said, “Obama’s speech is a ‘can’t we get along’ speech — sort of the opposite of Lincoln. He would have been with Stephen Douglas in 1858.”

Seriously?? I mean, I’m numb at this point to the Bush = Lincoln argument the right has been trying to peddle for years. The assertion that stubbornness is somehow the quintessential encapsulation of Lincoln’s leadership is so patently absurd that I would normally not even bother to post a rebuttal. But to compare Obama to a pro-slavery confederate just takes the desperate and asinine taco. And to manufacture this juxtaposition on the same news cycle reeks of a coordinated GOP smear.

The GOP may be in a slump, but thank the gods we can still count on FOX News for an overtly racist attack in time for Valentine’s Day.

Share this

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sam Freedom (not verified)Wed, 2007-02-14 09:57

Let's Be Honest Here...Re: A Tale of Two Lincolns

Objectively speaking, this stuff is brilliant. Obama has been lauded by admirers for what seems to be nothing more than he hasn't yet accrued the kind of destructive negatives that makes most candidates immediate cannon fodder. Honestly, listening to the liberal Democrats ogling over Obama was like listening to people talk about a great up and coming race horse. Had ZERO to do with substance and everything to do with superficial appeal. So kudos to Kristol and company for counterbalancing all of the hype and fanfare of a junior senator with all of 2 years experience by equating him with someone who was also for "appeasement, olive branch style." How nicely timed with the Australian PMs insistence that Al-Qaida in Iraq should put all their weight behind Obama. As much as you're excited about claiming all of this to be a co-ordinated foul, I see it as a bunch of articulate people who are just very good at expressing their point of view at a time when it really matters most. Cheers Sam
Kelsey (not verified)Wed, 2007-02-14 18:01

Re: Let's Be Honest Here...Re: A Tale of Two Lincolns

The GOP should not take solace in the comments of a foreign leader about our own internal politics and elections. We have to remember that this is one of the things that killed the candidacy of John Kerry in 2004. Some foreign leaders know their place when it comes to election endorsements of US Candidates. I am reminded of a speech I attended shortly before November, 2004, given by Ehud Barrack, former prime minister of Israel. In the Q&A session after his speech, someone in the audience asked him who he would like to see win the election: John Kerry, or President Bush. Barrack, though I'm sure he favored Bush based upon his more favorable views of Israel, answered very eloquently by saying "It is not my place to give an answer to that question." For the foreign leaders that don't know their place, we simply need to ignore them regardless of whether or not their comments are unfavorable or favorable to the party or candidate that we support. If foreigners want to participate in our government, they need to move to the United States, renounce loyalty to their previous country, and gain citizenship to ours. Until then, their comments are about as important to us as Valentines Day to a dude without a girl. Other than that, I agree with everything you just said.
Jay DaverthWed, 2007-02-14 11:04

Re: Let's Be Honest Here...Re: A Tale of Two Lincolns

Thanks for the articulate and well-thought out comment.  I tend to agree with most of what you're saying. While I generally have little praise for the GOP, it is mainly because I particularly admire their ability to play dirty really well ... evil genius syndrome I suppose. Oh, and thanks for pointing out Howard's comments - the smear machine seems to be in full gear - something I take to be a good sign of how scared they are of Obama's candidacy.

For the record, I think most Obama fans (myself included) tend to fancy his incredibly articulate / moving rhetorical style (his speech at the 2004 DNC nearly brought me to tears), his remarkably quick mind (see how he's handled all these attacks over the last few days, the 60 minutes interview, etc.), his fresh energy (inexperienced sure, but has the right kind of experience, has functioned in high-profile committees, and is full of positive new ideas and perspectives), and his pragmatic-reformist stance on the pressing issues of the day.

Will I vote for him? Who knows, as you say, the campaign will reveal more about the guy and I'll make my decision in a couple of years.

The main point of my post, however, is the utter insanity of comparing Bush to Lincoln all these years simply because the guy is stubborn and then coming out and claiming Obama would roll over and side with the pro-slavery crowd. Barack is rocking the boat against Big Insurance, Big Oil, Big Pharmaceuticals, Corporate malfeasance, and the bloated military-industrial complex - all of which Bush as appeased during his entire tenure. You really don't get more scrappy than Obama in a mainstream candidate. For Obama to seek to enagage in multi-lateral negotiations with other interests in the planet doesn't make him an appeaser, it makes him smart - he knows that the US is in no position to take on the planet and the time has come to move forward - fight when and only when we need to, not just when we want to.