Posted on 12/25/2008 4:34:30 PM PST by obamaisandrogynous
Barack Obama plans to take his oath of office, as president of the United States, on a Holy Bible, once owned by Abraham Lincoln. Many leftist reporters have enthused over the symbolism. They truly think there is some mystical connection between the Hawaii-born, half-Kenyan, Harvard-educated street agitator, and the Kentucky-born, self-educated, great emancipator, and savior of the Union, Lincoln.
Many conservative commentators criticize these comparisons of Lincoln and Obama, rightly, it is true, by pointing out that, aside from being elected to ever higher political office, Obama really “hasn’t done anything" for America. Clearly, Barry hasn’t freed an entire people left in bondage, or managed a cross-continental war, successfully.
That’s completely true — but it misses a greater point.
Obama admires Marxism and socialism. He has stated this in his own book, Dreams from My Father. By comparing himself to Lincoln, Obama is continuing to develop his Marxist personal narrative, and, he hopes, a Marxist cultural narrative for the U.S. The Lincoln Obama compares himself to is not the Lincoln normal Americans revere as a great president.
Back in the 1930s, American communists allied with former political rivals from the American center-left and created a coalition called the Popular Front. The alliance was formed to oppose fascism — i.e. Adolph Hitler and the Nazi Party, which was menacing the world.
During this time, the Communist Party of the U.S.A. proudly, if quite inaccurately, proclaimed that “Communism is 20th Century Americanism.” The communists also cast themselves as the rightful heirs of George Washington and Abraham Lincoln.
Obama was an avid reader and consumer of communist and socialist propaganda.
So Obama, by publicly embracing Lincoln, is actually not identifying with the president who saved the union from revolution. He is identifying with the 1930s, cardboard cut-out communist caricature of our 16th president.
(Excerpt) Read more at rlcil.org ...
Good point about how the Communists sought to appropriate Lincoln’s image.
Yes, the Marxist enemies of the West purposely use the most popular facades they can think of to fool people who don’t know how to think for themselves into thinking that “progressives” are all about mom and apple pie. You’d think the public would get wise to being so obviously manipulated.
” You’d think the public would get wise to being so obviously manipulated.’
Sorry, it’s too late. The sheeple are in the pen.
Agreed about the public, but in order to learn not to be duped they need to know something of history, politics, etc.
Most don’t bother to educate themselves.
It’s hard for me to imagine a less apt comparison between two people than one between Barack Obama and Abraham Lincoln.
The American public has been so dumbed down in the past 3 or 4 decades, it's a wonder there are any true conservatives left in this country. With the manner of indoctrination the public schools and their unions have been teaching more about gay rights, how to slip a rubber onto a condom, how to rebel against authority, and other socialist/marxist propaganda, our kids don't have a chance to become individualists. The only proof I need is what happened on November 4th with the election of a man who almost outright yells at people saying is a socialist. What scares me most of Obama is not Obama, but his handlers. His handlers will tell him what to do and he will do it because he owes it to them for the backing he received from them. My wish is that another Reagan will arise from the ashes of the election of 2008. Palin is our only hope.
“Barry hasn’t freed an entire people left in bondage, or managed a cross-continental war, successfully.”
Lincoln didn’t do that either. He emancipated only the slaves held in states under rebellion. They weren’t freed in the north. It was an act to control an asset of war...slavery, by the commander in chief.
The second point, that he successfully managed the war is arguable as well. ‘Emancipating’ the South’s labor source was the best tactical move he made. And that is what it was. It didn’t end slavery.
American Communists named the organization in which they served during the Spanish Civil War the Lincoln Brigade. Interesting...
Oh, did the North have slaves?
That’s like comparing the White Stripes to Led Zepplin.
Yes, they certainly did.
How many Blacks were slaves in the North after the civil War? Also how many plantations in the South still have slaves still today?
No where mentioned by the MSM is that Lincoln was the first Republican President and advocated minimal interference by government in the economy.
When he was sworn in, Lincoln had accomplished almost nothing for America except some stirring rhetoric. His political office experience was remarkably similar to Obama's, several terms in the IL legislature and two years in the House. Obama: several terms in the IL legislature and four years in the Senate.
IMO Lincoln's rhetoric had a great more deal more substance to it than Obama's, but as far as actual accomplishments in politics, and particularly in executive experience, the two men are remarkably similar.
Not exactly accurate. He pushed for compensated emancipation from early in his presidency and supported the various amendments that eventually freed all the slaves. The president has no role in amendments, but he encouraged Congress to pass them and send them to the states.
IOW, Lincoln did everything he constitutionally could to free all the slaves. He had no right or mechanism to directly emancipate northern slaves.
BTW, by the end of the war slaves remained in bondage only in KY and a few hundred in DE. All others had already been freed by state action.
c’mon. Both were born in places starting with KEN
Let B.O. and the Dims have Lincoln. They’ve been embracing him for years.....even the celluloid clowns on The West Wing would get weepy-eyed over the mere mention of “honest Abe”.
If the Republicans want to be a conservative party again, and that seems VERY much in doubt, they need to re-embrace the ideals of Jefferson, Washington, and Madison.....and the presidential governing precepts of Tyler, Cleveland, Pierce, and Hayes ( limited government, fiscal responsibility, and no needless bloodshed ).
Let the liberals have Lincoln. He’s always been one of them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.