Bush's "Democrats!" = Lincoln's "Copperheads!"

In the early days of the nation, there were ruptures in its fabric that could have caused its dissolution as well-intentioned but often overly ambitious men (some not so well-intentioned), sometimes even ruthlessly so, vied for position in either government or other enterprise needing for its success the manipulation of government. Almost miraculously – especially since the former colonies were undertaking a virtual first, ie., the initiation of a government from the ground up – the union held for six decades in spite of the machinations of those who saw it only as something to be used…until the presidency of Abraham Lincoln, born on 12 February 1809.

What could have meant the disestablishment of the union under a lesser leader than Lincoln was not allowed to happen. Consider: In the North, the Democrats divided into two factions – the War Democrats and the Peace Democrats. Both groups took issue with the way the Republican administration conducted the war, but the War Democrats at least supported the fight for the Union. The Peace Democrats were called “Copperheads.”

The Copperheads mounted a forceful and sustained protest against the Lincoln administration's policies and conduct. The most popular of the Copperheads was Democratic Congressman Clement L. Vallandigham, who in 1862 introduced a bill in Congress to imprison the President. At the 1864 Democratic convention, he persuaded the party to adopt a platform that declared the war a failure (sound familiar?) and called for negotiations with the Confederacy (sound familiar?).

In the process, Lincoln was caught at a time when an average of 425 of America’s most able men were dying each day of battle and disease, a circumstance that lasted for four long years. To see this in perspective, one needs only to recognize that virtually the same number of soldiers died every week during the Civil War (208 weeks) as have died in the four years of the battle in Iraq (208 weeks). The wonder is that Lincoln was not assassinated in his first year in office. The pressure for Lincoln to “do something” to stop the carnage must have been unbearable, but he held fast…he stayed the course.

Flash forward to this twelfth of February, Lincoln’s birthday, and find another president resolved to stay the course under tremendous pressure, even though in human terms there isn’t the remotest comparison to be made of today’s circumstances with the horrendous problems facing Lincoln and the Union. Indeed, one is reminded of presidents who stayed the course in 1917-18 and 1941-45, when Americans died at the rate of 320 per day for 4.5 years (234 weeks). The nation stood these horrific circumstances because survival depended upon the outcome of wars fought in far-flung places but not touching its shores.

The Democrat Party is similarly divided today as it was in 1861. It has its war faction and its peace-at-any-price faction, its own Copperheads. Its mantra is “dialogue/negotiate” with the sworn enemy (Islamic governments that have decreed the demise of this nation), as was the case in Lincoln’s day – just sit down and “talk it out,” then with the Confederates, and now with whomever. Democrat Senators Kerry and Dodd, the latter an announced presidential candidate, have “dialogued” with Syrian President Assad (Hezbollah’s supplier) in recent days on his turf, perhaps attempting to “negotiate,” each trying to be what he isn’t – the U.S. president – and undermining both this country’s administration and its military. This is little, if any, short of treason, as was Kerry’s lunacy during the Vietnam War when he met with the enemy in Paris – trying to be the president.

Senators Clinton and Obama, both announced presidential aspirants, are spreading their anti-war and anti-their-own-government venom in ways to gladden the heart of any enemy and give him aid and comfort, when they should be encouraging this administration in its worthy effort to stave off Islamic war-activity and the Muslim goal of subjecting the world. They are either too dumb to understand or too ambitious to care. They are the stereotypical Copperheads. Lincoln had Vallandigham and some other Copperheads arrested, but that can’t be done today. Copperheads can’t even abide the Patriot Act, giving rise to one’s wondering why, since if there’s nothing to hide there’s nothing to fear.

Senator Obama chose the Lincolnesque Springfield, Illinois, site to announce his candidacy, but George Bush comes much closer to a Lincoln that Obama could ever hope to. Indeed, Obama’s appearance at a place where his kind of wimpishness is anathema to the aura created by a man who could face difficulty head-on and defeat it is a sort of blasphemy. Meanwhile, Senator Clinton, the presumptive front-runner was cackling in New Hampshire about her vote for the war being prostituted by the president, taking absolutely no responsibility. This is cowardice and posturing on a profound level, indeed.

Lincoln was a “man’s man,” no disrespect for the ladies intended. Just so is Bush. The pretenders are a pathetic bunch of Copperheads, especially, the most notorious – Clinton, Obama, Edwards. Their names should not be uttered in the same room as that of Abraham Lincoln. They may scream “failure,” but they wouldn’t know either failure or success if knocked down by either.