Cheney is no Lincoln
In her concession speech, Congresswoman Liz Cheney not only alluded to arguably America’s greatest President – and the political founder of the Republican party – Abraham Lincoln. That is not uncommon for GOP Candidates and Party leaders. Republican organizations across the country have an annual Lincoln Day Dinner.
I have a special respect for Lincoln. On my bookshelves are more than 100 books on the 16th President – including many penned by people who knew him personally. Those are among my favorite reading. I have images and Lincolnian artifacts displayed in my home – including original photographs. My favorite is Lincoln and his son.
I was bothered by Cheney’s references to Lincoln because they were self-serving. She was not alluding to Lincoln to make points on principles – but rather in a comparison between Old Abe and herself.
She noted that he had lost elections before ascending to the presidency. That appeared to be a comparison to her crushing defeat and her intimation that she may be a candidate for President in 2024.
She suggested that the times leading up to Lincoln’s election to the highest office in the land were similar to what we see today – both being a run-up to a civil war.
Then there is that civil war narrative currently popular with those on the left – Democrats, the media and Cheney.
Anyone who knows American history would immediately see the utter lack of legitimacy in the comparison. In fact, I see nothing going on that remotely provides evidence of an imminent civil war – or even an ongoing insurrection … or coup attempt. Those who say we are in a particularly dangerous time in terms of political violence did not live through – or even hear about — the 1960s when the left was bombing, rioting (insurrecting?) and killing.
Racist Democrats killed President Kennedy and Martin Luther King. An international terrorist killed Senator Robert Kennedy. A left-wing shot and crippled Governor George Wallace as he was campaigning for President. Hundreds of thousands of left-wing protestors descended on Washington and even breached the Capitol Building. All that, and no one was claiming that the American Republic was teetering….
Shortly after Lincoln was elected – and before he was inaugurated – southern Democrat states started seceding from the Union. Both sides were building armies of millions of young men – and more than 400,000 died in five years of bloody battles.
As divided as America may be political, there is no broad sentiment for civil war. While there has been political violence, it has not come close to a critical mass that would have neighbors shooting at neighbors.
And speaking of the instance of violence, have you noticed the emphasis on violence from nutcases on the right and the totally dismissing of violence from nutcases on the left? Example: Ricky Shiffer, the guy who tried to breach the FBI office in Cincinnati with a nail gun – and was killed by FBI agents — was all over the news for days, and still is. Conversely, the story of the fellow who went to the home of Justice Brett Kavanaugh armed with intent to kill him has fallen off the radar – and never gets mentioned in stories dealing with a rise in domestic violence. Same with the attack by the women’s terrorist organization attacking pro-life operations. But I digress.
Cheney and her newfound friends of the left can talk about insurrections, coup attempts, civil wars, and the imminent fall of the American Republic, but that hyperbolic rhetoric is unnecessarily causing division and unrest. No amount of sanctimonious self-serving perceptive claims of courage, principle, and nobility can change that reality.
I understand that Cheney’s voting record is very conservative, but her main effort today is to empower the left-wing Democrats to defeat Republicans in November. That makes her an agent of the left. In her case, the past is not a prologue.
Cheney is no Lincoln – and shame on her for falsely appropriating the memory and meaning of the 16th President.
So, there ‘tis.