From 1864 to 2006... Democrats Haven't Changed a Lick

[Stephanie]

:shocked:



Fill in the blank:


By the year _____, the country had grown weary of the long and bloody ____ War. _____ thousand of the countries' best and bravest young men had fallen on the fields of _____. Many began to think that the war was not worth it, and the price of freedom too great. The Republican Presidential Candidate ____________ thought no price was too great for _________. Unfortunately, after _____ long years of war, _____'s support was dropping fast, and people were looking for a way out of the war.
If you thought this was written about President Bush and the Iraq War, you would be mistaken. This paragraph depicts the political climate in America 142 years ago... and describes the challenges that faced a different Republican President during a different US War.

Democrats haven't changed a lick in 142 years as you can tell from their 1864 political poster.
Click to Enlarge.




Dave Clark sent this very revealing 1864 Democratic Party poster and describes the uncanny comparisons to today's anti-war party:



1.) Showing the enemy soldier stronger and more resilient than our own. Here the southern soldier (enemy) is upright and strong, the northern (US) broken and dejected.
2.) The "useless war" on the tomb. Even then the pessimist couldn't see the righteousness of the conflict.
3.) The flag flown upside down in a distress display; even then they saw little hope and only failure.
4.) The grieving widow.


My, God! We know the outcome of that war, and if not for the strength and foresight of President Lincln (and a new willingness for sacrifice from the soldiers) did the north come out victorious in the end. This poster was produced in 1864. The former battlefield failure General McClelland was running on the democratic ticket as the peace promoter - a position opposite of the president- just like today.
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/

 

[insein]

It's funny and sad at the same time. It's also telling that this is no different than other times in the history of our great nation when liberals wanted to stop the killing and let the enemy win. Thankfully, history shows that we have had leaders that ignore the detractors and fight to win. I think GWB is one of the people that in 150 years, Americans will look back and say, "That man was one of the greatest Presidents ever because he stood up to the enemy and beat them back when no one else would." Same as Reagan. Same as Lincoln. Same as FDR and Truman. Same as Churchill. Same as Jefferson, Washington, Franklin, Adams and all the rest. History usually shines upon the great men even if they were labeled "Worst leader ever" at the time of their leadership, like Lincoln.

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

Lincoln was a shitty president who destroyed the ultimate check on centralized power. He did not particularly care about the moral problem of slavery; indeed, if he opposed slavery at all it was due to the economics of slavery (ie, pandering to white labor unions). He would have preferred to ship them all back to Africa. No, the reason he persued a war in which over a half million died (that would be something like 3 or 4 million americans dying today, as a percentage of the population) was because the south provided a disproportionate amount of tax revenue, and he had big ambitious plans for super-sized pork barrel spending. Of course his plans were realized after the civil war, resulting in some of the most wasteful and corrupt government spending that the nation has ever known.

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

Interestingly enough, I saw that print at an antique show once. There was a dealer who had tons and tons of pages from old Harper's Weeklys. I didn't buy that particular one, but I did like this one (September 27, 1862):



On the back there is some interesting reading. Keep in mind the first one is an editorial from the pro-Union Harpers.

http://img106.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=96301_abolition_122_454lo.jpg

http://img121.imagevenue.com/view.php?image=96305_lee_122_345lo.jpg

 

[Lakhota]

 

[BluesLegend]

View attachment 930860

I think we were still wiping out native Americans in the 1860's.