Chomp
(602 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-24-06 08:04 PM
Original message |
Be silent; I see it, if you don't . |
|
In February 1848 Rep. Abraham Lincoln explained his opposition to the Mexican War: "Allow the President to invade a neighboring nation, whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion and you allow him to do so whenever he may choose to say he deems it necessary for such purpose -- and you allow him to make war at pleasure . . . . If, today, he should choose to say he thinks it necessary to invade Canada to prevent the British from invading us, how could you stop him? You may say to him, 'I see no probability of the British invading us'; but he will say to you, 'Be silent; I see it, if you don't.'"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/23/AR2006042301014.html
|
demosincebirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-24-06 08:06 PM
Response to Original message |
1. The only lawmaker to oppose the Mexican War. |
Journeyman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-24-06 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
9. Actually, there were dozens of Congressmen who opposed the Mexican War... |
|
At least 85 Whigs voted to adopt a resolution put forth by George Ashmun of Massachusetts declaring the war had been "unnecessarily and unconstitutionally begun by the President."
Mr. Lincoln's primary involvement in the effort against the war came when the fighting was substantially over, and consisted in the main of lawyerly interrogatories delivered on the floor of the House in which he challenged President Polk to identify the "spot" on American soil where the war had begun. For this, he was castigated by his political opponents back home, tagged with the unflattering sobriquet "Ranchero Spotty," and supported only half-heartedly by his own party. In fact, the quote cited in the OP was not delivered on the floor of the House, or even within the city of Washington D.C., but was instead part of a letter he sent to his law partner, William Herndon, though it was meant for public dissemination within Illinois as explanation for his actions.
His attacks upon the President, and his challenges to the legal basis of the war, were political maneuvers, meant to paint the Democrats as reckless and were part of a Whig effort to gain advantage in the Presidential election of 1848. For this reason, the Whigs covered their backsides against charges they opposed the war itself in their zeal to paint its beginnings as suspect by nominating a war hero, Zachary Taylor, as their candidate.
Hmm . . . it all seems so familiar somehow . . .
|
demosincebirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-24-06 09:17 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
|
I was thinking in different century. (a senator from Oregon).
|
CrazyOrangeCat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-24-06 08:06 PM
Response to Original message |
2. His prescience in so many things . . . |
|
. . . just astounds me. Thanks for this post.
|
stevedeshazer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-24-06 08:09 PM
Response to Original message |
|
And to think modern Republicans claim him as the founder of the GOP. :shrug:
|
crikkett
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-24-06 08:19 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
|
Log Cabin Republicans:P (tee-hee, I logged in just to say that)
|
stevedeshazer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-24-06 08:22 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
kentuck
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-24-06 08:17 PM
Response to Original message |
4. K & R to the Greatest Page ! |
crappyjazz
(886 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-24-06 08:19 PM
Response to Original message |
6. 'Be silent; I see it, if you don't.' |
|
Sounds like it came right out of the "Decider's" mouth
|
nytemare
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-24-06 08:27 PM
Response to Original message |
8. That was a great column. |
WiseButAngrySara
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Apr-24-06 08:48 PM
Response to Original message |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 04:45 AM
Response to Original message |