Democratic Party Of 1864 = Party Of 2006

Spread the love

Loading

Gateway Pundit found this website that tells the story of the Democratic Party in 1864….and notices lots of similarities to the Democratic party of 2006:

By 1864, the Country had grown weary of the long and bloody Civil War. Hundreds of thousands of the countries’ best and bravest young men had fallen on the fields of Bull Run, Antietam, Shiloh, and countless more. Many began to think that the war was not worth it, and the price of freedom too great. The Republican Presidential Candidate Abraham Lincoln thought no price was too great for the abolition of slavery and the creation of a society in which a man was not judged by the color of his skin. Unfortunately, after four long years of war, Lincoln’s support was dropping fast, and people were looking for a way out of the war.

1864 Democratic Presidential Nominee, General George B. McClellan would fit in nicely with the current democratic party.

Presidential Candidate, George McClellan.–On Aug. 29, 1864, the Democratic National Convention assembled in Chicago, Ill., The Democratic Party Platform presented a plan of “Compromise with the South”, which became known as “The Chicago Platform”. They nominated General McClellan for the Presidency on the following declaration of principles:

Resolved…that in the future, as in the past, we will adhere with unswerving fidelity to the Union under the Constitution, as the only solid foundation of our strength, security, and happiness as a people, and as a framework of government equally conducive to the welfare and prosperity of all the States, both Northern and Southern.

Resolved….that this convention does explicitly declare, as the sense of the American people, that after four years of failure to restore the Union by the experiment of war, during which, under the pretence of military necessity, or war power higher than the Constitution, the Constitution itself has been disregarded in every part, and public liberty and private right alike trodden down, and the material prosperity of the country essentially impaired, justice, humanity, liberty, and the public welfare demand that immediate efforts be made for a cessation of hostilities, with a view to an ultimate convention of the States or other peaceable means, to the end that at the earliest practicable moment peace may be restored on the basis of the federal Union of the States.

Resolved….that the aim and object of the Democratic party are to preserve the federal Union and the rights of the States unimpaired ; and they hereby declare that they consider the administrative usurpation of extraordinary and dangerous powers not granted by the Constitution; the subversion of the civil by the military laws in States not in insurrection; the arbitrary military arrest, imprisonment, trial, and sentence of American citizens in States where civil law exists in full force; the suppression of freedom of speech and of the press; the denial of the right of asylum; the open and avowed disregard of State rights; the employment of unusual test oaths, and the interference with and denial of the right of the people to bear arms in their defense, as calculated to prevent a restoration of the Union and the perpetuation of a government deriving its just powers from the consent of the governed.

Amazing what a difference 142 years makes huh? Or not. Imagine the slogans back then:

Lincoln = Satan

Not In My Name

No Blood For Slaves

Lincoln lied, People Died

And so on….Lincoln understood that the fight was worth it, as Bush does. We are in a World War against terrorism and appeasement is not an option.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
3 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Dead on target, Curt.

As you probably know, Civil War anti-war Democrats were called “Copperheads”. If you want to have some fun, the next time you get into a debate with an anti-war type, call them a “copperhead”. Odds are they won’t know what you’re talking about. If it’s someone you’ll see again, just tell them to look it up. Believe you me, the next time you see them they’ll be pissed off and how!

More than that, Lincoln changed his war justification part-way through the war. When it started, he said it was just about preserving the union and not about freeing the slaves. Then, as the war went along, he changed it to freeing the slaves. You can use that one too if some lib tells you Bush changed his objectives.

So much for learning from your mistakes.

“Okie” on the Lam

Dem & Demmer — 142 Years of More of the Same…

Flopping Aces (h/t: Anchoress) presents material from this site that outlines Democrat positions from 1864 — when they were tired of the slog of war, and looking for a way out. Civil War cut-&-runners, so to speak.

Hmmm, kinda sounds eerily familia…