Lincoln, RFK were anti-war 'traitors,' too

Morons like to make statements like the title to this piece. Thank God, as Americans, they have the right and the pulpit to utter such crap. Also, thank God they're saying it in America or otherwise the pulpit from which they preach would be kicked away and the rope around their neck would break their fall.

Deseret Morning News, Sunday, April 29, 2007
Lincoln, RFK were anti-war 'traitors,' too
By Lee BensonDeseret Morning News

Amid all the protests, anti-protests and anti-protest protests accompanying
Vice President Dick Cheney's visit to Provo this week, Utah Attorney General
Mark Shurtleff got so caught up with microphone fever that he forgot his manners and lost his sense of history all at the same time.
In a speech at a pro-Cheney rally, the A.G. compared the anti-war rants of Rocky Anderson and Harry Reid to fabled war propagandists Tokyo Rose and Hanoi Hannah, calling the mayor of Salt Lake and the majority leader of the U.S. Senate "Iraqi Rocky" and "Hezbollah Harry," respectively.

He said they are aiding the enemy by suggesting we are losing the
war.

OK, forget that we are losing the war and forget that we're not even
real sure who the enemy is and even forget Shurtleff's lapsing into trash talk,
an art form I've always, where appropriate, rather enjoyed.

We’re losing the war Lee? We don’t know who the enemy is? Military expert, are you, eh? Or do you have military experts who aren’t disgruntled ex’s or trying to make a buck, who back you up? Besides, Harry didn't suggest that we are losing the war. He stated we were losing the war.

But what's with calling American politician war protesters traitors?

Disagreeing with this country's warfaring is as American as changing
your own oil.

Disagreeing, yes. Giving support to the enemy, especially as a Democratic leader of the Senate, is a tad different. Nice touch, that "changing your own oil" thing in place of "as American as apple pie". Really puts the war in context for you, doesn't it Lee.

Here are five names for Shurtleff: William Franklin, Abraham Lincoln,
Thomas Brackett Reid, Woodrow Wilson and Bobby Kennedy.

The thing they all have in common: All were war protesters.

William Franklin was governor of New Jersey when he protested the
Revolutionary War (and lost his job) in 1776 — much to the chagrin of his
father, Benjamin Franklin.

Ah, William had his reasons for being anti-war as the American colonial administrator and the last of the royal governors of New Jersey. He chose to support Great Britain throughout the American Revolution. His father, Ben Franklin, refused to support or speak to him the rest of his life. Words have meaning and actions have consequences Lee.

Abraham Lincoln was a U.S. congressman from Illinois in 1846 when he
protested President James K. Polk's Mexican-American war, calling Polk "a
bewildered, confounded and miserably perplexed man."

Lincoln called Polk's justification of the war unconstitutional, unnecessary and expensive, calling Polk "a bewildered, confounded and miserably perplexed man." Long way, even by Internet standards, from aiding and abetting the enemy. Lee, tell us just how anti-war Lincoln was after the "unprovoked" attack on Fort Sumter. This anti-war hero of yours didn't even have box cutter murderers slitting the throats of passengers and using the high jacked vehicles to murder more than 3,000 innocent civilians to blame for declaring war. Maybe he should have talked them to death, because there surely wasn't a military solution. Which was Lincoln Lee, anti war or craven war monger just looking for an excuse to wage war?

Thomas Brackett Reid of Maine was speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives
in 1898 when he resigned in protest of the Spanish-American war.

Resigned in protest? Don't get my hopes up Lee. Do you think Harry has that much moral conviction? Nah, neither do I.

Woodrow Wilson won the presidency in 1916 on the strength of an anti-war
campaign to keep America out of World War I (and a year later sent us into it
anyway).

And after Wilson entered the US into the war the effort became a bi-partisan effort to win with the Republicans winning control of the House of Representatives and the Senate in 1918. Bi-partisan Lee. When the troops were in the field. Are you seeing a difference here Lee.

Bobby Kennedy was a U.S. senator from New York in 1968 when he called for a
return of troops from Vietnam and declared his candidacy for the presidency
occupied by Vietnam supporter and fellow Democrat, Lyndon Johnson.

RFK in most of his campaign speeches in 1968 called for “peace” in Vietnam, offering a “negotiated settlement, but did not as belittle our troops or our effort. How ironic that you use RFK in your argument when it was Sirhan Sirhan, a Palestinian terrorist who assassinated Bobby Kennedy.

These men are not alone. American politicians have been protesting wars
since America started fighting in them. Even entering World War II wasn't
unanimous. When Congress voted on Dec. 8, 1941, 388 voted yes to one no from
avowed pacifist Jeannette Rankin of Montana.

She might have been unpopular, but she sure wasn't Tokyo Rose.

"As a woman, I can't go to war and I refuse to send anyone else. I vote 'NO'". However she did not vote against declaring war on Germany and Italy following their declaration of war on the U.S. Instead, she voted merely "Present."

That was "Present" Lee, not "The war is lost". That was a "No" vote to declare war, not a "You're a stupid man because I am smarter than you and you're not listening to me. I want the power" type of statement that makes the enemy think we don't have resolve as a nation.

Oh, and she didn't run next time. Maybe Harry shouldn't.

Words have meaning as do actions.

Whatcha think Lee?