Conservatives always wonder why black conservatives are always looked on by the moderate to liberal black mainstream as odd ducks, but it’s outbursts like today’s from Condoleeza Rice why. Something about being black and conservative zaps your brain of all common sense and you start comparing the Iraq War to slavery.
Secretary of State Rice compared the Iraq war with the American Civil War, telling a magazine that slavery might have lasted longer in this country if the North had decided to end the fight early.
“I’m sure there are people who thought it was a mistake to fight the Civil War to its end and to insist that the emancipation of slaves would hold,” Rice said in the new issue of Essence magazine.
“I know there were people who said, ‘Why don’t we get out of this now, take a peace with the South, but leave the South with slaves?’” Rice said.
Last week Donald Rumsfeld called people opposed to the war (the majority) Nazi appeasers, this week Rice is calling the majority of Americans in favor of slavery.
What are they smoking, and when does it hit the streets?
Related
How True
And You Shall Know Them By Their Misrepresentations
Condi Rice: Bush Is Her… “Feed”. EW!
Both Rummy and Condi have their metaphors wrong.
You read sadly no too, huh Rheinhard?
Well, all “Sadly, NO” did was write out what was basically in my head as soon as I read the first reports of this ridiculous Civil War metaphor…
“Hmmm… let’s see, what historical conflict can we make a bullshit comparison to next? The Franco-Prussian war? Nah, who do you root for in a fight between Otto von Bismarck and Napoleon III? War of Spanish succession? You can’t tell one Hapsburg from another without a scorecard. The Thirty Years’ War might work… has the requisite absolutist religious overtones, and is the only war I can think of started by throwing people out of windows…” But this is as far as I got before I saw that those quick-typing bastards at S!N had already run with the idea.
Those people were …. Democrats! And here I thought they’d only been the Cut-n-Run party since the 1960’s.
Those people were …. Democrats!
And conservatives!
At least Condi is working her way around to calling this fight what it is: a civil war.
OMG THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY WAS ALIGNED SOMEWHAT DIFFERENTLY 150 YEARS AGO THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING
See a tongue-in-cheek visual of Condi performing her newest “Neocon Concerto”…here:
http://www.thoughttheater.com
OMG THE DEMOCRATS PURGED THE RACISTS IN TEH SIXTIES AND THEY FOUND A SWEET, SWEET HOME IN THE… REPUBLICAN PARTY.
OW - There were a lot of Christians and conservatives who traveled down to the Dem-controlled South to oppose segregation. And the most virulent abolitionists during the 19th century would not be welcome in today’s Democratic party.
I think Condi’s point was that during any fight, including one that is just by any measure (ie, the Civil War), many wish to shrink from the challenge and seek a “return to normalcy.”
It certainly was true of the Copperheads during the Civil War (see McClellan).
This thread is proof that no matter what nonsense the Bushies sell, cons are buying. Do you realize how foolish you look? Comparing Iraq to the Civil War?
factcheck - not making a comparison, stating a fact.
ie, when in difficult situations, many wish the situation to disappear.
When the going gets tough…
Anyway, there are similarities between almost any war to some extent. Condi’s point was that there was a viable and substantial portion of the North that did not want to proceed with the fight. Again, see McClellan and the Copperhead.
I would suspect that you would like to draw similarities between Iraq and Vietnam, no?
Iraq and Vietnam are remarkably similar. Neither one was any of your business.
gprzw xgiahv qtcg ldjevk yqsendoux etvlbo lbscy