In a new popular history of "Mr. Polk's War," Invading Mexico, by Joseph Wheelan, I find:
"Above all, the Whigs resented Polk's assertion that by questioning his conduct, Whigs were aiding and abetting the enemy. [Tennessee Congressman Meredith] Gentry bitterly observed:'Because we will not crouch, with spaniel-like humility, at his feet, and whine an approval of all his acts, we are met...with the grateful compliment from the President that we are traitors to our country.'"
Om an unrelated note: Go Venus!
but you see, a true spaniel
ReplyDeletedoes not know he is a spaniel.
whatever happened to the Whigs?
ReplyDeleteThere are a lot of amazing similarities between Polk and Bush with regards to their wars, with Polk having basically faked an incident to justify invading Mexico. The one difference is that even if much of what Polk did was not really justifieed, he did resolve the broader question that had been looming for sometime of what would be borders of the western US, including in the northwest where there had been a lingering potential conflict with Britain. Unfortunately, I do not see any useful resolution of any sort coming out of Bush's adventure in Iraq, other than that Saddam Hussein is dead.
ReplyDelete"not really justified"
ReplyDeletespaniel for "fight them there so we won't have to fight them here" ?
not sure i want to sound like i am defending Saddam. but killing even the killer does not make me feel good. one could argue that Saddams crimes were necessary in that part of the world to preserve order and prevent the horror of the war of all against all.
and, having learned our lesson from "Kuwaiti babies torn out of incubators and thrown on the floor," we might discount, just a bit, other stories we have heard.
now, see, what's lovely about this, is that at least one reader will decide i am defendig Saddam and justifying his crimes.
Regarding the Whigs, the party pretty much fell apart around 1850. After the Republican Party was formed in 1854, most of the former Whigs moved into it, along with the Free Soilers. One of those who did so was the first Republican president and critic of the Mexican War during his one term in Congress as a Whig from Illinois, Abraham Lincoln.
ReplyDeletehow times change!
ReplyDelete"Regarding the Whigs, the party pretty much fell apart around 1850. "
ReplyDeleteInteresting - the party fell apart while it held the Presidency? Sounds paradoxical but it's true. Such was the power of slavery as an issue - the entire pre-1850 party structure split. True, the Democrats - barely - managed to survive, but not before splitting into two wings, which enabled Lincoln to win. The Whigs also had northern-southern splits. Many of them, including their last President, Fillmore, embraced that other 1850's fashion - know-nothingism - anti-immigrant politics.
I also read Wheelan's book and found it contained much I hadn't known.