The Gholston Post

I don’t recall one time where President-elect Barack Obama said he was Abraham Lincoln or he was going to be the next Abraham Lincoln. Based on articles I’ve read and comments I’ve heard, the president-elect is a great historical admirer of Lincoln and hopes to – in some ways – pattern his own presidency after Lincoln’s. That does not mean he is calling himself Abraham Lincoln or saying that he is going to be the next Abraham Lincoln, as two writers (Alexander Burns and John F. Harris) from Politico recently implied in an article I found that was picked up by the Detroit News. Just because a basketball player may want to pattern his game after LeBron James or Kobe Bryant does not mean he is saying he is LeBron James or Kobe Bryant. It merely means that he wants to take a look at the best attributes of individuals he admires and use them to improve upon himself. If an up-and-coming player says he wants to be a solid all-around player like Kobe or LeBron who can pass, rebound, play defense and score in bunches … does it mean he is saying he is or will be better than outstanding talents like Bryant or James? Of course not. To assume anything of the kind is just plain ignorant. In my readings, I found an article co-authored by Burns and Harris in the News in which the men try to pummel President-elect Obama for wanting to pattern aspects of his presidency after that of the man who was the 16th president of the United States of America. Reading between the lines, as I like to do, it almost seems as if the authors are accusing President-elect Obama of being too uppity in trying to pattern himself after Lincoln (or maybe by simply mentioning Lincoln’s name at all).

Here is an excerpt from the article:

In Barack Obama’sappearance last month on CBS’s “60 Minutes,” the conversation turned to the president-elect’s long-time love of Abraham Lincoln.

“There is a wisdom there,” Obama told interviewer Steve Kroft, “and a humility about his approach to government, even before he was president, that I just find very helpful.”

Humility? Obama’s frequent invocations of Lincoln — a man enshrined in myth and marble with his own temple on the National Mall — would not at first blush say much about his own instincts for modesty or self-effacement.

And now there areearly rumblings of a backlash to Obama’sostentatious embrace of all things Lincoln, with his not-so-subtle invitations to compare the 44th president to the 16th, the “Savior of the Union.”

Simply put, some scholars think the comparisons have gone a bit over the top hat.

Sean Wilentz, a scholar in American history at Princeton, said many presidents have sought to frame themselves in the historical legacies of illustrious predecessors, but he couldn’t find any examples quite so brazen.

“Sure, they’ve looked back to Washington and even, at times, Jackson. Reagan echoed and at times swiped FDR’s rhetoric,” Wilentz said. “But there’s never been anything like this, and on this scale. Ever.”

I invite anyone to disagree with me, but I don’t think the authors made their case that President-elect Obama did anything even remotely disrespectful or arrogant in showing his admiration for Lincoln. if I’m wrong, please read the article and tell me. Seriously. Presidents and president-elects always show admiration for past presidents and work to emulate the best quality of their historic predecessors. Burns and Harris, in my opinion, failed to make their case that President-elect Obama stepped out of line or did anything unusual or disrespectful in expressing his admiration for Lincoln and attempting to follow that lead in an effort to unite the country. This piece reads like two guys fighting hard to try and do what reporters have been doing since the beginning … manufacture and/or spin a negative story out of what should be an inspiring story.

Detroit News:
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081216/POLITICS/812160305