While a petition swells in Boston for the removal of an Abraham Lincoln statue, protesters in San Francisco didn’t bother waiting for public opinion before going after one of the biggest Yankee icons in American history. On Friday night, approximately 400 morons gathered to tear down a monument to Ulysses S. Grant, the legendary general who led the North to victory in the Civil War, thus ending the Confederacy and ultimately bringing slavery to an end in the United States.
Some apologists for the protesters have attempted to make a weak argument for why the protesters were right in targeting Grant.
“Grant did in fact own a man named William Jones for about a year on the eve of the Civil War,” said Sean Kane of the American Civil War Museum. “In 1859, Grant either bought or was given the 35-year-old Jones, who was in Grant’s service until he freed him before the start of the War.”
Ah. So at a time when slavery was accepted in the U.S., Grant was (possibly) gifted a slave that he set free after about a year. Let’s put that up against the fact that, other than Lincoln himself, Grant was more fully responsible for the end of slavery than any other single man in the country. Hmm, how does that weigh out? Well, in an era where mentally-challenged millennials cancel anyone who has ever said anything problematic in their entire lives (and, sometimes, their ancestors’ lives), it should come as no surprise that they would target Grant.
You know, if they even knew who Grant was in the first place. It wouldn’t surprise us if they simply tore down the monument because…well…it was there.
“Grant did briefly own one slave he freed years before the war; but as a general he smashed the Confederacy, and as president he crushed the Klan,” tweeted Adam Serwer. “He presided over the ratification of the 15th Amendment. People going after Grant probably just want to break things.”
Even the ultra-leftist Matthew Yglesias of Vox wrote: “Feels like this is the slippery slope overreach.”
Gee, ya think?