David Forte writes a thoughtful piece reflecting on the striking similarities between Barack Obama’s approach to the Presidency and the approach of a certain American president from the middle of the nineteenth century. No, not THAT president. Forte also examines the ways in which the tired comparisons between Lincoln and Obama are little more than window dressing. 
I know the Ashbrooks are tired of the Lincoln-Obama comparison. So am I. We all are. There are about a thousand problems with comparing presidents from different centuries, but I think Forte's takes the cake. Comparing Lincoln's resolve to preserve the Union to Bush's obsession with obliterating terrorists? Give me a break.
The point should be that Lincoln is in a class of his own. No one compares.
But if we have to listen to these silly comparison studies, why not make it more interesting? How about Bush's invasion of Iraq on faulty intelligence to James K. Polk's decision to enter an unpopular war with Mexico after the Thornton Affair? Even Lincoln opposed that war...
Or how about Bush and Truman? Nobody liked either when they left office. Truman has a good rep now...
Maybe Reagan and Washington? Jefferson and Clinton? I think the crazier the comparison, the better!
I'm not sure the Lincoln-Obama thing is that crazy.