Now, I doubt that the type of voters who choose their president on the principle that the candidate seems like “a regular guy”, and who proudly and aggressively have a rabid disdain for any candidate who evidences a mote of reasoned and insightful discourse, I say I doubt such voters have much historical knowledge, apart from what they see at movies like ‘Patton’ or ‘Rambo III’.

These voters are invariably Republicans, judging from the choices they’ve made for their presidential and VP candidates. The Old Man and the Pit Bull with makeup.

Despite their severe lack of historical insight they are frequently quick to trot out reference to the Munich Agreement of 1938 as a metaphor for what they characterize as the sort of gutless appeasement that is the foreign policy of their Democratic opponents.

Well, historical comparison is dangerous rhetorical tool. In can invariably used by either side of an issue to buttress its argument.

For instance, voting for an old war hero can frequently be fraught with danger.

Take the example of Marshal Petain.

You remember Marshal Petain. The venerable general of World War I. He became famous around the same time as the Munich Agreement. As President of Vichy France.

Trouble is, if the old war hero should die you could be stuck with Nazi occupation.

Or The Pit Bull.