Abe Lincoln and John Kennedy
 

I'd seen this before, but just got it again in an email and thought I'd share it. Maybe some of you haven't seen it ...

... very interesting ...

-------

Have a history teacher explain this----- if they can.

Abraham Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846.
John F. Kennedy was elected to Congress in 1946.

Abraham Lincoln was elected President in 1860.
John F. Kennedy was elected President in 1960.

Both were particularly concerned with civil rights.
Both wives lost their children while living in the White House.

Both Presidents were shot on a Friday.
Both Presidents were shot in the head.

Now it gets really weird.

Lincoln's secretary was named Kennedy.
Kennedy's Secretary was named Lincoln.

Both were assassinated by Southerners.
Both were succeeded by Southerners named Johnson.

Andrew Johnson, who succeeded Lincoln, was born in 1808.
Lyndon Johnson, who succeeded Kennedy, was born in 1908.

John Wilkes Booth, who assassinated Lincoln, was born in 1839.
Lee Harvey Oswald, who assassinated Kennedy, was born in 1939.

Both assassins were known by their three names.
Both names are composed of fifteen letters.

Now hang on to your seat

Lincoln was shot at the theater named 'Ford.'
Kennedy was shot in a car called 'Lincoln' made by 'Ford.'

Lincoln was shot in a theater and his assassin ran and hid in a warehouse.
Kennedy was shot from a warehouse and his assassin ran and hid in a
theater.

Booth and Oswald were assassinated before their trials.

And here's the kicker...

A week before Lincoln was shot, he was in Monroe, Maryland
A week before Kennedy was shot, he was with Marilyn Monroe.

Creepy huh? Send this to as many people as you can, cause: Hey, this is one history lesson people don't mind reading

And the most strange of all ...

PF said Steph did it.

(I just made up and added that last one. :))

dicksbro,

Amazing stuff! Thanks. :)

Shouldn't that actually read "A week before Kennedy was shot, he was in Marilyn Monroe?

There is a lesson in there somewhere...

I have seen that before and it's facinating.

Very interesting. :)

I haven't checked out every detail yet so I'm only sure that last point is true. :rolleyes2

If I were to become an assassin, I'd be picking a different American ^^^ as my first victim.

:spin:
crazy

i have never seen that before. Very interesting.

Just for the record, this is what snopes.com says about it

That link didn't work for me. What's the jist of what it said???

This is the correct link DB> http://www.snopes.com/history/american/linckenn.htm

Sorry about that, I screwed up the link. It's better now.

Sweetie, you're Lincoln's age, not me.

lol..ouch....did he tussle with the man himself? did he help him build the log cabin, or was he changing his diaper, telling him stories of " a long time ago, there was a man who said he couldn't tell a lie...that man was.."

I was almost surprised not to find more things "in error." Not sure I ever thought there was anything "mysterious" or "supernatural" about the items listed, only that they were intneresting ... and, I still think that. As an example, they mentioned the item about the "Both assassins were known by their three names" and that Booth was actually known as J. Wilkes. Might be true for then, but I grew up only hearing that Lincoln was shot by John Wilkes Booth ... not J. Wilkes. I think the counterpoint was, itself, pretty trivial. Or, that both Lincoln and Kennedy were shot on Friday ... like one in seven are terrifically good odds. I don't know, but I don't cancel picnics because there's a 14+% chance of rain and an 85+% chance it won't.

The wording was perhaps a bit much, but the point about "Both were particularly concerned with civil rights." is another that while the counterpoint may be true ... the historical perspective gives Lincoln great credit for the Emmacipation Proclamation and Kennedy great credit for his concern for minorities. If the word "particularly" had been left out, the statement might have been a bit more accurate.

The Marilyn Monroe point was probably the only one that was obviously and totally inaccurate ... and snopes even noted it was added on after the original list was first published. Score one point for snopes.

So anyway, I got the piece as an e-mail ... thought it was intersting and fun and shared it. Still think it's interesting (not profound) and that the "snopes.com" statements didn't diminish that and, in fact, were not very profound either. In fact, they seemed more like a very wordy way of saying "one liners aren't as accurate as in-depth analysis." Gosh, who would have guessed?

:)