Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
RAILforum
»
General Forums
»
Open Discussion
»
It's All Over - Joe
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by irishchieftain: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by George Harris: [i] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: [i] Again, for ready reference: https://www.c-span.org/presidentsurvey2021/?page=overall The Scholars ratings are 1) Lincoln, 2) Washington, 3) FDR, 4) TR, 5) Ike. I said to my Sister: “OK Barbara, you want Trump in those five, who gets displaced?” “Washington; he owned slaves”. Of course, that would do nothing for her perceived “travesty”, as Obama would become #11 — still in the first Quartile.[/i][/QUOTE]“Washington, he owned slaves”?? He was not the only early president to own slaves. As to Lincoln being number one, nope. I am not going to try to revise the list, but I would put Washington as number 1, and probably move Lincoln well down it. Read some of his speeches, and the careful wording of the Emancipation Proclamation such that carefully excluded freeing slaves in Kentucky and Maryland. He was a skilled politician, and despite the “log cabin” promotions, quite a wealthy man by the time he became president. FDR? Not so sure. In many ways he gave away the store to Stalin, but many people in the State Department were deluded as to the realities under Communism. Ike was in many ways president like he was general. He played his cards very close to his chest so that many issues were never publicized. I would put him ahead of FDR. My grandfather always insisted Truman should have been considered much more highly as he was the one dealing with the end of war settlements and issues. I think I would go with 1. Washington, 2. Ike, 3. Trump, or maybe even with Trump as No. 2. Not going to try to go further down the list. Had really not given much thought as to who gets displaced to where. We have had quite a few very good presidents, some of which were dealt very bad hands, and a few total losers, of which I consider the present resident of the White House about the bottom if not the absolute bottom of the pack. As to Obama? He should also be near the bottom. I can think of very little he did at all. As to his Nobel Prize? What was that for? Looking pretty? Saying, hey look at me, I am the first black president of the USA? [/i][/QUOTE]Many of the first leaders of the USA had owned slaves. Washington’s will from 1799 stipulated that all of his slaves would be freed. [URL=https://www.monticello.org/slavery/slavery-faqs/property/]Jefferson[/URL] was less magnanimous in terms of manumission, but still professed a belief that slavery was evil; who knows what manner of societal and familial pressures he was up against. The Emancipation Proclamation was specific to states “in rebellion” most likely to prevent MD and KY from rebelling themselves. MD abolished slavery in 1864 notwithstanding; KY had a number of politicians on the ground falsely asserting “states’ rights” in response to Lincoln attempting to directly influence emancipation laws in the state. Frederick Douglass said the following about the Proclamation: [QUOTE]“We are all liberated by this proclamation. Everybody is liberated. The white man is liberated, the black man is liberated, the brave men now fighting the battles of their country against rebels and traitors are now liberated… I congratulate you upon this amazing change—the amazing approximation toward the sacred truth of human liberty.”[/QUOTE]There were a number of problems with Truman’s postwar management, among them the Marshall Plan (empowering Konrad Adenauer to fill the government of the nascent Federal Republic of Germany with “former” national socialists, and to eventually go forward with the creation of the European Coal and Steel Community, today’s European Union), firing Douglas MacArthur when he wanted to go on the offensive against Red China’s direct interference in the conflict in Korea, allowing Alger Hiss to have his way in the creation of the United Nations (his committee essentially made the Charter a clone of Stalin’s USSR constitution from 1936), the allowing of Red China to come to be in the first place, and some other problems that do not come to mind immediately. Eisenhower was far too soft on the “New Republicans”, many of whom worked in his administration; he also gave assent to big government spending programs, the most (in)famous of which is the Interstate Highway System that perhaps should have been built by the private sector. Reagan in his early political years warned about these people, who are commonly termed “RINOs” (“Republicans In Name Only”) nowadays, as did Goldwater’s book [i]The Conscience of a Conservative[/i] which accused them of being no different from left-wing Democrats in terms of desiring to subvert the freedoms in the Constitution and institute oligarchic tyranny. Back to FDR: Much of what he is praised for in terms of wartime actions perhaps could have been averted if he had listened to the pleas of contemporaries like Churchill eight years earlier, never mind being more aggressive towards Japan than mere economic blockades. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
Home Page
Powered by
Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2
Copyright © 2007-2016
TrainWeb, Inc.
Top of Page
|
TrainWeb
|
About Us
|
Advertise With Us
|
Contact Us