America’s War on Terrorism enters its 16th year… our Commander-in-Chief continues to display a subtle contempt for the honored traditions of the Office- should we be surprised at his willingness to rattle the sabres and promote continued military actions?
The First Constitutional Scholar
In 1793, James Madison warned of the dangers in conducting long, expensive wars…
“War is in fact the true nurse of executive aggrandizement. In war, a physical force is to be created; and it is the executive will, which is to direct it. In war, the public treasures are to be unlocked; and it is the executive hand which is to dispense them. In war, the honours and emoluments of office are to be multiplied; and it is the executive patronage under which they are to be enjoyed. It is in war, finally, that laurels are to be gathered, and it is the executive brow they are to encircle.”
Lee descendants grapple with family legacy… the complex issue of monument removal haunts family
Wreckage of USS Indianapolis discovered… ship sank by Japanese submarine 72 years ago
Will Trump resign the Presidency?.… many before him have considered it
Fruitcake found in Antarctica “practically edible”… was abandoned over 100 years ago by explorer
Civil War Trust acquires 391 acres of battlefields in Virginia... purchase halts significant threat to 3 battlefields
Academics say the darnedest things… in the cozy confines of the University system. Impressionable undergrads eagerly hang on every word and grad students serve as willful accomplices as they look to continued advancement. Peer review is a veiled threat at best, considering the lock step that seems to permeate academia. Even when a proven fraud like Ward Churchill is called to account, academic circles are reluctant to police their own because of the lofty standard “academic freedom.”(The investigation revealed that Churchill had received tenure without a PhD in addition to plagiarism and fraud charges.)
Devaluing the term “genocide” since 1978
So, say whatever you please, professor… tenure has your back. History professors proclaim “changing the narrative” as the driving force behind their scholarship. Everything we’ve learned about America is wrong… so, like a Seinfeld episode of note, the opposite must be true: The founding of America actually had a negative impact on human history, the Founders were greedy imperialists in training, and ALL 15 Presidents before Lincoln owned slaves…. that’s right- ALL of them.
Surely, you jest…
This would come as a shock to John Adams and his son… both from Quincy, Massachusetts. James Buchanan, Franklin Pierce, and Martin Van Buren would likewise have an argument to such an absurd notion. Millard Fillmore was only in office two years, but slave owning cannot be included on his resume. Even Virginian William Henry Harrison had abandoned the practice by the time he entered public life. Members of the Founding generation hated the institution, yet felt trapped by it- Jefferson described having a wolf by the ears. As the abolition movement grew, later Presidents sought to defend slave owning rights, but their arguments were swept away in the tide. But, to listen to many academics today, the Presidency was nothing more than the last line of defense for the slave owning class. Never be surprised at what nonsense seeps out of our universities… our hard earned dollars make this “academic freedom” possible.
Filed under Ephemera, News
Andrew Burstein, The Passions of Andrew Jackson, Knopf Publishers, 2003, ISBN 0-375-41428-2
Before the recent renaissance of Andrew Jackson scholarship brought on by HW Brands’s 2005 biography, cultural historian Andrew Burstein( America’s Jubilee) tackled Old Hickory’s impulsive nature in a slender but effective volume. Heavier biographies like Jon Meachem’s American Lion, borrow extensively from Burstein’s unflinching look at the 7th President, a historically tragic figure: “Every tragic figure requires a flaw rooted in good intentions, and Jackson’s was his incessant pursuit of virtue in the political realm, where virtue, so greatly desired, can scarcely exist.”
According to Burstein, Jackson’s life was defined by conflict, much of it his own doing. Jackson suffered from a “corrosive vanity” that demanded utter loyalty from those around him. Jackson’s burning pride, rooted in the harsh realities on the Tennessee frontier, caused him to place a “defiant honor” above all other virtues. Burstein explains how honor and an “incessant need for redress” nearly ruined Jackson’s public career following the murder of Charles Dickinson. The book adeptly displays Jackson’s varied understanding of loyalty and how it caused him to make questionable, if not dangerous relationships; for example, his misguided defense of John Eaton and the nefarious negotiations with Aaron Burr, expose the darker side of Jackson’s character. Jackson’s impassioned virtues produced two rocky terms as President- the raucous persona of “Old Hickory” was popular with the newly enfranchised “common man,” but his careless policy decisions were ultimately destructive.
Recent attempts at comparing Jackson to Washington are quickly negated by Burstein’s incisive summation of Jackson’s place in our history, “Washington appointed to his cabinet the greatest talent he could find; Jackson appointed men whom he expected to think like him and do what he said. Washington knew his intellectual limitations and took considerable time to reach decisions, while the more impulsive Jackson made it appear…that he was somehow the recipient of a pure light of inspiration.” Driven by the desires of honor, loyalty, and redress, Andrew Jackson cut a jagged path through the formidable years of our republic. Burstein’s analysis provides valuable new insight into the mind of a man shrouded in democratic mythology.
James Madison Preparatory School
The rivalry between Andrew Jackson and Henry Clay defined American… political history during the Age of the Common Man. But this competition was far from standard, civil political discourse. Clay and Jackson despised each other.
Merely a Military chieftain
Jackson infamously described Clay in the following vitriol:
“He’s the basest, meanest scoundrel that ever disgraced the image of his God….nothing too mean or low for him to condescend to…(Clay) is the Judas of the West.”
Just Sour Grapes?
Clay never believed Jackson to be fit for public office:
“He is ignorant, passionate, hypocritical, corrupt, and easily swayed by the basest men who surround him. I cannot believe that the killing of two thousand Englishmen at New Orleans qualifies a person for the various difficult and complicated duties of the presidency”
Clay feared an unpredictable and potentially dangerous man… was using his martial popularity to win the nation’s highest office:
“But the impulses of public gratitude should be controlled by reason and discretion… I was not prepared blindly to surrender myself to the hazardous indulgence of a feeling… I solemnly believe General Jackson’s competency for the office to be highly questionable.”
To his supporters, Trump is the second-coming of Reagan… but every day, each passing Tweet, Donald Trump embarrasses himself and our republic. The most egregious behavior involves the apparent collaboration with Putin’s Russia. Trump and his acolytes have done little to assuage the concerns of the media or critics; often, going as far as to defend Putin and his authoritarian methods.
Before one of the largest Television audiences in the world… Trump did the unthinkable- he equated the actions of the United States with those of Putin- all comparisons to Reagan must end immediately. The President of the United States implied to the world a moral equivalence exists between our republic and the ruthless autocrat in Russia. Putin’s murders are documented and clearly show the brutal nature of his regime. Trump’s smarmy innuendo is an indication of both ignorance and complicity. Far from making us safer, this man is emerging as a serious threat to our national security.
No comparisons here.
Reagan’s call for an end to totalitarianism… shows just how different the two men really are:
“No, democracy is not a fragile flower. Still it needs cultivating. If the rest of this century is to witness the gradual growth of freedom and democratic ideals, we must take actions to assist the campaign for democracy.”….What I am describing now is a plan and a hope for the long term — the march of freedom and democracy which will leave Marxism-Leninism on the ash-heap of history as it has left other tyrannies which stifle the freedom and muzzle the self-expression of the people.”