American History

» Brian Tubbs - TR and Business

In response to Had The United States Not posted by JohnCrandall:

TR was definitely for controls on the market. He was certainly not an advocate of unrestrained capitalism. However, he was still pro-capitalist. His denunciations of William Jennings Bryan prove this.

Of course, I admire Bryan as well. The interesting thing about the space of time is that, looking back, we can admire people who were (in some ways) polar opposites - and see the good that they each brought to society. In Bryan's case, he brought a sense of conscience and reform. In TR's case, a sense of strength and vitality. Both men were important contributors to early 20th century America.

» Brian Tubbs - Historian Consensus

It seems to be the consensus of modern North American historians that the top three Presidents are LINCOLN, WASHINGTON, and FDR. The order sometimes changes, but it's almost always those gentlemen in the top three. I think we'd have to admit that those three Presidents had the greatest impact (for good or ill) on America.

» JohnCrandall - Historian Consensus

In response to Historian Consensus posted by BrianTubbs:

Yes, those three are very likely to be the top picks of most today. 30 years ago Thomas Jefferson might have been up there, but he is extremely out of favor these days. They even took him off the nickel. It's not that I don't see the great things that FDR did, its just that I have a firm conviction that the mess we have today originates during his terms. One biography of him that I read said that he was an extreme delegator, and that once he delegated something he moved on to other things. Sure delegating is an important leadership trait, but I fear he left us with such a huge executive branch that Presidential oversight, or even awareness of many things is not possible or likely. Even a workaholic like LBJ couldn't keep up with all that goes on in the President's name in modern America.

-- posted by JohnCrandall

» pink101 - Historian Consensus

In response to Historian Consensus posted by JohnCrandall:
.
I've just read a book review by William Novak. The book is about the rise of statism in the world and especially in America with FDR being one of the main players along with Charles Evans Hughes.
.
Here's a link on Novak:
.
http://history.uchicago.edu/faculty/nova...
.
Very interesting review and the book sounds like I should get a copy.
.
Here's a link to the book:
http://www.historycooperative.org/journa...

-- posted by pink101

» Brian Tubbs - Jefferson

In response to Historian Consensus posted by JohnCrandall:

Ironically, it was FDR who championed the Jefferson Memorial. Interesting and ironic given your dislike of FDR and love for Jefferson.

I personally think Jefferson has been overrated. He had a solid first term and a mediocre second term. And he really hurt us going into the Barbary Pirates conflict (where luck and/or God's Providence really carried us through) and the War of 1812. He NEVER should've downsized our military.

He was also something of a back-stabber and not all that honest. He really did John Adams wrong. And Washington too for that matter.

» JohnCrandall - Jefferson

In response to Jefferson posted by BrianTubbs:

I find it odd that you see him that way. I started as a political science major and graduated as a history major due to loving to take the classes, so I guess my original picture of Jefferson is from a political ideology perspective. As the champion of "the people" in the first days of America I find his reasoning generally consistent and sound. I understand that the embargo was unpopular, and that downsizing the navy seems foolish in retrospect, although as the trendsetting precedent from someone schooled in good old Whig political thought that he intended it as I think it makes a lot of sense. As either you or Pink said in the discussion on militarism, large standing armies (or navies) were not a part of the ideal republic, and that is what he was attempting to found.

-- posted by JohnCrandall

» Brian Tubbs - Founding Era Federalist

In response to Jefferson posted by JohnCrandall:

I'm pretty much a Founding Era Federalist in line with Washington, Adams, Hamilton (to some extent), and John Marshall.

Of course, as a Founding Era Federalist, that still puts me to the right of today's political climate. Hamilton, for instance, would NOT be comfortable with today's judicial activism even though he was a loose constructionist.

» pink101 - "today's judicial activism"

In response to Founding Era Federalist posted by BrianTubbs:

.
I think we need to understand what you mean by this wording, "today's judicial activism" in your above comments.
.
The way you're making your statement seems to say the meaning is well known. And, in light of the tenor or your comments, it also seems as though it can be used to put down any opposition. It's a similar to using the term, cradle to grave, to put down social legislation such as universal health care.
.

-- posted by pink101

» pink101 - "today's judicial activism"

In response to "today's judicial activism" posted by pink101:

.
It is critical in any consideration of current events to understand the historical context in which political ideas have come into popular use.
.
How do we come to acquire meanings for the politicized words and phrases we use? For example, what is it that divides us along the ideas of conservatism and liberalism?
.
In another thread on a different subject, Brian explains his meaning for a particular word is drawn from its original use.
.
Does the phrase, today's judicial activism share a relationship with the idea of laissez faire constitutionalism?
.

-- posted by pink101

» pink101 - Compare King To Bush II

.
What if we were to compare Martin Luther King, Jr., to George W. Bush.
.
Which man will have had the most positive effect on American History in times to come?
.

-- posted by pink101