a reply to: sdcigarpig
And off we go again!
First...can I just give a massive hurrah for the folks in this thread. I'm in love with the amount of info I am receiving and how it is being offered.
Nobody making fun of me for falling short on less obvious historical knowledge. Nobody attacking me or others...wow
Overnight (well...not during sleep) I thought a bit about those words "confidence" in the presidency. I've never quite thought about what it means to
lose confidence in the highest office. I feel like losing confidence in say, a physician, is terrible and dangerous...yet unless you are in a massive,
wide open area with a town of 12 people and no other choice, you can usually find another doctor and seek better care. The POTUS on the other hand is
the one and only, at least for that term. To the actual thoughts of confidence, it never struck me until the members on this thread reminded me
(directly or otherwise) what a lack of confidence does to the people that the POTUS resides "over." We place so much emphasis on the office, as we
rightfully should, and while I argue that every man and woman in this world are very imperfect, the damage done by a local carpenter usually remains
local while the damage done by a POTUS is typically national and sometimes (many times) global.
Thank you for opening these eyes a wee bit more.
I have to thoroughly agree on McCarthy. Obviously he was not the first person to begin such witch hunts but he sure made them very national and yet
very personal at the same time. I was born in 1979...well after Eisenhower/McCarthy era but even the tiniest bit of reading shows me how nasty those
trials were and how much horror can be inflicted by falsely accusing someone. It ruins lives and that damage is enduring.
I also agree on TV and this is where I'd love to request a follow up question. When you talk of TV being shallow and controlling (and I agree) how
much weight do you put on the blame of the producers versus the consumers for even watching such trash? Is it 100% the production at fault or is a
great deal of the fault given to the consumer who elects to watch that same trash? Was the brainwashing so powerful as to be unavoidable? Thank
Thanks for letting me wake up to a positive response as well! Do you feel that social systems and change are a true marker of progress? How much
emphasis do you place on economic markers?
Thanks for backing up NthOther's post. Gives me more of a nudge to take a look at thte events. Do you by any chance have a solid book recommendation
for an alternate view of the Secession? I see on Amazon a few that look interesting.
Thanks for the comments! I've always had this question in mind (not specifically of the GWB to Obama transition...of any transition). I know there is
no specific number, but I wonder at what point does an incoming president take the entire brunt of the blame (or in positive cases the award) for
their term? I ask because it seems that some policies set by a predecessor seem like they cause consequences that are short lived while others last a
lifetime, such as the repeat mention of the Fed by Wilson.
In this case, I have a solid opinion of my own and I agree that we seem to be totally ok, on the surface at least, to let fly with the squashing of
rights in times of fear. I know it is a movie, but it is reminiscent of V for Vendetta when we turn our lives over to the "Chancellor" of sorts. It
brings me right back to Wilson's four-minute-men and the attempted grab for freedom of speech in the name of American pride. Do you feel that the
people should be allowed 100% free speech so long as it does not incite violence?
I can understand the coveting of oil. May I ask what of religion brought us down; the following and belief, or the resulting backlash against
I am old enough to remember Reagan and to have voted the second term of Clinton which was my first legal vote. Again this speaks to the above
statement about confidence in the office itself. If the Lewinsky events never took place (as in did not happen...not just weren't uncovered) what
would you say about Clinton's overall presidency and effectiveness? Thanks!
Great comment! What do you feel are the dirtiest of our plays in the past 70 or so years? I think quite a bit about interment camps in the US but also
the many gruesome moments of Vietnam
I definitely understand the assassinations, but may I inquire further about the expansion of the two states?
Yeah....I may be a little more knowledgeable regarding the Civil War to WWI and WWII as I've spent more time on that than the other wars, but I have
to ask, do you feel slavery was truly on the outs? I wonder because prior to secession, new land grabs for the ability to keep slavery were occurring.
Though I suppose, again, this could be an indicator that it was more about states' rights than the actual institution of slavery. Do you feel that if
Lincoln or any other President had allowed those rights to stay intact that slavery states would have ended the practice? I wonder how long it would
have taken. Thanks!
Interesting point of view. Certainly not arguing against, but what do you feel was the good that came from these events, specifically from the Fed and
Great suggestion and thank you! This topic comes up on ATS quite a bit I have noticed. not the Whiskey Rebellion per se, but about people rising
against the government and the government's potential smack down of the very people who make up the country itself.