You are missed now, more then ever.
Posted on 02/21/2011 1:00:39 PM PST by Colonel Kangaroo
On Presidents’ Day, Americans take a day to recognize the office of the presidency – and to reflect upon the country’s best.
FrumForum asked freshman Republican members which president they admired the most, but excluded President Reagan from contention to give the other presidents a fair chance. The fourteen Republican members who responded gave a range of answers, but President Abraham Lincoln came out on top.
Interestingly, these freshman congressmen have something in common with President Obama, who has identified Lincoln as his favorite president. Independent voters also agreed – a new Gallup poll shows that Lincoln was their favorite president.
“President Lincoln’s ability to guide our country through our most difficult period in history stands as a testament to both his leadership, character and patriotism,” Congressman Lou Barletta (PA-11) told FrumForum.
“[H]e served as president during one of the most dangerous and trying times our nation has ever faced and he was able to keep our country from falling apart. Lincoln saved our democracy and is the reason our nation is still thriving today,” concurred Rep. Steve Chabot (OH-1).
That same Gallup poll predictably showed Reagan with a 24 point lead over the second place finisher, George Washington.
The congressmen who favored Theodore Roosevelt, the president who finished second in the FrumForum polling, cited his love for the environment and his respect for states’ rights. “Teddy Roosevelt is one of my favorites because of his can-do spirit, his respect for states’ rights, and his exemplary foresight to ensure that the beauty of our nation was left for future generations,” said Congressman Paul Gosar (AZ-01).
“Teddy Roosevelt… believed in and promoted American exceptionalism. In addition, he was instrumental in introducing the U.S. as a world power,” agreed Rep. Bill Flores (TX-17).
Thomas Jefferson was the non-Reagan favorite of Rep. Rick Crawford (AR-1): “Thomas Jefferson was a Renaissance Man. Not only did he write the Declaration of Independence, but he was an author, inventor, farmer, diplomat, and public servant, only to name a few. A true ‘man of the people.’”
Congressman Michael Grimm (NY-13) told FrumForum that he had served under George H.W. Bush – and that he was his choice for favorite non-Reagan president. “President George H. W. Bush was my Commander in Chief when I served as a Marine during Operation Desert Storm. He has the best experience any president can have from his service in the military, to his leadership as an ambassador, his time as a U.S. congressman, his role as the Director of the CIA, and his two terms as Vice President. President George H. W. Bush is the greatest and most dignified American I have ever had the privilege and honor to meet,” he said.
Rep. Chip Cravaack (MN-8) pointed to the economic accomplishments of the Coolidge administration to explain his choice: “During the Coolidge administration the federal budget shrank, the national debt was cut in half, unemployment stood at 3.6%, consumer prices rose just 0.4% and Americans personal wealth increased 17.5%,” he said.
Congressman Kevin Yoder (KA-3), on the other hand, proudly noted that President Eisenhower was from his home state. “He is a proud son of Kansas and a true American hero. Eisenhower worked his way to the highest level of service in the military and public office yet maintained his strong Kansas principles of humility and hard work… When he left office, he left our country with greater prosperity and through his service he made a lasting impression for future generations,” he said.
According to Gallup, 19% of all Americans view Reagan as the nation’s best president, with Lincoln, Clinton, Kennedy and George Washington trailing behind.
With files from Nicole Glass and Shawn Summers.
Some of the same people I’ve known who despise Lincoln for keeping the country together despise people who won’t say the Pledge of Allegiance, are alarmed by the rise in illegal immigration and the idea that Mexico might try to take back some of the southwest, and consider Obama and the liberals “un-American.”
Oh, the irony...
Saying the civil war wasn't over slavery but over states' rights (the right TO OWN SLAVES) is exactly the same as saying it's not about abortion, but "a woman's right to choose."
Thank my luck stars, that someone knows their history. And thank you for bringing up many relevent facts to Lincoln to the thread. Sadly, I find that the Lincoln lovers have only a remedial public education, understanding of who Lincoln was. It took many years after getting out of school, and learning actually history to understand the man more. He was no “do gooder,” and it’s funny, because many of the books praising him, refer to all the “good he did” despite the “adverse background.” It’s so miraculous, because it’s fabricated. Our history has been white washed by the same likes of public educators who purchase textbooks from Iran claiming there was no Holocaust.
The reason I’m participating in this thread (and glad you have), is because I learned much more and had a better starting point to learn from, after hearing people make claims about Lincoln that I didn’t believe. I had previously known that he did not fight the war for slaves, for example, because my mother is a history buff. However, I didn’t learn of his dictatorial tyranny until many years later, and starting to read books about the man and who he was. A warped man from a broken home, who wanted supreme power, much like our current occupier, who married an eventual (if not before) devil worship practicioner. At least now they just worship environmentalism, not like the olden days.
You have TR on the list of worst presidents? Where’s Bush? At least TR would not have tolerated illegal immigration or any immigration from people who didn’t want to assimilate. You should read his quotes on the matter.
You are missed now, more then ever.
Oh. Sorry to disappoint you. I’m not a Bush hater.
“”My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not to either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also so that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause.”—Abraham Lincoln.
You see, some of us know these things called “facts.” And some don’t. The war that Lincoln instigated about slaves wasn’t about freedom or slaves, it was about power. I’m sorry your education and your current critical thinking, have failed you.
If you wanted to make a proper analogy, you’d probably do better if you knew what you were talking about. Slavery was NOT the issue the war was fought over, it was the issue that the war was deemed to be about once it had started. Just like people commending Arizona for standing up for it’s sovereignty. It’s not about illegal immigrants, it’s about Federal Nanny state-ism. The media is just telling everyone it’s about the mean Arizonans hating immigrants. Maybe they do, and maybe they don’t, but Arizona is asserting it’s authority in more than one issue, just like other states are. The attitude is not about hating foreigners, anymore than the civil war was about slaves.
I’m sorry to have to be the one to tell you of your own ignorance on the subject. I’ve agreed with you on a number of topics in the past.
__________________________________________________________
“Saying the civil war wasn’t over slavery but over states’ rights (the right TO OWN SLAVES) is exactly the same as saying it’s not about abortion, but “a woman’s right to choose.”
Emotional arguments belong to the left, and a condescending false analogy only reflects poorly on your ability to form a logical, reasoned argument based on facts.
You’re too late. I love how they say that Lincoln “started” the Civil War. Same way Bush started the GWOT and FDR started WWII.
What about the Fugitive Slave laws that forces citizens of non-slave states have to participate in enslaving another human being? Not much states rights there.
If it is a voluntary union of the several sovereign states then why is permission needed for a new state to join? That sounds like an organization that controls who it lets in.
What, do you get a daily e-mail filled with the propaganda from Confederate-era newspapers?
I must be missing something. The military is currently an all-volunteer force — but they don’t have to take everyone who applies. They control who they let in. But it is still a voluntary force.
Can one of you please help me with one of the facts that was listed? I'm looking for a list of those 300 newspapers that Lincoln personally shut down. Can one of you point me to it?
Thank you for your praise and I am glad that you have educated yourself beyond the fairy tales people have spread since the Reconstruction.
I’m glad that you brought up the fact that Lincoln did not go to war for slaves. That point is much-argued and I have been “virtually” slapped even on this board for suggesting such a thing. I will further add that he freed the slaves not as a measure of “do-goodery,” but in order to foment an insurrection in the Confederate states, forcing them to fight on two fronts.
And also control when they get out.
The Constitution does not have such rules. Does that mean you cannot ever get out? Wouldn't that seem like tyranny? Look at the 10th Amendment. The states have rights which are not enumerated. Is the right of secession discussed? No. It is an unenumerated right. Which means, according to the 10th Amendment, that this is a right which is reserved to the states.
Getting into the union is a joint decision by both parties. But getting out ought to be something a state can choose to do by itself.
If only all present “Americans really” understood the so-called civil war....
Well, I’m not the original poster, and think you should be able to be use a search engine, but I’m willing to help you, but not hold your hand through the process known as “Research.”
Here’s a thoroughly referenced article, naming a few:
“Lincoln, on the other hand, shut down many newspapers. Chief Justice William Rehnquist discusses some of these cases of suppression”
Lincoln not only shut down newspapers he viewed as unpatriotic, he also ordered the arrest and imprisonment of some of their editors and publishers, without due process of law. Lincoln issued the following order to General John Dix:
You will take possession by military force, of the printing establishments of the New York World and Journal of Commerce . . . and prohibit any further publication thereof . . . You are therefore commanded forthwith to arrest and imprison . . . The editors, proprietors and publishers of the aforementioned newspapers. (Order of Abraham Lincoln to General John Dix, May 18, 1864)
“http://www.factasy.com/civil_war/book/export/html/2323";
_________________________________________________________
From the Encyclopedia Britannica Website, but you’ll have to get a subscription to read the entire article:
“Fall 2009 • 11 During the Civil War the federal government was responsible for the greatest amount of newspaper suppression in the nation’s history. More than 300 newspapers were shut down, most of them Democratic papers that were sympathetic to the Confederacy. Some historians have criticized President Abraham Lincoln for allowing such widespread constraints on the press. This article reconsiders the nature of Lincoln’s view of press freedom. Based on a letter the president sent to a Union general, it concludes that Lincoln changed his thinking about midway through the ...”
http://www.britannica.com/bps/additionalcontent/18/48051075/Abraham-Lincoln-and-Press-Suppression-Reconsidered
____________________________________________________________
Here’s an entire booklet about one incidence:
Abraham Lincoln
Press Freedom & War Restraints
How he suppressed the Los Angeles Star
“http://southcarolinaconservative.com/lincolnbook2008.pdf";
Feel free to knock yourself out, and I hope you learn something in the process. That took about 3 min of search engine searching, but I didn’t find a list. I’m not using Google anymore, and will have to get used to searching for things on my new engine.
“... in order to foment an insurrection in the Confederate states, forcing them to fight on two fronts.”
Especially since he didn’t find it in his mythical big fluffy heart to free the Northern States’ slaves, but merely the Confederate States’ slaves with the emancipation proclamation, and unconstitutional executive order.
You cannot just up and decide you no longer want to be in the military and then just leave. You leave when the military decides you can leave. Even at the end of your enlistment the military can force you to remain. Or once you are out the military can force you back in. It's commonly referred to as stop-loss.
Maybe you would like to try another analogy?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.